Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the possibility of introduction of electronic identification for bovine animals
Date: 2005-01-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agricultural census, data processing, electronic equipment, livestock, management information system, traceability

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 25.01.2005 
COM(2005) 9 final 

. 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

on the possibility of introduction of electronic identification for bovine animals 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

on the possibility of introduction of electronic identification for bovine animals 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

PREAMBLE 

Bovine  animals  are  identified  according  to  Regulation  (EC)  No  1760/2000  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 establishing a system for the identification and 
registration of bovine animals and labelling of beef and beef products and repealing Council 
Regulation  (EC)  No  820/97.  This  system  includes  the  elements  “double  eartag”,  “holding 
register”, “cattle-passport” and “computerised database”.  

According  to  the  aforementioned  Regulation,  the  Commission  was  required  to  examine,  on 
the basis of work performed by the Joint Research Centre, the feasibility of using electronic 
means for the identification of animals. The European Parliament and the Council, acting on 
the  basis  of  a  report  from  the  Commission,  are  invited  to  consider  the  possibility  of 
introducing  electronic  identification  arrangements  in  the  light  of  progress  achieved  in  this 
field. 

In  1998  the  Commission  launched  a  large-scale  research  project  on  livestock  electronic 
identification  (IDEA).  The  final  report  was  presented  in  April  2002  and  necessary 
clarifications were made in July 2002. This project has demonstrated that in principle, the use 
of electronic identifiers can deliver a substantial improvement in animal identification systems 
provided  a  number  of  conditions  concerning  the  accompanying  measures  are  fulfilled.  The 
conclusions  of  this  project  allow  recommendations  to  be  made  on  technical  issues  and 
conclusions  concerning  the  conditions  of  introducing  electronic  identification  arrangements 
for bovine animals in the EU. 

The  purpose  of  this  report  is  to  summarise  the  experience  gained  on  the  basis  of  the  IDEA 
project  on  the  use  of  electronic  identification  in  bovine  animals  and  to  draw  conclusions 
concerning  the  conditions  of  introducing  electronic  identification  arrangements  for  bovine 
animals in the European Union. It focuses mainly on the results of the IDEA-project but also 
considers experiences with the existing system. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

GENERAL ASPECTS 

1.1. 

Introduction 

1.2. 

Background to the IDEA project 

1.3. 

EC  legislation  on  identification  and  registration  of  bovine  animals  –  short 
description of the system currently in place 

1.4. 

Improvement of the existing system with regard to electronic identification 

2. 

DEVELOPMENTS  IN  ELECTRONIC  IDENTIFICATION  AND  POSSIBLE  IMPROVEMENT  - 
OUTCOME OF THE IDEA-PROJECT  

2.1. 

Performance of electronic identification systems in bovine animals  

2.2. 

Benefits  and  constraints  of  electronic  identifiers  for  the  identification  and 
registration of bovine animals 

2.3. 

Future requirements and possible options 

3. 

CONCLUSIONS 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
1. 

GENERAL ASPECTS 

1.1.  Introduction 

According to the provisions of Article 4 (7) of Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 establishing a 
system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and labelling of 
beef and beef products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 820/971, the 
Commission is required to examine the feasibility of using electronic means for 
the  identification  of  animals.  The  aim  of  this  report  is  to  explain  current 
progress  on  the  basis  of  work  performed  by  the  Joint  Research  Centre  of  the 
Commission  (JRC)  and  to  draw  conclusions  on  the  possibility  of  introducing 
electronic identification for bovine animals in the European Union.  

1.2.  Background to the IDEA project 

In 1998 the Commission launched a large-scale pilot project, called the IDEA-
project  (IDentification  Electronic  des  Animaux),  to  investigate  the  feasibility 
of using electronic methods for the identification of animals (general Decision 
C(97)4101  and  six  individual  Decisions  C(98)562).  The  aims  of  the  project 
were  prepared  by  the  JRC,  and  focused  on  the  reliability  and  advantages 
offered  by  an  electronic  identification  system  in  real  life  situations  for  the 
purposes of disease monitoring, subsidy eligibility and breeding management. 
These  broad  aims  formed  the  basis  of  a  call  for  participation  to  all  Member 
States.  From  the  fourteen  research  proposals  received,  ten  proposals  were 
retained  from  six  Member  States  (France,  Germany,  Italy,  Netherlands, 
Portugal, and Spain).  

