ADVANCING ANIMAL DISEASE TRACEABILITY

ROAD MAP FOR NEW YORK STATE

A Three-Year Plan

Submitted by:

JOY BENNETT, DVM, MPH, DACVPM

DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY

NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS

10B AIRLINE DR. 

ALBANY, NY 12235

(518)457-3502

Submitted to:

ALISON STOUT, DVM

AREA VETERINARIAN FOR NEW YORK

VETERINARY SERVICES

ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE USDA APHIS VS

Albany, NY 12205

 

August 2, 2022 
Table of Contents

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................... 3

II. CURRENT TRACEABILITY SITUATION............................................................................ 5

2.1 Who are we? ....................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Where are we now?............................................................................................................. 6

2.3 Strengths and Weaknesses.................................................................................................. 8

2.4 Opportunities and Threats................................................................................................... 9

2.5 Inventory of existing infrastructure and suitability assessment................................ 9

III. VISION AND MISSION CONTEXT FOR ADVANCING TRACEABILITY..................... 10

3.1 Vision statement ............................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Mission statement ............................................................................................................. 10

IV. TRACEABILITY REQUIREMENTS.................................................................................... 10

4.1 Strategic goal(s).....................................................................................10

4.2 Programmatic goal(s) (Objectives)............................................................... 11

4.3 Animal disease traceability performance measures.......................................................... 13

4.4 Data requirements............................................................................................................. 14

4.5 Information technology plan............................................................................................. 15

4.6 Resource requirements...................................................................................................... 15

4.7 Organizational needs......................................................................................................... 15

4.7.1 Executive support.......................................................................................... 15

4.7.2 Coordination and oversight procedures......................................................... 16

4.7.3 Policy............................................................................................................. 16

4.7.4 Staffing.......................................................................................................... 17

4.7.5 Budget requirements ..................................................................................... 17

4.7.6 Outreach ........................................................................................................ 18

4.7.6.1 Accredited veterinarians................................................................... 19

4.7.6.2 Slaughter plants................................................................................ 19

4.7.6.3 Industry as a whole........................................................................... 19

4.8 Monitoring and reporting interstate movement activity ................................................... 19

V. ADVANCING TRACEABILITY........................................................................................... 20

5.1 Ranking of priorities for advancement ............................................................................. 20

5.2 Implementation of objectives............................................................................................ 20
3 

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

• The fundamental problems addressed by this plan

New York State’s livestock industry is dominated by the dairy cattle sector which accounts 

for 90% of the value of annual production from livestock in the state. In order to protect and 

promote the dairy industry, the state in the 1960’s, and 1970’s established aggressive 

enforcement of laws and rules requiring identification of cattle and recordkeeping. All calves 

were vaccinated for brucellosis and at the same time permanently identified until 1973. 

Routine tuberculosis testing of all adult animals in cattle herds was done until 1987. This was 

to facilitate the eradication of brucellosis and tuberculosis in New York which was achieved 

during that time period. 

That system was primarily paper based, still exists virtually unchanged today, and is still the 

primary means to perform livestock traces. However, the decline of brucellosis vaccination 

and the elimination of area tuberculosis testing have greatly reduced the number of animals 

officially identified and recorded by veterinarians. Under law, the department has access to 

the records of livestock markets and dealers, but it occasionally takes time to get the 

information needed. In addition, milk testing and artificial insemination organizations have 

official tag records, but the state has had mixed results in attempting to trace cattle through 

these due to incompleteness of their records. In 2011, the change in policy by the APHIS 

deputy administrator for Veterinary Services to supply USDA ear tags to producers has 

opened up a new opportunity to identify cattle at the premises of origin. It will take some 

time before the industry, especially small beef producers, fully accepts this practice.

• The plan presented here has three major components. 

1. Maintenance of the existing traceback capability

2. Increase the searchability of the paper-based system by recording tag numbers from 

significant events and putting into New York’s CoreOne database.

3. Develop more cost-effective methods to capture data such as direct entry by producers 

and veterinarians and data uploads from other organizations issuing or recording 

identification numbers such as breed registries, DHI’s, and bull studs. 

• Primary benefits

The primary benefit of this plan is the gradual transition from a paper-based system to a more 

efficient electronic system which will meet the Interstate Traceability Performance Standards.

o This plan builds upon previous efforts to advance animal disease traceability. New York 

has spent 17 years and invested heavily in identifying premises data and producing a 

robust electronic system for recording premises identification. Starting with deer 

inventories for Chronic Wasting Disease, this system now has the capability to record 

individual animal identification associated with those premises which is flexible and can 

be searched easily. During the Winter and Spring of 2015, we began an intensified effort 

to update GPS coordinates for premises listed in our CoreOne database. This effort 

continues. 

• The plan fits within USDA’s framework for animal disease traceability by adopting and 

implementing the components of the USDA’s framework for animal disease traceability in a 

manner which will be cost effective over the long term.

• Ultimately, this plan will support animal health information systems within New York by 

greatly speeding up the retrieval of data used in livestock tracing. It will also make that data 

available on the internet 365/24/7. 
4

• This plan supports animal health information needs with other States/Tribes/Territories and 

USDA nationally by improving our rapid tracing abilities and improving our ability to receive 

and send electronic interstate livestock shipment data.

• New York now employs CVI Central to electronically provide receiving states information 

on interstate shipments. This assists other states in meeting all of their Performance Standards.

