Traceability

No-Cost RFID Eartags for Swine are Now Available

Wed, 10 Dec 2025 19:22:28 GMT

Swine producers and state animal health officials can now order radio frequency identification (RFID) eartags at www.840swinetags.com —at no cost!

According to USDA Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), the tags are shipped directly from Merck Animal Health to your premises with no middle steps, ultimately expediting getting tags into producers’ hands and pigs’ ears.

For producers, all you need to have to get your order going is a valid premises ID and your sow or show pig count. For state animal health officials, head to the website knowing the number of sows in your state. APHIS says that’s all it takes to get the order going.

What is the Swine Identification Initiative?
First announced in August 2025, this initiative—modeled after the successful no-cost RFID cattle tag program—aims to strengthen national swine disease traceability, APHIS explains.

“While traceability does not prevent disease, it significantly reduces the time needed to respond to outbreaks, helping to limit the number of affected farms and animals,” APHIS explains. “This, in turn, minimizes economic impacts on producers and their communities.”

In July 2025, APHIS awarded a contract to Merck Animal Health to supply up to $20 million in tags to sow and exhibition swine industry segments, over the next five years. Read more here.

APHIS notes that these RFID tags will need to be applied with a compatible tag applicator, which is not supplied through this program.

Pork Producers Adopt Enhanced Swine Traceability Resolution at National Pork Industry Forum

Thu, 07 Mar 2024 19:23:43 GMT

U.S. pork producers approved a resolution to enhance the country’s live swine traceability system during the 2024 National Pork Industry Forum on March 7.

“Traceability is a priority for the industry and has been for decades,” Lori Stevermer, incoming National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) president and Minnesota pork producer, said in a release. “These standards will improve our ability to control the spread of a foreign animal disease and lessen the economic impact of an outbreak should one occur.”

A producer-led task force brought together stakeholders throughout the entire pork supply chain in 2022 to identify and address current gaps in the live swine traceability system. This task force offered a series of comment periods for producers to provide input on the enhanced standards, NPPC said in a release.

That process resulted in the following recommendations:
• All swine owners would need to register for a premises identification number (PIN).
• High-risk swine (from a traceability perspective), including cull breeding stock and show/exhibition stock, would be required to be tagged with an AIN (animal identification number) RFID (radio frequency) tag.
• Producers would be asked to record consistent data points, including PIN of origin, PIN of destination, date of movement, animal type, and any official identification that is present. Producers would be asked to record this data electronically within three business days.
• Movement data would be reported to a centralized database following the detection of a trade-limiting disease.
• Semen would require a label with the PIN of the source herd.
• Cull markets and packing plants would use tattoo numbers unique to each facility.

“Industry delegates at Pork Forum took a proactive step to protect animal health and producers’ livelihoods. An outbreak of a foreign animal disease in the United States, such as African swine fever or foot-and-mouth disease, would result in the immediate suspension of pork exports from the U.S., which totaled over $8.2 billion in pork and pork products last year,” Scott Hays, NPPC president, said in a release.

Next Steps
What’s next? NPPC said the approved standards will be submitted to USDA for inclusion in the regulations mandating live swine traceability. To view the enhanced standards or learn more, visit nppc.org/trace.

Navigating Structural Changes: Rabobank's Insights on Challenges and Opportunities in Global Animal Protein Markets

Tue, 19 Dec 2023 16:15:46 GMT

From pork to beef to poultry and all other animal protein sources, the diversity of animal protein options creates a dynamic marketplace across the globe.

Rabobank recently released its 2024 outlook for global animal protein —focused on animal protein markets and production throughout the world.

Production

Overall, Rabobank believes animal protein production will keep growing in 2024, but at a slower pace. Specifically, beef, pork and wild catch seafood will see a decrease in production, while poultry and aquaculture show the strongest growth.

Drought leading to a massive U.S. herd reduction , high input costs and low profit margins have played a large part in the production slowdown of beef and pork especially over the last two years.

