Report from the Commission to the Council on the implementation of electronic identification in sheep and goats
Date: 2007-11-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: data processing, electronic equipment, goat, sheep, traceability, veterinary legislation

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 16.11.2007 
COM(2007) 711 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 

on the implementation of electronic identification in sheep and goats 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

1.1. 

1.2. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3 

EC legislation in relation to electronic identification of sheep and goats.................... 4 

Scope of the report ....................................................................................................... 5 

Experience on implementation of electronic identification ......................................... 5 

Elements of electronic identification ........................................................................... 5 

Performance of electronic identification systems for sheep and goats ........................ 6 

2.2.1 

Identifiers ..................................................................................................................... 6 

2.2.2  Readers......................................................................................................................... 8 

2.2.3  Data transfer from readers to data processing solutions .............................................. 9 

2.2.4 

The end-user perspective............................................................................................ 10 

2.3. 

2.4. 

3. 

Economic aspects ....................................................................................................... 11 

Future requirements ................................................................................................... 12 

Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 12 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 

on the implementation of electronic identification in sheep and goats 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Community rules on identification and registration of livestock, including sheep and 
goats,  were  laid  down  in  Council  Directive  92/102/EEC  on  the  identification  and 
registration  of  animals1.  However  experience  with  certain  diseases  showed  that  the 
implementation  of  Directive  92/102/EEC  had  not  been  entirely  satisfactory  and 
needed  further  improvement.  In  the  bovine  sector  it  was  necessary  to  establish  the 
concept of individual traceability in the context of the protection of consumers from 
Transmissible  Spongiform  Encephalopathy  (TSE).  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 products2 
was  adopted  and  its  requirements  are  upheld  in  the  current  Regulation  (EC)  No 
1760/20003. 

Experience gained during the foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in 2001 highlighted 
the need to establish traceability systems for sheep meeting the specific requirements 
of  this  sector.  Sheep  and  goats  are  now  identified  according  to  Council  Regulation 
(EC)  No  21/2004  of  17 December  2003  establishing  a  system  for  the  identification 
and  registration  of  ovine  and  caprine  animals4.  This  system  includes  four  main 
elements:  “identifiers”,  a  “holding  register”,  a  “movement  document”  and  a 
“computerised database”.  

Taking  into  account  the  well  known  limitations,  in  the  management  of  small 
ruminants, to read individual animal codes from eartags or tattoos of large numbers 
of  animals  in  short  time,  the  introduction  of  electronic  transponders  is  foreseen  to 
automate  reading  of  individual  animal  codes  directly  into  data  processing  systems. 
The  obligatory  introduction  of  electronic  identification  is  scheduled  for  1  January 
2008. 

According to Article 9(4) of the Regulation, the Commission is required to report to 
the  Council  on  the  implementation  of  the  electronic  identification  system, 
accompanied by appropriate proposals confirming or amending the date of obligatory 
introduction of electronic identification. 

1 
2 
3 
4 

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 204, 11.8.2000, p. 1. 
OJ L 5, 9.1.2004, p. 8. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Based  on  the  assessment  of  the  contributions  from  the  Member  States,  this  report 
describes  the  current  situation  and  draws  conclusions  on  the  feasibility  and 
appropriateness  of  obligatory  introduction of electronic identification  for  sheep and 
goats  in  the  European  Union,  as  from  1 January  2008  and  for  updating  technical 
aspects of the Regulation. It is accompanied by an appropriate proposal. 

1.1. 

EC legislation in relation to electronic identification of sheep and goats 

Community  rules  on  the  identification  and  registration  of  sheep  and  goats  were 
reinforced  by  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  21/2004  in  order  to  permit  individual 
traceability of sheep and goats throughout their lifetime. The implementation of that 
Regulation is scheduled in two steps. 

In  a  first  step,  all  animals  born  after  9  July  2005  had  to  be  identified  individually 
with a visible eartag in combination with a second identifier bearing the same code. 
The  second  identifier  could  be  a  second  eartag,  an  electronic  identifier  and  under 
certain conditions, also a tattoo or a mark on the pastern.  