• Alternatives explored:

o New York has already invested in an electronic record keeping system for animal 

traceability and cannot long support an infrastructure to maintain both a paper record 

system and an electronic system.

o The primary alternative to this plan would be to maintain the current paper-based

record system. A switch to a primary electronic system will produce benefits in time 

and economy. Efficient data capture will improve data quality, timeliness of 

information retrieval and cost savings.

o Alternatives such as GVL, myVetTech,and VetSentry which meet the NASAHO 

standards, are emerging. Smart ICVI, VSPS and Larch-Hill Labs offer eCVI’s but do 

not meet the NASAHO standards. As other states, private companies and USDA 

develop animal disease traceability information systems, we intend to adopt the newer 

and more efficient systems.

• Projected costs for FY2022, FY2023 and FY2024 benefits

The major benefit is that traceability data will be put into retrievable databases and time 

involved to do traces will be reduced from days and weeks to minutes.

In 2018, New York began using CVI Central and started scanning all CVI’s and 

subsequently entered any official ID into CoreOne. This has improved New York’s data 

entry time, data accuracy, and trace times. While there is less time invested in processing 

CVI’s, there is more time spent on entering ID’s. If more accredited veterinarians can be 

encouraged to use eCVI’s, especially those that issue high numbers of CVI’s,

improvements can continue. Large numbers of hours are still dedicated to data entry for 

scanned paper CVI, which are not true eCVI’s.
5

II. CURRENT TRACEABILITY SITUATION

2.1 Who are we?

o Primary responsibility for the prevention of the introduction and spread of contagious 

disease of livestock in New York is shared jointly between the New York State 

Department of Agriculture and Markets, Division of Animal Industry (DAI) and the 

United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 

Veterinary Services (VS). In addition, these agencies work closely with the New York 

State Department of Environmental Conservation and USDA/APHIS/Wildlife 

Services (on diseases affecting wildlife) and the New York State Health Department 

(on zoonotic diseases).

o There are several statewide livestock groups which we will need to update on the 

development and implementation of New York’s Animal Disease Traceability Road 

Map:

• Empire State Meat Goat Producers Association

• Empire Sheep Producers Association

• New York Angus Association

• New York Ayrshire Club

• New York Beef Producer’s Association

• New York Brown Swiss Association

• New York Deer and Elk Farmers Association

• New York Holstein Association

• New York Pork Producers

• New York Simmental Association

• New York State Dairy Goat Breeders Association

• New York State Guernsey Breeders

• New York State Horse Council

• New York State Jersey Cattle Club

o There are also numerous support organizations in New York which have an interest in 

Animal Disease Traceability:

• Cornell Cooperative Extension

• Dairylea Cooperative

• DairyOne Cooperative

• Empire Livestock Marketing

• New York State Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory

• New York State Veterinary Medical Association

• Pro-Dairy

• Quality Milk Production Services

• Upstate Milk Producers

• Agri-Mark

o This roadmap includes virtually all of the state of New York. Although there is some 

limited livestock agriculture in lands held by sovereign Native American nations 

within New York’s borders, these are fully integrated with the state’s marketing 

infrastructure. Although they act as independent bodies, they have fully cooperated 

with USDA initiatives.
6

o How are traceability data used internally, externally?

o During an infectious disease investigation, traceability data is used to 

determine the source of an imported disease and to ascertain any other flocks 

and herds that might have been exposed due to animal movement. The 

information is vital to New York State’s chronic wasting (?) disease program. 

It is used in inventory maintenance and for the approval of movement permits.

o Externally, this data is used to assist food safety agencies determine the source 

of residues found in food products. Most commonly this is to determine the 

herd of origin of cattle with drug residues at slaughter. The data is also used 

to determine ownership of strayed animals.

o What values guide the animal disease traceability system?

o Although large amounts of data are collected, stored, and used, small 

inaccuracies can reduce the system’s usefulness. The primary goal is accurate 

data entry. Since animals in interstate commerce are the most likely 

introduction of a disease threat, priority will be given to those animals over 

livestock which spend their entire lives on one premises.

o Furthermore, we have learned not to get too far ahead of the industries in this 

area. We need to allow the demands of commerce and the needs of producers 

to drive the evolution of ID methods and data capture technology.

2.2 Where are we now?

o New York has traditionally had a robust system of animal identification requiring the 

permanent identification of all livestock moving through livestock dealers and auction 

markets including those in slaughter channels. USDA-VS in New York uses AINM to 

record small ruminant ID distributed to sheep and goat producers as part of the scrapie 

program, and RFID tags procured by New York through previous cooperative 

agreements and for scrapie eradication activities are also distributed to the producer 

level in AINM. Ear tags for use in cattle, deer, and swine are purchased in bulk from 

manufacturers and inventoried at the cooperator’s central offices in Albany. Slaughter 

back tags for cattle, sheep and swine; and metal NUES eartags are ordered from the 

USDA warehouse. Written records are kept on all shipments of official tags to 

veterinarians, livestock dealers, livestock markets, and livestock producers. Required 

recordkeeping by veterinarians, markets and dealers has led to the ability to reliably 

trace back animals to the last premises they were held. 

o Under previous cooperative programs such as brucellosis, tuberculosis, pseudorabies, 

and scrapie, accuracy was determined to be much more important than timeliness of 

trace. Especially in tuberculosis and scrapie, New York typically was asked to trace 

animals months or years after they had left the state. Most records were held locally 

by livestock markets and dealers and it generally took a week to get information from 

those sources. A successful trace back was defined as the identification of all possible 

premises where an animal may have been infected or spread infection. A successful 

trace forward was defined as the identification of all possible premises exposed by an 

animal. While length of time taken to complete a trace is important, it was secondary 

to accuracy and completeness.

