Perspective

Animal ID Is About Integrity

By Michael Kelsey

Animal Identification is an issue that spawns more cussin’ and discussin’ within our industry than any other. Some of the tirade is based on misinformation and even fear, while some is probably based on false hopes. Animal ID is important, not because it should be voluntary or mandatory, not because the government should or should not control the data and not because we should or should not pay for it. It is important because it deals with the integrity of our product.

Debate on animal identification, LB 632, introduced by Sen. Cap Dierks, was heard in front of the Legislature’s Agriculture Committee on February 20. Early on, Sen. Dierks informed Nebraska Cattlemen of his intent to file LB 632 and he has been very transparent regarding his objective with the bill. While Nebraska Cattlemen opposed the bill for reasons that I will share in a moment, we did thank Sen. Dierks in our testimony for his openness and attention to this very important issue.

First let me briefly share what LB 632 proposes to do. According to the statement of intent, “LB 632 requires the [Nebraska] Department of Agriculture to develop a system to withdraw premise identifiers from the local, regional, state and federal databases. It also requires that the Department prepare an affidavit of confirmation that all information previously placed in the database for the purpose of premise identification has been removed.” 

The Agriculture Committee adopted amendments that “retain the direction that the Department accommodate requests to remove a premise registration but clarify that the Department provide only written confirmation that it has purged premise ID information from its own database and instruct the Department to cooperate with USDA in removing premise registrations.” LB 632 has been sent to General File by the Agriculture Committee.

Nebraska Cattlemen policy, which our membership created and adopted, encourages the voluntary registration of premises.

Premises Identification – Animal Health & Nutrition Committee – 2006

WHEREAS, premises registration is being offered on a voluntary basis by the Nebraska Department of Agriculture; and

WHEREAS, an effective disease surveillance system is in the best interest of individual producers and the beef industry as a whole.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED Nebraska Cattlemen encourages its members and all beef producers and allied industries to register their premises.

Nebraska Cattlemen has carried out this policy by hosting over half a dozen educational seminars across the state offering information about the National Animal Identification System. At each of those seminars, producers were offered information on how to register their premises and were encouraged to do so voluntarily. Copies of the premises registration form were available. The one-page form requires only general information such as physical address. There is no fee for registering a premises.

While Nebraska Cattlemen supports the concept of a voluntary animal identification program (Nebraska Cattlemen policy would support a mandatory program only for disease surveillance if such a program existed, which it does not), Nebraska Cattlemen is concerned that LB 632 does not effectively achieve the desired intention. The data in the premises registration system is held both in federal and state databases as well as in private systems if the producer has supplied that data to the private entities. Nebraska Cattlemen spoke with USDA about this issue and understands that USDA is currently promulgating a procedure that would allow producers to “un-register” their premises from government-held systems. The Nebraska Department of Agriculture should and will honor USDA’s procedure once it is promulgated. However, LB 632 has no jurisdiction over USDA to provide for the bill’s desired intent of purging records from a federal or private databases.

With all this in mind, the following questions must be asked: Is LB 632 necessary? Does LB 632 do what is intended? It is Nebraska Cattlemen’s opinion that the answer to both questions is no. LB 632 has the potential to provide false assurances to those who support the concept since it has no jurisdiction on federal or private databases.

It’s important to remember that in order for a producer’s premises to be registered, he or she must have completed the application. This is a voluntary procedure. According to the Nebraska Department of Agriculture (as of the hearing date), no producers have requested to have their information deleted. Nebraska Cattlemen believes that this is because producers voluntarily offered their information in the first place.

Data confidentiality is an interesting aspect of this issue. At the conclusion of most of the testifiers’ presentations, Sen. Erdman asked the presenter if they had registered their premises. Only two, including me, had done so. I pointed out to the committee that our information is protected. No one or no entity has the authority to know if you as a producer have registered your premises unless you choose to share that information. Obviously the Department of Agriculture has access to the data, but under LB 531, which Nebraska Cattlemen was instrumental in passing last year, the data is protected and cannot be released under penalty of law.

As the animal identification issue continues to be debated, it is important to understand the full ramifications of proposals, including intended and unintended consequences. Passion about this issue is important and necessary, but fact should guide our passion. Integrity of our product is at the fundamental core of the animal identification debate. Let’s not forget that integrity includes both fact and passion.  Y  Michael Kelsey is NC’s executive vice president.