Traceability:
Where Are We Now?
Panelists explain their views of national traceability system.
DENVER (Jan. 15, 2013) — The USDA announced a nationwide animal identification system for disease traceability on Dec. 20, 2012. Published in the Federal Register Jan. 9, the final rule will take effect 60 days later, March 11.
Where does that put the beef industry? A panel consisting of Mark Gustafson, JBS; Rick Scott, AgriBeef; and John Butler, Beef Marketing Group, addressed that question at the International Livestock Congress–USA 2013 (ILC) in conjunction with the National Western Stock Show in Denver Jan 15. Leann Saunders, Where Food Comes From Inc., moderated the panel.
Saunders explained that traceability is the ability to track animal movements, but there are three major differences in systems:
• breadth, or amount of information collected;
• depth, how far back tracking is available through the system; and
• precision, how accurate the information is.
Within the last 20 years, animal traceability has been an issue, and while most in the industry agree that it’s needed, the question of who manages the system and who pays for it was the biggest obstacle. Historically, Saunders said, it has been market-driven for branding initiatives. To access the Japanese market, beef had to have been traceable.
Gustafson said another catalyst would be a disease outbreak (which was actually the cause for the market-driven traceability programs, since Japan closed it borders to U.S. beef because of the confirmed case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in 2003). However, he said, the industry gets complacent about traceability when disease is not prevalent.
The panelists agreed that the federal animal disease traceability system is a good start, but there are many holes. Scott noted that, in the current system, each state develops its own system.
“Can we as an industry afford to allow states to create 50 different systems?” he asked.
Butler added that we don’t have a system that holds the industry as a whole accountable to a profit and loss. Segments are [accountable], but not each industry, he said, adding that responsibility and accountability are lax in the industry as a whole.
“Our chance of success is going to be private,” Butler predicted, offering traceability systems for Tyson’s Farm Check, Progressive Beef and Whole Foods as good examples of private programs.
Overall, the panelists agreed that animal disease traceability is necessary and the current system is a good start, but needs much improvement.
-----------------------------
Editor’s Note: The above article was written under contract or by staff of the Angus Journal. It may not be reprinted without express permission of the Angus Journal. To request reprint permision, contact the editor at 816-383-5200.
The Virtual Library is provided as a resource to cattlemen by the editorial team at Angus Productions Inc. (API), publisher of the Angus Journal, the Angus Beef Bulletin, the Angus Beef Bulletin EXTRA and the Angus e-List. For questions about this site, to submit an article for our consideration, or to report a broken link, contact the editor at 816-383-5200; 3201 Frederick Ave., Saint Joseph, MO 64506.
API claims copyright to this website as presented. We welcome educational venues and cattlemen to link to this site as a service to their audience.