USDA: Animal Disease Traceability
August 18, 2010
The USDA will be conducting a series of public meetings to discuss the new Animal Disease Traceability system, which will be replacing the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) that was scrapped earlier this year.
The purpose of the meetings is to allow the cattle industry and general public a chance to give their input on the traceability regulation, performance and standards that are currently being developed.
The meeting objective is to review and clarify the current new framework. Discuss the approaching of performance based regulations, deliberate performance standards, and concepts being developed by the regulatory working group.
The Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service (APHIS) along with a regulatory working group representative will give three presentations.
State Perspective on Animal Disease Traceability:
Share the perspective and usefulness of Animal Disease Traceability state wide and nationally.
Animal Disease Traceability Framework:
Share the new components and concepts of the traceability framework with the livestock industry and general public.
Report of The Regulatory Working Group:
A representative of the regulatory working group will discuss the process involving the new traceability framework and proposed rule being considered.
After the presentations there will be small group sessions with discussions that will be shared with the group as a whole. Meeting participants will be asked to discuss their ideas of USDA and the Traceability Regulatory Working Group regarding the Animal Disease Traceability regulation and performance standards.
Questions will be asked around the following topics:
Feedback on the preliminary traceability performance standards.
Suggestions related to implementing the Animal Disease Traceability framework.
Details and dates of the meetings are available at the USDA website:
Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service
The USDA plans to have the Animal Disease Trace
ability system implemented by 2013.
© Copyright 2010 Livestock-ID
46 comments:
ummmm, no means NO NAIS, no matter how you wrap it ...
How many ways do the people have to say NO before the USDA gets it? Do we need to say/write it in another language you all understand? At all of your last meetings, "NO" was stated loud and clear. Don't think that you will simply keep putting this out there different ways and we'll just roll over and allow it.
No mean No! 2013…..Think Again!
Kimm,
Thank you for your comment, the meetings now are asking for your input, and asking how you would like to have the traceability done. The USDA wants to create a system that is friendly to producers and financially feasible.
Do you honestly think we don't need some sort of traceability with our food chain, to protect our safety, our children?
P.S. This is a resource blog, not a political or social forum. People come here to get information on the programs, incentives, tips, and free help that is available for livestock.
I invite to read my blog, there is many informative posts.
Have you read some of the articles here? or just came to blindly post a statement, without merit?
"Do you honestly think we don't need some sort of traceability with our food chain, to protect our safety, our children?"
No, I don't and I am tired of people dragging out "protect the children" as a way to emotionally coerce people to their agenda. You know and the USDA knows that pretty much ALL food born pathogens are from the processing plants and not from the farm...unless it is a CAFO. People who eat their own home grown meats are not worried about it. Change and ENFORCE the slaughterhouse rules so that the meat is safe and not sloppily done by overworked men and have the USDA actually inspect them properly and regularly. We do NOT need the government to tell us how and what to eat nor to "protect" us...when has that ever worked? Look at all the USDA rules out there already and still people get sick. Did you ever get sick from eating in a restaurant? Did you assume it was from the farm whatever you ate came from or the kitchen? Most folks with half a brain know the answer. This isn't about safety it's about money...as usual.
You are mixing diseases, e-coli and salmonella are diseases from the process of raw meat, whether it is in the meat processing plant, or prepared at a local restaurant. This is not a livestock disease.
BSE (Mad Cow)is a livestock disease, so is foot and mouth. These are the diseases we are talking about.
Uh- I know you guys think we are ignornat hick farmers, but we are not so stupid as to not know that if you change the name it is still the same thing. We said NO NAIS and we mean it, whatever you want to call it. Taking away our rights to grow our own food- even in the name of "safety"- and giving it to the companies that make contributions to your campaign is just WRONG!
"The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. "- H.L. Mencken
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety”- Benjamin Franklin
Just a reminder I am not associated with any government agencies. I am a blogger, with experience in Animal Identification and RFID systems.