In a second step, the Regulation foresees the linking of the individual animal codes 
with  movement  information.  The  provision  that  the  movement  document  and  the 
holding register shall contain the individual codes of the animals is linked with the 
date  of  introduction  of  electronic  identification  (point  B.2  and  C.2  of  the  Annex  to 
Regulation  (EC)  No  21/2004).  Until  this  date  only  the  number  of  animals  and  not 
their individual animal codes are recorded on  movement  documents  and  in  holding 
registers. 

For  the  implementation  of  electronic  identification,  the  Commission  adopted 
Decision  2006/968/EC  implementing  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  21/2004  as 
regards  guidelines  and  procedures  for  the  electronic  identification  of  ovine  and 
caprine  animals5.  These  guidelines  are  the  technical  basis  for  interoperability 
between  devices  from  different  manufacturers  as  well  as  for  the  approval  of 
electronic identifiers. 

Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 provides for the following derogations. 

–  Member  States  in  which  the  total  number  of  sheep  and  goats  is  less  than 
600 000  may  make  electronic  identification optional for animals  not  involved 
in intra-Community trade. 

–  Member  States  may  authorise  a  facilitated  batch  identification  system  for 
animals  intended  for  slaughter  before  the  age  of  12  months  and  not  intended 
either  for  intra-Community  trade  or  for  export  to  third  countries.  This 
derogation is currently applied in 10 Member States. 

5 

OJ L 401, 30.12.2006, p. 41. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
1.2. 

Scope of the report  

In  order  to  prepare  this  report,  the  Commission  invited  Member  States  to  provide 
information on their experience with the implementation, on a voluntary basis or on 
pilot  projects,  of  electronic  identification.  The  Commission  received  information 
from  Cyprus,  France,  Germany,  Italy,  The  Netherlands,  Portugal,  Spain  and  the 
United Kingdom.  The present report is therefore  mainly  based  on  the  contributions 
from those Member States that have acquired experience with the implementation of 
electronic identification. 

In addition to  the  up-to-date information from the Member States, the Commission 
also  considered  results  from  its  own  large  scale  project  on  livestock  electronic 
identification (IDEA – Identification Electronique des Animaux), which was carried 
out in 1998-2001. The studies and pilot projects in the Member States had different 
scientific goals and the fields of study ranged from scientific laboratory experiments 
to field tests. The specific results can therefore not always be compared. This report 
summarises the results in general terms. 

2. 

EXPERIENCE ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRONIC IDENTIFICATION  

2.1. 

Elements of electronic identification 

Electronic animal identification is based on the use of radio frequency identification 
(RFID),  a  technique  operating  at  low  frequencies  and  very  short  distances.  The 
electronic identifier is called a transponder and is a passive, read-only device which 
contains no internal source of electrical power. The identification code can only be 
read  when  the  transponder  is  energised  by  the  signal  transmitted  by  a  reader.  The 
transponder reacts to this signal by emitting an information telegram, which includes 
the animal identification code. Communication between transponders and readers are 
effected by two, alternative, data transmission protocols (half-duplex, HDX; and full-
duplex,  FDX-B).  After  transmission  of  the  information  telegram,  the  transponder 
reverts to a completely passive state until the next activation. 

In  order  to  ensure  proper  communication  between  transponders  and  readers  from 
different  manufacturers,  the  ISO  standards  11784  and  11785  have  been  developed 
and were published in 1996. The ISO standards are accepted and used internationally 
and therefore Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 makes reference to them. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
The  International  Committee  on  Animal  Recording  (ICAR)  has  described  test 
procedures  aimed  at  verifying  the  compliance  of  transponders  and  readers  with  the 
existing  ISO  standards.  Those  procedures  have  been  published  in  the  International 
Agreement on Recording Practices6 and Decision 2006/968/EC makes reference to it. 

Electronic  identification  has  the  advantage  of  allowing  the  transmission  of 
electronically read individual animal codes directly into data processing systems. It 
is therefore an efficient solution to link individual animal codes of sheep and goats to 
movement information because those species are normally moved in big groups and 
frequently undergo several assembly operations at markets and assembly centres.  

2.2. 

