Robert and Linda Groom moved their family from Scotland to the U.S. 26 years ago with a plan. Their goal was to start a cattle operation. Today, they’re running one in the Finger Lakes region of New York where they raise registered Angus and Charolais seedstock. In addition to selling breeding stock, the Grooms help their bull customers market calves for premium prices.

Robert Groom is a member of U.S. Cattlemen’s Association (USCA) and has served as a board member for four years. The USCA supports Rep. Harriet Hageman’s (R-WY) joint resolution to block mandatory electronic identification (EID) for cattle.

The EID rule would require EID for all intact cattle and bison 18 months of age or older, including dairy cattle and rodeo and exhibition cattle. It is scheduled to become effective on Nov. 5, 2024.

“Hageman, in drafting this bill, is essentially a stop to prevent the implementation of the rule APHIS has finalized,” said Groom. “There are multiple factors that will affect cattle producers – not just now but into the future by implementing mandatory animal ID.”

He added that USCA has animal identification policies – primarily that it should be voluntary and not burdensome.

Some of USCA’s opposition to EID relates to animal disease traceability. “Animal disease traceability is a bit of a red herring,” said Groom. “Fundamentally, APHIS and USDA are charged with preventing the importation of foreign animal disease. We conveyed policies to USDA about bringing in beef from countries that have FMD (foot-and-mouth disease). They’ve gotten around some of those things, and so far, they’ve been fortunate they haven’t imported products that have led to a FMD outbreak.”

Groom said for foreign animal disease to occur in the U.S., something or someone has to allow it to enter. The rationale for having individual mandatory animal ID in the states is essentially saying that if the government makes a mistake, there’s no accountability, and traceability will be the backup plan.

“In the UK in 2001, there was the biggest FMD outbreak in more than 40 years,” said Groom. “At that point, they had already implemented individual animal ID, with mandatory movement records and paperwork for animals that move to livestock auctions or wherever else. Every animal was identified individually, and they said this gave them the ability to control a foreign animal disease if it should happen.”

He said the ID concept failed there. “The FMD outbreak was handled the way it was handled 50 years ago,” he said. “They killed all the animals, burned them and put them in the ground.”

Most U.S. farmers remember that outbreak, including the heart-wrenching images of thousands of animals placed in mass burial sites. “The animal traceability thing never came into play,” said Groom. “The worst of it was that the outbreak was caused by policy inaction of the UK government.”

The disease was introduced through imported beef in pigs’ feed and transmitted from there. Groom noted this occurred in a relatively small country with a relatively good infrastructure, yet “it utterly failed.”

While USDA-APHIS is promoting mandatory EID as a positive for the cattle industry, Groom said there’s no evidence to suggest what they are proposing will work the way they say it will. Many members of USCA are concerned about what the data may be used for.

“The current administration is big on the Green New Deal – climate policy and carbon regulation,” said Groom. “If all animals are individually identified and they know who owns them and where they are, in order to meet climate goals, they could issue a demand (for example) to reduce a herd by 10%. They would know how many cattle someone has because they’re all individually identified. They could arbitrarily reduce a herd, which might take someone from being a viable operation to a no longer viable operation.”

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) says any information on cattle will not be used for any purpose other than to trace movement. “They can claim that, but we don’t believe private entities should have this data because then they can profit from the data,” said Groom. “We believe that animal traceability should fall upon state veterinary offices. Each state already sets their own requirements for animals coming into their states from another state.” He said allowing states to manage cattle movement has been sufficient.

There’s concern that the information obtained by RFID readers may not remain confidential. “The fear of it becoming no longer confidential is not unrealistic,” said Groom. “How many times have we heard about a government entity being hacked and private data taken? They can’t promise that won’t happen because data is the language of the world, and there are plenty of unscrupulous people and organizations and countries that will seek to seize that data.”

USCA is also concerned about the potential for carbon taxes, issues around suppositions that cattle are bad for the environment and that eating beef is bad. “We’re fighting all of that as well,” said Groom. “They could use the ability to know who has what, and where to impose fines, surcharges or limitations on individual operations and privately-owned land. It would allow the violation of our individual rights.”

Groom expressed the fact that cattle producers are individuals trying to make money and remaining in a profitable business. “When they mandate everything is identified individually, that hints at inventory control,” he said. “The days of us having a competitive market anywhere will be obliterated because the USDA will have a handle on the number of cattle in the nation. If more cattle are brought in from other countries to make up a deficit, prices for U.S. cattlemen will decline.”

While competition in the marketplace is necessary, those who may eventually know everything about cattle operations before sellers get to the marketplace are in a much better position to control prices, he added.

With the Nov. 5 deadline for mandatory EID tagging looming, Groom urges cattlemen to contact their members of Congress to become aware of the concerns.

“If it passes and comes into effect, it might be more about getting people to comply,” he said. “Our goal as an association is to represent those individuals and recognize the value of private property rights.”

by Sally Colby