A Saskatchewan rancher and veterinarian has prevailed in a lengthy dispute with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency over cattle identification ear tags.
“It’s a welcome bright spot in this tough harvest situation,” Ken Habermehl said last week. “I’m a proud Canadian cattleman today.”
The Canadian Agricultural Review Tribunal ruled Sept. 3 that Habermehl did not have to pay a $500 fine imposed by the CFIA for delivering cattle without ear tags in May 2009.
The dispute over the fine was the subject of a two-day tribunal hearing in Saskatoon in June. Its decision cannot be appealed.
Read Also
U.S. resumes ban on cattle imports from Mexico
U.S. looks for ways to control New World screwworm as infestation prompts U.S. to close the border again
In the 16-page ruling, tribunal chair Donald Buckingham said the CFIA failed to provide sufficient evidence to justify the fine.
“The tribunal finds that the respondent (CFIA) has not made all of the essential elements of the case and as a result, the applicant (Habermehl) did not commit the alleged violation and is not liable for payment of the monetary penalty,” he wrote.
Habermehl said he was overwhelmed when he opened his mail and received news of the decision.
“I read it and I sat in my truck and I couldn’t believe I got the ruling in my favour,” he said. “It was a 16-month emotional struggle.”
The case involved the movement of 29 cow-calf pairs to the Elbow community pasture from Habermehl’s farm at Macrorie, Sask., on May 26, 2009.
After arriving at the pasture, seven cows were found not to have approved ear tags, an apparent violation of section 176 of the Health of Animals Regulations, resulting in a $500 penalty against Habermehl.
Habermehl refused to pay the fine, arguing the cattle all had tags when they were shipped from his farm and the tags must have fallen off during transit due to faulty design.
“Section 176 is killing the industry,” he said.
Once the hearing began, the onus was on the CFIA to prove that the cows were untagged when they left the Habermehl farm that morning, something Buckingham ruled the agency was unable to do.
Attempts to reach CFIA officials for comment by the deadline for this article were unsuccessful.
Habermehl said his biggest disappointment has been the CFIA’s response throughout the process.
“If they had come out and talked to me and been reasonable, we probably could have avoided all this,” he said.
Habermehl hopes the publicity generated in the cattle industry by the case will result in changes to the regulations regarding ear tagging.