This is an information blog, not a social forum to vent anger. There is a place for that. I believe if you read this post you just might find the information your looking for.
George,
Are you a livestock producer??? Knowing about the process of animal ID and RFID systems is one thing, but having REAL HANDS ON EXPERIENCE WITH THE ACTUAL ANIMALS is totally different. So very many "do gooders" in the area of food safety and food production have no experience in actually growing or raising the food they are so very happy to set up systems to monitor and/or regulate. So many of these "systems engineers" just do not have a real grasp of what they are expecting the REAL farmers/growers to do. The same goes for the folks who are the "regulators" of different laws or "systems". They may look good on paper, sound good at the podium but the actual process of "doing the system" what ever it is, is an VERY different matter. Meat born illnesses are the result of the the slaughter or later processing of the animal, NOT with the animal itself. This is something that the current set of regulators/lawmakers just cannot seem to get clear in their heads.
You ask that responders here on this site not be political!! Now how in the heck can this whole idea of NAIS and FORCED animal ID and tracking be ANYTHING BUT POLITICAL?!?!?!?!? Get real. It IS political because it is coming from the government. Sorry but that is just how it is.
I attended the Riverdale, MD USDA session. I was the only person there who was not representing a business, industry organization, or gov't agency. This meeting was difficult for private citizens to attend because it came up on short notice, and most of us have other jobs to attend. No one pays our way to be there either.
Traceability (ADT) is not about food animals or food safety. It never has been. Even USDA admitted that in one of their NAIS handbooks.
Equine has its own table at these sessions along with Miscellaneous livestock.
You say you are concerned about BSE and FMD. Both can be controlled without any new traceability plans (which, BTW, doesn't control those diseases,it merely tells us where they've been. Talk about closing the barn door after the horse is loose!) There is a test for BSE in a carcass that USDA won't allow to be used. Just google Creekstone Beef for that story.
And FMD can be kept out of the country if we don't open up our borders - which is the real reason for NAIS and ADT.
BTW, neither disease affects the quality of the meat. With BSE, care just needs to be taken not to cut into the spinal column, and FMD is strictly an economic disease because the animal loses weight until it recovers.
Opening up our borders (which is part of Agenda 21) to unsafe imports is bad policy. But USDA wants to do it anyway because it's good for big business. ADT, and formerly NAIS, is the plan to make it look like they are protecting us. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are actually increasing our risk of a disaster.
These current USDA sessions are designed to tell USDA how to mandate traceability and make it sound less objectionable, but they are still using a Premises ID database, they talk about upgrading low tech ID methods to RFID at a later date, and they're trying to figure out how to achieve the reporting goals.
So, to sum up, the 90+% of livestock owners that opposed NAIS won't like ADT much better.
Thank you Barbara, good constructive comment. I agree with some aspects, others I don't, but overall good comment that expresses your opinion.
George exactly what is it that you don't agree with on Barbara's post?
Thank you Gisela for your comment.
On Barbara's comment there was a few things I did not agree, I didn't want to go into details, but since you asked, this is what I do not agree with.
Quote from Barbara:
You say you are concerned about BSE and FMD. Both can be controlled without any new traceability plans
How can you can you control a disease you don't test for?
Quote from Barbara:
BTW, neither disease affects the quality of the meat. With BSE, care just needs to be taken not to cut into the spinal column, and FMD is strictly an economic disease because the animal loses weight until it recovers.
I don't want to eat tainted or diseased meat. Keep the spinal column or cord in, and keep the meat.
Quote from Barbara:
Opening up our borders (which is part of Agenda 21) to unsafe imports is bad policy.
This is double standards. What is unsafe imports?
Japan closed its borders to unsafe imports, but was pressured to re open...why?
> With BSE, care just needs to be taken not to cut into the spinal column
wrong !
