NAIS: Modernizing Animal Health Protection
Bruce I. Knight, Under Secretary for
Marketing and Regulatory Programs
Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium
Madison, WI
December 7, 2006
Thank you, Robert (Fourdraine). I’m delighted to join you for your winter meeting today to talk about the National Animal Identification System, or NAIS for short.
Secretary Johanns has made it clear that NAIS is, and will remain, one of his top priorities. I don’t need to tell any of you how important it is to everyone in the livestock industry to have a modern animal identification system that will enable us to respond timely to animal disease events.
We all know that the threat of a foreign animal disease outbreak in the United States is real. Everyone can take appropriate steps to protect their animals, but some risk remains.
We’re all working to make sure that disease outbreak never arrives, and we never have to put this system to full implementation. However, it’s impossible to completely eliminate the threat or predict when an outbreak might occur, where it will hit or how severe it will be.
Many people have worked hard and long to lay the foundation for the National Animal Identification System—including many of you in this room. Nationwide, NAIS is a voluntary system that welcomes producer participation in one or more phases from premises registration to animal identification to tracing.
Here in Wisconsin, you’ve chosen to make premises registration mandatory—and that’s your option. We want this system to work for the benefit of the producers within each state.
Where We Stand
Right now, and for the next year or so, our primary focus for NAIS is going to be on getting premises registered so farmers and ranchers can benefit when we have information to share. The big push is on commercial operations, but we’re encouraging everyone who has livestock—even just a backyard flock or a couple of riding horses—to register their premises.
Secretary Johanns has set some challenging goals for NAIS—including getting 25 percent of premises registered by the end of January 2007. Today, we have more than 335,000 registered—out of about 1.4 million premises. That takes us close to the first goal. But the ultimate goal—having a critical mass of producers on board by the end of January 2009—will be much more challenging. As I said, that will be our priority for the next year.
Changes in NAIS
I know we need to clarify some issues on NAIS. We’ve made some changes in the system—and that’s left some folks confused and unsure. But the truth is we’ve made those changes in response to feedback we’ve received from farmers, ranchers and our partners in the states and industry organizations. And let me say that we’ve been very impressed with the forward thinking and progressive attitude about NAIS among industry and producer groups like WLIC.
We’ve been listening and making course corrections in line with what we’ve heard. That includes making clear that at the federal level, NAIS is a voluntary system. It’s designed pure and simple to protect animal health, to protect consumer confidence, to protect domestic and world markets, and most of all—to protect producer economic investment and income.
Producers can choose the extent of their participation. They can choose to simply register their premises and stop there. We want livestock and poultry owners to understand that registering your premises today does not commit you to participating in the tagging or tracing phases of NAIS down the road.
I want to talk more about Phases II and III of NAIS in a minute. The animal ID component is now available—and I know many of you are ready to go on that. It’s being adjusted slightly while animal tracing is in the development phase.
USDA, the states, private companies, producer organizations and the marketing channels continue to partner on these phases. Before I get into the details on the next steps, I want to address some concerns that a number of you have raised.
Outreach and Communication
To make NAIS successful, reaching out to producers and stakeholders is essential. Working with the states, APHIS has developed new communications materials to provide information producers told us they needed before they could make a commitment to register their premises.
Earlier in the fall, the agency held a two-day communications workshop to share the outreach materials and key messages designed to enhance the consistency and effectiveness of premises registration outreach efforts. In addition, on November 8, APHIS also launched a redesigned NAIS website that better describes the system and why it is important. The website—www.usda.gov/nais—includes a library of all the print materials available as well as a section on “myths and facts” intended to dispel misinformation.
Finally, on November 22, USDA published its draft NAIS user’s guide on the web for public comment. This document provides details on NAIS and is the most up-to-date information resource on animal identification.
Confidentiality
Let me turn to one of the concerns we hear about most frequently—confidentiality. We’ve had farmers ask: Are you going to track my animals on my farm? Are you going to give out my private business information in response to Freedom of Information requests? Will other federal agencies have access to information about my operation?
The answer to all these questions—and many more we have received—is NO. We have specifically built safeguards into NAIS to ensure that private business information is safeguarded.
Animal identification and tracing information will be kept in state and private databases like the WLIC Information System, not with USDA. It will only be accessed when there’s a need to trace animals in a disease situation.
Secretary Johanns has said repeatedly that USDA will protect farmers’ private information. We take our responsibility for confidentiality seriously.
We will not betray the trust that farmers and ranchers place in us through NAIS. That trust goes to the core of the development of NAIS as a true partnership.
Costs
There’s also been some concern about costs for NAIS. As I said, the first step—premises registration—is free. But for those who choose to participate in the second phase—animal identification—there are costs involved.
