EID The sheep industry is facing melt down with EID being imposed on our industry .

If sheep numbers drop much more there will be casualties in the processing and slaughter industries, all which need to have product coming forward 12 months of the year to stay viable . With out them remember our product is worthless .

The extra cost consumers may think will get passed back to the producer . Nothing could be further from the truth . The extra work and cost will result in fewer farmers keeping sheep , reducing supply and driving prices up through supply and demand . Some processors will fold (Jobs).

 It will not only effect lamb.Most livestock farms have sheep and cattle and with a reduction in sheep number and with the farm scaling  on the labour front cattle numbers could be cut to keep the work load in tune with labour available .

Remember cattle numbers have dropped significantly in the last couple of years and although prices are firmer so costs have increased as well .

 We are approaching a crossroads where sometime soon food demand will out strips supply , measures like EID have not been thought through by the Euro crats , its a food tax but not as we know it !!

out on the hill:

EID The sheep industry is facing melt down with EID being imposed on our industry .

If you want to look at the long term trends sheep and cattle numbers have hardly dropped below what they where before headage payments came in all we have lost since the the start of SFP is all the stock that where just attached to the N bag and the numbers game. most of the animals that have been lost in the country have come out of the hardest area like the highlands and Cumbria the stock in these areas isn't very productive, you would need at least 5 highland blackies to produce the same weight of lamb as your average lowland ewe so i wouldn't worry to much about the fall in numbers yet. 

out on the hill:

 We are approaching a crossroads where sometime soon food demand will out strips supply , measures like EID have not been thought through by the Euro crats , its a food tax but not as we know it !!

 If you truly belive that demand for food will outstrip supply what are you worried about, you must have seen what grain prices did when people thought there wouldn't be enough was it a doubling or a tripeling of price?   Roll on the good times EID will just sort the wheat from the chaff in the sheep industry

eid is just another nail in the sheep farmers coffin.

If we all have the courage to stand firm and say NO, we will defeat this nonsense.

Wee man, i take it you like eid and all the hassle?

all tags should be outlawed on grounds of cruelty.

out on the hill:

EID and double tagging that goes with it will be a  huge time issue for breeding ewes in the future , not only the cost of lost EID tags but the time to replace them and more importantly recording  the details in the flock book. You try writing in a note book on a wet day in the middle of winter

double tagging has nothing to do with EID they are completely separate enteritis. we already have double tagging!!! the only difference that most farmers will have to face is that the tags cost a bit more. I have a suspicion that even if we stop EID we will still have to record individual moments if this is the case then EID is deffinetly the lesser of 2 evils as the computer will do the flock book automatically.    

Glasshouse I am not particularly for EID i don't think it will add much value to the industry but i am getting very very bored with the "it's the final nail in the coffin" talk that surrounds British farming especial when we have lambs making £100 and ewes making £70. if you sell 10 lambs at that price you can get a scanner and the computer program to go with it and you will never have to write another number assuming you already have a PC with a Printer(2 and a half more lambs if you don't). we could say no but we could also take the Canadian argument that if they had had individual movements recorded they could have proved where their one cow that had BSE came from killed every cow on that farm and the border with the USA would have stayed open. the border closing cost the Canadian cattle industry Billions of dollars! a few tens of millions for EID tags and the data base to go with it would have been cheap.

P.s you would have a very boring thread if no one took the other side   

wee man:

P.s you would have a very boring thread if no one took the other side

This is true wee man and good on yer.

I think a lot of the 'heat' in the tagging debate arises because of the illogical and rather stupid behaviour of our ruling political elites. A case of BSE in Canadian beef causes panic because politicians do not argue that one case, like one swallow, does not make a summer. A theory that BSE might via some miraculous medium be transferred to sheep's brains and by some further miracle re-emerge in their loins is allowed to give rise to the idea of individually identifying sheep not once, but twice and then by electronic means. In short, the cost to Canada of billions of dollars and the Cost to Welsh, Scottish and English farmers arises because the political processes ensure that are governed by idiots. Not, I hasten to add, foolish idiots but very clever ones.

Roll on the revolution but, until that time, I refer you to another thread in which Scottish Farmers are calling for a protest march on this issue. Name the place and time and I'll be there.

wee man:

a few tens of millions for EID tags and the data base to go with it would have been cheap.