O.11.3
Infectivity in skeletal muscle of BASE-infected cattle
Silvia Suardi1, Chiara Vimercati1, Fabio Moda1, Ruggerone Margherita1, Ilaria Campagnani1, Guerino Lombardi2, Daniela Gelmetti2, Martin H. Groschup3, Anne Buschmann3, Cristina Casalone4, Maria Caramelli4, Salvatore Monaco5, Gianluigi Zanusso5, Fabrizio Tagliavini1 1Carlo Besta” Neurological Institute,Italy; 2IZS Brescia, Italy; 33FLI Insel Riems, D, Germany; 4CEA-IZS Torino, Italy; 5University of Verona, Italy
Background: BASE is an atypical form of bovine spongiform encephalopathy caused by a prion strain distinct from that of BSE. Upon experimental transmission to cattle, BASE induces a previously unrecognized disease phenotype marked by mental dullness and progressive atrophy of hind limb musculature. Whether affected muscles contain infectivity is unknown. This is a critical issue since the BASE strain is readily transmissible to a variety of hosts including primates, suggesting that humans may be susceptible.
Objectives: To investigate the distribution of infectivity in peripheral tissues of cattle experimentally infected with BASE. Methods: Groups of Tg mice expressing bovine PrP (Tgbov XV, n= 7-15/group) were inoculated both i.c. and i.p. with 10% homogenates of a variety of tissues including brain, spleen, cervical lymph node, kidney and skeletal muscle (m. longissimus dorsi) from cattle intracerebrally infected with BASE. No PrPres was detectable in the peripheral tissues used for inoculation either by immunohistochemistry or Western blot.
Results: Mice inoculated with BASE-brain homogenates showed clinical signs of disease with incubation and survival times of 175±15 and 207±12 days. Five out of seven mice challenged with skeletal muscle developed a similar neurological disorder, with incubation and survival times of 380±11 and 410±12 days. At present (700 days after inoculation) mice challenged with the other peripheral tissues are still healthy. The neuropathological phenotype and PrPres type of the affected mice inoculated either with brain or muscle were indistinguishable and matched those of Tgbov XV mice infected with natural BASE.
Discussion: Our data indicate that the skeletal muscle of cattle experimentally infected with BASE contains significant amount of infectivity, at variance with BSE-affected cattle, raising the issue of intraspecies transmission and the potential risk for humans. Experiments are in progress to assess the presence of infectivity in skeletal muscles of natural BASE.
http://www.prion2009.com/sites/default/files/Prion2009_Book_of_Abstracts.pdf
Explain how an RFID tag will prevent BSE cattle from entering the food supply. Then explain why USDA allows imports of OTM cattle from Canada, and why USDA only tests about 1% of cattle and prevents a private packer from testing at their own expense.
Why do they want to follow the cattle instead of stopping them before they get here?
Thank you for your comment Anonymous, August 23, 2010 9:54 AM.
Anonymous Quote:
Explain how an RFID tag will prevent BSE cattle from entering the food supply.
An RFID tag contains a microchip that has a unique ID, the ID is never duplicated or manipulated. The RFID tag can't be tampered with or reprogrammed. 134.2 KHz RFID tags which are ISO 11784/85 are read only tags.
RFID tags provide the most reliable form of identification for cattle and livestock. They also provide the quickest way to accurately read the animal ID's. Preventing human error in reading of the tag ID's and the speed at which they can be read, is one of the benefits of RFID tags.
At feedlots cattle going through raceways can be read easily and reliably identified with RFID panel readers. If you need to Identify an animal very quickly, you just read the tag with a RFID stick or wand reader.
(An example.) If testing is done at the feedlot level, and BSE or another disease is discovered, they already have a record in their database of the cattle that was received, and which lot they are in. Next step would be to identify the animals in the lot with an RFID reader, and segregate those animals.
Anonymous Quote:
Then explain why USDA allows imports of OTM cattle from Canada.
I need to research this, so I will post another comment on this question.
Anonymous Quote:
why USDA only tests about 1% of cattle and prevents a private packer from testing at their own expense.