Rebuilding the herd looks to still be an expectation—not reality—heading into 2024. This will continue beef’s production decline into next year.

Pork has been through a challenging year, and Rabobank expects production to contract modestly in 2024.

Finding a silver lining, Rabobank experts believe some market conditions may improve as input costs ease for producers.

Structural Changes

Some opportunities and risks may also be on the horizon as changes in market conditions are structural rather than cyclical—adding ongoing costs and changes, Rabobank explains.

Specifically, Rabobank encourages animal protein companies and producers to take stock on their strengths and prepare to transition their business to an operating environment with high costs and tight margins.

These structural changes include, but are not limited to:

- Demographic Changes: tightening labor markets which leads to increased production costs, reduced population growth which may slow consumption growth

- Investment Needs: funds to improve productivity and to upgrade production systems to meet emerging market and regulatory needs and consumer preferences

- Higher Prices: consumers are adapting to higher prices and are showing a willingness in some markets to pay a premium for better quality products

For animal protein companies and producers, now is the time to consider productivity improvement efforts, review the portfolio, strengthen partnerships, consider investment needs and opportunities, and adjust pricing strategies to the higher cost base.

Consumption

The increased costs of goods and services is weighing on consumers as incomes stagnate and a recessionary threat looms.

Rabobank expects inflation among the world’s top animal protein-consuming countries to average more than 3% next year, but that represents 15% to 20% higher costs compared to pre-pandemic levels, says the report.

Meanwhile, high production costs and tighter supplies will support animal protein prices and constrain global consumption in 2024, Rabobank explains.

Overall, consumer decisions at the meat case are shifting as budgets tighten, as well as more emphasis on food nutrition, quality and convenience helping sway purchasing patterns.

Outside Pressures

Disease, such as African swine fever (ASF) and highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), are major health challenges in global animal protein production that continue to drive production loss, create uncertainty and affect trade, Rabobank explains. While more localized, foot-and-mouth disease, porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS), and lumpy skin disease also have an affect on production and market access.

Heading into 2024, these disease risks remain top of mind. While surveillance and prevention is still important, Rabobank says efforts in 2024 will focus on biosecurity and traceability, regionalization and producer compensations models, vaccines and the use of advanced genetic technologies.

Weather patterns, such as the shift to El Niño, could also bring consequences for global animal protein. In general, El Niño conditions lead to driers conditions in northern Brazil, Australia and Asia, while there tends to be more rainfall in southern parts of Latin American and the U.S., Rabobank explains.

The growing idea of sustainability and its reliance on traceability also adds pressure to the market. Connections throughout the supply chain, from retailers all the way back to the farm or ranch, will be the most effective way to measure progress in this area.

Rabobank also expects animal protein supply chains to begin exploring product claims and labeling alongside emissions reduction progress.

Both dynamic and resilient, the animal protein sector is likely heading into another challenging year. However, it’s important to understand and consider the potential opportunities that could help operations survive or even thrive in the years to come.

Read More:

2024 Pork Industry Outlook: Finding Opportunity Through Challenges

Industry Faces Financial Challenges: Glimpse of Hope in Inventory Strategies

Prepare for a Changing Beef Industry

Two-Thirds of Consumers Deem Transparency Very to Extremely Important, Survey Finds

Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:06:24 GMT

Two-thirds of consumers say transparency in animal protein is extremely or very important, says Merck Animal Health, as part of the company’s results in its first consumer transparency research study.

The study focused on gauging consumers’ growing interest in transparency in animal protein and its importance in their purchasing decision and brand trust. Specifically, the study explored the consumers’ perception of industry transparency when to comes to animal welfare and sustainability and the crossover between transparency, traceability and their willingness to pay for transparency label claims.