o Currently, virtually all clerical work including distribution of identification devices is 

done by the three members of the Animal Disease Control Unit. The unit is hierarchical 

with a principal clerk supervising the two other clerks. 
7

o All tag ordering except for scrapie tags goes through the state office. All scrapie orders 

go through the federal office. Efforts are being made to coordinate electronic record 

keeping with other organizations which issue official tags such as Dairy One (a DHIA) 

and Genex (an AI stud). We have seen marked improvements in Dairy One’s records 

in recent years. 

o Record systems maintained by veterinarians, livestock markets and 

livestock dealers are held on paper or in local computer systems. New York puts 

into our TraceFirst database all tags issued through this department to veterinarians, 

dealers, livestock markets, and producers. At the present time, New York continues 

to work with regional DHIA’s operating in New York to make tags issued by those 

entities more easily traced electronically (e.g. Dairy One (a DHIA) issues “21Z” 

tags that are traceable through CoreOne). To further increase compliance and data 

accuracy, New York is actively encouraging the use of identification devices in 

livestock (horses, cattle, and cervids) which can be read electronically. In recent 

years, the USDA has been distributing RFID 840 official tags to New York, and 

these have been distributed in turn to producers with priority given to replacement 

heifers. New York has been allotted 134,500 RFID tags by USDA for FY2022. Our 

storage situation is limited and as such we are distributing tags to an increased 

number of producers and to a limited number of hand selected livestock markets 

and dealers conducting dispersal sales.

o What standards for traceability are currently being used and are they appropriate?

Current animal disease traceability standards were designed to identify the last 

premises an animal was previously housed. At best these standards reliably looked 

back a few weeks or months. In the case of highly infectious diseases and chemical 

residues found in meat and milk, this was effective surveillance. However, 

transmissible spongiform encephalopathy and diseases caused by Mycobacterium 

sp. and lentiviruses have long asymptomatic latent periods. In these cases, an 

animal must be traced back months to years to find the source of infection.

o What is the state of technology infrastructure? Capability in terms of size? 

Compatibility within and outside the agency, unit, department, etc. for sharing data 

when needed?

The state of New York has been partnering with Trace First and its 

predecessor, Via Herd for the past several years to develop person and premises 

registration and animal tracking software. The result is a robust database system 

which is kept updated, backed up, and made available off site. Because the 

database is held offsite, there are no size restrictions. The database allows for the 

free exchange of data with the federal Standardized Premises Registration System 

(SPRS) and Generic Database (GDB). Automated links have been developed to 

both these systems. In the 2018-19 agreement period we improved the efficiency

with which data from both paper and electronic records are uploaded to CoreOne. 

We acquired TraceFirst’s CVI Central software which is designed to facilitate 

data upload. We continue to scan older paper documents in the office and load 

them into CoreOne. 

o Because the system is web-based, information can be retrieved 24/7/365 by any 

authorized user who has access to the internet.
8

o Funding

While New York State has invested much to develop this system, it still requires 

funding to maintain. Although not a large amount, funding must be found year to year. 

Roughly a quarter to a third of the cost of our traceability activities are covered by our 

cooperative agreement.

2.3 Strengths and Weaknesses

• New York developed a comprehensive and robust system of traceability in order to

make rapid progress in the tuberculosis and brucellosis eradication programs in the 

1950’s, 1960’s, and 1970’s. This program required permanent identification on all 

cattle handled by dealers and livestock markets even those going direct to slaughter. 

In addition, complete records are required on almost all cattle handled. While the 

system is cumbersome, it does permit rapid tracing in most circumstances.

.

• Although New York requires that calves less than 200 lbs. be officially identified 

in commerce, documenting such animals back to their birth farm is still difficult 

sometimes. Because of changes in marketing, these young calves which once were 

destined to be slaughtered for veal are now being raised for dairy replacement or 

beef production. In addition, many of these calves are being moved between 

premises and livestock markets and dealers several times before they finally enter 

the dairy string or go to slaughter, amplifying the opportunities for disease 

propagation and transmission.

• Although an increasing number of dairy herds are utilizing RFID tags for 

management, infrastructure at many livestock handling facilities is inadequate to 

capture that information. Presently, the visually reading of the small RFID tags is 

a challenge and the recording of 12 or 15 digits correctly is problematic. Some 

livestock markets have RFID panel readers, some of these installed with financial 

assistance from NYDAM and most have RFID handheld readers. Although this 

data can be downloaded into computers, manually entering data from paper CVI’s 

from high volume markets is still a concern.

• Also, because of tag failure, New York had not previously discouraged the use of 

multiple official identification devices on individual animals. In fact, in the case of 

brucellosis vaccinates, and captive cervids NY has actually required the use of 

multiple official identification devices on animals. We currently do not see a large 

number of animals with multiple official identifications as stakeholders adapted to 

the regulations. The times when we do see multiple tags, it is often at fairs where 

dairy cattle have two tags, the older tag not being compatible with the reader in the 

dairy parlor.

• The major difficulty in data capture is an electronic ICVI system to compete 

effectively with the paper-based system. New York has no provision to charge for 

forms or processing, so the least cost option is the use of state provided forms. The 

VSPS interstate is cumbersome to use, and the cost of available commercial 

applications cannot be justified for livestock. There are 3 eCVI applications

consistent with NASAHO Standards available for use in New York: Vet Sentry, 

myVetTech and Global Vet Link. AgMove was just acquired by GVL January 

2022. There are two other options: Smart ICVI and, for equine there is Larch-Hill 
9

Labs. We do have veterinariansin NY who use these applications. We are interested 

in increasing the use of these products, placing the labor involved with data entry 

in the hands of veterinarians and producers. But it is difficult to incentivize the shift 

to these applications as producers bear the cost of their use. 

