Governments have a long history of using tracking technologies to determine our whereabouts, habits, and even preferences. at cell phone and automobile to Snowplows and garbage trucksThe government seems to want to track everything that moves. mousse.
The USDA recently rule—It is expected to come into effect within a few months. —All cattle and bison traveling across state lines must be tagged. radio frequency identification (RFID) ear tags. RFID technology uses radio frequencies to transmit and collect data through a system of electronic tags and scanners. This technology is considered a type of electronic, or remote, barcode that allows a scanner to read an RFID chip anywhere from a few meters to about 100 meters away. In some ways, similar to short-range GPS systems, RFID can track geographic location and also act as a data collection and storage system.
Quickly scan RFID tags for livestock can pull up It provides information such as the cow’s date of birth, weight, vaccination records, ownership history, which farm it went to, and how it was transported. USDA is justifying its RFID mandate. public health evidenceIt is claimed that it can help track and eradicate disease outbreaks among livestock, such as mad cow disease or hoof disease.
While plausible at first glance, it is not clear whether the order will achieve its intended purpose. very Make it clear that you will be disproportionately injured Small independent ranchers and livestock farmers.
First of all, most ranchers already want to be able to identify their cattle. physical metal tags For years to do so. Electronic RFID tags are twice as expensive Like traditional metal tags, they require an upfront investment in scanners and software, making the switch too expensive for many small farms. Farmers also complain that electronic tagging is more difficult. visually identified This is important during cattle drives and other large, fast-paced livestock movements. Therefore, most farmers using electronic tags tags are still there Animals using traditional physical tags require a double investment in two types of tags.
There is also the issue of tag retention. “I’ve talked to a lot of people who used these RFID tags and their cows lost 50 percent after five years,” said Ken Fox, a dairy cattle farmer in South Dakota and chair of R-CALF USA’s Animal Identification Committee. said Wisconsin State Farmer. “After nine to 10 years, only 14 percent of the tags remain. And our cattle can be with us for 15 to 20 years, so that’s a serious problem.” Fox also points out that RFID scanners often need to be replaced every four to five years.
fox Point out Not all livestock operations are created equal. For dairy farmers who keep their animals in confinement, frequent replacement of tags makes better logistical sense, even if it is more expensive. However, tag replacement may be completely impossible for livestock ranchers. “If you have cattle on 10,000 to 30,000 acres of grazing land and you process them twice a year, it doesn’t work.” said fox. “If you lose that tag, how will you know who that cow is?” Amish farmers also Oppose Electronic tagging is based on moral grounds against the technology.
Large livestock operations can afford to double tag their livestock using physical and electronic tags, and in fact many have already done so voluntarily. This means that the burden of obligations will be heaviest on small and medium-sized farms and ranches. USDA regulations also more directly favor large-scale cattle operations, including: allow them to use The so-called “group identification” of livestock herds of a certain size and continuity.
“The new rules require large cattle operations to use one ID per group of a certain size instead of one ID per animal,” Remington Kesten wrote. blog post For David’s Pasture, a small cattle farm in Missouri. “This means that once the order goes into effect, small farms will actually incur more costs per animal than larger farms.”
Worse, this group identification actually undermines USDA’s entire disease tracking rationale for mandatory electronic tagging. “This intentional loophole also reduces traceability for large farms and exporters, which contradicts USDA’s main reason for mandating RFID ear tags in the first place.” note Kesten.
This rule fails on its own. Supporters point to the 2003 mad cow disease outbreak in Washington state: yes It is worth noting that although the use of electronic tags allowed for quicker identification of where the disease originated, the government was able to trace the original diseased cow to its native farm in Canada within 13 days.
It is also worth recognizing that livestock disease outbreaks are extremely rare in the United States. not article In ~ lancaster agriculture, which takes a generally favorable stance on the USDA mandate, notes that hoof disease was last discovered in the United States in 1929. Farmers like Fox highlighted In the United States, brucellosis has been successfully eradicated without electronic tagging.
Rather, the biggest source of disease outbreaks are large-scale commercial farms. “There has been no data in the last 10 years to show that foodborne illnesses have been caused by diseases on small farms.” write Kesten. “All major disease outbreaks in recent years have occurred on large farms.” In other words, small, independent ranchers are taking the brunt of the new regulations in the name of solving a problem that has nothing to do with them.
Finally, the USDA rule raises serious data privacy concerns. RFID tags are not possible. Distinguish between scanners—Portable and easy to carry around, allowing anyone with a scanner to access the data contained in each tag. Ominously, USDA rules I decided to use the term. electronic identification tag Instead of RFID Although an acronym, RFID tags are currently the only technology approved by the USDA for tagging livestock.
This flexible language allows the USDA to explicitly leave the door open Provides more comprehensive tracking technology. This could come in the form of “active” RFID tags instead of the “passive” RFID tags currently considered. wider range readability is poor or even gps tracking Number of cattle via satellite.
One small sign of hope for American ranchers is that Congress finally appears to be waking up to the excessive influence of the USDA. Recently, Senator Mike Rounds (R.S.D.) introduction A bill that would prohibit the USDA from enforcing regulations mandating electronic tag technology for cattle and bison.
USDA is trying to find a solution to a problem that has already been largely solved through current practices.
fox put in More colorfully: “Someone once told me this: NASA spent millions of dollars developing a pen that could work in sub-zero temperatures and zero gravity. The Russians just used a pencil.”
