A Model for Data Collection and Reporting for Cow/Calf and Feedlot Operations

Introduction Multiple forces are moving the beef industry toward complete traceability of meat products. The cattle industry is producing food for consumers and their demands are evolving to include food safety, nutrient value, natural/organic production, antibiotic-free, genetic preference, animal husbandry (process verification), source verification and traceability. There is a growing worldwide adoption of country mandates for traceability. The livestock industry has been working for several years to develop data collection and reporting models. The need for completion and implementation of these models from birth to slaughter and eventual consumption has been elevated due to Homeland Security issues. The National Animal Identification Plan is being developed by a task force and is sponsored by the National Institute for Animal Agriculture. This is a joint effort of industry and government. The plan will serve as a template for standardization of identification numbering systems and establishment of standard format specifications of required data that will be associated with an animal. Individual identification of cattle will require additional inputs associated not only with the cost of the identification device but also the labor and equipment needed to read, record, and store the individual identification number and related data at each of the production segments. As individual identification is used in the future to facilitate collection and analysis of production data it will become increasingly important that the ID systems are reliable and efficient to use. The success of an individual identification model will include identification at an early age and allow for data collection throughout the animal’s life cycle. The objectives were to evaluate the relative ease of use and efficiencies associated with the collection and recording of individual identification numbers and early life date at the Utah State cow/calf ranch operation. The evaluation included the identification devices, the hardware used to record the individual data as well as the data collection software.