• One problem with each state developing its own system is that there is a large 

amount of redundancy in data entry. For example, animals being tested for export 

will have identification entered from test charts and also the same information from 

the ICVI’s. Animals entered as exports in New York will then be entered as imports 

by the receiving state and vice versa. The adoption of NASAHO Standards should 

help with this problem. 

2.4 Opportunities and Threats

• Does this plan enable or avoid consequences of potential threats?

Before routine sampling of all of the dairy herds in New York for Brucellosis 

ceased, the department could maintain lists of all herds producing milk in New 

York. Although recording distribution of official identification and interstate 

movements cannot replace that information, it will give the state a better idea where 

the more active farms are.

• Does this plan provide for better use of available resources than current 

approaches?

 By emphasizing inputting identification data prior to a trace back, this plan is 

much more personnel intensive but vastly quicker than poring through paper 

records after an outbreak. In addition, this plan may produce trace outs from 

unrelated premises which could never be found through the paper-based system.

• Does this plan enhance networking opportunities?

As standardized ways to store and transmit data develop, the time it takes to 

retrieve and transmit vital information will be reduced from days to minutes. 

• If this plan is not implemented, what are the threats?

Failure to implement this plan will greatly reduce New York’s ability to trace 

animals. The reduction of funding for tuberculosis and brucellosis programs has 

reduced staff available to keep current the CoreOne database.

• If this plan is not implemented, will others be tasked with doing so?

The animal identification and traceability program help support other functions 

such as food safety, producer payment security, and the identification of stray and 

stolen animals. In the absence of the Division of Animal Industry coordinating this 

effort, there is no other entity that can do so.

• Complications for previous efforts to coordinate with other entities within New 

York’s boundaries, and outside the state:

The lack of consistent national standards for identification devices and 

databases has hindered the interoperability of the various systems of animal 

identification. 

2.5 Inventory of existing infrastructure and suitability assessment

• Human resources
10

Currently, the Division of Animal Industry employs 11 veterinarians and fourteen

licensed veterinary technicians in the field throughout New York State. In the central 

office, there are 5 veterinarians and 5 clerical positions.

• Space availability

As our department has economized in both staffing and real estate, we are currently 

short on storage space.

• Connectivity resources, both in office and in the field 

Because the current traceability database is housed by a commercial concern and 

available through the internet, there are no connectivity problems except in the limited 

areas where high speed internet is unavailable.

• Access to USDA animal disease traceability and animal health information resources

Due to security constraints, and changes in the system, the USDA IT applications are 

of marginal utility to our office.

• Organization of all existing paper record systems used to access animal disease traceability 

or animal health information

As the state transitions to electronic record systems, the traditional file system is being 

reduced. The 75 five drawer file cabinets formerly used to file ICVI’s and test reports by 

premises for cattle, bison, goats, deer, camelids, swine, and sheep have largely been 

replaced by document uploads to CoreOne. Original brucellosis vaccination charts are 

filed by the computer input number because of their longer retention schedule. 

• Computerized data management capability, including present storage size, speed, security, 

etc.

Because all information is maintained on a commercial contract server, there are no 

constraints in data management capability, storage size, speed or security. CoreOne is 

accessible to all authorized personnel with a laptop, PC, or smart phone. 

• Automated data capture capability

Due to the nature of carbonless forms, ICVI’s and original test and vaccination charts 

are almost exclusively hand-written and cannot be adequately captured in an automated 

system. Our New York State Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory is actively working on an 

electronic Equine Infectious Anemia report and we hope to capitalize on that soon. 

III. VISION AND MISSION CONTEXT FOR ADVANCING TRACEABILITY

3.1 Vision Statement

The Division of Animal Industry intends to maintain its achievements in animal 

disease traceability, improve traceability wherever practical, and accomplish these 

intentions at minimal cost to our livestock industries. 

3.2 Mission Statement

The mission of the New York State Department of Agriculture & Markets is to foster 

a competitive food and agriculture industry to benefit producers and consumers. 

IV. TRACEABILITY REQUIREMENTS

4.1 Strategic goal
11

To continue developing and implementing a State-wide infrastructure for advancing 

animal disease traceability compatible with New York State and USDA standards. 

4.2 Programmatic goals (objectives)

Objective 1: Manual data capture and preservation of currently available data into a 

retrievable database.

• Monitor ICVI data quality

• Input data into appropriate systems

• Improve retrieval of available traceability information

• Integrate surveillance and traceability data

Each paper ICVI is already reviewed for completeness and compliance with applicable 

regulations. All identification on animals moving in interstate commerce and other associated 

information should be entered into a database for instant retrieval in case of a disease outbreak. 

The challenge is the manual entering of all of this information. As technology develops, electronic 

ICVI’s may become more popular. For the foreseeable future, the majority of ICVI’s will be in 

the conventional multi-part forms which are filled out by hand. The poor quality of the copies and 

the handwriting precludes any optical data recognition so clerical help will still be used to enter 

identification information. One benefit of this personnel intensive operation is that forms do not 

have to be standardized. All available data is captured. New York makes no differentiation 

between surveillance and traceability data. 

As noted elsewhere, New York has an established traceability database, CoreOne, provided 

by TraceFirst, an international leader in the industry. All identification information is entered into 

New York’s CoreOne database. The CoreOne system is a system that facilitates retrieval of any 

animal identification and movement information. Until usable electronic ICVI technology is 

developed and implemented, there is no alternative to the costs of manual data capture.

