Electronic Animal ID - The Feasibility and Potential

The virtues or vices associated with a National Animal Identification System (NAIS) have created much controversy over the past few years. Many advocates have touted the need for an ID system in the face of major disasters or animal health epidemics. Certainly the usefulness of a functional animal ID system has been documented with some notorious animal disease problems such as tuberculosis in Michigan, BSE in Washington and Texas, as well as most recently again with Foot and Mouth disease in Great Britain.

The utility of an animal ID system was dramatically displayed with the very high degree of success demonstrated in re-uniting micro-chipped pets with owners following Hurricane Katrina. Conversely many pets with limited ID have never been re-united with their owners. In essence, to gain widespread acceptance of an animal ID system, usefulness and enthusiasm really depend on understanding how such a system might improve or make more convenient the care of animals or the marketing of animal ag products, such as meat, milk, and fiber. This technology is purported to be useful and cost effective at all levels of the production chain.

Much has been written about the attributes and functions that an electronic system could provide to animal tracking and identification. While much has been written and theorized, there has been very little done in the field to match up the theory with actual hands-on applications. In the past year researchers and staff at Penn State have been using electronic ID and components to field test the devices and tags to determine the utility of using electronic ID in various points in the production system. For widespread adoption and support in the absence of a regulatory edict, it is important to document positive benefits for users sufficient to offset the extra cost and effort.

On the farm, laptop computers and hand held devices can be synchronized with the electronic ID in tie stalls, lock ups, palpation rails, and other animal handling facilities. Dairy information and individual cow information, such as that found in PCDART or Dairy Comp 305 ®, can be retrieved electronically and synchronized with animal ID using electronic ID and readers. This technology is very accurate and can save producers much valuable time in determining individual animal management decisions in large groups. At the farm level, animals can be identified quickly and accurately as they enter van, trucks, or trailers. Date, time, and even GIS location can be noted and recorded and lists generated at the site. This information could be used as producers move animals from site to site. Date, time, location, and animal ID can be recorded as animals leave a farm. Truckers picking up cull animals have successfully used the equipment. Animal ID can be accurately recorded for each animal with out restraint, in a matter of just seconds. If needed, animal ID can be read by holding a wand through the slots of the trailer. This technology is user friendly and can be used conveniently at the farm level. Costs are modest for the equipment and would not be a deterrent for most hauler or producers. Some software packages if certain applications can be a little pricey.

Some markets have a strong emphasis for age-source-verification. To test the technology for this application, all animals on several farms were given electronic ID ear tags. On these test farms, animals could identified by independent verifiers at any time. Animals can be easily and accurately identified and tracked from the farm to processing. At processing plants electronic ID can be linked to bar codes to follow and link particular animals to products. Available technology has successfully documented that these tasks are achievable and verifiable.

Traceability of animal movements in the face of herd epidemics has been a major driving force for the application of electronic ID but managing the data base and capturing the information at collection points has been an issue. In PA several large auctions and processing plants have been equipped with panel readers. If these panel readers are turned on they can successfully capture the electronic ID of animals. With modest adjustments, we have been able to down load the data and confirm that the panel readers were actually reading the animals with electronic ID.

All in all, the usefulness, accuracy, and speed of the components that compliment electronic ID's have been documented. Until this point much has been written and discussed concerning a National ID system and its benefits to the entire industry. Nearly everyone can conceptualize that global trade and national animal health initiatives are important, such lofty goals are sometimes hard to envision as tangible benefits at the grassroots level. Through a number of very practical trials and tests we have shown quite convincingly that electronic ID in animals can be of real benefit to producers. The technology is accurate, for the most part is user friendly, and its use and widespread adoption could be a win-win for the producer as well as animal health experts and regulators who wish to follow and record animal movement.

.........................................................

David Wolfgang, Extension Veterinarian

Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences