**Importance of Traceability for the Future**

*Bruce I. Knight, Under Secretary for*

*Marketing and Regulatory Programs*

*National Institute for Animal Agriculture*

*ID Info Expo 2007*

*Kansas City, MO*

*August 30, 2007*

Thank you for the kind introduction. I am very pleased to be here today.
Traceability is a critical topic---one that will define the future
success of animal agriculture from both a disease control standpoint and
a marketing perspective.

You've heard earlier in these sessions from Dr. John Clifford and the
NAIS staff about how USDA intends to advance animal disease
traceability. You've also heard from Samantha Simon about USDA's
certification and age- and source-verified programs. Today, I'd like to
take a few minutes to talk about the future---a future that is full of
possibility.

**[High Cost of Animal Diseases]{.underline}**

But first I want to look back for just a minute. And I want us all to
remember just how costly animal diseases can be.

Take bovine TB, for example. Since 2002, USDA has spent about \$130
million on indemnities and control activities for diseased or suspect
cattle. Over the past five years, more than 25,000 cows have been
destroyed of nearly 790,000 tested to prevent the spread of bovine TB.

Then there's BSE. As I've said before, the discovery of BSE in one cow
in the U.S. in December 2003 brought our export market to a crashing
halt. We lost 80 percent of our beef trade in 2004. USDA also spent \$5
million investigating the outbreak and later \$189 million on the
enhanced BSE surveillance program.

And don't forget the 2002 outbreak of exotic Newcastle disease. It began
in California in two backyard poultry flocks. The largest outbreak in 30
years, it took 10 months to eradicate at a cost of nearly \$160 million.
There were 22 commercial premises affected along with 2,400 backyard
flocks. Four million birds had to be euthanized, and more than 1,600
federal and state personnel were involved in the disease-fighting task
force.

**[Modernizing Traceability]{.underline}**

These examples alone demonstrate dramatically the need for an efficient,
modern traceability system. We are well on our way to putting in place a
comprehensive traceability system that builds on the tracking mechanisms
already well established under our disease programs. Now is the time to
take advantage of the new technologies available to speed tracebacks.
And we intend to do that.

As you know, our ultimate goal is a 48-hour traceback capability.
Comprehensive, state-of-the-art solutions are needed to get us there,
and NAIS can help. We're continuing to work in partnership with the
states and industry and to seek the input and involvement of our
producers as NAIS develops and unfolds.

I want to make clear that NAIS is not so much something new as it is an
updated, modernized and integrated approach to animal identification and
tracing.

Current animal identification efforts typically only address individual
objectives, such a specific disease eradication programs, interstate
commerce, breed registries and age and source verification. It is
interesting to think that an animal may be identified multiple times but
not be fully traceable because separate programs use different herd and
flock identification practices. The result is a series of databases
maintained by the states, industry and USDA that are incompatible.

This incompatibility or inefficiency directly impacts our ability to
respond quickly and effectively to animal disease events. To underscore
this point, our last four TB investigations took animal health officials
an average of 125 days to complete. We need something better.

The paradox is that where we've had success in eradicating disease, we
may no longer have an effective traceability arrangement because the
connections to producers through our active disease programs have lapsed
as the diseases have been eliminated.

A good example of this is Bangs Vaccination. As recently as 1995, we had
approximately 9 million heifers vaccinated and identified annually.
Today, just over 4 million of the approximately 16 million eligible
heifers nationwide are vaccinated for brucellosis.

So the more successful we've been in the past, the higher the risk for
the future because the traceability structure we need may no longer be
in place to do the job.

We need a state-of-the-art approach that cuts across species and extends
the benefits of tracing beyond livestock participating in a particular
disease program.

For the first time, the United States now has a program dedicated to
animal identification and tracing. By choosing to participate in NAIS,
producers are strengthening the national traceability infrastructure and
filling the gaps left by our successful disease program efforts.

**[The Business Plan]{.underline}**

From the beginning, our goal has been to create a practical system
focused on animal health. To that end, I am very excited by the upcoming
release of our business plan for advancing animal disease traceability.
Neil and team did an excellent job outlining the strategies we plan to
implement as we work towards our ultimate goal of 48-hour traceback.

While the solution is complex and will require cooperation throughout
the industry and the participation of individual producers across
species, we will pursue short-term goals with the states and industry to
advance the infrastructure over time.

In the coming weeks, we will be sharing a preliminary draft of the
business plan with state animal health officials, Species Working Groups
and the NAIS Subcommittee.

I am committed to moving this program to a very transparent
platform---something everyone can see...including the folks that have
been critical of animal ID. And just as important, I want industry
leaders---such as yourselves, government officials and producers to see
the plan, react to it and know where they can fit in. The key to our
success will be helping folks see where they can come together to
accomplish a common goal.

**[Building Markets]{.underline}**

I think it's clear to those of us in this room that NAIS will better
enable us to safeguard animal health in the U.S. That's the purpose
first and foremost---protecting livestock and preserving the livelihoods
of producers. But there are other benefits as well.

Knowing we can pinpoint problems and address them should a disease
outbreak occur builds confidence in the health and wholesomeness of U.S.
livestock. Further, the animal ID program enables us to meet the
international obligations we face in the world market. Having the system
in place will smooth the way for livestock exports.

We're all aware of the concerns about BSE around the world. We've worked
hard to demonstrate that we have the safeguards in place to ensure that
the products we sell are safe and healthful to eat.

In May, the OIE---the World Organization for Animal Health---awarded the
U.S. a formal classification of "controlled risk" for BSE. This is
essentially an international clean bill of health for our national
cattle herd. It's a determination based on a scientific assessment of
risk using internationally agreed upon standards. Trade partners that
adopt OIE standards as their own standards for trade now have no
scientific reason to block imports of U.S. beef---of any age.

Producers who choose to participate in NAIS---may be able to use the
system in conjunction with source and age verification programs to
satisfy the documentation requirements that international markets
demand. Eventually, I believe, the domestic market will want to see this
level of accountability as well.

**[COOL]{.underline}**

Many ask, will NAIS be useful for Country of Origin Labeling? Again, I
want to stress that our focus with NAIS is animal health, but we believe
the system is flexible enough to support other purposes like internal
herd management, international marketing and perhaps country of origin
labeling.

Let me tell you just briefly where we stand on COOL. The COOL
requirements currently on the books call for implementation of labeling
for most commodities on September 30, 2008. Labeling requirements for
fish and shellfish have been in effect since April 2005.

The Administration is on record as being concerned about the burden
imposed by COOL, but we are also committed to implementing the
requirements in a fair and balanced manner with the least possible cost
and the lowest possible burden on everyone in the production chain.

Of course, things could change. The House version of the next farm bill
includes a different approach that seeks to address products that are
domestic, foreign or may be of mixed or multiple origins.

In any case, producers could use NAIS to track this information for
themselves to meet COOL requirements.

**[Conclusion]{.underline}**

In closing, USDA can't, and shouldn't, do animal ID alone. It's about
partnership.

We will release a business plan within a month that will give each
sector a clear picture of their role and opportunities.

For any of you in the audience who are producers, I encourage you to
register your premises and tell your neighbors to do so as well. It's
about your animals, your livelihood, your future.