Under  the  project,  approximately  370000  cattle,  500000  sheep,  29000  goats 
and  15000  buffaloes  were  identified  for  application  of  one  of  the  following 
electronic identifier types:  

– 

– 

– 

electronic eartag 

ruminal bolus 

injectable transponder 

The final report was presented in April 2002 and necessary clarifications were 
made in July 2002. Further detailed information about the project is available 
on the web-site: http://idea.jrc.it.  

1.3.  EC legislation on identification and registration of bovine animals – short 

description of the system currently in place 

Council  Directive  64/432/EEC  of  17  March  1964  on  animal  health  problems 
affecting  intra-Community  trade  in  bovine  animals  and  swine2  requires  all 

1 
2 

OJ L 204, 11.8.2000, p. 1. 
OJ  121,  29.7.1964,  p.  1977/64.  Directive  amended  and  updated  by  Council  Directive  97/12/EC 
(OJ L 109, 25.4.1997, p. 1) and last amended by Regulation (EC) 21/2004 (OJ L 5, 9.1.2004, p. 8). 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
animals  to  be  identified  for  certification  purposes.  However,  the  detailed 
arrangements  for  identifying  the  animals  or  for  tracing  the  holding  of  origin 
were to be determined by the competent authority of the Member State. 

According  to  Council  Directive  90/425/EEC  of  26  June  1990  concerning 
veterinary  and  zootechnical  checks  applicable  in  intra-Community  trade  in 
certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal 
market3, animals must be  identified in  accordance with Community  rules and 
be  registered  in  such  a  way  that  the  original  or  transit  holding,  centre  or 
organisation can be traced. 

With the adoption of Council Directive 92/102/EEC of 27 November 1992 on 
the  identification  and  registration  of  animals4,  bovine  animals  should  be 
identified  with  an  eartag  bearing  a  code  which  makes  it  possible  to  identify 
each animal individually as well as the holding on which it was born. 

However  past  experience  showed  that  the  implementation  of  Directive 
92/102/EEC  had  not  been  entirely  satisfactory  and  needed 
further 
improvement.  Therefore  it  was  necessary  to  adopt  a  specific  Regulation  for 
bovine animals in order to reinforce the provisions of the Directive.  

Hence  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  820/97  of  21  April  1997  establishing  a 
system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding 
the  labelling  of  beef  and  beef  products5  was  adopted.  According  to  this 
Regulation, bovine animals shall be identified by an eartag applied to each ear 
and  be  accompanied  by  a  passport  throughout  any  movement.  These 
requirements are upheld in the current Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000. 

The basic objectives of these rules are: 

– 

– 

– 

the localisation and tracing of animals for veterinary purposes, which is 
of crucial importance for the control of infectious diseases, 

the traceability of beef for public health reasons, and  

the  management  and  supervision  of  livestock  premiums  as  part  of  the 
reform of the common agricultural policy. 

The  system  for  the  identification  and  registration  of  bovine  animals  includes 
the  elements  “double  eartag”,  “holding  register”,  “cattle-passport”  and 
“computerised database”. 

Eartags.  Current  requirements  are  laid  down  in  Commission  Regulation  (EC) 
No  911/2004  of  29  April  2004  implementing  Regulation  (EC)  No  1760/2000 
of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  as  regards  eartags,  passports 
and holding registers6. Eartags shall contain at least the name, the code or the 

3 
4 
5 
6 

OJ L 224, 18.8.1990, p. 29, as last amended by Directive 2002/33/EC (OJ L 315, 19.11.2002, p. 14). 
OJ L 355, 5.12.1992, p. 32, as last amended by Regulation (EC) 21/2004 (OJ L 5, 9.1.2004, p. 8). 
OJ L 117, 7.5.1997, p. 1. 
OJ L 163, 30.4.2004, p. 65. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
logo  of  the  competent  authority  or  the  central  competent  authority  of  the 
Member  State  which  allocated  the  eartags,  the  two-letter  country  code  and  a 
numeric  code  not  exceeding  12  digits.  An  additional  bar  code  may  be 
authorised  by  the  central  competent  authorities  of  the  Member  States. 
Furthermore  the  replacement  eartags  used  in  the  event  of  eartag  losses  may 
contain a mark with the version number of the replacement eartag expressed in 
Roman numerals.  

