Ranchers oppose USDA’s electronic chip mandate.

A ‍proposal by the United ​States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to⁣ require electronic ear tags for cattle and bison crossing state lines is facing criticism from industry experts. According to ⁢Justin Tupper, ‌president ​of the United States⁤ Cattlemen’s⁤ Association, this mandate would⁣ burden ⁤American ranchers with unnecessary costs and ultimately⁤ drive up the price of beef.

Tupper ​expressed concerns about the impact on commerce,⁢ stating that it would make the industry’s job more difficult. He ​emphasized⁣ that​ ranchers are already​ struggling to keep beef prices low and would be forced to pass on the expense ⁣of​ electronic ear tags to consumers.

Related ‌Stories

• IRS Extends Tax​ Relief to Farmers and Ranchers

  9/27/2023

• IN-DEPTH: Ranchers’ Independence Fades as Corporations⁢ Expand ⁣Control ⁢of ‌Food Supply

  9/8/2023

Tupper further highlighted the​ significant costs ‍and risks associated with implementing ​this proposal. Currently, livestock are tracked ‍using visible ⁣and trackable tags with ‍11-digit numbers. However,‍ the USDA’s proposed regulations would require radio-frequency identification tags that are both visually and electronically readable for interstate movement‌ of ‌cattle and bison.

The proposal includes various categories⁤ of⁤ livestock that would‌ fall under these regulations, such as⁤ sexually ⁤intact cattle and bison over 18 months old, female dairy​ cattle ⁤of‍ any age, and cattle and ⁤bison ‍used⁤ for rodeo, recreational events, ⁤shows, or exhibitions.

Electronic⁤ identification tags for livestock movements have been a⁤ topic of controversy since the discovery of​ mad cow disease in the United States in 2003.⁤ While most​ livestock ⁣owners ‍support⁣ tracing, Tupper emphasized the need for a uniform system‍ that does not penalize American⁣ ranchers.

Tupper‌ also pointed out the estimated cost of implementing ​these tags,‍ which could exceed $30 ​million. He argued that if ranchers are‍ required to comply with this mandate, the⁢ government should ​bear the financial burden.

Support for the ranching community comes​ from Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.), who proposed‍ an amendment to prevent the​ government from mandating⁢ electronic tracking‍ of⁤ cattle and bison. Hageman argued that the current identification‌ system is effective, robust,‍ and affordable, and ⁢implementing the ‍new regulations would impose significant costs on⁤ ranchers.

“If small and ‍medium operations are ⁤forced into this same system and ⁣without the ​proper capital, they will be locked out of ​the markets.”

Setbacks and Obstacles

On Wednesday, the House⁢ rejected the amendment that would bar USDA from​ requiring electronic tracking of cattle. The fiscal⁢ 2024 spending bill, which ⁣includes the regulation,⁣ is expected to pass the House but may face opposition in the‌ Senate. A date for ‌the vote has⁤ not ⁢been set.

The nation’s‌ ranchers have been facing numerous challenges, including the threat from the synthetic‍ “meat” market and rising beef prices. Droughts have reduced grazing land for cattle, while feed costs have increased. The USDA reports⁣ that the cattle count‌ is at its lowest point since ⁢1962.

Bernt Nelson, an economist with⁤ the American Farm ​Bureau, predicts that ​the beef​ supply shortage​ and high prices will continue for at least another year. If ⁤the new regulations are approved, ranchers will be forced⁣ to further raise​ prices to ​stay in business.

Tupper emphasized ​the ⁣need⁤ to protect both ​ranchers and consumers, as there is‌ a limit to how much consumers can afford to pay.

How reliable are electronic ‌ear tags in disease control compared to alternative methods such as DNA testing or blockchain technology?

, it would not only strain their financial resources but also impact their ability to invest in other areas of their operations. This could lead to a decline in overall productivity and growth in ⁣the⁤ industry.

Furthermore, Tupper expressed concerns about the effectiveness of electronic ear tags in disease‍ control. While the USDA claims that these‌ tags would improve traceability and help identify and contain disease⁤ outbreaks, Tupper argued that they may not be as reliable as anticipated. He suggested that alternative methods, such ⁤as DNA testing or blockchain technology,​ could be explored to achieve the same objectives without imposing excessive costs on ranchers.

In response to⁢ these criticisms, the USDA defended its proposal, stating ⁢that electronic⁤ ear tags are already being used in many states‍ and have proven to ⁢be effective in animal identification and tracking. They‌ emphasized the importance of traceability in ensuring food safety and protecting public ​health.

The debate over electronic ear tags for cattle‍ and bison crossing state lines reflects the ongoing tension between regulatory initiatives‌ and the concerns of industry stakeholders. While the intent behind the USDA’s proposal is noble,⁣ the implementation and associated costs should be carefully evaluated to minimize ‌the‌ negative impact on American ranchers.

As the discussion continues, ​it is crucial for industry‍ experts, policymakers, and stakeholders to come together and find a balanced solution that considers both the needs of the livestock industry and⁣ the goals ​of the USDA. Collaborative efforts, informed⁣ by ​scientific research and ‌economic analysis, can help develop a system that ensures traceability, safeguards against disease outbreaks, and supports the sustainability ⁣of American ranching.