In the case of UK sheep EID, the one thing that DEFRA have been absolutely positive and resolute about is that they will NOT be setting up any kind of national database to record movements of individual sheep.  In which case, movement tracing will still be down to the batch recording system currently operated by Trading Standards and the ONLY benefit in terms of animal health of EID will be the ability to read a sheep's ear tag electronically (rather than visually) and know where it was born.  And the only sheep disease where this may have any relevance is Scrapie.

wee man:

double tagging has nothing to do with EID they are completely separate enteritis

Enteritis - although I assume this was a mistyping of entities - what a beautiful Freudian slip!  Enteritis = inflammation of the small intestine, possible symptoms include diarrhoea!

Wee man, you're spot on, even without EID it is highly likely and possible guaranteed that we'll have to record individual numbers and cross reference any replacement tags in the on-farm flock register - that won't be a lot of fun for anyone with a large flock.

But, as Jacobu rightly points out without a central database EID is worthless, giving nothing more than we already have. EID only works when there's a central database able to record the individual movements, without it what's the point of individual ID?

However, there are other benefits other than health that could come from EID, it can allow rapid recognition of beneficial bloodlines and management practice and I know one farm where liveweight gain has been recorded for a couple of seasons and its allowed them to identify which pastures are performing best and prioritise grassland rejuvenation and reseeding.

Beyond that it could also deliver a myriad of on-farm recording benefits, particuarly for closed flocks where ewes suffering repeat foot problems can be recorded and a whole host of other issues too. Once collected this data can be analysed and used to determine both breeding and culling strategies for the future and that's not to mention the possible benefits of abattoirs being able to feedback slaughter data direct to farm for every individual allowing the best sire and dam lines to be identified - again of most benefit to closed flocks, but equally anyone buying tups or ewes from more than one source could see which breed the best and leave the best returns.

Finally, and this is the big win, with EID and a central database we could do away with the six day standstill (13 days in Scotland) and all the incumbent problems it brings. After all if the database is updated in real time, there would be a log off every sheep's location at any given point, apart from when they're travelling, and any one of them could be tracked along its movement history to see where its been and if its been exposed to any potential disease risk.

But, a central database is a must for any of these benefits to be truly realised.

I can see where this is going....sheep passports next!

crazysheep:

I can see where this is going....sheep passports next

Yup! Unfortunately, I've been saying this since 2001 and it is all becoming horribly, horribly true. Still, why should we worry about sheep - the Government would like to plot our movements every second of the day!

wee man:

double tagging has nothing to do with EID

I disagree  . Double tagging was brought in so that individual identification of sheep could be maintained when there was tag loss.

If you use a batch system, using farm flock numbers  for selling sheep there is no need to have individal identification .

From a disease point of view if I sell 1 or 50 sheep to the Wee man it makes no difference because there is a link.

The TSE threat has gone in sheep , anything that ate contaminated feed before 1996 is history

So the reasons for having individual ID in sheep are now unclear ., this legislation was written on the back of the uncertainty of BSE

What gains does individual ID have ? - If you  want it as a breeding tool thats  great

The OLD Scottish batch system was simple , and when an animal turned up with a problem could be track traced in most cases back up the supply chain by the tags in its ear.(A flock movement  tag was added to the sheep when it arrived on farm )

Even if a national database for sheep was set up ,before it would get rid of the 6  /13 day standstills I believe it would have to be certified by Europe which wouldn't happen overnight.

Most people will just accept this stupid legislation OR will get rid of their sheep.

My view - Government stated it would get rid of unnecessary bureaucracy - for once deal with it before it is implemented .

or at least tell us the benifit it will bring the industry and disease tracability  , because I don't see it

Individual ID is the issue , its not just the extra money for the tags its all the extra time and admin that comes with it

out on the hill:

Individual ID is the issue

Absolutely right.  EID was dreamt up as being the most efficient way of updating a national database of sheep movements recording movements of individual animals.  If producers, markets and abattoirs could record movements electronically and submit them online, then a recording system would be a possibility.  Expecting Trading Standards to input ear tag numbers from potentially illegible paper forms would be a nightmare. 

If there is to be no database then individual ID is irrelevant, as is double tagging.

With no database, there is no benefit for tracing contacts in the case of an outbreak of infectious disease as tracing still has to be done by reference to the records of individual markets and producers.

It is not just EID we need to be fighting, but also the requirement for individual ID on movement documents.  Without EID, the recording in markets of the individual IDs of the sheep making up each lot will be a tremendous imposition, and each lot could not leave the market until the data was in the market's computer and therefore be available for creating the ongoing movement form for the buyer.

