Producing paperwork: Sask. producers push back on proposed livestock tracing by feds

Changes to livestock tracking proposed by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) have been put on hold, to the relief of many agriculture workers and experts in Saskatchewan, though many remain concerned that the pause won’t result in any change to the proposed regulations.

The initially proposed changes would expand the monitoring of animals throughout the production system.

Read more:

• Sask. ag minister hopeful for progress on Canadian mission in China
• How one prairie company is reconnecting families with old farms
• ‘Crime of opportunity’: Cattle theft in Saskatchewan concerning for producers

Kris Boyes, a cattle rancher in Glen Ewen, Sask., said these changes “blindsided” people like himself in the industry and would mean much greater work for producers like him.

“Most ranchers have their days full,” Boyes said. “From feeding cows to whatever planting in the spring, when you’re getting cows off the grass, the days of running cows down the chute, and vaccinating your calves and processing … you still have your regular chores to do. You’re still trying to get to the field to put in the crop, you’re fencing … and hauling calves and cows out, and what have you. And then you’re supposed to sit down with all your extra time and enter all this information into a computer database.

“It makes no sense.”

Traceability meant to limit disease outbreak

According to the CFIA, “the proposed amendments are intended to close gaps in the current framework and strengthen Canada’s livestock traceability system. This supports effective response to disease events, minimizes economic disruption and helps Canadian producers and processors remain competitive at home and abroad, while supporting long-term economic stability for businesses.”

Citing tracking animal diseases as a key focus and the driving force behind the proposed amendments, the CFIA said it is committed to “reducing red tape and regulatory reform and is advancing a number of modernization initiatives to support businesses, while ensuring Canada’s animal health system remains effective, practical, and fit for purpose.

“Animal diseases continue to occur, and when they do, Canada must be able to respond quickly, accurately, and effectively,” the government agency’s statement read.

Kris Boyes’ cattle in the field in southeast Saskatchewan. (Kris Boyes/submitted)

The Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (SARM) welcomed the federal government’s decision to pause the proposed livestock traceability regulations. In a news release on Thursday, president Bill Huber said a focus is needed on the serious concerns raised by producers to see more practical regulations published.

“SARM supports effective traceability; it is essential for disease response and for maintaining our markets,” Huber said.

“But any new rules must reflect reality in rural Saskatchewan. That means realistic reporting timelines, recognition of connectivity gaps and proper support for implementation, not one-size-fits-all requirements downloaded onto producers.”

Chad Ross, chair of governance, government policy and programs with the Saskatchewan Cattle Association in Estevan, said on The Evan Bray Show on Tuesday that the proposed changes to traceability requirements would likely prove to be more onerous for producers in the province.

Ross told Bray that producers reacted strongly to the proposed regulations and the cattle association accordingly called for a halt to the regulations.

In a release on Wednesday, the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan (APAS) has affirmed its support for stronger livestock traceability to better respond to animal disease events, but emphasizes that new costs and requirements cannot be a burden to producers.

Listen to the full interview with Chad Ross here:

Producers push back on proposed regulations

Boyes is not pleased that some producer organizations knew about these proposed changes before they were made public and did not alert producers in the province.

“With this traceability, not only will it cause major time constraints and a major pain in the neck on days when you’re moving cattle, you still have everyday work to do,” Boyes explained. “Now, afterwards, we got to go and sit down and do this bunch more book work and enter these numbers into a database.”

Boyes estimated that having to record the 15-digit numbers on the radio tags that are already mandated for each head of cattle each time livestock are moved would result in about 30,000 digits being recorded for every time 200 cows are brought to pasture. Not only does that create extra work for producers, Boyes said the constant tag checking will cause stress to his animals.

There is also a cost per tag and for electronic radio frequency tag readers that ranchers would need to invest in, including backup equipment in case of failure or loss.

Ross agreed that any border closures, due to disease or otherwise, would be devastating for producers, remembering the bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or “mad cow disease” outbreak in 2003.

Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan (APAS) president Bill Prybylski remembers that outbreak, as well as the bovine tuberculosis event in 2024. He said there is a purpose for increasing tracking of animals in case of future illness outbreaks.

“If that animal has come in contact with other animals … those animals may be at risk of being infected, so they need to be identified,” Prybylski said.

Traceability includes animal identification, premise identification and movement tracking. Ross said animal identification has been in effect for a long time, using radio frequency ID to identify the herd of origin. Premise identification tracks where cattle are located.

When it comes to herd movement tracking, there is the ability to track animals back to their herds of origin and brand inspection for groups of cattle, but there isn’t individual animal identification, Ross noted.

The new regulations aim to individually track each animal that belongs to a producer—particularly in the case of disease outbreak—and to be able to follow the movement of that animal through the production chain. Ross said the industry can be complex and an animal will move through various parts of the industry throughout its life.

“Being able to do that would just enhance and speed up that process so that we could get those borders open (in the event of a disease outbreak),” Ross explained.

He cited mistrust of the government as one of the biggest frustrations with the newly proposed traceability measures. Citing worries about government overreach himself, Boyes is also concerned about the federal government having precise numbers about the number of cattle each producer owns and potential mass culling as a result of illness.

“If you have one positive case of tuberculosis in your herd, your entire herd is culled,” Boyes said, which, he explained, can be devastating to a rancher’s operations.

“We already have traceability. We already have a livestock manifest. Most producers brand. If I had a diseased animal come back to our production, I can go in my book and I can tell you exactly where that animal’s been most of its life,” Boyes explained.

Ross also said this process would be burdensome to producers with both work and cost to implement. “It has to be simplified,” he said, though he noted that measures in place now are “quite a bit better from where we started.

“There is some overreach that we need to simplify,” Ross continued. “Without producer buy-in, compliance is going to be minimal. In order for this to work, we have to have compliance.”

Ross and Prybylski referred to additional facility and scanner costs, the cost of tracking information and the time to fill out records as some of the largest deterrents producers face with the proposed changes.

“It just cannot be onerous on our producers,” Ross said.

“If we have to keep track of every animal every time it’s being moved from pasture to pasture, or from pasture to the feedlot … it’s going to generate more work for producers,” Prybylski explained.

“Producers, they want to produce food, they don’t want to be producing paperwork.”

Proposed changes on hold

Prybylski said APAS asked for and is happy to see the CFIA pause the implementation of the regulations to give producers an opportunity to consider how the changes might affect their operations, potential solutions to mitigate those impacts and risks of extra work and costs as a result.

Boyes isn’t at peace with the proposed changes paused for the time being.

“It’s not a stop, it’s just on hold,” he said.

The Saskatchewan Cattle Association is asking for a proactive approach to be taken, depending on what traceability measures are implemented, promoting awareness and educating producers on whatever changes might be made over a two-year period, with options for producers to provide feedback and share their concerns.

“There’s been some shock value here for our producers, and that just plainly hasn’t happened,” Ross told Bray.

Producers are being encouraged to continue sharing their thoughts on this issue at forums like the Saskatchewan Beef Industry Conference and the SCA’s upcoming annual general meeting. SARM and APAS are both encouraging farmers to share their concerns, while SARM said it will continue to work alongside Saskatchewan cattle producer groups to see solutions and experiences specific to the province included in discussions.

Prybylski said APAS is encouraging the CFIA and the federal government to engage with stakeholders like producer groups and ranchers in the province to “get the feedback from the folks that are actually going to be affected by these regulations.

“We look forward to that consultation process,” Prybylski added.

Ross also encouraged producers to keep good records, calling it a “great first step,” regardless of potential regulation changes, in case of any future disease outbreaks.

“Canadian beef is the safest beef in the world,” Ross said on The Evan Bray Show. “It’s the tastiest, it’s the most consistent and we export 50 per cent of what we produce.”