Our goal is to keep costs as low as possible by encouraging a wide variety of options for identification devices. As more industry working groups complete recommendations for their species, we expect more companies to develop products to meet those requirements.
In Phase III, state and industry organizations will maintain the databases to enable animal tracing. Again costs will vary, depending on the services the producer chooses to use.
Competition among databases should help to keep costs down. We expect the payoff for producers to come as the market begins to pay a premium for animals whose history is known.
Phase II
As I said earlier, our primary push for the next year is premises registration. But at the same time, we are moving forward on the next two phases.
As you know, animal identification is currently available for some species, but not all. The states and private industry continue working on this component.
There are two potential options for animal identification—individual identification and group or lot identification. Only animals that move from their original premises to locations where they come into contact with other animals—such as livestock auctions, feedlots or fairs—need identification. Those that just move from their premises of birth to custom slaughter don’t require identification for health purposes.
With the NAIS numbering system, USDA allocates the 15-digit animal identification or group numbers to manufacturers authorized to produce the identification devices. USDA will authorize manufacturers, industry organizations, service providers and states to maintain databases on animal identification numbers issued.
These databases are scheduled to become operational next April. Until then, USDA is maintaining the distribution records.
Keeping information on distribution of the animal identification numbers or AINs in state or private databases rather than USDA’s AIN Management System is part of USDA’s effort to respond to producers’ concerns about privacy. Handling the information this way helps reassure producers concerned about confidentiality, and, we believe, will help increase participation in NAIS.
Some people have asked how the AIN devices will be integrated with identification requirements of other USDA animal health programs. NAIS identification devices are official and can be used for most regulatory programs, including interstate commerce.
Some programs, like TB, are already using AIN tags. AIN tags are an option for sheep and goat producers in the Scrapie program, but the current Scrapie tags based on flock and herd management ID remain an official number and identification option. We will be revising the identification requirement for the Brucellosis calfhood vaccination program to allow the use of AIN tags, if the producer prefers.
But keep in mind, no previously recognized official identification system has been discontinued. However, we will continue to evaluate how systems can be standardized, integrated and used for all programs.
I want to say one more thing about the identification devices—and that is that USDA has established a technology-neutral position on these. We want to leave it up to producers and the market to decide which identification methods to use.
Several species—bison, cattle and equine—have recommended using the ISO-compliant radio frequency identification technology. So, while not selecting or requiring a technology, APHIS recognizes the importance of standardization to ensure compatibility across vendors. Standardization makes it possible for one device reader to read RFID devices from multiple manufacturers. Therefore, RFID devices for NAIS should meet ISO 11784 or 11785. Additional new technologies may emerge, and APHIS will work with the American National Standards Institute to facilitate these—including pilot or field trials.
We want NAIS to advance as technology moves forward. But we will do everything possible to avoid a business practice of planned obsolescency.
Phase III
Let’s turn now to Phase III—animal tracing. States and the private sector will maintain records to permit animal tracing in the case of a disease outbreak.
Producers will be able to choose an animal tracing database to report animal movements that might pose a significant risk of disease transmission. Again, this is where competition among various databases can help minimize costs and maximize confidentiality.
Each of the databases need hold only a minimum of information for each animal—the premises identification number, the animal identification number, date of the event and the event itself—move in or move out. Databases can include more information, such as the species, age and sex of the animal. But this information is not necessary for animal health purposes. Since database creators and providers may offer additional services, costs will vary.
Animal health officials will only request animal movement information from these databases when there is a risk to animal health. We have identified a few specific situations when animal health officials will seek information from these databases.
Triggers for access include:
- An indication or confirmed positive test of a foreign animal disease,
- An animal disease emergency, as determined by the Secretary of Agriculture or state departments of agriculture, OR
- A need to conduct a traceback or traceforward to determine the origin of infection for a program disease such as Brucellosis or tuberculosis.
Over the next few months, we will be working on technical requirements to integrate private and state animal tracking databases with NAIS. We expect to complete the Animal Trace Processing System early next year. Already we have 10 interim tracing databases participating in the development of the interfaces with the NAIS—including the one that the Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium operates on behalf of the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture and Consumer Protection.
Conclusion
Over the past year, I believe we’ve made significant strides with NAIS, making some needed changes in response to feedback from producers. We’ve made progress getting premises registered. Wisconsin has played an important role in that effort with nearly 54,000 premises registered—including the vast majority of commercial producers.
We still have work to do in finalizing the next two phases—animal identification and tracing. But we are moving forward in partnership with states and industry groups, building on the foundation that has been laid over the past several years.
The good news is that NAIS is coming together. The structures are in place or nearing completion to make it the answer to our need for a modern system to protect animal health by enabling rapid traceouts and tracebacks when a disease outbreak occurs. In the end, NAIS will be successful because farmers, industry organizations and states recognize its value, support it and participate in it.