Surveyed consumers were given the following definitions:
Transparency: knowing how food is grown, raised and made
Traceability: know where foods come from, or more specifically, being able to follow the movement of food products and ingredients through the supply chain

Study Results

Capturing the opinions of over 1,000 consumers who represent the U.S. shopper, highlights of the study’s results include:
• 66% reported transparency in animal proteins (meat, fish, eggs and dairy) as extremely or very important; reasons were considered personal, such as health and nutrition
• 86% of consumers who reported transparency as important also rank traceability as extremely or very important; 40% of those consumers also want to know where the livestock comes from
• Over 50% reported they were willing to pay a 5% premium for transparent labeling
• 55% reported environmental sustainability as very to extremely important
• 66% reported animal care and treatment very to extremely important

“The survey results tell us consumers want more information than ever in order to make informed decisions about the food they put on their dinner tables,” says Allison Flinn, DVM, executive director of value chain and consumer affairs at Merck Animal Health.

Merck Animal Health describes the company’s DNA TRACEBACK platform as one example of an animal protein traceability solution to accurately trace meat and seafood from farm to table that helps build trust in food labels. Utilizing “nature’s bar code”—DNA—this technology assigns a unique barcode number at slaughter to each animal that can be traced through the supply chain from the farm gate, to the processing plant and to the restaurant plate.

Sustainability, nutrition, food safety and animal welfare are all topics consumers want to know more about, and greater transparency builds trust, Flinn adds. This research also provides insights into how farmers, ranchers, food brands and allied industry partners, like Merck Animal Health, can collaborate to meet their expectations.

USDA Proposes Amendments to APHIS's Traceability Regulations

Thu, 19 Jan 2023 20:04:19 GMT

USDA published a proposed rule which would amend U.S. animal disease traceability regulations to require eartags in cattle and bison that are both visually and electronically readable — electronic identification (EID) tags.

Some changes have been made to a prior APHIS plan, including now the agency using the term EID tags instead of radio frequency identification (RFID) tags. APHIS said that is to accommodate the potential for future technologies other than RFID relative to the tags.

Industry Responds

Ethan Lane, vice president of government affairs at NCBA, broke down the timeline for the transition to EID tags in Thursday’s AgriTalk.

“We currently have the RFID tag rule that we saw at the end of the Trump administration that took a three or four year period to ramp up and transition to,” Lane says. “This EID tag will go live as soon as it is finalized, which is likely to be a year to 18 months.”

What’s at Stake

The EID system is aimed at helping the U.S. cattle industry deal with the emergency response to animal disease events, with APHIS concluding that while foot and mouth disease (FMD) and other diseases have been largely excluded from the U.S., “exclusion of every high impact disease through every pathway of introduction is likely an unachievable task.”

Kent Bacus, NCBA’s executive director of government affairs, echoes APHIS, saying FMD is one of his association’s biggest concerns.

“We haven’t had a case of FMD in the U.S. since the 1920s, and there hasn’t been FMD in North America since the 1950s,” he says. “We have a very naive herd that would be devastated by FMD, as would other hoofed livestock.”

Disease management tactics aside, Bacus says the domino affect FMD would have on the supply chain that is continuously being soddered and broken would be “catastrophic.” He points to highly-pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) and African swine fever (ASF) as examples.

The Gameplan

Under the proposed rule, APHIS would require tags to be used that are both visually and electronically readable for interstate movement of cattle and bison six months after a final rule is published in the Federal Register.

Comments on the APHIS proposed rule are due Mar. 20. There is not yet a definitive date when the plan will finally be in place.

Easier Said ... But It Must Be Done

Mon, 06 Jun 2022 16:13:01 GMT

As many, if not all, in animal agriculture can attest, conversations, meetings and research around traceability, information systems, animal identification and sustainability have been happening for several decades. So, why does the National Institute for Animal Agriculture (NIAA) and Farm Journal sense now is the time to foster a more robust conversation?

