Electronic Identification: US Department of Agriculture reveals final rule requiring electronically readable tags for interstate movement of some livestock

The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced its long-awaited update to the animal identification rules on Friday, April 26, 2024.

The agency will now require that sexually intact cattle and bison moving interstate must be tagged with electronically readable tags. Previously the metal clip tags (bangs tags or something similar) were sufficient for this same class of livestock. Additionally cattle and bison of any age used for rodeo or recreational events; and cattle and bison of any age used for shows or exhibitions will require electronic tags. Cattle and bison are exempted from official identification requirements if they are going directly to slaughter, says the USDA rule.

USDA will continue to provide tags to producers free of charge to jumpstart efforts to enable the fastest possible response to a foreign animal disease, said the USDA statement.

A copy of this rule may be viewed today, and the rule will be published in the Federal Register in the coming weeks. This rule will be effective 180 days after publication in the Federal Register. 

“Rapid traceability in a disease outbreak will not only limit how long farms are quarantined, keep more animals from getting sick, and help ranchers and farmers get back to selling their products more quickly – but will help keep our markets open,” said Dr. Michael Watson, APHIS Administrator.  

One of the most significant benefits of the rule for farmers and ranchers will be the enhanced ability of the United States to limit impacts of animal disease outbreaks to certain regions, which is the key to maintaining our foreign markets, said USDA’s statement.

Those cattle already tagged with visual tags (such as bangs tags) prior to the implementation date of this rule will be grandfathered in. In other words, they will not be required to bear an electronic identification tag if they are already wearing a visual, approved tag by the implementation date.

The implementation date is expected to be about six months from April 26, 2024, or around Oct. 1, 2024.

North Dakota state veterinarian Dr. Ethan Andress explains that the rule essentially requires that an electronic tag will replace the metal clip or “bangs” tag.

“This will only be required for interstate shipment,” he said. The rules we currently have don’t change – it’s the same rules we had, it’s just that we will no longer use the metal tags.”

Dr. Andress said the state has equipped attending veterinarians for North Dakota auction markets with electronic readers for the tags. He said if animals requiring a tag arrive at the auction barn without a tag, the veterinarian can apply a tag for a fee. This is current practice, except the current tags are inexpensive metal tags, not electronic identification tags.

On the aspect of data storage, Andress said the state already keeps track of sexually intact cattle 18 months and older that move interstate. Currently, veterinarians handwrite that data at the auction barn and submit it to the state to be transcribed and entered into a digital database. The electronic tags should allow the data to be automatically entered into the digital database, without the need to transcribe the numbers in the state office.

In 2002, USDA introduced its National Animal Identification System plan, or NAIS. In 2010, the agency reported that “since 2004” it had spent $150 million “trying to get NAIS up and running,” adding that Congress had reduced USDA’s funding because it wasn’t succeeding in implementing the program.

The 2010 report also said: “Certain portions of the U.S. cattle industry have shown strong resistance to what they perceive as a costly government intrusion in their private affairs. Participation in the initial phase of NAIS, premises registration, reflected this same degree of interest, as very high percentages of eligible premises were registered for most major animal species—poultry (95%), sheep (95%), swine (80%), goats (60%), and horses (50%)—with the exception of cattle (18%).”

It’s no secret that, as with many issues, the industry has been split regarding its support and lack thereof for mandatory federal identification programs, particularly anything requiring electronic identification.

In the past and currently, R-CALF USA has believed that current identification programs – bangs tags, brand inspection programs, back tags, etc, are sufficient.

The National Cattlemens Beef Association has traditionally supported USDA’s position over the years. At its recent convention, NCBA approved policy similar to USDA’s recently published rule. NCBA policy also calls for a “private, industry managed, nongovernment Independent Database Collaborator” to serve as a “hub” for “critical data coordination.”

In the group’s official statement, NCBA said it has has worked hard to secure $15 million in funding for producers to reduce the cost of implementing this change.

“We also remain committed to safeguarding producers’ private data and continuing to reduce the cost of ear tags for farmers and ranchers. Our industry faces a tremendous threat from the risk of a future foreign animal disease on American soil. To avoid devastating financial losses during a potential outbreak and to help producers quickly return to commerce, we need an efficient animal disease traceability system,” said NCBA President Mark Eisele, a Wyoming rancher.

