Cross-border problems if data tag systems diverge
Without further efforts to harmonise cattle electronic eartag identification (EID) systems across the UK, keepers north and south of the Border could, almost literally, find themselves not working on the same wavelength.
For, despite the major benefits in terms of data storage and the other virtues currently being extolled at meetings around the country by SCOTEID for adopting ultra high frequency (UHF) transponders in cattle eartags, England could be set to settle for using a more basic low frequency (LF) chip.
Speaking at one of the current series of roadshow meetings before a full government consultation on the issue is launched in the spring, Anna Robertson of SCOTEID said that while no date had yet been finalised, the use of electronic eartags in new-born calves was likely to become mandatory by summer 2021.
“But anyone wishing to start using them sooner should be able to do so later this year,” she said, adding that while SCOTEID was set to take over the role of recording cattle births, deaths and movements from the central cattle tracing system (CTS) operated at the British Cattle Movement Service (BCMS) by the middle of this year, the compulsory use of electronic tags was likely to still be 12-18 months down the line, leaving time for the industry to consider the best way forward.
Together with John Gregor she told a packed meeting in Kinross this week that trials had been in operation in Scotland since 2012
– and all the results pointed towards UHF offering both technical and administrative benefits over the LF tags, viewed as the baseline system by the EU.
Problems with lower data storage of LF tags – which are already used for sheep EID – could mean that the national herd might have to be re-tagged with new numbers, said Gregor.
And the fact that the actual numbers in LF chips currently have to be cross-referenced to the cattle identification number through the use of a “tag bucket” meant that the WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) offered by the UHF system where both tag and transponder held the same number was superior and offered cast-iron traceability.
But while the audience questioned whether it was sensible to have different systems on either side of the Border, Gregor said that even if UHF readers weren’t available in the English markets – or LF ones in Scotland – the tags could still be read visually as they are at the moment.
Outlining the benefits of UHF tags, Rogers said they
could be read at a far greater distance and wouldn’t confuse the system if a number ran through a reader at the same time – as often happened with LF tags.
And on top of the capacity to offer more storage for details such as medicine records, the UHF chips were considerably cheaper as they were widely used across many sectors rather than the more specialised and hence more expensive LF chips.
But with many farms already owning LF readers for recording sheep numbers and data – and some using LF cattle tags for management purposes and to operate feeding systems in dairy parlours – it was hoped that “dual system” tags which contained both UHF and LF chips would also become available.
However, Rogers added: “That might be a while down the line as we will need to see what system the English tracing system settles on as such dual systems might cause some difficulties with readers in the south.”