Again I will need to do some research on the USDA and BSE testing. BSE testing is done in many countries at higher rates than 1%
The purpose of the Animal Disease Traceability, is to track animals that are diagnosed with a disease, to their farm or origin.
George said, "An RFID tag contains a microchip that has a unique ID, the ID is never duplicated or manipulated. The RFID tag can't be tampered with or reprogrammed. 134.2 KHz RFID tags which are ISO 11784/85 are read only tags."
Please look at this article and its conclusion.
www.rfidnews.com/iso_11784short.html
Conclusion
There are a number of legitimate, very worthwhile potential uses for ISO 11784/85 transponders, however national animal registration databases relying on postive and unique identification is not one of them. For a comprehensive discussion please see:
www.rfidnews.com/iso_11784.html
Either someone hasn't done their homework when choosing this chip, or they are lying to us.
As far as USDA's supposed mandate to protect the welfare of the American livestock industry, this link explains what they are really doing.
www.cattlenetwork.com/R-CALF--USDA-OTM-Rule-Heightens-Disease-Risk-To-U-S--Cattle-Herd--U-S--Consumers/2007-09-19/Article.aspx?oid=664870
Do you understand now why we don't trust USDA? And there is much, much more than just these two examples.
BSE MRR TSS, R-CALF ON CANADA VS USA
Bill Rancher Joined: 10 Feb 2005 Posts: 1418 Location: GWN Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:49 am Post
subject: Texan wrote:
Hey Terry, I'd like to get a little further clarification on something if/when you have time. I'm not sure if I'm reading you correctly....
flounder wrote:
This is what sank my battleship in regards to testifying for r-calf. they actually appoached me about it, but i told them i would be glad to testify, but i was not stopping at the Canadian border, my testimony was to come south as well if given the opportunity. and that ended that, but i did supply them with a load of data, for whatever that was worth.
I highlighted the parts that confuse me. This almost makes it seem as if R-CALF was asking you to testify for them, but changed their mind when they found out that you were going to tell the WHOLE truth, instead of just the truth as regards Canadian imports. I thought that R-CALF was only interested in the WHOLE truth - not just the selected parts of the truth that fit their protectionist agenda? After reading your post, it makes a person wonder. Maybe I read it wrong... Am I reading this correctly, Terry? That can't be right, can it? Thanks.
snip...
I was wondering exactly the same thing Texan.
_________________
Canadian Beef....A cut above the rest! my answer to big muddy from canada ;
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=12
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=24
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=36
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15704&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=48
full text submission ;
http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/contentStreamer?objectId=09000064801f3412&disposition=attachment&contentType=crtext
Friday, August 20, 2010
USDA: Animal Disease Traceability August 2010
Greetings,
as a consumer, my opinion (if that matters), you need some sort of traceability for your livestock. I don't want to know anything about your family, your income, your kids, your sex life, nothing but to be able to trace that animal from farm to fork. I want to know whether or not if that animal has been fed animal protein, antibiotics, and if myself or my family do get sick, we should be able to trace that product. I don't see the problem. you can trace every part on your car, I can find out anything I want about you on the internet. why can't I do that with a cow?
i just don't see what the big deal is...TEST, TEST, TEST, and approve NAIS. ...
snip....please see full text ;
Friday, August 20, 2010
USDA: Animal Disease Traceability August 2010
http://naiscoolyes.blogspot.com/2010/08/usda-animal-disease-traceability-august.html
Anonymous says "I want to know whether or not if that animal has been fed animal protein, antibiotics, and if myself or my family do get sick, we should be able to trace that product."
Traceability to the farm gives the consumer NONE of that information.
If consumers want that info, then you need to contact the giant multinationals that use imported and factory farmed livestock and tell them to provide it. When you buy local, you can ask the farmer himself. And, once again, traceability includes non-food livestock. If this had anything to do with food safety (and it doesn't), why does anyone need to know when my horse goes to a local horse show that happens to be across a state line?