The goal is to capture identification and premises information from all test and vaccination 

charts, and all incoming and outgoing ICVI’s for cattle and cervids. 

Estimated costs are as follows:

2022- FTE Data Entry Clerk (Office Assistant 3) @ $53,237 + fringe @ 63.72% 

CoreOne system maintenance- $94,518

CoreOne Database Hosting - $12,680

CVI Central - $35,000 

Contract Total: $142,198

2023- FTE Data Entry Clerk (Office Assistant 3) @ $54,302 + fringe @ 63.72% 

CoreOne System Maintenance- $94,518

CoreOne Database Hosting - $12,680

CVI Central - $35,000 

Contract Total: $142,198

2024- FTE Data Entry Clerk (Office Assistant 3) @ $55,388 + fringe @ 63.72% 

CoreOne System Maintenance- $94,518

CoreOne Database Hosting - $12,680

CVI Central - $35,000 

Contract Total: $142,198
12

Objective 2: Development of electronic capture of data from underutilized data sources

• Enhance IT infrastructure

• Take advantage of compatible standards for sharing data with States/Tribes/Territories 

and USDA as they become available.

• Establish and/or update tag distribution record system:

With the introduction of the traceability rule, a set of standards has been established for 

official identification. Once the rule is in place, it will be easier to exchange information with 

other governmental agencies. Data standards for data exchange should be established on a 

national/international basis. It is anticipated that as electronic ICVI’s become more popular, 

systems to monitor the data quality will be instituted into the software. New York’s current 

CoreOne software requires that official identification follow the federal standards.

As transitions are made to automatic data capture and electronic documents, this database 

will need to keep up with the varying data sources. It will be a priority that as the USDA tag 

allocation system is updated or replaced, automated data transfer between it and CoreOne is 

established. Several independent data bases exist which hold official tag numbers, and which 

are not integrated into the CoreOne system such as those used by DHI and livestock marketing 

cooperatives. Data transfer protocols and privacy concerns must be addressed prior to the 

capture of this information. Electronic ICVI’s will push that burden of accurate data entry 

onto the veterinary office which completes the form so suitable incentives must be developed 

to encourage the use of electronic ICVI’s.

Objective 3: Stakeholder outreach

• Target, develop, and implement outreach messaging regarding data quality and processing 

for animal health information forms

• Re- establish advisory committee

One of the most effective outreach methods is to keep local food animal practitioners 

informed of the importance and traceability. The department keeps in contact with this 

essential group through e-mail, mailings, attendance at veterinary meetings, and 

conferences and one-on-one with veterinary practices. At the current time, some meetings 

have been cancelled due to COVID, but the emails and mailings continue.

New York has a large dairy cattle industry which accounts for most of the livestock in 

the state. New York does not have any state-wide livestock commodity groups that can 

influence a majority of their respective industries. The most influential group representing 

livestock in New York is the New York Farm Bureau which through its county grassroots 

organization represents more livestock producers than any other organization. New York 

will continue to work with the Farm Bureau and specialty livestock groups to keep 

stakeholders to stress the importance of traceability. In addition, outreach can be made to 

producers at venues such as the New York Farm Show and Empire Farm Days and through 

Cornell Cooperative Extension.

Objective 4: Transparency

• Establish authority

• Develop policy
13

The commissioner has authority to prevent the introduction and spread of infectious 

diseases in the state. New York will enforce the federal traceability rule and expand it to 

include some movements within the state such as moving animals to public exhibition.

Policy will flow from the consensus of the advisory committee as New York develops a 

traceability program in conformation to the national program.

2022- Professional time preparing regulations and policy materials, and at meetingsVeterinarian @ $61.79 per hour at 180 hours + 63.72% fringe = $18,209.27

Travel costs for outreach- $1,000

2023- Professional time preparing regulations and policy materials, and at meetingsVeterinarian @ $63.02 per hour at 180 hours + 63.72% fringe = $18,571.74

Travel costs for outreach- $1,000

2024- Professional time preparing regulations and policy materials, and at meetingsVeterinarian @ $64.72 per hour at 180 hours + 63.72% fringe = $18,919.48

Travel costs for outreach- $1,000

4.3 Animal disease traceability performance measures 

• Measurement to date:

The traditional method of measuring traceability has been “successful traces”, that is 

the ability to trace a disease animal back to the premises where the animal was exposed 

to the disease. Because New York has used tamper-proof tags in all cattle, even 

slaughter cattle, and required the recording of this information by markets and dealers, 

virtually all traces are successful traces. The only failed traces occur when animals 

cannot be identified in other states by the identification used when the animal left New 

York. This has occurred when identification is misplaced at slaughter or when a 

receiving state re-identifies (at brucellosis vaccination for example) the animal without 

recording its previous identification.

• Current Baseline

o The current baseline is trace back to the herd of origin of any animal based 

on the identification devices it bore when it left New York.

o At the current time, New York can determine the following in real time 

primarily through written logbooks and paper files:

 Performance standard 1: Determination of the state of origin and

dates of movements

 Performance standard 2: Confirmation of tag distribution within 

New York for all NUES tagged animals.

 Performance standard 3 is more difficult to meet under short time 

constraints. The ability to trace 95% of the animals moved into New 

York in 3 business days necessitates pre-loading of the identification 

numbers of all imports. As noted elsewhere, automated data transfer 

is impossible with the current system and the alternative, hand entry 

of individual identification numbers, is costly.

 Performance standard 4: Determination of the premises in New 

York which shipped an animal when the receiving state can 

document the shipment.
14

4.4 Data requirements

• Standards to be used for location identification

Location is based on front gate longitude and latitude. In addition, premises 

911 addresses are recorded if they are not the same as the premises mailing address.

