United States Department of Agriculture • Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service • Safeguarding American Agriculture 

Veterinary Services 

Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health November 2006 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Equine Identification and 

Familiarity with the National 

Animal Identification System 

(NAIS) 

A primary goal of the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture’s National Animal Health Monitoring 

System (NAHMS) Equine 2005 study was to collect 

data on health and management practices on U.S. 

equine operations. As part of that goal, data were 

collected on equine identification (ID) practices and 

operator familiarity with the NAIS. 

 NAIS is a voluntary State-Federal-Industry 

partnership designed to help producers and animalhealth officials respond quickly and effectively to 

animal-disease events in the United States. For 

more information on NAIS visit 

<http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/index.shtml>. 

For the Equine 2005 study, NAHMS collected 

data on equine health and management practices 

from a representative sample of operations with 5 

or more equids in 28 States divided into four 

regions.* The 28-State target population 

represented 78.0 percent of equids and 78.6 

percent of operations with 5 or more equids in the 

United States. Interviews were conducted from July 

18 through August 12, 2005, and 2,893 equine 

operations provided data on equine health and 

management. 

Of operations participating in the study, 40.3 

percent identified their primary function as 

“farm/ranch” and 37.0 percent identified their 

primary function as “residence with equids for 

personal use.” Over 95 percent of operations had 

horses and 34.8 percent had equids other than 

horses, e.g., donkeys, burros, mules, ponies, and 

miniature horses. 

__________________________________ 

*Regions: 

West: California, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, 

Washington, and Wyoming

Northeast: New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania

South: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Maryland, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia 

Central: Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, 

and Wisconsin

Equine Species Working Group 

In fall 2003, a task force that included nearly 30 

national equine organizations was formed to 

evaluate the concept of a national ID system. 

Known as the Equine Species Working Group 

(ESWG) the task force looked at developing 

standards for equine ID beneficial to the equine 

industry and compatible with the plans being 

considered for other livestock. The ESWG provided 

input to the NAIS Subcommittee of the Secretary’s 

Advisory Committee of Foreign Animal and Poultry 

Diseases. For more information about the ESWG 

visit <www.horsecouncil.org/equineid.htm>. 

Identification methods 

In the NAHMS Equine 2005 study, equine 

operators were asked about their methods of 

unique animal ID (defined as each equid has a 

different ID; no two equids have the same ID). 

Operators were given a list of possible methods of 

unique identification** and given the option to report 

forms of ID not listed. Forms of unique equine ID 

were not mutually exclusive, so that more than one 

form of ID could have been used on an operation or 

on the same equid. An ID unique on the home 

operation may not be unique off the home 

operation. 

Nearly three-fourths of all resident equids (71.3 

percent) had some form of unique ID. For the 

Equine 2005 study, a resident equid was defined as 

an equid that spent or was expected to spend more 

time at the operation than at any other operation, 

whether or not it was present at the time of the 

interview. The operation was its home base. 

____________________________________ 

**Hot-iron brand, freeze brand, microchip, tattoo, permanent brand 

inspection (card with markings indicated or sketch), registration 

papers, Coggins test papers (laboratory test results), halters or collars 

with name or number, passport, and other. These forms of unique ID 

are specific to the Equine 2005 survey and may not meet the 

requirements of the NAIS. 
United States Department of Agriculture • Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service • Safeguarding American Agriculture 

Four of five operations (80.8 percent) used a 

unique ID for at least some resident equids, and 

half of operations (50.7 percent) used a unique 

ID for all resident equids. A higher percentage 

of large operations (20 or more equids) were 

more likely to use a unique ID on at least some 

resident equids than medium operations (10 to 

19 equids) and small operations (5 to 9 equids) 

(91.3, 85.2, and 77.8 percent, respectively). In 

addition, operations where the primary use of 

equids was lessons/school, show/competition, 

racing, or breeding were more likely to use 

unique forms of ID than operations where the 

primary use of equids was farm/ranch work or 

pleasure. 

