New version page

Legal and Ethical Issues of Animal Tracking

This preview shows page 1-2-3-26-27-28 out of 28 pages.

View Full Document
View Full Document

End of preview. Want to read all 28 pages?

Upload your study docs or become a GradeBuddy member to access this document.

View Full Document
Unformatted text preview:

Slide 1Slide 2RFID – Animal AgSlide 4Slide 5Slide 6Slide 7Slide 8Slide 9Slide 10Slide 11Slide 12Slide 13Slide 14Slide 15Slide 16Slide 17Slide 18Slide 19Slide 20Slide 21Slide 22Slide 23Slide 24Slide 25Slide 26RFID – Animal AgSlide 28Legal & Ethical Issues of Animal TrackingBackground & StatusLegal and Practical ConcernsCostConfidentialityCompetitionLiabilityEthical ConsiderationsRFID – Animal AgBackground & StatusUSDA initiated the implementation of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) in 2004. NAIS – A Cooperative State-Federal-Industry partnership intended to:Standardize and expand animal identification programs and practices to all livestock species and poultryThree components—premises identification, animal identification, and animal tracking. Long-term goal of the NAIS is to provide animal health officials with the capability to identify all livestock and premises that have had direct contact with a disease of concern within 48 hours after discovery.RFID – Animal AgNAIS is currently a voluntary programUSDA has adopted a phased-in approach to implementation. Although the draft strategic plan references mandatory requirements in 2008 and beyond, to date no actions have been initiated by USDA to develop regulations to require participation in NAIS. The NAIS is a national program intended to identify all agricultural animals and track them as they come into contact with, or are inter-mixed with, animals other than herd mates from their premises of origin.RFID – Animal AgApproximately $14.3 million has been available to state and Tribal cooperators to begin implementation. More than 80,000 premises had been registered as of early 2006; over 350,000 premises registered by Feb 2007. Currently, animal health officials conduct disease trace outs with systems already in place:records related to program diseases, on-farm recordkeeping, required interstate movement certificates and breed registries. Epidemiologic investigations can take days to weeks to complete - records often kept on paper or not standardized across state lines.RFID – Animal AgCurrently, all states and many Tribes have approved premises registration systems; APHIS says all 50 states have projects in drafting/implementation stages.Highest % of registration: Wisconsin (108.2%); Lowest % of registration: Connecticut (0.7%).Questions:Participation rates in current registration of premises focusWhy are the high % high?Why are the low % low?Why are we not at 100% across all states?RFID – Animal AgMay stem from adoption of the program:Pre-adoption of NAIS, partnership of 100+ animal and livestock professionals from 70 associations, organizations, and government developed the USAIP. Who was included on the partnership discussions?USAIP plan identified framework & defined data standards for implementing/maintaining phased-in animal id system USAIP was not an exact blueprint for the current NAIS. USDA indicated it will continue to seek input from industry and other interested parties throughout the design and implementation of the NAIS (species groups still in place)Questions:Who was represented then?Who is represented now?Balance & adequate representation from all stakeholders?RFID – Animal AgNAIS v. COOLNAIS is not being implemented as a result of the COOL initiative. COOL = Country of Origin LabelingNAIS intent: track animal disease to its source and other potentially exposed premises within a 48-hour period after detection (disease focused)COOL intent: identify for commercial marketplace what agricultural products (raw and processed) originate from US (market focused) Questions:Are the differences in the two programs real?Are the differences identified?Many who advocate COOL are opposed to NAIS; why?RFID – Animal AgCost: Private sector and government will share cost of necessary implementation elements (stated expectation)State's and Tribe's animal health authority (e.g., State veterinarian) responsible for administering and maintaining premises registration system for region under its purview. Questions:Are the cost projections realistic?Do costs burden smaller producers more than larger producers?Private costs vs. public costsLocation:The premises registration system:address, contact name, type of premises, and phone number to contact the person in charge of the premises. Key pieces of information sent to national premises information repository to make information available in case of disease traceback needs. Questions:Do we need to have all this information?Why?Where will the location information go?Who will have access to the information?RFID – Animal AgTechnology:Some technologies will work better for some species than for others. USDA focus on design of identification data system as opposed to what type of technology to useOnce identification system is designed, the market will determine which technologies will be the most appropriate to meet the needs of the system. Animal owners using RFID for official identification have been told they will not necessarily need to have an RFID reader; Producers have also been told free to use any data management serviceQuestions:Is technology neutral to species and to types of producers?Access to information gathered by the technology?RFID – Animal AgAnimal Identification:USDA proposed animals needing identification individually would have a 15-character number.Groups or lots of animals would be identified through a 13-character number, and premises would be identified through a 7-character number.USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) identified plans to pursue rulemaking to officially recognize 7-character premises identification number, 13-character group/lot identification number, 15-character AIN.RFID – Animal AgUse of tagging stations approvedEntities operating from a fixed location that have been officially approved by APHIS to apply identification devices to animals that are required to be identified.Animal owners required to individually tag animals that leave the premises of origin can elect to transport animals to an approved tagging station. pay operator of tagging station to apply individual animal identification devices & report identification information tagging stations may include,


Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Legal and Ethical Issues of Animal Tracking and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Legal and Ethical Issues of Animal Tracking and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?