Thank you Barbara and Anonymous for your comments, I will read each one and reply them all shortly.
Barbara WROTE August 24, 2010 3:14 PM
Anonymous says "I want to know whether or not if that animal has been fed animal protein, antibiotics, and if myself or my family do get sick, we should be able to trace that product."
Traceability to the farm gives the consumer NONE of that information. If consumers want that info, then you need to contact the giant multinationals that use imported and factory farmed livestock and tell them to provide it. When you buy local, you can ask the farmer himself. And, once again, traceability includes non-food livestock. If this had anything to do with food safety (and it doesn't), why does anyone need to know when my horse goes to a local horse show that happens to be across a state line?
===================
i would think that the non-livestock issue crossing state lines is part of the ever emerging infectious disease threat (whether it be zoonotic disease or not), and or terrorist threat i.e. Trojan horse threat. non-livestock animals can infect livestock. so, you take your horse across state line, unknowingly having a disease (or knowingly i.e. trojan horse, terrorist), and it infects livestock and non-livestock in another state, for them to pass it on and on etc. bottom line, it's a risk factor. unfortunately, this is a different world now. i feel for the small farmers, and i hate factory farming. but when a country tries to globalize their agriculture and feed the world, and at the same time police the world, we the people at home loose, and loose, and loose. just my opinion. ...
Horses and llamas are livestock. In the US, they are not food.
The only "native" diseases humans share with horses are spread by insect vectors.
I don't take a sick animal to show. Local shows involve working out of your trailer and not in a communal barn. I would never allow my horse to go nose to nose with a strange horse - that is an invitation for trouble.
Horses do not get FMD. FMD can be carried by people, inanimate objects and the wind. The way to prevent FMD is to stop it before it crosses our borders. We have successfully kept FMD out of the US since 1929 without NAIS/Traceabilty. USDA wants to allow Brazilian cattle into the US. Brazil has FMD. USDA thinks they can control it by identifying every animal in the country. That is unrealistic. USDA is willing to risk American agriculture to expand "free" trade. I refuse to give up my civil liberties and security to appease the WTO.
Part one
The USDA refuses to test all cattle for BSE, in fact they denied Creekstone that honor in when they designed a state of the art lab. All they wanted to do was ensure Japan that their meat was safe. You can find more articles on this through your own research.
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/other/bse/news/jul2006bse.html
http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creekstone_Farms_Premium_Beef
This was stated back in 2006: Washington-U.S. Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns said today that the federal government said today that the federal government can't let an Arkansas City Company test its cattle for mad cow disease because doing so would be bad for international trade..... Notice how they use the word mad cow instead of calling it BSE.
The USDA has also proposed a rule to allow shipping of cattle from Brazil which is known to have FMD. It doesn't matter if a little region of Brazil is free and clear of FMD. FMD travels on anything and can devistate USA cattle farmers, producers of other cloven animals and hobbyists. And the word will be depopulation. Plain and simple. Then if a Region in the USA is declared with FMD what do you think will happen to our livestock producers in that area per the OIE rules and regulations. They will have to go through huge loops just to prove their animals and property are clean. Can I say this will be very expensive for many of them. They will go out of business.
Direct from the Federal Registry: http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#home
type in APHIS-2009-00034-001 in the search box, you might want to read some of the comments.
Part 2
RFID devices will not stop the spread of FAD's and this is what we are talking about, not the quickness of use whether it’s a panel or wand and the so called human mistakes made you mentioned. How dare the USDA put USA cattle farmers, producers and hobbyist at risk to any foreign animal disease. The one thing I find disturbing is how you promote RFID which really goes along with the UN-OIE to tag and track everything, farm to fork, cradle to grave. An organization made up of foreign governments that I did not vote for.