Cattle  passports.  Detailed  rules  for  the  model  of  the  passport  have  been  laid 
down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 911/2004. Passports shall be issued 
for each bovine animal within 14 days of the notification of its birth, or, in the 
case  of  animals  imported  from  third  countries,  within  14  days  of  the 
notification  of  its  re-identification  by  the  Member  State  concerned.  Passports 
may  be  issued  for  animals  from  another  Member  State  under  the  same 
conditions. In such cases, the passport accompanying the animal on its arrival 
shall  be  surrendered  to  the  competent  authority,  which  shall  return  it  to  the 
issuing Member State.  

the  Member  State  has  a  computerised  database  which 

Whenever a bovine animal is moved, its passport shall accompany it. By way 
of  derogation  from  this  requirement  a  Member  State  may  determine  that 
animals can move within its territory without being accompanied by a passport 
provided 
the 
Commission  deems  to  be  fully  operational.  In  the  case  of  the  death  of  an 
animal, the keeper shall return the passport to the competent authority. When 
animals are sent to the slaughterhouse, the operator of the slaughterhouse shall 
return  the  passport  to  the  competent  authority.  When  animals  are  exported  to 
third  countries,  the  last  keeper  shall  surrender  the  passport  to  the  competent 
authority at the place where the animal is exported. 

The passport shall contain information on the animal (identification code, date 
of birth, sex, breed or colour of coat, identification code of the mother or, in the 
case  of  an  animal  imported  from  a  third  country,  the  identification  number 
given  corresponding  to  the  identification  number  of  origin),  identification 
number  of  holding  where  born,  and  identification  numbers  of  all  holdings 
where  the  animal  has  been  kept  and  the  dates  of  each  change  of  holding.  In 
addition the passport shall contain the signature of the keeper(s), and the name 
of  the  issuing  authority  (Transporters  whose  sole  responsibility  is  the 
movement  of  animals  are  not  considered  to  be  keepers  and  hence  their 
signature will not be required). 

Holding registers. Detailed rules for the content of the register are laid down in 
Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  911/2004.  The  register  shall  contain  up-to-
date information on each animal (identification code, date of birth, sex, breed 
or colour of coat), the date of death of the animal on the holding, in the case of 
departure the identification code of the holding of destination and the date for 
departure, and in the case of arrival identification code of holding of dispatch 
and the date of arrival. In addition, checks by the competent authority must be 
clearly identified in the register.  

The computerised national databases play a key role for maintaining a proper 
control  of  animal  movements  and  managing  subsidies.  The  database  must 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
contain information for each bovine animal (identification code, date of birth, 
sex, breed or colour of coat, identification code of the mother or, in the case of 
an  animal  imported  from  a  third  country,  the  identification  number  given 
corresponding to the number of origin, identification number of holding where 
born,  and  identification  numbers  of  all  holdings  where  the  animal  has  been 
kept, the dates of each change of holding and the date of death or slaughter). In 
addition the database must contain information for each holding (identification 
number  and  name  and  address  of  the  holder).  The  database  must  be  able  to 
supply  at  any  time  a  list  of  identification  numbers  for  all  bovine  animals 
present on a holding, and a list of all changes of holding for each bovine animal 
starting from the holding of birth or holding of importation.  

Controls by national authorities 

According  to  Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  1082/2003  of  23  June  2003 
laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) 
No 1760/2000 as regards the minimum level of controls to be carried out in the 
framework  of  the  system  for  the  identification  and  registration  of  bovine 
animals7 the Member States have to inspect at least 10% of their holdings. By 
way of  derogation, where a Member State has in place a database, which the 
Commission deems to be fully operational and which provides effective cross-
checking  facilities,  a  rate  of  5  %  may  be  envisaged.  The  results  of  the 
inspections  have  to  be  communicated  to  the  Commission  in  the  form  of  an 
annual report. 