In reality, if we have to have the recording of individual ID on movement forms, EID will be essential. 

Almost all our sheep are pedigree so we have to record their individual IDs in our records, and for the sake of completeness, they are always recorded on movement forms (even if going to slaughter), just in case other records are lost or corrupted.  Our numbers are small (100 lambs a year max.) so the cost of EID reader and software compared with the few hours a year needed to record them now, will not be cost effective. Someone earlier in the thread has compared to cost of the equipment with the market value of lambs at present, but it is the annualised cost of all tags and equipment which needs to be compared to PROFIT made per lamb that needs to be compared with the benefit to flock efficiency.

I can see the benefits of EID on larger farms if the management of the flock and facilities allow the equipment to be set up in such circumstances that it will be reliable, in picking up data to help make breeding choices and help record treatments and so on, but this choice should be down to the individual producer, not a matter for legislation.

As with almost all EU legislation, there has been no cost benefit analysis.  The reality is that, without the requirement to create an individual movement database, there is ZERO benefit to requiring or recording individual ID.  If this is the case ANY additional cost to the industry is throwing money down the drain!

out on the hill:

The TSE threat has gone in sheep , anything that ate contaminated feed before 1996 is history

Err- not quite. Am just about to lamb a commercial ewe born in 1995!

More seriously though, I went to a cross compliance meeting last night and it is plain that DEFRA have no idea how this is going  to work. The space on the movement book page for individual identification of animals is totally inadequate for recording even 20 sheep moved to market. The NFU man suggested that it could be recorded on computer. OK that's fine by me, but what about the chap up the road who has never worked a computer and is unlikely to start now. Is he effectively excluded from stockmanship because he can't handle IT?

Then there will be the wonderfully confusing situation for a number of years where batches of mixed ewes will be sold. Some will legitimately have one ear tag, some two and some will have EID. The older ewes will be batch recorded and the younger ones individually recorded. Sort THAT on out down the market on a Monday morning!!

By all accounts, BCMS are in a bit of a mess with cattle tracing. There are far fewer cattle movements and each batch is much smaller - normally 1 to 10 go through the ring at once.

How on earth is a national data base for sheep going to work? we don't even have a national data base for humans.

Peter,

       I had a letter from the House of Commons today: Mr Drew [my MP] has asked for a reply to my enquirery re EID's. Will keep you posted.

Its quite clear that everyone on this thread understands the problem a lack of a national database will cause. As Jacobus quite rightly says without a national database both individual identification and EID are totally worthless.

With regard to the cost issues of EID, the rules don't actually say that farmers have to record individual ID's by any electrronic method, they simply have to insert an EID tag or bolus. So, for smaller flock owners where an EID reader etc... is uneconomic the only extra cost is that of the EID tag itself, records can still be kept manually - a half baked piece of legislation I know but that's what the rules say.

It is likely that electronic recording would, though, be the best option at markets and abattoirs to avoid any errors creeping into the system and it may be possible that these operators could issue farmers with a list of EID's read to avoid the manual recording on farm (although as I understand it the rules say the ID's must be read before they leave the farm).

And while there are benefits to some farms of using EID, for others it adds no more traceability or assurance than we already have through the exisiting system, as I said before the biggest benefit will come when a real-time database can be established to help eliminate the six and 13 day standstills. Crucially, too these are only UK legislation, not EU rules, so it should be easier to have them taken away.

top tup:

Its quite clear that everyone on this thread understands the problem a lack of a national database will cause. As Jacobus quite rightly says without a national database both individual identification and EID are totally worthless.

Not having a national database for movement of individual animals causes no problem at all for individual identification or EID, it merely renders them utterly useless and a complete waste of money.

I also think you are being over-optimistic in believing that a full individual tracing system would lead to the end of the standstill regime.  Epidemiologically, the standstill is designed to allow symptoms of disease to develop and be recognised before possible contacts can move and potentially spread infection.  A full ID database, updated in real time by the holding of departure, (not by the destination holding via snail mail as it is now) would speed up the tracing of dangerous contacts but would not do anything to slow down the spread of disease before it is first identified.  This would also apply to the present batch recording system if it was updated electronically on departure from a holding.  Individual IDs add little to the tracing of contacts except for the certainty that this particular animal was definitely one that went through x market.  By the time a disease emerges, the whole country will be on a standstill anyway.

top tup:

as I said before the biggest benefit will come when a real-time database can be established to help eliminate the six and 13 day standstills.