Performance of electronic identification systems for sheep and goats 

2.2.1 

Identifiers 

Regulation  (EC)  No  21/2004  refers  explicitly  to  the  use  of  electronic  eartags  and 
ruminal boluses. The two types can be defined as follows:  

• 

• 

electronic  eartag:  a  transponder  embedded  in  a  package  designed  to  be 
permanently fixed to the animal’s ear ; 

ruminal  bolus:  a  transponder  housed  in  a  specific  gravity  container  (e.g. 
ceramic) which is orally administered to a ruminant and that remains (due to its 
weight, shape and size) permanently in the reticulo-rumen (forestomach);  

Electronic eartags 

reported 

Electronic  eartags  can  be  applied  early  in  the  life  of  an  animal  (principally  to 
newborn lambs). Only limited technical knowledge is required to correctly place the 
identifier. The occurrence of inflammations of the ear cannot be excluded; in fact, the 
type of eartag, as well as age, species, breed of the tagged animals and the tagging 
season  has  been 
the  occurrence  of 
inflammations/infections. The loss rate for eartags (both electronic and conventional) 
is  generally  higher  than  for  boluses.  Loss  rates  of  about  5%  occur  under  practical 
conditions  and  figures  up  to  14%  have  been  reported  under  extreme  scrubland 
grazing conditions. The presence of the eartag can be verified visually and in case of 
reading  difficulties,  a  handheld  reader  can  be  brought  close  to  the  identifier. 
Fraudulent  manipulations  (unauthorized  replacement)  of  the  ear  tags  are  still 
possible. Recovery at slaughter does not cause any problems. 

to  have  an  effect  on 

6 

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has published standards dealing with aspects 
of radio frequency identification (RFID) of animals. In addition, the International Committee on Animal 
Recording (ICAR) has developed procedures aimed to verify the compliance of certain RFID devices 
with  ISO  standards.  Those  procedures  have  been  published  in  the  International  Agreement  on 
Recording Practices in the version as approved by the ICAR General Assembly, June 2004. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Ruminal bolus 

The  bolus  is  deposited  in  the  reticulum  which  develops  as  part  of  the  forestomach 
after birth. Therefore there is some limitation to the minimum age at which a bolus 
can  be  introduced.  Specific  mini-boluses  are  on  the  market  and  low  loss  rates  are 
reported when  applied to animals  aged 3 weeks and  older. Recent publications and 
experience  from  the  Member  States  showed  that  loss  rates  less  than  0.1%  can  be 
achieved as long as the correct bolus type (size, weight) is applied in relation to the 
age and the weight of the animal. In particular under management conditions, which 
are susceptible to higher losses of eartags (e.g. scrubland grazing) the bolus has clear 
advantages. The application of boluses requires appropriate training. The presence of 
a  bolus  cannot  be  checked  externally  without  a  RFID  reader.  In  the  case  of  non-
reading  of  an  animal,  which  was  previously  identified  by  a  bolus,  it  would  not  be 
possible to determine whether the bolus was lost or stopped functioning. Fraudulent 
manipulations of the identity of the animal are almost impossible, and in any case are 
not  worthwhile  if  compared  with  the  value  of  the  animal  and  the  cost  of  the 
intervention. Manual recovery is a practice which can be easily implemented in the 
slaughterhouse,  on  the  condition  of  an  appropriate  training  of  the  relevant  staff. 
Technical solutions for the automatic recovery at slaughter are under development. 

Other  types  of  identifiers  are  currently  not  accepted  as  official  means  of 
identification  for  sheep  and  goats  in  Regulation  21/2004.  However,  some  Member 
States reported some experience with those types of identification: 

• 

• 

injectable transponder:  a  small  size  transponder  capable  of  being  implanted 
into an animal’s body by injection, and encapsulated in a biocompatible and non-
porous material, such as glass; 

electronic mark on the pastern: a plastic-encapsulated transponder designed 
to be fixed to the animal’s pastern.  