Sanctions 

Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  494/98  of  27  February  1998  laying  down 
detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 820/978 
sets out the application of minimum administrative sanctions in the framework 
of  the  system  for  the  identification  and  registration  of  bovine  animals  in  the 
Member States. Hence competent authorities have the power and the obligation 
to sanction breaches of identification and registration. 

Controls by Community services 

The  Commission  services  have  carried  out  a  series  of  missions  in  order  to 
evaluate the operation of official controls over the traceability of beef and beef 
products. The whole chain from farm to retail outlet was evaluated, including 
identification,  registration  and  movement  of  cattle.  Furthermore  the  services 
have  focused  on  traceability  aspects  during  missions  to  evaluate  the 
implementation  of  certain  EC  measures  aimed  at  the  eradication,  control  and 
prevention of certain diseases.  

The  over-all  conclusion  based  on  the  outcome  of  the  missions  was  that 
Member  States  generally  have  farm  registration  systems  in  place  and,  whilst 
operational  deficiencies  were  widespread, 
the  principles  of  animal 
identification  are  understood  and  largely  applied.  However,  in  many  Member 

7 
8 

OJ L 156, 25.6.2003, p. 9, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 499/2004 (OJ L 80, 18.3.2004, p. 24). 
OJ L 60, 28.2.1998, p. 78. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
States,  the  operation  of  the  national  database  for  bovine  animals  was 
inadequate,  mainly  due  to  delays  in  entering  births,  deaths  and  movements. 
This meant that animals could either be wrongly recorded or vanish altogether 
from  the  official  records  for  lengthy  periods.  In  addition,  errors  or  non-
compliances  were  not  automatically  detected,  and/or  followed  up,  by  the 
responsible authorities.  

The  main  weaknesses  found  in  regard  to  identification  and  registration  of 
bovine animals were incorrect identification, not updated holding registers and 
failures to report to the national database. 

Furthermore Commission services have carried out audits in the framework of 
the clearance of accounts (EAGGF-Guarantee) of animal premiums in several 
regions of the Member States. These audits also focussed on the identification 
and registration of bovine animals. Common weak points detected in this area 
were mainly concerning databases not being up-to-date and insufficient control 
measures. 

1.4.  Improvement of the existing system with regard to electronic identification 

The main shortcomings within the existing systems that have been identified in 
the  annual  reports  on  controls  on  identification  and  registration  of  bovine 
animals  from  Member  States  and  during 
inspections  carried  out  by 
Commission services (see 1.3) are listed below and the possibilities to improve 
the situation by electronic identification are discussed.  

– 

Incorrect identification of animals 

Incorrectly  identified  animals  (e.g.  animals  with  only  one  or  no  eartag) 
are consistently one of the major problems that are identified during ‘on 
farm’  checks.  In  such  cases  the  introduction  of  electronic  identifiers 
instead of a classical eartag may not improve the situation, because also 
these identifiers must be applied correctly.  

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
Lost eartags are a further problem. Even if the quality of classical eartags 
is  improving  continuously,  eartags  may  still  fall  off  or  be  removed. 
However this risk of loss or fraudulent manipulation is minimised when 
using electronic identifiers of the type of bolus or injectable transponder. 
These types can only be removed using surgical methods. 

– 

Holding register not up to date 

Holding  registers  that  are  not  properly  maintained  are  a  fundamental 
problem area. The use of electronic identifiers could help to improve this 
situation, in particular when the holding register is kept in computerised 
form,  which  is  the  case  for  a  growing  percentage  of  farms.  Automatic 
reading  and  the  possibility  of  automatic  entry  into  the  holding  register 
can  reduce  manual  documentation  work  on  farm  and  thereby  reduce 
these types of discrepancies. 

