WASHINGTON, D.C. – According to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), animal disease traceability is knowing where diseased and at-risk animals are, where they have been and when they were there which ensures a rapid response when animal disease events occur. A final rule was announced in April of 2024 requiring certain livestock to wear electronically readable devices in order to prevent and or manage disease outbreaks in livestock.

“Although animal disease traceability does not prevent disease, an efficient and accurate traceability system reduces the number of animals and response time involved in a disease investigation. This, in turn, reduces the economic impact on owners and affected communities,” APHIS said. “A comprehensive animal disease traceability system is our best protection against a devastating disease outbreak. USDA is committed to implementing a modern system that tracks animals from birth to slaughter using affordable technology that allows for quick tracing of sick and exposed animals to stop disease spread.”

However, Wyoming District 3 Senator, Cheri Steinmetz explained Wyoming should reject the USDA’s ruling on electronic livestock traceability, siting producers have already developed a form of animal tracking systems, which have been used for decades, in a recent press release. 

“Americans have built a comprehensive and effective disease traceability system which has proven over decades to be reliable, affordable, flexible and the envy of the world in its ability to protect the food supply. Just as important is the system’s protection of private property rights, assuring confidentiality, proprietary investments, and cost-adjustable aspects that fit the producer,” Steinmetz released. “Wyoming laws have codified the right to voluntarily identify livestock using historically reliable means which include brands, backtags, tattoos and ear tags.”

According to APHIS, the official identification methods and devices identify an animal or group of animals by applying an official identification number to the animal. Official APHIS-approved ear tags are approved for certain species. APHIS also noted, the tags must be approved before a manufacturer can produce and sell the tags. 

“The new electronic identification device (EID) mandate is being implemented by the USDA as an agency ‘rule’. In other words, this was not requested by congress or, more importantly, by the livestock industry,” Steinmetz explained. “This type of traceability – a tag emitting a signal that could be captured by any compatible receiver – is a food sustainability goal of the World Organization of Animal Health which is an advisory organization for the World Health Organization.”

According to Steinmetz, the implementation of the ruling is used as a source of power and control and will require the use of more spending.

“Elites in the global organizations want control of the livestock industry and food supply. They want to know how many cattle people own in order to regulate the industry. The goal isn’t just safe food, it’s part of their climate change cult which includes control of land use by monitoring livestock movement patterns. To show where this is going in the U.S., Ireland has embraced EIDs, and the result is a government proposal to kill 200,000 cattle to slow climate change,” Steinmetz said. “The USDA rule does not enhance disease traceability but does allow for tracking of the animal’s life history and location, going far beyond disease tracing at a cost that will seriously affect producers and require spending millions of your tax dollars when we’re pushing to reduce government spending.”

Steinmetz notes, during the first stages of the implementation, only 11% of the livestock would be tracked –rodeo stock, cattle and bison which cross the state lines however the senator expects the ruling to quickly expand, leaving the consumer to cover the costs. 

“To date, the USDA has spent $15 million just to stand up the office within the USDA; this price does not include the EID tags, wands to read the tags, computer infrastructure, extra labor costs throughout the supply chain or extra costs at the sale barn and processing plants. From this we can see that actual numbers are likely in the billions,” Steinmetz said. “We all know these costs will be passed on to you and I at the grocery store.”

Steinmetz took action to protect consumers and producers alike when she filed the SF0064 “Wyoming Opposes Mandatory Electronic ID Devices-Livestock” to oppose the EID mandate and require the Wyoming State Veterinarian and all Wyoming veterinarians to inform livestock owners of the other options for the identification options. The bill would also stipulate the EID tags would be the receiving buyer’s responsibility should Wyoming livestock be sold to buyers in states requiring the identification. 

“As the Chairman of the Agriculture State and Public Lands Committee in 2024, I drafted a bill during the interim (which passed the Committee) directing the Wyoming Livestock Board Director to use the exemption in the USDA ‘rule’, which allows for state-to-state agreements to continue ‘business as usual.,’” Steinmetz explained in her release. “This bill is not yet numbered, but I expect it to be soon. I have contacted Legislators from six other states who plan to introduce similar legislation, joining us in pushing back against this federal agency overreach and continuing ‘business as usual’ between states.”

Currently, Senate File No. SF0064 is cosponsored by Senators Brennan, Ide, Kolb, Pearson
and Representatives Allemand, Banks, Neiman, Strock, Williams, Winter.

“If the USDA and the APHIS were concerned with and focused on preventing a livestock disease outbreak, they would stop the importation of livestock from countries that have known and documented problems with disease, yet they do not do so,” the senate file reads. “The vast majority of livestock affected by this mandatory electronic identification rule originate from wide open spaces and live on clean, diseasefree pastures and not in confined areas with thousands of livestock coming from different areas.”

The USDA would stop the main route of infection, if the USDA was concerned with and focused on disease and outbreak prevention in imported livestock, where Steinmetz expressed countries have had known and documented disease problems. 

“This is why I am sponsoring a bill requiring Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) for beef and hope to see it passed this session so that consumers know the origin of the product, and producers benefit from the labeling as a value-added market component,” Steinmetz explained. “We have a superior traceability system worth defending, which is already protecting our livestock industry, our food source, and the pocketbook of every consumer. Our way of life is worth protecting.”

The policy itself states Wyoming should oppose the APHIS rule for mandating EID’s for Wyoming livestock and allow Wyoming livestock producers to continue to do business with the rights, freedoms and liberty with historically reliable methods of identifications. It also demands for the USDA to produce cost estimates to the State of Wyoming.

“Wyoming shall demand that the USDA and the APHIS provide a complete and full accounting and accurate estimate of all costs associated with mandating that Wyoming’s livestock producers use electronic identification ear tags, including costs associated with hardware, software, ear tags, wands, retrofitting of livestock handling facilities, retrofitting of sales barns, working of livestock and costs related to additional paperwork, digital input and filings necessary to prove compliance with the electronic identification ear tag rule to the Wyoming legislature,” the file reads.

Currently, according to the State of Wyoming Legislature, no meetings or floor sessions have been scheduled.