History and Current Status of Equine ID

 

 

Ky Mortensen, American Association of Equine Practitioners

 

 

 

1.  Background/History of the NIAA Equine ID Committee:

The committee began during the last decade and developed plans for an equine ID symposium of its own between the 1994 and 1998 NIAA Animal ID seminars.  The committee consisted of members of the American Association of Equine Practitioners (AAEP) Infectious Diseases Subcommittee on ID, US Animal Health Association (USAHA) Equine Infectious Diseases Committee/Livestock ID and the NIAA Livestock ID Committee. 

 

Why did NIAA establish an Equine ID Subcommittee? 

 

NIAA would be a good opportunity for the Equine ID subcommittee as they are industry / issue based, have done a good job communicating / educating over the years and are a leader in the area of issues related to livestock identification.

 

NIAA Equine ID Symposium

Equine ID Symposium held in July 2002 during the NIAA ID/INFO/EXPO.  Participants were asked to consider an identification system that would not endorse any specific modality, but would provide for unique and permanent (computer-compatible) ID for each horse.  Participants also shared their views on:

• Positive Aspects of such a system

• Issues to resolve

• How to proceed with next steps

• Objectives were to advance equine ID considerations by demonstrating benefits to international trade, existing/emerging diseases, ID's role in emergency preparedness, theft prevention and welfare in general. 

• Electronic ID, iris and retinal biometrics, smart card technology, online health certificates and European technology and world trade.

• Position statements by AHC, AAEP, AQHA, USAE, Thoroughbred Racing Protective Bureau and other breed association representatives were a very important part of the symposium offering objective views based on science and technology today. 

• An overall summary compiled by a team of facilitators indicates that while there were several positive aspects of a potential national equine ID system such as trace-ability of horses, enhancement of trade, integrity of information and accurate census taking, there are several issues to resolve.  First and foremost of the issues to resolve is determining if there is a need for such a system.  If there were agreement on the need, the issues to resolve would include: standardization, privacy, cost, and incentives.

Recommendations:

1. NIAA post the raw data and information collected during the break-out sessions on their website for participants to access

2. NIAA establish a study group (to include representatives of industry organizations, the veterinary profession, government and other interested groups) to determine a direction for a national equine identification system

3. NIAA reported at the USAHA, AAEP meetings (and other meetings as needed) and will be responsible for championing the study group mentioned above (A report-out will be given at the USAHA meeting in October, but no concrete recommendations/action steps will be presented at that time)

4. Concrete recommendations/action steps to be given at the next national NIAA meeting in April 2003.

 

Next Steps:  During a follow up conference call held in September 2002, a challenge was brought forth in a letter addressed to the committee that proposed a Study Group be established to consider if there is a potential need for a national equine ID system. 

 

It was voted upon that such a Study Group be established and that J Amelita Facchiano chair that study group. 

 

In November 2002, NIAA established the Equine ID Subcommittee as part of the existing Animal ID and Information Systems Committee.  Amy Mann was asked to serve as chair and J Amelita Facchiano, co-chair. 

 

Task force meeting in DFW

Then mission/purpose and agenda and location of this meeting was designed to invite the participation of as many breed associations/registries that were available during this time frame. 

 

Mission / Purpose:

To discuss how a possible ID system could help the horse industry and be integrated into all current systems in use today, allow integration for future methods currently in R&D and without endorsement of any one specific modality at the time. 

 

 

2.  A National ID system – presented by Mr. Neil Hammershcmidt, Chair ,

NIAA Animal ID and Information Systems

 

Neil Hammerschmidt presented a background of the National Identification Work Plan that was developed by the National Food Animal ID Task Force and coordinated by the National Institute for Animal Agriculture.  An extremely important note is that this work plan has taken 22 years to develop into its present plan. (Refer to our ten years)

 

Individual animal identification importance was driven by three key factors:

 

First Animal Disease issues,

Second, food safety issues, and

Third, potential marketing opportunities thru branded products, quality assurance programs, etc. 

Another aspect of factor 3, is that this would also have positives for equine in maintaining market accessibility - both domestically/internationally; i.e. equivalency rules of trade agreements.

 

National ID System Definition:

An ID system that through established standards and defined data elements, allows for the compatibility of systems while providing the effective availability of agreed to system information across each segment of the industry. 

 

Why Livestock ID?

In order to help insure the safety of the food system, an ID system was of very important.  Animal Disease Management and food safety was the "Driver" that created a sense of urgency for an ID system.  Animal Disease issues require monitoring and surveillance, control and eradication, and emergency preparedness.   

 

How would a National ID System help the equine industry?

What are the strengths/weaknesses of a National ID System? 

Strengths:

Out of all of the issues listed for the food animal group the one main point that would help the Equine Industry is the ability in the event of a Disease outbreak.  Identification would help regionalize a potential disease outbreak and limit it's spread.  The only way to protect the Equine population is with tracking the movement of each horse.

 

Weaknesses:

            The question of who will maintain and develop a database for all horses that are not in registries kept repeating itself.  Questions of logistics such as data base management; maintenance, control, access, privacy, and cost were discussed. 

 

• It was stated that a large percentage of all horses in the United States are not registered.  A national ID system would help identify these horses that are not already identified with the breed registries as well as serve in Disease outbreak situations however for no other apparent reason.

• Each felt that they were doing a good job of identification with their present means for registration and felt that it would be difficult to "sell" or change to a new system of identification. 

Move for Possible Action:

One breed registry stated the benefits of a potential national ID system are understandable and suggested that the industry look at all methods of ID, consider how they all would best serve the industry and come up with some type of proposal to communicate, educate, promote and market equine ID without Any mandate as a service and benefit to the industry in general. 

 

Several attendees felt that Equine ID should be something that should be educated to the equine public about.  The horse owning industry should be told what an ID system is, and why an ID system would or would not be beneficial.

 

3.  Is Equine Identification something that needs to be discussed beyond this meeting today? 

Glenn Slack posed the question and following discussion; an unofficial vote by show of hands from the segment of the industry represented was taken on the question:

“Is equine ID something that needs to be discussed beyond this meeting today?” 

 

Vote Results:                In Favor = 7                   Not In Favor = 5 

 

The vote was taken to gain a feeling of what this segment of the industry felt at this time even though the vote may not represent a larger cross section of the equine industry. 

 

As was evident by the unofficial vote, not everyone from this segment of the industry is willing to buy into the issues of equine ID and the NIAA Equine ID subcommittee needs to be very aware of this. 

 

Conclusion: 

1. A decision was made by an unofficial vote of 7 to 5 in favor of continuing to discuss Equine ID issues.

2. Benefits of an ID system need to be discussed further with each group and/or registry via communication and education of members; i.e., breed newsletters, journals, etc. 

3. A "White Paper" on the strengths / weakness of an Equine ID System should be developed by the NIAA Equine ID Subcommittee with input from each segment of the industry and compiled by an non biased party or entity. 

4. Fair and equal representation of the breed registries / associations on any Equine ID Committee or Subcommittee is important regardless of its venue or forum. 

5. An Ad-Hoc committee on Equine ID could be formed as an ongoing effort of the American Horse Council to keep its members apprised on endeavors in ID whether they related to livestock and/or equine as this topic will come up in other circles and the horse industry needs to keep themselves in front of the issues.