NAIS Staggers Forth
Last month, USDA Secretary Mike Johanns issued a lengthy press statement designed to kick start the slow-to-develop and often controversial national animal identification system.
Johanns said, “By early 2007, USDA expects to have the technology in place, called the Animal Trace Processing System or commonly known as the metadata system, that will allow state and federal animal health officials to query the NAIS and private databases during a disease investigation. The animal tracking databases will record and store animal movement tracking information for livestock that state and federal animal health officials will query for animals of interest in a disease investigation.”
The newborn USAIO, sired by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, followed quickly with a statement from their Chairman, Kentucky cattleman Charles Miller.
He said, “USAIO agrees that the time has come to move the national animal identification system forward, and that market forces are placing a greater sense of urgency on the issue of traceability. Livestock producers need access to a reliable animal movement database. That is why USAIO was created, and we are ready to provide this important tool to the nation’s farmers and ranchers.
Our beta-testing phase has been extremely successful. This gives us great confidence that the system is ready to receive live data from livestock producers.
We share Secretary Johanns’ desire to meet producer participation benchmarks on a voluntary basis, and feel this can be accomplished if a workable, cost-effective solution is made available as soon as possible.”
Last year, Allen Bright, who headed up the original NCBA animal identification group that morphed into the USAIO, said this about the need for an animal ID program: “The NAIS plan is, for the most part, very sound and the members of the Cattle Working Group recognized that there was a need for the data to be held privately for the protection of producer’s confidentiality and information. I have long advocated that the best way to maintain confidentiality is the NAIS data being held by a non-profit animal industry consortium that would recognize that the data ultimately belongs to the producers and that would allow animal health authorities structured access to the data as needed for disease surveillance.”
Bright’s group, definitely an ambitious lot, said a working program would be a fact of life by January, 2006 and it would include all the major protein resource groups. The new organization is still trying to conduct meaningful dialogues with the poultry and pork groups who seem to have serious, unresolved reservations about the project.
So here’s the inquiring minds question: Will the USDA and the USAIO be working hand-in-hand on this project or just traveling down parallel tracks and watching each other from a friendly but cautious distance? If it gets off the ground, will it be a government or private enterprise project? After all, the Ag Department’s “Animal Trace Processing System” and the USAIO’s “animal movement database” is essentially the same thing.
USAIO clarified their position with this later statement: “USAIO will have the same working relationship with USDA as any other organization that operates an approved animal movement database. That relationship will become more clear when USDA announces its criteria and standards.”
Miller’s comment about “a workable, cost-effective solution” is really the heart of the situation. If we’re to do this thing, it doesn’t matter who comes up with the solution; it can be created and managed by a government or free-enterprise entity. But for the sake of simplicity, we need only one program with one workable database. And one with an absolute guarantee of security.
Johanns said, “By early 2007, USDA expects to have the technology in place, called the Animal Trace Processing System or commonly known as the metadata system, that will allow state and federal animal health officials to query the NAIS and private databases during a disease investigation. The animal tracking databases will record and store animal movement tracking information for livestock that state and federal animal health officials will query for animals of interest in a disease investigation.”
The newborn USAIO, sired by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, followed quickly with a statement from their Chairman, Kentucky cattleman Charles Miller.
He said, “USAIO agrees that the time has come to move the national animal identification system forward, and that market forces are placing a greater sense of urgency on the issue of traceability. Livestock producers need access to a reliable animal movement database. That is why USAIO was created, and we are ready to provide this important tool to the nation’s farmers and ranchers.
Our beta-testing phase has been extremely successful. This gives us great confidence that the system is ready to receive live data from livestock producers.
We share Secretary Johanns’ desire to meet producer participation benchmarks on a voluntary basis, and feel this can be accomplished if a workable, cost-effective solution is made available as soon as possible.”
Last year, Allen Bright, who headed up the original NCBA animal identification group that morphed into the USAIO, said this about the need for an animal ID program: “The NAIS plan is, for the most part, very sound and the members of the Cattle Working Group recognized that there was a need for the data to be held privately for the protection of producer’s confidentiality and information. I have long advocated that the best way to maintain confidentiality is the NAIS data being held by a non-profit animal industry consortium that would recognize that the data ultimately belongs to the producers and that would allow animal health authorities structured access to the data as needed for disease surveillance.”
Bright’s group, definitely an ambitious lot, said a working program would be a fact of life by January, 2006 and it would include all the major protein resource groups. The new organization is still trying to conduct meaningful dialogues with the poultry and pork groups who seem to have serious, unresolved reservations about the project.
So here’s the inquiring minds question: Will the USDA and the USAIO be working hand-in-hand on this project or just traveling down parallel tracks and watching each other from a friendly but cautious distance? If it gets off the ground, will it be a government or private enterprise project? After all, the Ag Department’s “Animal Trace Processing System” and the USAIO’s “animal movement database” is essentially the same thing.
USAIO clarified their position with this later statement: “USAIO will have the same working relationship with USDA as any other organization that operates an approved animal movement database. That relationship will become more clear when USDA announces its criteria and standards.”
Miller’s comment about “a workable, cost-effective solution” is really the heart of the situation. If we’re to do this thing, it doesn’t matter who comes up with the solution; it can be created and managed by a government or free-enterprise entity. But for the sake of simplicity, we need only one program with one workable database. And one with an absolute guarantee of security.
posted by Chuck Jolley at Wednesday, June 07, 2006
0 comments
