i Farmers wary of requiring animal IDs
Farmers wary of requiring animal IDs
BY CRAIG CROSBY
Staff Writer Kennebec Journal & Morning Sentinel 03/21/2009

BY CRAIG CROSBY

Staff Writer

Maine farmers are keeping an eye on Washington these days as Congress is reviving efforts for a mandatory national animal identification system.

"A lot of these farm groups are really watching this right now because the farmers really feel threatened," said John O'Donnell, who raises beef cattle on his Monmouth farm. "They've been trying to do this for several years."

Rep. David Scott, D-Georgia, chairman of the U.S. House Agriculture Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry, used last week's hearing on the national animal identification system, or NAIS, to demand the program be made mandatory across the country.

Two bills under consideration in the House, HR 814 and HR 759, would force farmers to identify and track their animals.

"Congress' agriculture committee and United States Department of Agriculture continue to think national ID is the solution without articulating the problem," said Russell Libby, executive director of the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association, who plans to meet with representatives in Washington next week. "So far they've been unwilling to listen to the many farmers across this country."

Implemented in 2004 after bovine spongiform encephalopathy -- mad cow disease--was found in a Washington state herd, the NAIS program is designed to enable authorities to trace the source of a disease outbreak within 48 hours. The program includes a registration number for each location where animals are raised, identification numbers for each animal and reporting requirements whenever those animals are sold, moved or slaughtered.

The NAIS was intended originally to be mandatory by 2008, but lawmakers made it voluntary in response to farmers' outrage about the expense and government intrusion the program would create. Small farmers, particularly, were angered that the program did not distinguish between a family that owns a single horse and a large farm with several thousand head of cattle.

"It gives (the government) the ability to come onto your farm," O'Donnell said. "Most of the veterinarians I talk to are for it, but that's because they've been sold that it's a food safety issue. We see it as a bureaucracy and government intrusion."

The voluntary program has enjoyed marginal success. Only about 500,000 sites, or 35 percent of those eligible, have registered over the past five years, according to the USDA. Only about 10 percent of Maine sites have registered.

Rep. Collin Peterson, D- Minnesota, chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, said during last week's hearing that the lack of participation would make it impossible to trace the source of a disease outbreak.

"After five years of throwing over $100 million at voluntary system, we are still in pretty much the same place," Peterson said. "Even worse, many of the crucial aspects of the program show little promise of ever being substantially implemented."

"I believe a mandatory system is necessary and carries with it many benefits for producers, processors and consumers," Scott said.

Those benefits do not apply to most farmers, particularly those in Maine, Libby argued. Small farmers believe the program is meant to make it easier to export beef, but the vast majority of Maine's beef winds up in the local market, Libby said.

The identification program, while increasing disease traceability, doesn't help prevention, Libby said. Moreover, the cost of the computer chip that would allow the government to track each animal easily could erase the profit that animal reaps at sale or slaughter, he said.

"If you're not part of the overseas marketing program, it's hard to see why you have to be part of the system," Libby said. "MOFGA's concerns have really been around making sure we don't require extra systems at the same time as farmers around the country are having a hard time maintaining viable businesses."

There are no plans to make Maine's identification plan, dubbed IDME, mandatory, state veterinarian Don Hoenig said.

"My personal opinion is we need a better system of animal identification in this country," Hoenig said. "In an animal disease emergency, we're going to need to quickly trace animals onto a farm and off the farm. The goal is 48 hours. We're nowhere near that."

Hoenig envisions a system that would requires farmers to identify animals when they change ownership. The data then would be collected at the end of the animal's life.

"I don't think every animal in this country is going to have an identification tag or electronic chip," Hoenig said. "This is such a controversial topic. I think we're a long way from coming to any kind of conclusion on it."

If there ever is a mandatory identification program, Pittsfield dairy farmer Tom Cote hopes it applies to farms across the board.

"If the large farm has to do it, the small farm should do it," he said. "One or two animals can spread something as easily as someone with a thousand cows."

Most dairy farmers already keep detailed records on their animals, so Cote is not necessarily opposed to a national identification program, but shares concerns about the expense and government interference.

"We hate to have things mandated on us," Cote said. "They'll tell us, 'You come up with how to pay for it.' I don't think anybody wants big brother looking over their shoulder."

Craig Crosby -- 623-3811, ext. 433

ccrosby@centralmaine.com

Bookmark and share this story: digg del.icio.us Reddit

Reader comments

Click here to view or add reader comments