Presentation on theme: "NIAA ID Expo August 22, 2006 Linda S. Campbell"— Presentation transcript:
1 NIAA ID Expo August 22, 2006 Linda S. Campbell Luray VAChair, Goat Species Working Group
2 BackgroundDiversity of Goat UsageIssues Facing IndustryID RecommendationsMovement ReportingWork to DateSuccessful ImplementationCommittee Structure
3 BackgroundInitially, a combined Sheep and Goat Working Group was created. To facilitate more diverse representation from each industry, and to address differences between species, separate groups were developed and began work.
5 Issues Facing Industry Multi uses for goats under variety of environments and managementsID for Scrapie Eradication (NSEP) program already in placeCost of program versus value per head – economic viabilityTag retention due to thinness of ear, nature of browsing habits, curiosity of goats, infectionsOne breed with very tiny ears that does not allow traditional ear tag usage15 digits on a small ear tag difficult to read
7 Concerns Being VoicedBatch uploading of existing Scrapie Premise ID to convert to NAIS ID without first asking Premise OwnerPracticality of program implementationCost of program versus value per head – economic viabilityLack of details about program available when Premises IDs being signed upQuestions of constitutionality of programAny mandatory requirement
8 Goat ID Recommendations Continue with current approved ID being used for Scrapie programConduct US field trials to fully test with different breeds and managementsRequest that USDA/FSIS approve site for electronic implants, with preference for tailProvide approved devices to producersAllow Group Lot ID when applicable
9 Goat ID Methods (In place with NSEP) Unique Registration tattoos *When accompanied by official Registration/Certificate of IdentityScrapie Program Plastic and Metal Ear tagsElectronic Implants/RFID tags *When accompanied by official Registration/Certificate of Identity
10 Problems with Ear TagsWhile ear tags could most efficiently provide both visual and electronic identification, the problems with retention, infections and the issue with the LaMancha breed, currently make it not acceptable as the only method of identification.
11 GWG Work to date Recommendations for ID and movement reporting Compiling information and developing communications with goat breeders in US and internationallyDiscussing/defining high risk and low risk eventsDeveloping Working Group information website:Providing articles for mediaDeveloping survey for industry feedbackDeveloped discussion list for industry feedback
12 Movement ReportingUtilize existing methods of collecting and reporting movement information for initial phase:Certificate of Veterinary InspectionExisting regulatory program (such as Scrapie)
13 Successful Implementation Requires… Allowing flexibility with ID methods beyond phase-in periodContinued involvement with industry representatives as as plan developsWorking with organizations to integrate with existing systemsAdequate research and field trials using range of goat breeds and managementsIncorporating existing production/management information and current industry practicesImplementing reasonable record keeping requirementsProtecting producer confidentiality of records
14 Successful Implementation Requires… Comprehensive educational effort offering information and accurate answers for producers, markets, consumers, inspectors, veterinarians and othersWorking with organizations to integrate with existing systemsImportant for individual states to consider recommendations of species working groups if they separately implement programs prior to full NAIS implementationAdequate funding to provide staffing to handle existing regulatory programs and port inspections should be ensured.
15 Goat Working Group Members The goal of the Goat Working Group has been to seek input from individuals that represent owners and partners involved with all components of goat breeding, usage and handling.James Ramseyer Joe David Ross Joan Dean Rowe, DVM Lisa Shepard Marvin Shurley Diane Sutton, DVM Robert Swize Cindy Wolf, DVM Linda WorleyLinda Campbell, Chair Barry Arnett Jan Carlson Bonnie Chandler Charles Christensen Bennie Cox Rene DeLeeuw Carolyn Eddy Ray Hoyt David Morris, DVM Stan Potratz
16 NAIS SubCommittee Members Members AffiliationMr. John Adams National Milk Producer's FederationMs. Linda Campbell American Dairy Goat AssociationDr. Mark Engle National Pork BoardDr. Robert Fourdraine Wisconsin Livestock Identification ConsortiumDr. Bob Hillman Texas Animal Health Commission, State VeterinarianMs. Amy Mann American Horse CouncilMs. Marcine Moldenhauer Excel CorporationMr. Jim Niewold Swine ProducerDr. Clarence Siroky Idaho Department of Agriculture, State VeterinarianMr. Scott Stuart National Livestock Producers AssociationMr. Gary Wilson Cattle Producer, Ohio Department of AgricultureDr. Cindy Wolf University of Minnesota, CVMDr. Taylor Woods Missouri Department of Agriculture, State VeterinarianUSDA APHIS Veterinary Services ResourcesMr. Neil Hammerschmidt - NAIS Program StaffDr. John Wiemers - NAIS Program Staff
17 At the end of the day……we hope that whatever is developed will provide a uniform system that meets the goals of protecting U.S. animal agriculture, while preserving the economic viability of the producers; large and small; protecting confidentiality of information; and providing an effective and accurate means of identifying our animals at the least cost and least disruption to our operations and lives.