The RFID which is ISO 11784/11785 comes from the UN, http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html Dogs and cats here in the USA use a different RFID and eventually will be changed over to 11784/11785, yes we even studied all of this. Just how many RFID must an animal be injected with? We even studied the effects of RFID in pets and being a horse owner I will never inject a foreign object in their body. Once an RFID is injected the owner takes full responsibility should something happen. I am actually sick and tired of people telling me that I am irresponsible for not using RFID in my pets. I don’t loose them. Its just a matter of propaganda to get people to submit. The more times you say it the more they believe.
George nobody wants to eat tainted or diseased meat but with the USDA and FDA working for Big Ag and drug companies, what can be done to correct this? You see over the last FEW years just to many recalls have happened. Instead of shutting down these big vertical integration facilities they make laws for me. Truth be have it we probably eat lots of tainted meat. Nothing goes to waste even bruised meat gets ground up for those frozen burritos'.
You said, Japan closed its border to unsafe imports but was pressured to re-open... A question to you would be why would food safety be a trade barrier? Canada was the same deal, lets just change the age of the cattle and resume trade. You see when the Canadian border was shut down due to the one BSE cow it wasn’t very long after that did the Canadians threaten to take the USA to trade court. The age of the cattle just changed and once again the border trading resumed. Another good article to read:
Http://xstatic99645.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/canadiancattlemen_for_fairtrade.pdf
This is the newest from Mike Johanns right from the Senate floor. You might also want to read the whole site as allot of truth comes to the forefront.Http:/naissucks.com/wordpress/?m=201003
Gisela
Thank you for your comments Gisela,
I will read them along with the others and reply each one, will also read the links you have provided so I can give you my opinion.
This is also a partial response for Barbara.
Quickly on RFID and recording of animal identification.
The ISO standards are made based and according to thorough research and extensive and costly testing, and many countries are involved.
The recording standards of animals including livestock and companion have a guideline.
You might want to look at the following site.
The International Committee for Animal Record Registration (ICARR) www.icarr.org
The rules and methods of animal recording include tags, tattoo. and RFID tags.
This is an extensive site, tag manufacturers must have what is called an ICARR approval to be included in this list, which then becomes eligible and used in RFID tags for animals.
George,
Even RFID News says the ISO 11784/11785 chip is NOT recommended for this purpose. What more needs to be said about that? Even if I wanted to spend my money to chip my private property, despite the inherent risks of introducing a foreign body into an animal, because the UN says so, why would I choose a chip that won't work as needed?
I don't buy into research that has a political agenda attached to it.
And why is the US pushing unConstitutional UN policies on Americans? I don't take orders from the UN and neither should our government.
I realize I've strayed from the original topic of your blog, but all these things are connected, and I'm not going to play this game willingly. Nothing less than the future of the United States is at stake.
Barbara, thank you for your comment.
I will reply this shortly. I will verify the links that you claim ISO 11784/85 is not recommended for animal identification.
Just a note RFID news is just news, they must be able to back up this claim, so I will look to see what and where they justify their statement, because I know this is false...
ISO 11784/85 is the recommended standard for animal traceability.
Please give me some time to verify the RFID news link with their claims. Will let you know what I find out.
Thanks again Barbara for your comment. You did stray a bit from the topic, others have as well, but this is ok, I am allowing your comments, Most of your comments are good comments and constructive, some are off the topic, again I am fine with this, but going forward would like to stick with the topic.
I will answer all the topics, from RFID, to diseases, to feed, and other issues commented here.
My plate is full right now, but do encourage everyone to continue with their comments, it is a free world, and everyone has the right to comment their own opinions.
Thank you all.
Barbara thanks again,
In response to your comment posted:
Barbara, August 24, 2010 9:49 AM
I am going through the information you provided now, very interesting. Will comment shortly.
Response to: Barbara, August 25, 2010 7:59 AM
Barbara Quote:
Even RFID News says the ISO 11784/11785 chip is NOT recommended for this purpose. What more needs to be said about that? Please look at this article and its conclusion.
www.rfidnews.com/iso_11784short.html
Barabara, I have done as you suggested. I have went to this site and read the article.