Because if we, who believe strongly animal-derived proteins are good for people, do not share animal agriculture’s story, those who wish to diminish or eliminate animal agriculture from today’s food system will lead the conversation. Sadly, in several cases, they are already forming the narrative.

Mission Critical

Farm Journal and NIAA are both internal animal agriculture organizations. As a leading voice in the swine, beef, dairy and veterinary sectors, Farm Journal’s mission is to purposefully share relevant content with you, its readers, as well as listen. After all, today’s communication model is more two-way than one-way.

NIAA’s mission is to convene animal agriculture experts and allies to explore, discuss, learn and develop knowledge that fosters interdisciplinary cooperation. Since 1916, NIAA has been focused on the continuous progress of animal agriculture.

Staying true to our missions, neither of our organizations are in spaces that engage with shoppers, influencers and others affecting the social license of animal agriculture. However, we can foster conversation and exploration that provides for well-informed decision-making by those in animal agriculture and those who engage with shoppers and influencers — checkoffs, trade associations and allied industries.

Two-Way Communication

Let’s start with a more robust dialogue that focuses on the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats at the intersection of traceability, information systems, animal identification and sustainability. We will explore and learn through research insights, case studies and point-counterpoint-style deeper dives. And we most certainly want to live up to today’s two-way communication model. Feedback and dialogue are encouraged and, quite frankly, required for success, whether through email, webinars or in-person gatherings.

Our work is not to advocate for a certain outcome or decision. As the facilitator of this conversation, we might introduce research or insights that challenge our thinking. We might allow for threads of conversation to be fully explored before moving on to the next. But no matter, we always want to ensure we live up to the expectation our stakeholders have come to expect — a place where tough issues can be explored and discussed in a collaborative manner.

Advancement is Necessary

It has been said there is no issue so great that reasonable people cannot come together to solve it. We will identify and bring those reasonable people in our industry together.

It also has been said that humankind has yet to develop a technology or innovation that is not used. While some innovations might be replaced by more advanced systems, it is hard, if not impossible, to identify advancements that have been “shelved” simply because we’ve decided not to use them. Just like communities went from communicating with letters and postcards to telegraphs then the telephone and onto email and text messaging, there are numerous examples in animal agriculture of similar advancements.

In the coming months, Farm Journal and NIAA look forward to exploring the intersection of traceability, information systems, animal identification and sustainability with you.

Farm Journal and the National Institute for Animal Agriculture Team Up to Help Animal Ag Share Its Story

Tue, 24 May 2022 19:55:11 GMT

“Everybody works for somebody. Me, I work for everybody in these United States that steps into a butcher’s shop for a T-bone steak, and you work for me. There’s not much difference.”

In the 1963 western movie McLintock!, G.W. McLintock, played by John Wayne, shared that succinct description on how the protein value chain works with a ranch hand. However, like many aspects of business and life, we know ensuring a safe, wholesome, affordable food supply is a bit more detailed and intertwined than McLintock describes.

(Farm Journal)

Not to make this too convoluted but each of these factors is a proverbial onion with many layers — and the more you peel the more you might experience a bit of discomfort before you reach the glorious result. You might say it’s like caramelized onions on a juicy steak or chop – representative of consumer trust in animal-derived proteins and animal agriculture’s social license to operate.

Now, add one more layer to the onion – the one pertinent to this discussion. How does animal agriculture collectively ensure we meet shoppers’ and buyers’ increased interest in and demand for greater transparency about the meat, poultry, milk, eggs and fish they choose for themselves and their loved ones?

While more complicated than this, consumer trust and social license are preserved and enhanced with data points that when aggregated and looked at holistically “tell” a story — a story of a protein-rich food that is delicious, nutritious, sustainable and accessible. Farm Journal and the National Institute for Animal Agriculture (NIAA), in a newly formed program that explores the intersection of traceability, information systems, animal identification and sustainability, believe these four areas can guide animal agriculture to its “story.”

