United States 

Department of 

Agriculture

Animal and 

Plant Health 

Inspection 

Service

April 2013

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Proposed Rule

APHIS-2012-0073

RIN 0579-AD91

Ruminants Imported from Fever Tick-Free 

Regions in Mexico

Policy & Program Development

Policy Analysis & Development
Summary

The Mexican government has declared the State of Sonora as a region free of “fever 

ticks,” that is, certain ticks of the genus Rhipicephalus that cause cattle fever. APHIS has 

determined that there would be negligible risk of fever ticks being introduced from Mexico by 

exempting cattle and other ruminants originating from this state from acaricide treatment and the 

7- to 12-day waiting period prior their entry into the United States. The proposed rule would 

require affected importers to apply for either inspection or supervised dipping at the port of 

entry. Under the proposed rule, cattle that are dipped at the port of entry would not need to be 

held for a 7- to 12-day waiting period.

From 2009 to 2013, 1.21 million cattle were imported yearly from Mexico. About onefourth came from Sonora. Cattle imported into the United States from Mexico are generally 

purchased by stocker operations that background the cattle on pasture before they are shipped to 

feedlots.

The average unit price of cattle imported from Mexico, 2009 to 2013, was about $440. 

The average cost of dipping with acaricide is $3.50 to $10.00 per head. It takes approximately 

five seconds for three cattle to cross a dipping vat. For an average 500-head herd, dipping takes

about 15 minutes. To inspect a 500-head herd takes from 4 to 12 hours. Depending on the size of 

the herd and time needed for inspection, some importers may choose to have the cattle dipped 

rather than inspected. The estimated cost of dipping is equivalent to about 1 to 2 percent of the 

value of the imported cattle. Any resulting cost savings realized by U.S. cattle importers, due to 

inspection rather than dipping of cattle, would depend on the relative price responsiveness of the 

sellers and buyers of the cattle. APHIS does not expect the rule to result in an increase of any 

consequence in the number of cattle imported from Mexico. 

i
Table of Contents

Summary.............................................................................................................................. i

Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1

Reasons Action is Being Considered.................................................................................. 1

Objectives of and Legal Basis for the Rule ........................................................................ 2

Potentially Affected Small Entities..................................................................................... 2

Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements..................... 3

Duplication, Overlap, or Conflict with Existing Rules and Regulations............................ 3

Alternatives to minimize Significant Economic Impacts of the Rule................................. 4

References........................................................................................................................... 5

ii
Introduction

The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to evaluate the potential effects of their 

proposed and final rules on small businesses, small organizations and small governmental 

jurisdictions. This initial regulatory flexibility analysis describes expected impacts of this 

proposed rule on small entities, as required by section 603 of the Act.

Regulations in 9 CFR 93.427(b)(2)(i) and (ii) require that cattle entering the 

United States from Mexico, except when known to be free of exposure to fever ticks (certain 

ticks of the genus Rhipicephalus), to be treated with an acaricide 7 to 12 days prior to entry. The 

cattle must be accompanied by documentation from the relevant Mexican health authorities 

certifying treatment. Animals that are known to be free of exposure to cattle fever ticks are 

exempt from this requirement. Fever ticks cause cattle fever, also referred to as bovine 

babesiosis.

The proposed rule would exempt cattle originating from the Mexican State of Sonora 

from acaricide treatment and the associated documentation as long as certain requirements are 

met. In addition, the proposed rule would require the importer to apply for either inspection or 

supervised dipping at the port of entry. The current regulations require both. Under the proposed 

rule, cattle that are dipped at the port of entry would not need to be held for a 7- to 12-day 

waiting period.

Reasons Action is Being Considered

The Mexican government has declared Sonora free of fever ticks and requested that 

cattle and other ruminants from Senora be exempt from acaricide treatment and the associated 

waiting period as a condition of eligibility for entry to the United States. APHIS has determined 

1
that recognition of these fever-tick free regions and the treatment exemption pose minimal risk of 

introducing fever ticks into the United States.

Objectives of and Legal Basis for the Rule

The objective of the proposed rule is to facilitate the importation of Mexican cattle by 

designating the State Sonora as a region of Mexico that are free of fever ticks. The proposed rule 

is a part of a continuing policy to allow the importation of foreign agricultural and animal 

products that pose no significant risk of introducing pests or diseases into the United States. This 

rule would amend 9 CFR 93.427. Its legal basis rests on the statutes that underlie this regulation, 

namely, the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.).

Potentially Affected Small Entities

For the purpose of this analysis and following the Small Business Administration (SBA) 

guidelines, the potentially affected entities are classified as Beef Cattle Ranching and Farming 

(NAICS 112111). By the SBA standard, farms in this category are considered small if annual 

receipts are not more than $750,000. According to the 2007 Census of Agriculture, of the 

656,475 beef cattle farms, 99 percent had annual receipts of less than $750,000 and are therefore 

considered small. Cattle imported into the United States from Mexico are generally purchased 

by stocker operations that background the cattle on pasture before they are shipped to feedlots. 

While there is no economic information available on the number, size, or distribution of the 

stocker operations, it is reasonable to assume they are small, given that 99 percent of beef cattle 

ranches and farms in general are small entities. 

2
From 2009 to 2013, the United States imported an average of 1.21 million cattle annually

from Mexico, of which about one-fourth originated in Sonora.

1 The average unit price of cattle 

imported from Mexico, 2009 to 2013, was about $440. The average cost of dipping with 

acaricide is $3.50 to $10.00 per head. It takes approximately five seconds for three cattle to cross 

a dipping vat, or about 15 minutes for an average 500-head herd. It takes anywhere from 4 to 12 

hours to inspect a herd of this size. That is 30 to 90 seconds per head. Depending on the size of 

the herd and time needed for inspection, some importers may choose to have the cattle dipped 

rather than inspected. The estimated cost of dipping is equivalent to about 1 to 2 percent of the 

value of the imported cattle. Any resulting cost savings realized by U.S. cattle importers, due to 

inspection rather than dipping of cattle, would depend on the relative price responsiveness of the 

sellers and buyers of the cattle. APHIS does not expect the rule to result in an increase of any 

consequence in the number of cattle imported from Mexico. 

Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 

Requirements

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements associated with the proposed rule are 

discussed in the rule under the heading "Paperwork Reduction Act."

Duplication, Overlap, or Conflict with Existing Rules and 

Regulations

APHIS has not identified any duplication, overlap, or conflict of the proposed rule with 

other Federal rules.

1 Economic Research Service: http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/animal-products/cattle-beef/statisticsinformation.aspx

3

 
Alternatives to minimize Significant Economic Impacts of 

the Rule

Based on our review of available information, APHIS does not expect the proposed rule 

to have a significant economic impact on small entities. We have prepared this initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis because our understanding of possible economic effects of the rule on small 

entities is incomplete. In the absence of apparent significant economic impacts, we have not 

identified alternatives that would minimize such impacts.

4
References

Census of Agriculture, 2007, 

http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/index.asp

U.S. Small Business Administration. U.S. Small Business Administration: Table of Small 

Business Size Standards Match to North American Industry Classification System 

http://www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/sba_homepage/serv_sstd_tablepdf.pdf

5