Across the four regions, a similar 

percentage of operations used some form of unique 

ID on at least some resident equids. However, a 

higher percentage of operations in the South region 

(54.1 percent) used a unique ID on all resident 

equids compared to operations in the Northeast 

region (43.6 percent). 

The most common forms of unique ID were 

registration papers (61.7 percent of operations and 

47.8 percent of equids) and Coggins test papers 

(40.0 percent of operations and 27.2 percent of 

equids). The least common forms of unique ID 

were microchip (3.1 percent of operations and 

1.5 percent of equids) and passport (1.1 

percent of operations and 0.3 percent of 

equids). Freeze brand and hot-iron brand were 

used as unique IDs on 13.8 and 12.2 percent of 

operations, respectively and 5.2 and 4.6 

percent of equids, respectively. Of the 3.9 

percent of operations and 2.3 percent of equids 

that had “other” unique IDs, DNA and blood 

testing were common forms of other unique 

IDs. 

Familiarity with NAIS 

 To describe their level of familiarity with 

NAIS, operators selected from four options 

ranging from “had not heard of it before” to 

“knowledgeable.” At the time of the study 

survey, 41.7 percent of operations had not 

heard of NAIS and only 14.4 percent were 

knowledgeable about NAIS (figure 1). 

 

 

 A higher percentage of large operations (20.3 

percent) were knowledgeable about NAIS 

compared to small operations (13.2 percent). The 

percentages of operations that had not heard of 

NAIS were similar across all operation sizes. 

A higher percentage of operations in the South 

region (16.9 percent) were knowledgeable about 

NAIS than operations in the Northeast region (9.0 

percent) (figure 2). 

0

20

40

60

80

Knowledgeable

Knew some basics

Recognized the name, not much else

Had not heard of it before

Figure 2. Percentage of Operations by Familiarity with the NAIS and by Region

Percent

Region

South Northeast West Central

40.7

21.4 21.0

16.9

47.4

24.4

19.2

9.0

37.0

23.7 25.9

13.4

44.1

23.4

18.7

13.8

Familiarity

Knowledgeable

Knew some basics

Recognized name, not much 

else

Had not heard of it before

14.4%

21.2%

22.7%

41.7%

Figure 1. Percentage of Operations by Familiarity with NAIS
United States Department of Agriculture • Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service • Safeguarding American Agriculture 

Operators that used their equids primarily for 

farm/ranch work were more likely to have at least 

recognized the name NAIS (66.2 percent) than 

operators that used their equids primarily for racing 

(44.6 percent) and pleasure (53.0 percent). This 

higher level of knowledge about NAIS may be 

explained by the fact that operations that used 

equids primarily for farm/ranch work were more 

likely to have cattle and therefore may have 

received information about NAIS from multiple 

industry sources. 

Knowledge level about NAIS was associated 

with the use of unique forms of equine ID. Based 

on the Equine 2005 study, operations 

knowledgeable about NAIS were more likely to use 

a microchip as a unique form of ID than operations 

that had limited to no knowledge of NAIS. 

Level of knowledge regarding equine infectious 

anemia (EIA)—a viral disease of equids—was 

associated with an increased knowledge of NAIS. 

Operators that at least recognized the name EIA 

were 2.8 times more likely to also have some level 

of knowledge about NAIS. 

_______________________ 

For more information, contact: 

USDA:APHIS:VS:CEAH 

NRRC Building B, M.S. 2E7 

2150 Centre Avenue 

Fort Collins, CO 80526-8117 

970.494.7000 

E-mail: NAHMS@aphis.usda.gov 

http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov 

#N463.1006 

____________________________________ 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits 

discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of 

race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where 

applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, 

religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, 

reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is 

derived from any public assistance program. (Not all 

prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with 

disabilities who require alternative means for communication of 

program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) 

should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 

(voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to 

USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250–9410, or call (800) 

795–3272 (voice) or (202) 720–6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal 

opportunity provider and employer. Mention of companies or 

commercial products does not imply recommendation or 

endorsement by the USDA over others not mentioned. USDA 

neither guarantees nor warrants the standard of any product 

mentioned. Product names are mentioned solely to report 

factually on available data and to provide specific information.