Injectable transponder 

transponder.  Sophisticated  coating  substances  on 

Even  if  an  injectable  transponder  has  the  advantage  that  it  can  be  applied  to  very 
young  animals,  there  is  still  uncertainty  about  its  optimum  position  (e.g.  abdomen, 
caudal  fold,  cleft  between  the  claws,  metacarpal  area).  The  injection  is  a  more 
complex  process  requiring  specific  training,  which  also  influences  the  retention  of 
the  surface  of  some 
the 
transponders ensure a fast encapsulation and prevent migration of the transponders. 
The injectable transponder is not visible from outside. In the case of non-reading of 
an  animal  with  an  injectable  transponder  it  would  not  be  possible  to  determine 
whether  the  transponder  was  lost  or  stopped  functioning.  The  removal  of  an 
injectable  transponder  from  a  live  animal  is  not  worthwhile  if  compared  with  the 
value  of  the  animal  and  the  cost  of  the  intervention.  The  recovery  rate  of  the 
injectable transponder at slaughter is low in comparison with the other identifiers and 
automatic methods have not been developed. Therefore, depending on the injection 
site, the risk that injectable transponders enter the food/feed chain is higher than for 
other  electronic  identifiers.  Injectable  transponders  are  widely  used  in  pets  and 
horses.  

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
Electronic mark on the pastern 

More recently, an alternative EID tag under development is a transponder included in 
a mark on the pastern (also called "leg band"). Only a few practical experiences exist 
with  this  type  of  identifier.  In  principle,  the  identifier  can  only  be  applied  to  adult 
animals,  whose  pastern  has  reached  its  maximum  diameter.  This  limits  the 
possibilities  of  an  early  identification  of  lambs  within  six  months  as  laid  down  in 
Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 21/2004. The application is easy and no animal 
health problems have been reported. The external mark is clearly visible, but on the 
other  hand,  more  susceptible  to  fraudulent  manipulation  and  rough  environment 
conditions. This type of identification has specific management benefits for holdings 
where individual animal codes need to be recorded in the milking parlour. 

2.2.2 

Readers  

The reading efficiency is influenced by the performance of the readers and identifiers 
and by the capability of the relevant staff to ensure an appropriate installation of the 
reading system (antenna positioning, raceway width, setup of the firmware) in order 
to  prevent  interferences  from  the  environment  and  to  ensure  the  best  possible 
performance of the equipments..  

Several  field  tests  in  the  Member  States  achieved  100%  readability.  On  the  other 
hand,  figures  as  low  as  50%  were  also  reported.  If  mixed  groups  of  animals  with 
electronic  and  non-electronic  identifiers  are  handled  together  a  general  logistic 
problem may occur. 

Two general types of reading situations are assessed. 

Static reading 

Static  reading  is  carried  out  on  single  restrained  (static)  animals  (in  for  e.g.  a 
feeding grill, or corridor) with a handheld reader (also called "portable" or "mobile" 
reader),  thus  eliminating  transcription  errors.  Present  models  of  handheld  readers 
work  with  farming  management  features  (e.g.  weight  crates)  to  enable  a  regular 
control  of  the  animals'  performances.  The  reading  efficiency  is  influenced  by  the 
physical characteristics (e.g. size and shape) of the antenna and the level of charge of 
the battery supply (some readers decrease the reading distance at low battery levels). 
However,  a  minimum  quality  of  the  marketed  devices  can  be  guaranteed  by  the 
approval procedure established by Decision 2006/968/EC. The animals are read one 
by  one,  which  clearly  limits  the  reading  speed.  Therefore,  a  handheld  reader  is 
mainly used for smaller groups of animals. Also, non-reading animals can be easily 
detected and individually managed. Handheld readers are generally easy to use and 
do not require high technical skills. Handheld readers are comparatively cheaper than 
fixed readers. However, more sophisticated functions are present in more expensive 
models only.  

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
Dynamic reading 

In dynamic reading systems, the moving animals pass through a corridor where an 
antenna of a fixed (static) reader has  been placed. The  reading speed and distance 
are  considerably  higher  (in  real  life  conditions,  one  animal/second)  than  with  a 
handheld reader. Fixed readers are usually combined with the automation of the IT 
management  system.  Detecting  and  separating  non-reading  animals  can  require 
appropriate structural facilities (e.g. automatic gates). Dynamic reading systems need 
time  for  installation.  The  antenna  of  a  fixed  reader  needs  to  be  tuned  to  allow  an 
optimal  reading  of  the  identifiers;  however,  more  recent  readers  come  with  an 
automatic tuning option. For the new generation mixed reading conditions (different 
types of identifiers) do not influence the reading efficiency. Technical solutions exist, 
where fixed readers can be easily transported and installed at different places without 
requiring too much effort. 

