Page 77 - Spring2013

of unfair enforcement actions) for dairy cattle 1. Cattle going to custom slaughter are
owners and horse owners. exempt regardless of whether the meat
WAPF and others called on the grassroots will be consumed by the person moving
to mobilize again, and thousands of people the cattle or by someone else;
across the country responded with comments to 2. Cattle going direct to slaughter at in-
the USDA opposing the new proposed rule. In spected slaughterhouses can be identi-
support of the grassroots efforts, a coalition of fied with just a backtag, rather than a
organizations worked at the agency level, both permanent form of identification;
at USDA and the Office of Management and 3. Brands, tattoos, and breed registry
Budget. certificates are official forms of iden-
While the program was not stopped, the tification as long as the shipping and
final rule issued by USDA addressed the major- receiving states agree;
ity of the concerns raised by livestock owners. 4. The definition of “dairy cattle” has been
Before discussing the details, it is important to clarified by listing specific dairy breeds
recognize the scope of this rule. There are no (Ayrshire, Brown Swiss, Holstein, Jer-
requirements imposed by this rule for any type sey, Guernsey, Milking Shorthorn, and
of movement within a state; it only applies when Red and Whites), rather than including
animals cross state lines. Even when an animal dual purpose and mixed use breeds;
crosses state lines, there are no requirements for 5. State and tribal abbreviations on ear
premises registration or electronic identification. tags can be used in place of the “US”
Under the final rule, unless otherwise ex- symbol on ear tags;
empted, livestock moved across state lines would 6. Instead of requiring a certificate of
have to be officially identified and accompanied veterinary inspection for all cattle,
by an interstate certificate of veterinary inspec- states can agree to accept alternative
tion or other documentation, such as owner- documentation so as to address the
shipper statements or brand certificates. scarcity of large animal vets.
In practical terms, sheep, goat, and pig
owners will not be subject to new requirements; The final rule also dropped any require-
the rule refers to the identification requirements ments for “feeder cattle,” that is, beef cattle
under existing disease control programs for these younger than eighteen months of age. The fight
animals. Similarly, horse owners have already over this issue has only been postponed, how-
been identifying horses that cross state lines due ever, because the USDA plans to have another
to equine infectious anemia programs and will rulemaking specifically on feeder cattle. But no
face few new burdens in practice. Horses that new requirements will be implemented at this While the

are used for transportation interstate, such as by time, and we will be able to focus on the specific program was
horse and buggy, are exempt from the require- problems posed by identifying younger animals not stopped,
ments, one of the changes from the proposed in a separate discussion.
rule. The final rule also clarifies that a physical We must also work at the state level, con- the final rule
description qualifies as an official form of iden- vincing state authorities to reach agreements issued by
tification for horses without needing approval with each other to allow for alternative forms of USDA
from state officials. identification and documentation to make it as
inexpensive and easy as possible for producers. addressed
MAIN IMPACT For poultry, the proposed rule would have the majority
The main impact of the rule will be on cattle required most backyard poultry owners and of the
and poultry owners. For cattle, the rule requires farmers to individually identify any bird they
identification and documentation for beef cattle purchased from out of state, including day-old- concerns
eighteen months or older, dairy cattle, and show chicks from hatcheries. WAPF and others had raised by
cattle that cross state lines. In response to public urged that poultry be completely exempted from livestock
comments, the agency made several changes to the rule. While USDA did not do so, it did make
reduce the burdens imposed by the rule: two significant changes in the final rule: owners.
Wise Traditions SPRING 2013 SPRING 2013 Wise Traditions 77