– 

Delay in / absence of reporting events to the central database 

Failure (delay, absence or incorrect information) to report births, deaths 
or  movements  are  the  most  frequently  detected  deficiencies  in  the 
existing  system.  In  the  case  of  reporting  incorrect  data,  either  incorrect 
data records will be created in the central database or the report will be 
refused.  In  both  cases  the  records  subsequently  generated  in  the  central 
database are inconsistent with the actual status of the animal. The use of 
electronic  identification  can  facilitate  reports  to  the  central  database,  in 
particular  for  holdings  with  a  computerised  holding  register.  The 
introduction  of  electronic  identification  could  be  particularly  beneficial 
for traders  and  markets,  as  the  automated  system  will generate  a higher 
reporting accuracy for bovine animal movements.  

Conclusion 

Electronic identification can contribute to improvements in existing systems of 
cattle  identification.  For  example,  electronic  identifiers  allow  a  faster  reading 
and  a  higher  reading  accuracy  than  classical  eartags.  Dynamic  reading  and 
direct  entry  of  data  into  databases  is  also  possible  (removing  potential  errors 
caused by inaccurate manual database entry). This could in particular ease the 
procedure  to  report  the  movements  of  animals  to  the  database.  However  the 
contribution  of  electronic  identification  to  improve  animal  identification  and 
traceability should not be overestimated in view of the nature of difficulties in 
applying  existing  systems.  Complete  tagging  of  all  animals  and  an  efficient 
identification, 
data  management  are  preconditions  for  any  system  of 
irrespective of whether electronic identifiers or classic eartags are used. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
It should be noted that the growing volume of animal information in the central 
databases  ensures  that  the  reliability  of  records  continues  to  improve  by 
extending  the  basis  for  cross-checking  of  information.  The  ability  to  verify 
records and cross check with existing data within the system means that errors 
are increasingly detected automatically. It is an ongoing process to reduce these 
discrepancies  further,  and  this  depends  to  a  large  extent  on  the  ability  of  the 
competent authorities to take the necessary follow-up measures to ensure that 
only reliable data is entered and stored in the central databases. However, the 
main focus for improving the system of tracing of bovine animals remains with 
the functioning of the central database. Providing appropriate information and 
training  to  all  people  involved  is  an  important  element  to  ensure  that  the 
principles  of  database  management  are  rigorously  maintained  in  order  to 
improve identification and tracing of bovine animals. 

2. 

DEVELOPMENTS  IN  ELECTRONIC  IDENTIFICATION  AND  POSSIBLE  IMPROVEMENT  - 
OVERVIEW OF THE OUTCOME OF THE IDEA-PROJECT (DETAILED INFORMATION IS 
AVAILABLE ON THE WEB-SITE: http://idea.jrc.it) 

2.1.  Performance of electronic identification systems in bovine animals  

Electronic  identification  in  general  is  the  identification  (of  animals)  by  radio 
frequency.  The  two  elements  are  the  identifier  and  the  reader.  The  identifier 
contains a passive transponder (microchip with no energy source inside) which 
transmits  memorised  information  (identification  code)  when  the  reader 
(transmitter-receiver) activates it at a certain frequency. 

In  the  IDEA-project  the  electronic  identification  of  bovine  animals  and 
buffaloes  has  been  studied  using  electronic  eartags,  ruminal  boluses  or 
injectable transponders. 

2.1.1. Identifier application, reading and recovery 

2.1.1.1.  Identifier application 

The  IDEA  project  demonstrated  that  the  application  of  an 
electronic identifier does not present any difficulty when the animal 
is  well  restrained.  Training  is  essential,  mainly  for  the  application 
of the ruminal bolus and the injectable transponder. 