Fixed  readers  can  easily  be  connected  with  weight  crates  or  installations  (gates)  to 
segregate read and non-read animals. They provide a practical solution for managing 
large  numbers  of  animals  within  a  short  period  of  time.  Due  to  their  technical 
complexity,  the  different  functions  they  can  provide  and  the  higher  performance, 
fixed readers are more expensive than handheld ones. The RFID market provides at 
the moment static readers which, despite their sophistication, are user friendly (plug 
and play). 

2.2.3  Data transfer from readers to data processing solutions 

The important benefit of electronic identification of animals is the ability to read the 
identification codes of the animals directly into a data processing system (e.g. animal 
movement report, or herd management). Therefore, several projects also included the 
connection between the reader and PC/PDA and the data transfer into management 
software or even a central database. 

Programmable  readers  are  equipped  with  a  memory  capacity  to  store  the  animal 
codes read. Using this memory, the individual animal data can then at a later stage be 
transmitted  to  a  PC.  In  case  of  dynamic  readings,  simultaneous  data  transmission 
from  the  reader  to  the  PC  requires  a  permanent  connection.  Positive  results  with 
Bluetooth  and  Wi-Fi  have  been  reported  for  distances,  depending  on  wireless 
protocol and environment in case wired solutions are not practical.  

The interfacing between the software on the programmable readers and the software 
for  further  data  processing  was  reported  as  an  issue  which  needs  further 
consideration.  Programming  work  was  necessary  to  adapt  the  available  farm 
management  software  in  order  to  communicate  with  the  readers  as  well  as  with 
central  databases.  This  problem  is  frequently  due  to  the  fact  that  the  farm 
management software is proprietary and therefore any adaptation to incorporate the 
additional  information  requires  additional  programming  work.  At  present,  no 
international  or  EU-standard  exists  for  the  reader  output  data  format.  Technical 
discussions are currently being held at ISO level. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
2.2.4 

The end-user perspective 

Farm 

With appropriate training, the application of electronic and conventional identifiers is 
comparable.  Readers  have  shown  their  practicability  and  it  is  merely  a  question  of 
price to equip farms with readers of high quality. Farmers are more motivated to use 
the technology, when the RFID system is user friendly and when direct management 
benefits  are  obtained  (cost  reductions,  time  savings,  elimination  of  errors).  This  is 
more likely on farms with intensive management systems (e.g. dairy goats, pedigree 
breeders),  where  individual  animal  performance  data  (e.g.  milk  yield,  lambing 
results)  are  recorded  on  a  routine  basis.  The  integration  of  automatic  reading  into 
farm  software  needs  further  attention  by  the  manufacturers  (RFID,  farm  software), 
on  the  basis  of  predefined  criteria.  The  use  of  electronic  identification  on  farms 
requires a basic level of technical knowledge and PC-skills. Appropriate training was 
reported  to  be  an  important  element  during  the  introduction  of  electronic 
identification. If the sheep industry is less IT literate than other agricultural branches, 
solutions need to be considered where service providers could handle the electronic 
identification  for  farmers  (e.g.  transporters  read  animals  during  loading  and  notify 
the movements on behalf of the keeper). In particular for smaller farms, the option to 
notify animal movements without electronic reading remains, so that the costs for the 
technical equipment can be restricted to the costs for identifiers without reducing the 
benefits downstream. 

Markets/assembly centres 

Electronic  identification  is  an  efficient  way  to  trace  the  movements  of  individual 
animals via markets. The possibility of regrouping animals from different origins at 
markets in order to sell them in homogenous lots has been reported as an advantage 
of  electronic  identification.  At  least  in  some  Member  States,  markets  are 
characterised  by  extremely  high  animal  flows  (>2000  animals  auctioneered  per 
hour). The RFID system must ensure at least the "selling speed" in the auction ring. 
Through a careful installation of the reading system it is possible to prevent most of 
the  risks  of  poor  performance  (electromagnetic  interferences,  management  of 
exceptions).  The  technical  requirements  for  the  equipment  are  very  high,  because 
poor reading performance and the inability to handle anomalies would bring normal 
market operations to a halt. Detecting and recording non-read animals (e.g. electronic 
identifier  not  existing  or  not  functioning)  in  high  animal  flows  is  therefore  a  key 
issue which needs further consideration. The presence of metal constructions, which 
are easily cleaned and disinfected, constitutes an additional challenge for the reading 
technology  in  markets  and  assembly  centres.  Equipping  such  places  with  high 
performance  dynamic  reading  systems  do  require  investments  considerably  higher 
than  for  visual  reading,  the  amortisation  of  which  depends  to  a  large  extend  on  its 
utilisation. However, if compared with the visual reading of individual animal codes, 
electronic identification is a feasible solution for ensuring individual traceability via 
markets. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
Slaughterhouses 