• Standards to be used for official animal identification, including arrangements with 

other States, Tribes, Territories, as well as official identification methods/devices 

used within the cooperator’s jurisdiction 

New York is transitioning to the identification standards contained in the 

August, 2011 proposed Animal Disease Traceability rule. New York already 

requires standard NUES tags for animals moving through livestock dealers and 

livestock markets. As AIN identification becomes more common, the markets and 

dealers will utilize those as the official identification number in lieu of the NUES 

tag. The hardest part of the transition will be limitation to one official identification

device per animal.

• Will the State/Tribe/Territory be using official metal ear tags beyond the current 

system involving accredited veterinarians only applying the tags at the time of 

performing regulatory animal disease work? 

New York has always provided to livestock dealers and markets tamper-proof 

tags at state expense. In February 2008, these tags were brought into compliance 

with NUES. All tags were coded starting with “21M”. Applicators for these tags 

are provided to dealers and markets at state cost. 

In December 2011, New York began to send out NUES tags to producers. The 

tags are the standard USDA eartags, provided in bulk to the central state office. 

From there, the tags are sent directly to producers who are responsible for providing 

their own tag applicators. These tags all start with “21P”. 

New York also sends metal NUES tags to accredited veterinarians, and these 

tags all start with “21D” or “21V” for official calfhood vaccinates.

• What tag distribution record keeping systems will be used? (required to be 

addressed within the Road Map) 

New York currently keeps written logs which are then entered into a TraceFirst 

database which is kept offsite at a commercial server farm. Trace outs can be easily 

done either from the logbooks or through the database. 

• What data requirements exist for commuter herd agreements?

All animals must be individually identified with 840-series RFID tags or 

USDA-issued metal tags or ear tattoo with PIN number on the home farm location 

identified above prior to movement. 

• Forms approved for interstate movement in addition to ICVIs 

In addition to state issued ICVI’s, New York has been accepting both the 

USDA VSPS eCVI and Global Vet Link eCVI’s. Beginning in 2015 we began 

accepting New Planet Technology’s data. We also accept VetSentry and LarchHill Labs eCVI’s. And we accept EECVI’s. Owner-Shipper Statements (aka 

“waybills”) are permitted for livestock moving to slaughter and for calves less than 

200# or less than 14 days old, if we have an agreement with the origin state’s 

veterinary authority. 

• Data sharing with other states and USDA 
15

New York has no opposition to sharing traceability data with other 

governments with a valid need which can maintain the security and the privacy of 

the data. New York needs to be informed whenever its data is being used, however.

NYS worked with TraceFirst and now NY CoreOne is currently sending animal 

data through EMS to AHER. 

• Group/lot official numbers

o Group/lot identification has never been used in New York. If required to 

do so by federal rule, the system can be easily configured to accept group/lot 

numbers.

4.5 Information technology plan

The state plans to continue to utilize and upgrade its TraceFirst database, CoreOne. In

2018, we began to integrate TraceFirst’s application, CVI Central in order to reduce clerical 

labor. We have integrated laboratory information into the system. As USDA develops the 

Animal Health Surveillance and Monitoring System, it is anticipated that further 

integration may be done to facilitate electronic data transfer between state and federal 

systems. As the technology behind electronic ICVI’s matures and data is standardized, 

real time capture of this important data will be made possible. As of late 2021, the Animal 

Health Services dashboard is being developed by the USDA. And New York plans to 

investigate the capabilities of USDA’s newly introduced AHER. 

4.6 Resource requirements

• New York has access to the expertise required to meet these goals and objectives.

• Our current working relationship with TraceFirst will be adequate to maintain and 

expand New York’s traceability program.

• A continuity of operation plan (COOP) is in place and our system has inherent 

continuity due to the servers where CoreOne resides being located off-site.

All original (paper) records are stored at the department’s offices in Colonie, 

NY. These are considered backup to the electronic records which are maintained 

by a commercial company in Texas. Because of the thoroughness of this 

redundancy, the continuity of operation plan has not been tested.

• Are automated data capture resources needed?

As private industry has accepted the use of RFID tags, New York has assisted 

with the installation of several panel readers in livestock markets. New York would 

like to encourage larger livestock markets to computerize this data and use it to 

improve traceability data for the state. 

4.7 Organizational needs

• Organizational changes in the division have already been implemented due to 

elimination of all brucellosis surveillance, down-sizing, and reorganization. The 

present staff is cross trained in all of the important surveillance and tracking 

systems.

4.7.1 Executive support

• Is additional support from executive management needed?

o Priorities in department over the past several years have been to economize 

operations i.e. do more with less. It has been a number of years since the last 

significant disease outbreak and there have been a number of administrative 
16

turnovers. The importance of the traceability system needs to be emphasized 

from the bottom up but also through national forums. 

• How is accountability provided?

o There are two staff veterinarians responsible for overseeing day to day 

operations to ensure traceability standards are being met.

o The state veterinarian is consulted when decisions are required, resources 

needed, or other significant matters come up. The commissioner’s suite is 

kept fully briefed on matters influencing policy and public relations. 

4.7.2 Coordination and oversight procedures 

• Emergency preparedness resources:

The Department of Agriculture and Markets and the Division of Animal Industry 

are integral components of the New York State Comprehensive Emergency 

Management Plan. In the case of disaster or large-scale emergency, resource 

allocation is coordinated through the NYS Division of Homeland Security and 

Emergency Services. There is an Emergency Coordinator at the department-wide 

level and also within the Division of Animal Industry, 

• Monitoring compatibility with other States, Tribes, Territories, and USDA. 