As leaders from Farm Journal and NIAA first began discussing this collaborative initiative, foundational research was conducted of farmers and ranchers raising beef and dairy cattle and pigs. Many data points from this inaugural research when combined with consumer/shopper research indicate there are many reasons it is time to more fully explore how animal identification, information systems and traceability contribute to the sustainability – environmental stewardship, social responsibility and economic viability, of animal agriculture. The below data points are of particular interest.

(Farm Journal)

In their annual Power of Meat study , the Food Industry Association (FMI) and the North American Meat Institute (NAMI) continue to find consumers believe “meat/poultry belong in a healthy, balanced diet” – 76% agreed with this statement in 2020 and 73% in 2021.

Permission to Consume

Insights from the same studies demonstrate to animal agriculture the need to give consumers “permission” to consume animal-derived proteins. The need for “permission” stems from increased interest in how animal agriculture affects health and wellness, environmental stewardship, animal welfare, worker health and safety, and more. To provide this “permission,” animal agriculture needs to share its story, which must include robust data points.

Through this collaboration, Farm Journal and NIAA will:

Explore and dive into the market conditions affecting beef, dairy and pork, such as foreign animal disease landscapes; export demand and opportunities; consumer trust; and on-farm and ranch management.
Provide a platform to explore the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to greater connectivity among traceability, information systems, animal identification and sustainability – providing examples of lessons learned and best practices.
Highlight management practices and technology from aspiration to action.
Build consensus within animal agriculture.
Benchmark annual research exploring farmers’ and ranchers’ attitudes and practices affecting traceability, information systems, animal identification and sustainability.

Over the past several years, conversations about animal identification, sustainability, traceability and information systems have occurred sporadically and, for the most part, in silos. Today, individuals and organizations from around the globe are having a constant conversation about these four areas and how they relate.

Google trends indicate the rising interest areas within animal agriculture are climate change, meat as a food and greenhouse gasses. A Google Trends search for “meat” shows on a scale of 0 to 100 with 0 signifying little interest and 100 maximum interest, “meat” interest went from 24 in January 2004 to 73 in March 2022. For comparison, “alternative protein,” scored a 18 in January 2004 and a 76 in March 2022.

Monitoring the public’s interest in alternative proteins can indicate their attitudes about animal-derived proteins as both plant and cell-cultured proteins rely on environmental stewardship and social responsibility claims to compete with animal-derived proteins. While shoppers might not significantly switch from animal-derived proteins to alternative proteins, their interest can lead to greater rules and regulations that affect animal agriculture’s social license.

Together, Farm Journal and NIAA believe animal agriculture leaders need to come together to be a leading voice in these conversations. After all, if animal agriculture does not lead conversations, it will be “on the table, not at the table.” There’s a difference.

The time is now for this more robust and meaningful conversation. Are you ready to be “at the table” or “on the table”?

Traceability

No-Cost RFID Eartags for Swine are Now Available

Pork Producers Adopt Enhanced Swine Traceability Resolution at National Pork Industry Forum

Navigating Structural Changes: Rabobank's Insights on Challenges and Opportunities in Global Animal Protein Markets

Production

Structural Changes

Consumption

Outside Pressures

Two-Thirds of Consumers Deem Transparency Very to Extremely Important, Survey Finds

Study Results

USDA Proposes Amendments to APHIS's Traceability Regulations

Industry Responds

Read more: JEV: Don’t Wait Until It’s Too Late

What’s at Stake

Read more: Spike in Illegal Pork Brought in by Travelers in Taiwan Prompts Warning

The Gameplan

Easier Said ... But It Must Be Done

Mission Critical

Two-Way Communication

Advancement is Necessary

Read More

Farm Journal and the National Institute for Animal Agriculture Team Up to Help Animal Ag Share Its Story

Farm Journal and the National Institute for Animal Agriculture Team Up to Help Animal Ag Share Its Story

Permission to Consume