This is not a credible source or a news site.
www.rfidnews.com has no credentials at all. There is no contact info, no company info who runs the site. This site has no authority on RFID technology. It is articles written by people with their own biased opinions.
I read the article, the article has no date of when it was written. Judging from the content of the article, I will say it was written between 1995 to 2000, at the beginning when RFID started taking traction.
The article itself does not give any credible sources for its claims. This is something you must have to back up a statement.
This article gives wrong and false information.
If someone suggested this link to you, and you are suggesting this to everyone, you are spreading wrong and inconclusive information.
This article is without merit, credentials, and sources. This is a biased article from someones opinion. Not an OFFICIAL document.
I would suggest you visit the following site, it is a credible source, with true information.
http://www.iso.org/iso/home.htm
George,
I went to your website and searched for ISO 11784/11785, but there were no matching results.
But, even if there were, trust has to be earned. This is like asking Monsanto if rBST is safe. Of course, they will say it is.
And, again, even if the chip performs to what you claim it does, I want no part of it. I don't need it, it costs me money, I get no benefit from it, it presents a potential health risk to my horses, and I resent that any government agency would require it for their purposes. The US is theoretically still a free country. What I want to know is why so many people are willing to sell their (and everyone else's)freedom for a false sense of security.
In Response to: Barbara, August 24, 2010 7:34 PM
Quote Barbara: Horses and llamas are livestock. In the US, they are not food.
The only "native" diseases humans share with horses are spread by insect vectors.
I agree with you Barbara they are livestock, and usually not intended or part of our food chain, but they can catch and transmit diseases, not foot and mouth or BSE, but as a precaution it is a good idea in my opinion to include them in animal identification.
Quote Barbara: USDA wants to allow Brazilian cattle into the US. Brazil has FMD. USDA thinks they can control it by identifying every animal in the country.
The USDA along with the FDA must have a livestock and disease import policy for importing livestock, which should include: age and source verification of the animal, certificate of health, livestock under a certain age limit.
I am not sure if that is something that is in place? If it is in place, and this is the main part. The USDA and cattle industry as a whole must abide by the same rules, they would or should stipulate for imported livestock.
If you want to limit your imported livestock, to control diseases, you can't expect to export your livestock without any traceability, testing, or verification. After all other countries in the world that import U.S. livestock, don't want to import cattle with diseases like foot and mouth or BSE.
In Response to gisela, August 24, 2010 8:07 PM
Quote Gisela: The RFID which is ISO 11784/11785 comes from the UN, http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html Dogs and cats here in the USA use a different RFID and eventually will be changed over to 11784/11785, yes we even studied all of this. Just how many RFID must an animal be injected with?
Gisela, This is off the topic of livestock traceability, I already answered this question
concerning the ISO 11784/85 standards.
This is to put the record straight on ISO 11784/85, It is the standard for all animal identification. Yes in the past the U.S. used a different standard for companion animals (Cats and Dogs) which was 125.0 KHz, while Europe used the same frequency of 134.2 KHz for companion animals along with livestock.
In order to simplify traceability and reduce the costs of microchips be produced, and reduce the cost to consumers for RFID readers, It was agreed that only 134.2 KHz was to be used for all animal identification from Livestock to companion animals.
The microchip is the same, just comes in a different form, as an ear tag for livestock, an injectable transponder for horse, llama, and companion animals.
As a rule, if a companion animal has the legacy 125.0 Khz micorchip, that is still acceptable, and no one is implanting an extra glass transponder in companion animals.
Another note for companion animals, this is strictly for identification purpose only, not for disease control, it is not a requirement in the U.S. It is only a requirement should you want to travel to Europe with your dog or cat, because laws there are all companions animals have to have a microchip for identification.
Just because a bunch of desk jockeys think tracking my private livestock at my time and expense is a good idea, doesn't mean I agree with them. I am not on the gov't payroll. USDA is paid with my tax dollars. Who's in charge?