There is some limitation to the minimum age at which a bolus can 
be  introduced  into  a  bovine  animal.  The  bolus  is  deposited  in  the 
reticulum and this part of the forestomach is formed during the first 
months in the calf’s life. In view of the importance of forestomach 
maturity  for  bolus  retention,  generally,  the  later  the  animals  are 
given  the  bolus,  the  better  the  retention  rate,  although  the  feeding 
regime  also  influences  forestomach  development,  and  therefore 
bolus  retention  in  young  animals.  Further  investigations  are 
necessary  to  obtain  more  precise  information  on  the  possibility  of 
applying boluses to young animals. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2.1.1.2.  Reading performance 

The  IDEA  project  demonstrated  that  the  percentage  of  reading 
failures of the ruminal bolus for cattle and buffalo is constant and is 
less than 0.35%. However the reading efficiency of the bolus could 
be affected when it is applied to an animal, carrying a magnet as a 
protective device against metallic objects ingested during grazing.  

The  percentage  of  reading  failures  observed  for  electronic  eartags 
is 0.63% but shows a tendency to increase one month after tagging 
and  may  increase  up  to  2.3%  after  14  months.  The  percentage  of 
reading  failures  observed  for  injectable  transponders  is  0.7% 
increasing to 1% at one month after tagging and decreasing beyond 
that time to 0.3%. 

Certain deficiencies were reported using dynamic reading system in 
slaughterhouses.  The  specific  conditions 
in  slaughterhouses 
(presence  of  high  amounts  of  metal,  interferences  due  to  the 
various  devices used) apparently influence the performance  of the 
stationary readers. 

2.1.1.3.  Recovery results 

There  is  an  essential  need  to  recover  electronic  identifiers  for 
several  reasons.  Firstly,  electronic  identifiers  are  special  waste 
(electronic waste, contaminated with organic material) which has to 
be kept out of the food chain as well as the environment. Secondly, 
recovering each electronic identifier is necessary to avoid any kind 
of fraudulent use. 

The  recovery  results  of  electronic  eartags  and  ruminal  boluses 
indicate  the  absence  of  recovery  problems  at  slaughter  as  well  as 
successful reading. 

The situation is totally different for the injectable transponder. Only 
about  80%  were  recovered  and  only  52%  of  these  could  be 
successfully read after recovery. The extraction process apparently 
influences the readability.  

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.1.2. Technical characteristics of identifiers and readers 

It  is  recommended  that  identifiers  and  readers  comply  with  the  ISO- 
standards. ISO 11784 relates to the code structure of the transponders for 
animal  electronic  identification  and  ISO  11785  relates  to  the  technical 
aspects of communication between transponders and readers (the ability 
of a reader to read both HDX and FDX-B transponder types9). 

Due  to  development  in  the  field  of  microelectronics,  the  efficiency  of 
readers  and  identifiers  is  likely  to  continue  to  improve.  It  is  also  likely 
that the size of the transponder will continue to shrink, whilst the reading 
distances between transponders and readers are likely to increase. In the 
framework  of  the  IDEA  project,  stationary  readers  reached  reading 
distances of about 80 cm. In the case of portable readers the mandatory 
reading  distances  (in  order  to  get  a  certificate  for  a  combination 
reader/transponder) was equal to 22 cm for ear-tags, bolus and injectable 
transponders.  All  systems  of  electronic  identifier  showed  a  high 
readability in dynamic conditions (>97%). 

2.2.  Benefits and constraints of electronic identifiers for the identification and 

registration of bovine animals 

Compared  with  the  classical  eartag,  electronic  identifiers  have  the  common 
advantages  of  automatic  reading  with  higher  accuracy  than  visual  reading  of 
classical  eartags  and  the  possibility  for  automatic  entry  of  readings  into 
electronic data processing. 

Besides this, some differences exist between the types of electronic identifiers. 

2.2.1. Electronic eartag 

Advantages 
The animal can be tagged in the first week of its life. The application of 
the  eartag  needs  only  a  minimum  of  special  training.  It  is  possible  to 
check from a distance if the animal is identified or not.  

Disadvantages 
In  the  same  manner  as  the  classical  eartag,  the  electronic  eartag  is  not 
totally  protected  against  loss  and  possible  fraudulent  manipulation 
although the technical development has improved. 