Recording  of  individual  animal  codes  guarantees  traceability  within  the  food  chain 
by  providing  a  clear  link  to  the  history  of  each  individual  animal.  Pre-slaughter 
reading  and  post-slaughter  reading  have  been  tested  in  several  projects,  and  both 
have been demonstrated to be feasible. The identifiers can be read in the lairage area 
(to confirm delivery of the animal(s) to the plant), as well as at the beginning of the 
slaughter  chain  (to  confirm  slaughter)  and  at  the  end  of  the  slaughter  chain  (to 
confirm identifier recovery). Concerning the reading efficiency reference is made to 
the  preceding  paragraph.  Manual  recovery  of  identifiers  is  feasible;  however 
automatic  recovery  of  identifiers  needs  further  technical  developments.  In  order  to 
ensure the uniqueness of the animal identification code any fraudulent second use of 
electronic identifiers should be prevented. 

2.3. 

Economic aspects 

The  estimation  of  costs  for  the  27  Member  States  depends  on  the  number  of  small 
ruminants to be tagged with electronic identifiers, and the number of holdings to be 
equipped with electronic readers and data processing equipment. Besides the prices 
of  the  equipment  used  (e. g.  1-2€  for  electronic  identifiers,  handheld  readers  from 
less than 200€, static readers from 1000€), the total cost will depend on how Member 
States  make  use  of  several  derogations  in  Regulation  (EC)  21/2004  and  the 
percentage of small holdings (e.g. hobby farms) which are able to notify individual 
animal codes after manual reading.  

Calculations  carried  out  by  several  Member  States  and  also  by  the  Joint  Research 
Centre  of  the  Commission  showed  that  costs  for  readers  and  data  processing 
equipment  constitute  a  substantial  part  of  the  total  annual  costs.  A  gradual 
introduction of electronic identification, starting with the electronic tagging as a first 
step  and  linking  the  movement  information  with  the  individual  animal  codes  as  a 
second step, would save expenses during the introductory period.  

Taking into account that manual recording of individual animal codes in large herds 
of  sheep  and  goats  would  require  a  large  expenditure  of  human  labour,  automatic 
reading  systems  can  contribute  to  reduce  this  effort.  Electronic  identification  as 
fundamental  part  of  individual  traceability,  not  only  reduces  the  risks  but  can  also 
provide  efficiency  benefits  for  instance  in  the  fields  of  farm  management,  animal 
breeding,  official  controls  and  food  safety.  The  multi-purpose  use  of  electronic 
identification  systems  is  an  important  incentive  for  the  small  ruminant  farming 
industry  and  the  other  related  industries  and  hence  facilitates  implementation. 
Therefore "on-farm-benefits" play a key role for the general acceptance and efficient 
introduction of electronic identification. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
2.4. 

Future requirements 

The  results  of  the  Member  States'  projects  show  that  electronic  identification  of 
sheep and goats functions under a wide range of production conditions. Only in one 
Member  State  problems,  detecting,  isolating  and  recording  of  non-read  animals  in 
high  animal  flows  were  reported  as  a  limiting  factor  under  extreme  conditions. 
Recent trials in the Member State concerned demonstrated that these problems could 
be solved. 

The  benefits  of  electronic  identification  are  limited  if  the  animal  code  is  just 
displayed  on  the  reader  and  not  entered  into  the  software  solutions  for  movement 
reporting  or  farm  management.  The  adoption  of  international  standards  concerning 
data  format  and  communication  will  address  most  of  the  problems  of  the  present 
limited availability of fully adapted, open reader-compatible software solutions. The 
multiple use (e.g. flock management, breeding, performance recording) of electronic 
identification  beyond  its  initial  sanitary  purposes  (movement  control,  disease 
eradication) is seen as an important incentive for wider acceptance. 

3. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Regulation  (EC)  No  21/2004  introduced  the  principle  of  individual  traceability  of 
sheep  and  goats,  which  should  be  upheld  in  order  to  meet  the  current  and  future 
requirements of an identification system aimed at ensuring a high standard of animal 
health and food safety.  

• 

• 

• 

The  traceability  of  movements  of  individual  animals  via  different  holdings 
requires the recording of individual animal data for each movement. Electronic 
systems ensure the automatic reading and recording of individual animal data, 
especially  for  small  ruminants,  which  are  often  moved  in  large  numbers  and 
sometimes  via  markets  or  assembly  centres  where  the  composition  of  these 
groups changes.  

Electronic reading systems  are  dispensable when individual  animal codes can 
be  read  visually  and  recorded  manually  (e.g.  small  animal  groups)  or  in  the 
case of group identification (e.g. holding code).  

legislation  already 

Taking into account the different management and environmental conditions in 
the Member States, Community legislation should not promote one or another 
technical  solution.  It  is  a  matter  of  subsidiarity  to  select  equipment  for 
electronic  identification  in  accordance  with  the  specific  national  needs. 
technical  standards.  The 
Community 
responsibility for approval of devices lies with the competent authorities of the 
Member  States  with  the  purpose  that  such  devices  allow  establishing  the 
identity  of  animals 
the 
Commission’s role is crucial to guarantee that a common approach and agreed 
standards apply across the Community and to provide support to the Member 
States. The possibility to establish a Community Reference Laboratory (CRL) 
should be considered. 

traded  between  Member  States.  However, 

fixes  basic 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

To accommodate technical developments and experience with certain types of 
identifiers and the specific needs in certain fields of application, Member States 
should also be allowed to approve new types of identifiers (e.g. electronic mark 
on the pastern, injectable transponders) provided that the maximum period for 
tagging,  as  laid  down  in  Regulation  (EC)  No  21/2004  are  respected  and  that 
each type of identifier is kept out of the food chain. 

The  basic  technical  conditions  to  identify  small  ruminants  in  their  holding  of 
birth  with  electronic  identifiers  are  fulfilled.  However  the  date  of  obligatory 
introduction of electronic identification should consider the time-frame needed 
for  the  Member  States  to  carry  out  the  necessary  legal  and  organisational 
arrangements before that date.  

The  experience  with  the  implementation  of  electronic  identification  in  some 
Member States has shown that considerable investments in reading technology 
of  high  performance  at  different  places  in  the  whole  production  chain  are 
essential for the functioning of the system.  

The  successive  electronic  tagging  of  young  animals  in  their  holding  of  birth 
will  lead  to  a  situation  where  animals  with  and  without  electronic  identifiers 
would  have  to  be  managed  together  during  an  introductory  period.  It  is 
therefore intended to dissociate the date from which the movement information 
should contain individual animal codes (point C.2 of the Annex to Regulation 
(EC)  No  21/2004),  from  the  date  in  Article  9(3)  of  Regulation  (EC)  No 
21/2004. 

For the reasons explained above, at this stage it would not be possible to fully 
justify  any  decision  as  regards  the  final  date  of  obligatory  introduction  of 
electronic  identification  at  Community  level.  It  is  therefore  recommended  to 
have a wider stakeholder discussion in particular about the economic impact of 
the introduction of individual traceability and electronic identification before a 
final date in Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 is fixed. Such a date should be set by 
the  Commission  under  the  comitology  procedure  in  accordance  with  clear 
conditions laid down by the Council. The Commission envisages establishing 
such  a  date  in  2008,  in  view  of  the  possible  implementation  of  electronic 
identification in all Member States by end 2009. However, the legal framework 
should  allow  Member  States  to  implement  electronic  identification  according 
to  their  national  needs  also  before  the  final  date  in  Regulation  (EC)  No 
21/2004. This will also be of help for a well reflected decision on the final date 
of obligatory introduction at Community level. 

EN 

13 

   EN