It is already current practice to have health certificates with a description of the horse accompany horses traveling interstate. The only purpose of ID is to make certain the horse and papers match. Since we don't usually have livestock inspection stations at every interstate bridge and state line road, who is checking this? And do you really think there is no way that someone could circumvent this system if they tried? ID is just a way to make money and give a warm, fuzzy feeling to the public that they are being protected.
For that matter, if I travel interstate with my horse for personal reasons, how is that commerce? Doesn't commerce mean something is being sold (or in the case of Wickard and Filburn - not being sold)?
The US (as well as other countries) already disallow trade from countries with endemic FMD. That's the smart thing to do. Why is USDA trying to change that? It only benefits the people trading, not the American rancher.
And if we don't want to import BSE, why do we continue to trade with Canada and increase our risk by allowing older cattle? Why did USDA refuse to permit Creekstone to test for BSE at their own expense? Who are they really protecting?
I'm sorry, George. There is no valid reason for most livestock owners to participate in the ID boondoggle. If business wants to have age and source verification, let them pay for it themselves and leave the rest of us alone.
Thank you for your comment Barbara,
Traceability in this case is for livestock of Cattle, Bison, Pigs, Sheep, and Goat for the traceability of the animals in the event of a disease outbreak.
Canada had its cases of BSE, Canada also tests quite often for diseases. The Canadian government and the Cattle industry reacted to the closed border, and then came up with a traceability system for livestock, that yes includes RFID ear tags.
Canada acknowledged the problem, reacted and made its livestock compliant for international trade, so has many other countries like Australia, Ireland, Great Britain, just to name a few. Why? an effort to control diseases...So importing countries don't receive diseased cattle.
"You say there is no valid reason for livestock owners to participate in ID." There is, BSE, and Foot and Mouth, among other TSE's.
I disagree with you, it might be your opinion, but not the opinion of others...
Barbara.
I regret that I had to delete your last comment. I have nothing to hide, my name is on this post.
What you had posted was not necessary at all, it was also malicious and an attack on me personally. That is Not needed here.
Also don't agree with your comment. You are clearly just posting anything you feel, because you now can't argue a point in a civilized manner.
It's a shame, you did have compelling arguments, now it is clear, you will post what ever you feel.
I understand the feelings of those who oppose a traceability program, what are the actual things you oppose? or reason you don't want a traceability program, besides the RFID part.
Is it cost of tags?
Privacy?
extra work involved?
All of those things and the unconstitutional loss of private property rights through the issuance of Premises ID.
This paves the way for new taxes, regulations, penalties and fines on livestock ownership, and will expose our animals to new FADs by lowering import requirements.
Thanks for your comment Anonymous, interesting view point, and a valid concern.
Consumers have the right to buy stuff that are safe, especially the food that we eat. And consuming products that are unsafe will violate us. Local health offices in your community listens to your concerns regarding your rights as a consumer. Also, Ottawa personal injury lawyers address your concerns as well.
Another Mad Cow Disease outbreak confirmed in California.
Are these farmers for real? What kind of comments is that? and from people who supply me my Steaks. I am a little worried.
Great post.
Look at my blog post - Terry Sawyer
It's actually a nice and useful piece of info. I'm haρpy that
you sіmρly shаred thіs helpful infοrmatіοn wіth uѕ.
Please keep us іnformed like this. Τhanks fοr sharing.
Here is my web page ... Terry Sawyer
Thank you for your comment Terry.
Іts lіke you reaԁ my thoughtѕ! Υou appeaг to gгаsp a lot approximately thіs,
like you wrοte the e-book in it oг something. Ι thіnk that уou сoulԁ do with sоmе
% to force the message house a bit, however instead of that, this is magnificent blog. A fantastic read. I will definitely be back.
My homepage ; Terry Sawyer
Thank you for your comment Chicago Tribune,
Post a Comment