9 

HDX  (Half-duplex):  The  information  is  transmitted-back  by  the  transponder  after  activation  by  the 
reader.  An  HDX  transponder  charged  with  energy  during  the  activation  uses  the  interruption  of  the 
activation signal to transmit its signal. The HDX transponder shall respond between 1ms and 2ms after 
a 3dB decay of the activation signal and uses FSK modulation at (124.2±2) kHz to transmit a binary 1 
and at (134.2±1.5) kHz to transmit a binary 0. The encoding signal shall be NRZ. FDX (Full-duplex): 
The  information  is  transmitted-back  by  the  transponder  within  it  is  activated  by  the  transmitter.  An 
FDX transponder receiving the activation field shall transmit its code during the activation period. The 
FDX  transponder  uses  a  modified  DBP  (differential  bi-phase  encoding)  encoded  sub-carrier  witch  is 
amplitude  modulated.  The  transponder  shall  send  its  message  back  using  the  frequency  bands  129  to 
133.2 kHz and 135.2 to 139.4 kHz. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
2.2.2. Injectable transponder 

Advantages 
The  transponder  can  be  applied  in  the  first  days  after  birth.  The  IDEA 
project  demonstrated  that  losses  are  directly  linked  to  the  size  of  the 
transponder, i.e. the longer the transponder the higher the losses in young 
animals during the first month after tagging. The transponder can only be 
removed  using  surgical  methods,  which  would  seldom  be  worth 
performing when judged against the value of an average animal. 

Disadvantages 
The  identifier  is  not  visible  from  outside.  Without  a  reader  it  is  not 
possible to check if the animal carries any electronic identification. The 
recovery  rate  of  the  transponder  is  low  in  comparison  with  the  other 
identifiers.  Therefore  the  risk  that  identifiers  enter  the  food  chain  is 
higher.  Only  half  of  the  recovered  identifiers  are  readable  after 
extraction, which complicates cross-checking and documentation. Finally 
the injection of the transponder needs some special training. 

2.2.3. Ruminal bolus 

Advantages 
Once the bolus is correctly applied, losses are nearly impossible. To take 
out the bolus from a live animal is very difficult and requires the use of 
surgical  methods.  The  recovery  rate  in  slaughtered  animals  is  almost 
100%. 

Disadvantages 
There is some limitation to apply the bolus to very young animals until 
the forestomachs have reached a certain stage of maturity, especially the 
reticulum. This depends not only on the age of the animal but also on the 
feeding regime. The identifier is not visible from the outside. Without a 
reader  it  is  not  possible  to  check  if  the  animal  carries  any  electronic 
identification.  The  presence  of  a  magnet  device  to  protect  against  the 
ingestion  of  metallic  objects  can  influence  the  reading  efficiency  of  the 
bolus. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.3.  Future requirements and possible options 

The results of the IDEA project show that electronic identification of cattle is 
feasible  under  actual  field  conditions.  Due  to  high  accuracy  of  reading 
performance and the possibility of direct entry of readings into electronic data 
processing  systems,  electronic  identification  can  contribute  to  a  higher 
accuracy  of  holding  registers  and  instant  recording  of  movements  etc. 
However,  the  introduction  of  a  Community-wide  approved  identification 
system  implies  a  consideration  of  technical  characteristics,  data  management 
strategies, organisational aspects and legislative requirements. It should also be 
considered that the introduction of electronic identification would prove useful 
for other purposes in addition to sanitary and premium controls (e.g. automatic 
feeding systems, herd management, herdbook keeping, milk recording). It may 
be  more  practical  and  cost-efficient  to  use  a  unique  electronic  identifier, 
provided  that  a  common/multipurpose  technical  standard  is  agreed  and 
established. 

3. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The introduction of electronic identification should be considered in the light of its 
technical  feasibility  and  its  capability  to  improve  the  existing  system  of  bovine 
identification.  It  has  been  demonstrated  that  the  technology  has  been  developed  to 
the  extent  that  it  can  be  applied.  Electronic  identification  can  improve  the  existing 
system  of  identification  and  registration  in  certain  ways.  It  can,  for  example, 
contribute to a higher accuracy in holding registers, allow instantaneous inputs into 
central  databases  and  ensure  records  are  continually  maintained  and  updated 
provided that the current system of identification and registration based on classical 
eartags is well established. Otherwise the benefits of electronic identification would 
not be achieved. 

