|
Long Range Planning Group On USDA-APHIS-VS-CEAH Animal identification (ID) has for decades been an essential tool in disease control and eradication programs. None of the ID methods is without problems. Veterinary Services has had a long-standing interest in electronic ID. In the mid-1970’s the agency participated in some extensive early research at the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratories, designed to not only provide individual animal identification, but to also provide methods to record and access various other data such as body temperature and events relating to health, weight gain, and pedigree. This research provided some very interesting and promising early results, which many assumed would quickly lead to the wide availability and use of electronic ID systems. Now twenty years later, electronic applications remain very limited. The current groundswell of interest and concern about food safety has placed additional emphasis on the need for good, reliable, and inexpensive ID systems. Everyone seems to agree that an essential component of any credible preharvest food safety program should include capability to trace foodborne human disease outbreaks back to the source. Given our long-standing need for reliable ID within our existing eradication programs, and considering the anticipated additional incentives relating to food safety, Veterinary Services has formed a small working group to try to collate and summarize the current situation and current possibilities for wider use of electronic systems. This activity is in its early stages and has begun with a review of existing information and an economic assessment of various existing nonelectronic ID systems. By tracking all of the developments and possibilities for developments surrounding electronic ID, we hope that at least for Veterinary Services, a uniform approach can be taken with all programs and all species. The Food Safety and Inspection Service has a similar working group, and the two agencies have agreed to interact at periodic intervals, in any case before any final directions are established. Despite the seemingly slow progress toward implementation of practical electronic ID systems, it would still appear to be the key to future overall success in animal identification. There are several hurdles that remain to be crossed. Issues around cost, durability, range of interrogation, and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) regulations on disposition of transponders are not yet fully resolved. There does appear to be recent progress toward agreement on uniform standards as defined by the International Standards Organization (ISO). If ISO standards are adopted, producers of this technology may feel much more confident about further product research, markets may expand, and costs of individual units should decline. Despite the slow progress, there appears to be room for long-range optimism.
|