R-CALF USA doesn’t believe the rule is all about disease management.   

“It’s no surprise that while USDA claims this EID mandate is to improve disease control, it proudly discloses in the rule’s accompanying press release that ‘the most significant benefit of the rule’ is to maintain foreign markets,” said R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard.

“This is because the beneficiaries of this rule are not cattle producers or consumers. Instead, this rule is intended to benefit multinational beef packers and multinational eartag manufacturers who will profit at the expense of cattle producers and consumers. In fact, because the rule is cost-prohibitive for independent cattle producers, the agency is using millions of taxpayer dollars to give millions of their unnecessary EID eartags away.

“The USDA has slapped independent cattle producers, who have worked closely with the USDA in the past to very successfully control, contain, and eradicate foreign animal diseases, in the face.

“We will fight against the implementation of this disastrous rule that infringes on the freedoms and liberties of our nation’s independent cattle farmers and ranchers. This is government overreach at its worst.

“Our goal will be to restore for our nation’s cattle producers the flexibility the USDA promised them when they agreed to the agency’s 2013 rule. That common-sense rule provided producers the flexibility to use a variety of different animal identification devices, depending on what best fit their individual operations. Among those approved devices producers could choose among were the very inexpensive metal eartags and the very costly electronic identification eartags. The USDA has robbed producers of their ability to make their own business decisions. We cannot and should not tolerate this as an industry.”

The U.S. Cattlemen’s Association has remained relatively neutral on the animal identification front, but has adamantly opposed USDA’s proposal to establish a mandatory animal identification program for all cattle in the country.

The Canadian government requires all beef cattle be equipped with an electronically readable tag when leaving the premise on which they were born.

Canadian purebred breeder Andy Shuepbach, Lilybrook Herefords, Claresholm, Alberta, Canada, said he applies the electronically readable tags at weaning time. He said typically he has to replace about 10 to 15 percent of the tags each year on his cowherd, although this varies depending on the brand of tag he uses each year.

He said public auction markets are required to watch for tags, and typically apply tags if needed for a fee of $18 or more per head. At Lilybrook Herefords, Andy and his family have to put the cattle through the chute before selling them to be sure they have a tag. He said because of the long hair on the ear and the small size of the tags, it isn’t uncommon for the tag to be difficult to see in the pasture or even in the corral.

Schuepbach has found ways to incorporate the tags into his ranch setup, using them on his bulls to implement a feeding program that monitors each bull’s daily feed and water intake.

Producers in Canada can order tags from a private company or though the Canadian Cattle Identification Agency. Because he orders his through CCIA, the tags are denoted in the government database as originating on his ranch.

If those cattle were ever found to carry a concerning disease, the government would contact him to learn more about where and when the cattle were sold, in order to start the tracing process of where the cattle are now.

“Some feedlots record those RFID tags going into the feedlot and record them leaving. So there is probably a lot of information on those tags, but there could be broken links in the chain where someone didn’t do their job,” he said.

Shuepbach said the original owner of the cattle (and tag) should make notes in the database when the cattle are sold, die, etc.

“Overall, I’m not against the program. It’s probably a good program, although I typically don’t like government involvement. If there is a disease outbreak on our doorstep, hopefully we can trace it quickly,” he said.

Wyoming Congresswoman Harriet Hageman has made no secret about her concerns about more government oversight of the U. S. cattle herd. In the past, she has told TSLN that it opens the door to intrusive government policies such as those in some European countries that are forcing the reduction of cattle numbers in the name of climate change.

“I am frustrated and concerned that OIRA (Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs) would allow a final rule to move forward mandating the use of EID eartags. Not only is such a mandate bad policy, this rule has not gone through the proper regulatory review required. APHIS failed to undertake a proper federalism review and did not provide an accurate economic analysis. This mandate is duplicative and places an unjust burden on ranchers who have to cross state lines to take their cattle to market. I will continue to fight for our small, independent ranchers and hope they will hold their industry representatives accountable for supporting such a destructive rule.”

USDA’s final rule can be found at: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/sites/default/files/traceability-final-rule.pdf and is expected to be published in the federal register soon.