Branding remains a necessary form of identification for beef cattle in certain situations in North America.
It’s one of the only permanent forms of identification on the open range and in community pastures and is a crucial way to identify lost or stolen cattle. As well, financial institutions may require branding as proof of ownership of cattle.
All cattle that leave their farm of origin must also be identified with a Canadian Cattle Identification Agency ear tag, and many cattle may have a management tag with an identification number that can be read by farm staff.
Read Also
Mixed results on new African swine fever vaccine
The new African swine fever vaccine still has issues, but also gave researchers insight into how virus strain impacts protection against the deadly pig disease.
The results of the latest Canadian National Beef Quality Audit included information on the occurrence of branding at Canadian slaughter plants. The plants were surveyed in late 2010 and early 2011 to assess quality defects in carcasses.
The project was funded by the beef cattle industry science cluster under the Growing Canada Agri-Innovations Program and beef producer national check-off funds.
This is the third audit to be completed and follows up on the initial audit undertaken in 1995 and a second audit in 1999. All of the audits have focused on issues that can be managed by producers, such as injection site lesions, bruising, horns, liver abscesses and condemnation of heads and tongues.
Branding has significantly de-creased in occurrence since the 1999 audit, when 25 percent of fed cattle had brands. In the 2010-2011 audit, only 9.8 percent of fed cattle were identified with brands.
The majority of the brands were located on the hip, at 60 percent, with the rib area next at 37 percent and the shoulder area at three percent. Only 0.1 percent of cattle were identified with multiple brands, which again is a drastic drop from 1999, when more than eight percent of fed cattle had multiple brands.
Why do we worry about branding as a quality defect?
The primary reason is that hides are a valuable commodity to the packing industry. The annual economic losses caused by branding were estimated at $2.8 million, which translates into 88 cents per head for all cattle going through slaughter plants. However, this is a drastic improvement from 1999, when the annual economic losses to the beef industry caused by branding were estimated at $15.8 million.
Branding is also an important animal welfare issue. We know that any method of branding causes short-term pain and stress to the animal. Unfortunately, we do not have practical techniques that would allow us to provide local anesthesia to animals that are being branded. However, pain control medications are licensed for cattle that may help alleviate some of the pain after the procedure.
Freeze branding has been shown to be slightly less painful than hot iron branding, but it is a more technically difficult procedure and is useful only on dark-hided cattle. Staff should be trained on how to administer either hot iron or freeze brands.
Whenever possible, try to minimize branding and use alternative forms of identification. When branding is necessary, use a single iron and a small brand to reduce the pain. Don’t use hot iron brands on wet cattle because scalding may occur. Talk to your veterinarian about the potential of using pain control medications during branding.
The National Beef Quality Audit is a good news story because it shows a reduction in quality defects.
More information is available on the Beef Cattle Research Council website at www.beefresearch.ca.