One of the priorities of New York’s traceability program is to send staff people 

working on the traceability to program to the USAHA and NIAA meetings to interact 

with personnel from other states and USDA on traceability. The State Veterinarian 

is active in the National Assembly of State Animal Health Officials and the US 

Animal Health Association.

• Responsible staff: 

Since traceability is the backbone of the effort to protect New York’s livestock 

from introduced diseases, it has a top priority in the central office. One Veterinarian

2 positions, reporting directly to the state veterinarian, is responsible for the planning 

and reporting of the program. The same staff veterinarian 2 in the central office is 

responsible for direct implementation of the program including attendance at national 

meetings, preparation of outreach materials, and coordinating field activities. Field 

veterinarians are responsible for outreach to local veterinarian and farm groups in 

their assigned territories.

• Disputes arbitration:

The state veterinarian is ultimately responsible for the success of the traceability 

program and would, with the advice and consensus of the Assistant District Director, 

have authority to arbitrate any disputes that might occur. 

• With responsibilities spread over several levels from the state veterinarian down to 

the field veterinarian, there is ample opportunity to receive feedback from those 

directly and indirectly affected by the program. In addition, feedback will be 

obtained at outreach events. The state veterinarian frequently solicits direct input for 

affected farms and businesses.

• We manage transitions through the team effort involved with the traceability program 

and we are confident this ensures continuity in case administrators leave or are 

assigned to other tasks. 

4.7.3 Policy
17

• The Department of Agriculture and Markets has sufficient legal mandate to require 

identification and tracking of animals for disease control purposes. 

• The largest obstacles to achieving that mandate are lack of adequate funding and 

ability to insure privacy of the regulated parties. The latter issue was largely 

addressed by 7 USC 8791, which exempted data voluntarily submitted by producers 

to participate in a USDA funded program. 

4.7.4 Staffing

• Justification of full-time, paid support staff 

Although reduced by attrition over the past several years, existing support staff 

is viewed as essential to the division’s disease control efforts. Reductions due to 

attrition or reassignment have occurred in recent years, but we anticipate being able 

to maintain our current staffing level for the duration of this Road Map. Much of 

the justification for the fulltime support staff comes from the need to fulfill work 

supported by cooperative agreements. 

• Existing staff have been hired and promoted through the state’s merit based civil 

service system.

• The current group of administrative veterinarians is highly trained, most with 

advance education in epidemiology and disease control and some with advanced 

degrees and specialty certifications.

• Each person working in traceability has a civil service job description which can 

be found at http://www.cs.ny.gov/cc/tsplan.cfm. 

• With the success of the cooperative disease eradication program, disease specific 

program responsibilities have declined greatly. The New York Division of Animal 

Industry now employs 5 clerks who primarily support traceability efforts. These 

are surveillance, premises identification, and animal tracking programs. 

While the number of clerical people required to work in large cooperative 

agreement programs such as Brucellosis and Tuberculosis have declined, many

new responsibilities such as emergency preparedness, animal health assurance 

programs, animal welfare, captive wildlife, live bird markets, and on farm food 

safety have emerged. Commensurate with this increasing diversity, the state now 

employs five veterinarians in the central office, many with advanced training in 

epidemiology. In addition, the state has 10 field veterinarians and fourteen licensed 

veterinary technicians working throughout the state. 

4.7.5 Budget requirements

• Funding for traceability comes from the cooperative agreement and the state 

budget. Money used from the state budget is allocated to the Department of 

Agriculture and Markets and discretionarily allocated to the Division of Animal 

Industry. The annual budget for this plan is estimated to be $479,700. Included in 

the annual budget is $343,230 of current discretionary spending and $135,509 from 

the current traceability agreement.

• Funding requirements projected by year for FY2022, FY2023 and FY2024 for 

implementing this plan:

Approximate estimate of the annual cost for this plan is $479,700. This

estimate does not include indirect expenses. 

• In general, personnel expenses and some computer maintenance expenses are paid 

by the state and non-personnel expenses such as outreach, travel, meetings, and 
18

development of computer program to interface with USDA and private systems are 

expenses paid for with outside i.e. cooperative agreement monies.

• Most of this plan is scalable; reductions may delay but not preclude the eventual 

accomplishment of the objectives and goals. That is, data entry and outreach can 

be reduced, and the system will still be operable but at a reduced capacity.

• There is no other available funding at the present time other than use of the 

discretionary money from the Department of Agriculture and Markets or through a 

cooperative agreement with USDA-APHIS.

4.7.6 Outreach 

4.7.6.1. Accredited veterinarians

• What is the plan for informing accredited veterinarians of the new 

framework and the specific three-year plan for implementation?

• What continuing education is being planned for improving data quality 

relative to animal health information systems being used? Submitting 

official forms in a timely manner?

• What is the plan for enhancing the use of eICVIs?

We intend to reach out to practicing veterinarians throughout the 

state by email and also through continuing education events to 

advise them of eCVI options and to encourage eCVI use.

• The accredited veterinarians in New York also have roles in traceability:

New York currently has approximately 944 category I and 1411

category II accredited veterinarians. Within the National Veterinary 

Accreditation Program, current e-mails were obtained for virtually 

all of them. Current email addresses are maintained for accredited 

vets and timely messages are sent on an as needed basis.
19

4.7.6.2. Slaughter plants

We are in the process of collecting slaughter plant contact information from 

all the slaughter plants in New York for traceability purposes. The livestock 

markets that supply our slaughter plants are an integral link in traceability. Each 

of New York’s approximately 30 livestock markets has several federal and state 

employees assigned to it. Direct contact with market managers and personnel 

is made on a weekly basis. Our inspectors and veterinarians have the authority 

to review and copy dealer and market records and all transactions must be 

recorded.