To  decide  on  the  possibility  of  introducing  electronic  identification  systems  on  a 
Community  wide  basis,  the  following  general  conditions  for  the  identification  and 
registration of bovine animals would have to be considered: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Organisational  structures  and  data  management  systems  have  to  be  well 
established. 

Animals  would  have  to  be  identified  at  any  time  by  (at  least)  two  identifiers, 
where  one  must  be  a  ‘visual’  eartag  and  the  second  can  be  an  electronic 
identifier. 

According to present knowledge the requirement of tagging within a period not 
longer  than  20  days  after  birth  limits  the  use  of  the  bolus  in  view  of  the 
maturation of the forestomachs of the calf. 

Each type of identifier has to be kept out of the food chain, which would limit 
the use of the injectable transponder due to its reduced recovery rate. 

The  additional  costs  for  electronic  identification  need  to  be  considered  in 
relation to its increased accuracy. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
In view of the above, the options available can be summarised as follows:  

1. 

Introduction of electronic identification as a compulsory system in all Member 
States 

The  advantages  of  electronic  identification  would  be  introduced,  but  the 
various  needs  and  conditions  in  the  different  Member  States  would  not  be 
considered.  It  is  debatable  if  Member  States  that  are  still  in  the  process  of 
establishing  the  existing  system  would  benefit  from  an  additional  change  in 
identification procedure. 

2. 

Introduction of electronic identification as an optional system, where Member 
States may authorise the replacement of the second eartag with an electronic 
identifier  in  view  of  the  future  introduction  of  a  compulsory  system  in  the 
Member States. 

Common technical standards should ensure compatibility between the Member 
States. 

3.  Keeping the status quo (two classical eartags, electronic identifier may be used 

in addition) 

Under this option, electronic identification may be used in addition to classical 
eartags.  However,  electronic  identifiers  would  form  no  part  of  the  official 
identification  system.  The  existing  system  should  be 
improved  by 
strengthening the control measures and sanctions already in place.  

In  view  of  the  direction  already  taken  with  regard  to  the  reinforced  system  for  the 
identification and registration of sheep and goats as laid down in Regulation (EC) No 
21/200410  it  is  highly  desirable  to  move  overtime  to  electronic  identification  of 
bovine animals taking into account the need to develop the implementing measures 
required  for  the  proper  introduction  of  the  system  of  electronic  identification 
Community-wide. Therefore option 2 is the preferred option for bovine animals as it 
can  introduce  benefits  to  all  current  and  future  Member  States  irrespective  of  their 
capability  to  introduce  advanced  identification  systems.  The  introduction  of 
electronic  identification  should  be  monitored  on  the  basis  of  reports  from  the 
Member  States  to  the  Commission.  The  efficient  functioning  of  the  national 
databases for bovine animals is an important element for the successful introduction 
of  electronic  identification  of  bovine  animals.  A  decision  on  the  compulsory 
introduction  of  electronic  identification  should  take  into  account  the  practical 
experience gained by those Member States which choose to introduce the system on 
an optional basis during a period of up to three years. 

10 

OJ L 5, 9.1.2004, p. 8. 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
In  order  to  be  functionally  operational  the  use  of  electronic  identification  must  be 
mutually compatible between national procedures and must therefore be harmonised 
at Community level. Initially this would primarily relate to the technical standards of 
electronic  identifiers  and  reading  systems.  The  information  on  the  electronic 
identification of the animal has to be kept in the national cattle database, the holding 
register and the cattle-passport. As a precondition for legislative proposals, the Joint 
Research  Centre  of  the  Commission  should  provide  detailed  technical  guidelines, 
definitions  and  procedures  in  the  area  of  technical  characteristics  of  identifiers  and 
readers;  test  procedures,  acceptance  criteria  and  certification  model  for  agreed  test 
laboratories;  procurement  of  appropriate  identifiers  and  readers;  application  of 
identifiers, their reading and recovery; codification of identifiers; common glossary, 
data dictionary and communication standards. 

EN 

16 

   EN