Identification information Opinions differ on what U.S. livestock producers need to satisfy demands of international customers
DENVER, Colo. — The argument over animal identification in the United States isn’t letting up.
There is agreement that a system is needed, but the debate continues over what kind of identification is acceptable and who will manage and store the data, said Leann Saunders of IMI Global Inc., a private data collection company.
“When we look at our major trading partners and our customers who rely on them for business, Japan, Mexico and Korea, they have more requirements around animal identification,” she told the International Livestock Congress in Denver Jan. 15.
Read Also
Going beyond “Resistant” on crop seed labels
Variety resistance is getting more specific on crop disease pathogens, but that information must be conveyed in a way that actually helps producers make rotation decisions.
However, industry players question what kind of identification might work and how much traceability international customers want.
Mark Gustafson, who is responsible for exports with JBS at Greely, Colorado, said customers are shocked that the United States doesn’t have a full system.
However, he said American suppliers can find cattle that carry traceability information if specific customers request it. He doesn’t believe the entire American beef herd needs to have such a system.
“Almost every country in the world has some degree of traceability,” he said. “Australia, in my opinion, has probably the most sophisticated traceability program of all of our competition.”
China has 22 technical conditions, including traceability, if the U.S. hopes to regain that market.
Companies that supply beef for branded programs have developed traceability systems, and some players argue that a private rather than government mandated approach is more useful.
A private system can be audited and those who join a branded program understand it is one of the requirements.
Agri Beef, a Washington state based company that includes cow-calf, feedlots and a processor, has developed branded beef programs and acknowledges that traceability protects the brands even if customers don’t request it.
“Throughout our entire system, we have invested significant amounts of money for traceability,” said Rick Stott of Agri Beef.
“We have traceability in our feedlots. We understand every animal that has been treated. We know where every animal is at every point in time.”
He said it has become a cost saving in terms of animal health, carcass merit and selection.
“The customer really doesn’t demand it, but we know there is value to it,” he said.
International customers may request it, but domestic customers rarely do.
“None of our customers are clamouring to know. That demand does not exist in the consumer market today,” Stott said.
John Butler of the Beef Marketing Group, a consortium of 16 feeding operations in Nebraska and Kansas, supports a privately run and third party audited system that is accountable to shareholders.
“Our chance of success is going to be private,” he said.
Consumers probably assume traceability exists, he added, but the reality is that it isn’t available for many products.
“Any of the branded programs we are involved in, traceability is a given,” Butler said.
The federal government continues to push for a system to provide 48 hour traceability in the event of a disease. A final rule on animal disease traceability was published in the federal register and should go into effect March 11.
Animals must be accompanied by an interstate certificate of veterinary inspection or other documentation, such as owner-shipper statements or brand certificates.