4.7.6.3. Industry as a whole

New York’s commercial livestock industry is dominated by the large 

number of dairy cattle in the state. New York is currently the fourth leading 

producer of milk in the US. Farm consolidation has greatly reduced the 

number but increased the size of the average dairy farm in New York. At the 

same time, the abandonment of smaller and marginal dairy farms has led to 

increased interest by small and part time operators to produce specialty crops 

which can be marketed locally. This includes goat and sheep dairies, meat goat 

and sheep production, and “free range” hog and poultry production. This 

activity has acted to stabilize alternate livestock numbers in the state but also 

has brought in many new producers who do not have a traditional farm 

background or training. 

Because of this, many of the small producers are suspicious of 

governmental activities which seem to be intrusive. Government programs are

sometimes viewed as primarily benefiting large farms and government 

regulations as unfairly restricting small producers. Since many are part time 

farmers with full time obligations elsewhere, they generally do not affiliate 

with state and regional groups and rarely attend meetings or training sessions 

offered by Cooperative Extension. Since there is an understandable mistrust 

of government, it may be the best way to provide outreach is through proxies, 

that is, through private veterinarians, livestock markets, and cooperative 

extension.

4.8. Monitoring and reporting interstate movement activity 

o The number of animals and the number of shipments moving interstate used to be

monitored by summary data from all import and export shipments and put into a 

spreadsheet including the New York premises involved, the number and species of 

animal, the date, and the state of destination/origin. Original paperwork was scanned 

and uploaded to the destination premises file in CoreOne so it could be retrieved easily. 

Now CVI’s with information about permit ID, dates, origin and destination premises, 

species, age, sex, and official ID flow into CVI Central, and then into CoreOne.

o The goal was to more fully automate this system to avoid entering identification 

numbers in one system and summary information in another. And CVI Central has 

achieved this

o Data are verified or validated by our clerical staff and also CoreOne data entry fields 

only permit ID numbers to be entered in the correct format for the type of ID selected, 

so the system is somewhat self-validating for the format of the tag numbers. 
20

V. ADVANCING TRACEABILITY 

5.1 Ranking of priorities for advancement

1. The traceability system framework in New York is already in place. The one overarching 

need remains to be recording data in a timelier and less expensive manner. This will require 

developing automated data capture and transfer systems while maintaining the current 

system.

2. In addition, some work will remain to be done in producer outreach to meet the 

requirements of the proposed traceability rule. Cattle producers will need to start routinely 

utilizing official identification. Now that a small number of RFID ear tags are available to 

the producer at no charge, a gradual transition should occur to reach compliance with the 

rule. Most of the dairy sector is currently identified with official ear tags. The challenge 

will be to identify animals on the premises of birth. The beef industry in New York consists 

of many small producers, most of which do not commonly sell animals in interstate 

commerce. As the purebred producers move to the use of official identification on all 

animals, other producers will follow, similar to the pattern seen in the sheep industry.

3. The CoreOne database is fully functional for New York’s traceability needs.

4. The major obstacle to a fully implemented plan is the lack of ways for stakeholders to 

submit data electronically. While New York could solve this problem, a national solution 

is ultimately required, even if it is just to specify standardized data to be transmitted. Once 

standards are formed, private companies and states can begin to offer electronic forms to 

replace multi-part paper forms. Reducing barriers to private veterinarian use of CVIs in 

VSPS or any other eCVI application would be an outstanding achievement. 

5. Fitting livestock markets with panel and handheld RFID readers would improve RFID 

capabilities and improve record keeping accuracy and efficiency. Veterinarians for several 

of our largest livestock markets resist using eCVI’s and still submit paper CVI’s, thus 

requiring manual entry into CVI Central.

5.2 Implementation of objectives

1. Maintenance of the current system.

New York has spent 17 years developing database system to track premises with livestock. 

With the addition of individual animal identification, it is essential that the premises data 

be constantly updated. 

2. Development of automated data exchange between New York’s CoreOne and outside 

databases.

Manual entry of tag numbers is expensive, slow, and prone to transcription errors. This 

system will not be fully viable until data is entered automatically or by the first user. 

Incentives must be created to encourage electronic submittal of documents. NASAHO’s 

establishment of eCVI standards should help guide the development of new eCVI 

application options. Although the recent loss of the AgMove application is not 

encouraging.

3. Promotion of the traceability program

Stakeholders must accept and see benefits to the program in order to get buy-in. Outreach 

can be directly to producers and indirectly through trusted sources of information such as 

veterinarians and cooperative extension.

4. Use of automated readers.
21

This has been disappointing in New York. It’s likely that producers, independent dealers,

and markets may be uneasy with complete and instant visibility of all their livestock 

transactions and are reluctant to financially invest in the equipment. If funding was 

available to assist them in acquiring large panel, or some other form of, reader that works 

for each market, they might be willing to incorporate them into their businesses. Also, 

electronic data capture systems that are compatible with ours are needed. Livestock 

markets still generate receipts that go to consignors and but are not electronically sent to 

us. We are missing opportunities to record animal tags and movements. When we need to 

perform a trace to a market, we contact them or go to their premise to search their records. 

We either need to come up with some incentive or education for them to switch to, or help 

them obtain funding to purchase, systems that would get us this information in a faster, 

more convenient, more cost efficient, accurate, fashion.