The establishment of most things these days costs money. Undoubtedly it will be our money. I can see that electronic tagging can have benefits in stock management (having had to squint in torchlight to see if the old dear who is rejecting her twins is ewe X or Y!) But nationally? Wouldn't it just be another database for the authorities to a) deny that they have received b) mix up batch information c) lose entirely - as seems to be the norm. I'd rather have the 6 day standstill and work round it than argue the toss with some official about whether some electronic  movement info was correct or not. That may not suit everyone but remember - there is nothing so simple that DEFRA can't make complicated! 

We’ve all had a moan .

There needs to be a  risk aproach

There is no need for home bred  ewes to be electronically tagged if they are not going to be read until  it leaves its holding of birth. Therefore for ewes that are on their holding of birth EID is a waste of money and trace ability is not compromised

IF there is going to be a slaughter derogation for animals going to slaughter from their holding of birth then this should also apply to ewes  -  batch with all animals with same flock tag.

On the other end of the scale some sheep will move many times and it may be beneficial for them to be electronically tagged but as Jacobus said without a database how are they going to track these individual movements ?

On the down side markets would find it impossible to read tags and it is very important that we keep the  live market  system . Lamb prices would not have rallied like they have since the new year if there had not been a live market , and I would get so many good dinners at St Boswells.

The batch system does work it is not perfect but it is a simple system that delivers traceability when there is a disease outbreak like we saw with F & M. If mistakes are made remember a computer adage garbage in – garbage out  , technology is only as good as the info you give it , thats why it must stay simple , especially for us hill Billie’s .

 I assume that most of you are FW readers so you may have noticed DEFRA has placed an advert on page 16 which should clear up some of the confusion people have about how the old and the new system will working together.

Jacobus:

Someone earlier in the thread has compared to cost of the equipment with the market value of lambs at present, but it is the annualised cost of all tags and equipment which needs to be compared to PROFIT made per lamb that needs to be compared with the benefit to flock efficiency.

Ok Jacobus you have prompted me to go in to my accounts and work out the % of my average profit margin that will be taken by readers and software. for my 800 ewe flock i am spending 1% of my normal profit margin per lamb on EID kit (excluding tags). I am currently paying 66p per lamb for the chip (over and above the normal tag cost).

how many of you have looked at a new management system developed by SAC to slow down anthelmintic resistance using EID whats a drench working for another 10 years worth? 

Out on the hill   you ask how the markets will work. there will be some problems untill all the old (none EID) stock are out of the system, once all sheep are EIDed then the markets will function in much the same way as now. at each loading bay there will be a couple of run through readers.

There are currently readers in the uk that can read 2000 sheep per hour with no mistakes!!!!!!!!!! (there are also lots that can't)   how fast can you unload a lorry?  

That doesn't mean that it is right.

 Politicians I think are starting to question it in Europe as well as here , as if it is made compulsory then subsidised electronic tagging systems  that are present in some European countries will not be allowed to be subsidised any more and where previously farmers were quite happy to stodge along are now wondering what it will cost them.

If lambs were all making £70 , 65p for a tag might not be an issue for some , but if you are selling small BF store lambs at £30 I think it a different matter.

wee man, if you want to have eid, go ahead, just dont force it on the rest of us, and more importantly , dont tell politicians it might work .

freedom of choice is what western democracy is all about.

some people love extra impositions from authorities, it gives them some sort of kick.

i am not one of them.

glasshouse:

wee man, if you want to have eid, go ahead, just dont force it on the rest of us, and more importantly , dont tell politicians it might work .

Don't worry glasshouse i am not going to Westminster with a plaque saying imposes EID now, though it might be a good idea for you to go with a plaque saying the opposite.

Don't tell the politicians that it might work suggest that this is the only argument you have that holds any water?

Just turned the computer on to find an email press release from the NSA about EID.

Apparently Hungarian farmers and politicians have just woken up to the fact that, despite the Hungarian national sheep flock being below the numbers that would oblige them to adopt compulsory EID, they are not absolved from the requirements to record individual tag numbers on movement documents and records.

This applies, of course to all EU countries, whatever the size of their national sheep or goat flocks.  Pity their ministers didn't notice this when they voted for the EID regulations thinking they didn't affect their farmers.

We're just following up this at the moment. Sounds like there might be a chink that can be exploited here.