Latest earmarking/movement news affecting goats.
Originally from: Christine Ball
The following news has been received from Ruth Goodwin of the British Goat Society and affects ALL goats which must be earmarked according to the rules below. If anybody needs help or more info please contact me on ... Cheers,
Christine Ball.
AGRI-NEWS STOP PRESS – SOME GOOD NEWS AT LAST
DEFRA’s early summer review of the interim animal movements regime proposes that (assuming no further cases of FMD) goats, and sheep, can go to shows from 15th May 2002. Also, that there will be exemption from the 20-day standstill for individually identified breeding goats of either sex. Earmarking update: DEFRA and SEERAD have agreed that the following is acceptable: One ear: the six digit Herd Number e.g.123456
Other ear: A modified registration earmark, with the numbers first, will be accepted as the goats’ individual number, the presence of letters after the number is permitted. E.g. instead of a BGS earmark of ABC10R, you must put 10ABCR. 10 will then be the official individual number of that goat. An individual number is needed for showing, selling on twice, export, breeding movements' etc. This system avoids the need to put two rows of tattooed digits in a kid’s ear. However, if you are taking a bought-in goat to a show, which is legally not tattooed with the breeder’s Herd Number (because of its age), it should be marked with an “S”, followed by your Herd Number, followed (if the other ear is already tattooed with, say a BGS earmark with letters in front) by an individual number. This would involve two tattooing operations, or a tag.
Originally from: Mary Critchley
Eartagging....How quick the British are to collude in their own destruction out of a depressingly misplaced confidence in the "authorities". But what is even more depressing is that it's the animals who suffer first.
Take a step back and just think about what DEFRA sound like with their utterly obnoxious rules and regulations.....
DEFRA and SEERAD have agreed that the following is acceptable:
One ear: the six digit Herd Number e.g.123456
Other ear: A modified registration earmark, with the numbers first, will be accepted as the goats' individual number, the presence of letters after the number is permitted. E.g. instead of a BGS earmark of ABC10R, you must put 10ABCR. 10 will then be the official individual number of that goat. An individual number is needed for showing, selling on twice, export, breeding movements' etc. This system avoids the need to put two rows of tattooed digits in a kid's ear.
However, if you are taking a bought-in goat to a show, which is legally not tattooed with the breeder's Herd Number (because of its age), it should be marked with an "S", followed by your Herd Number, followed (if the other ear is already tattooed with, say a BGS earmark with letters in front) by an individual number. This would involve two tattooing operations, or a tag. Heil Defra......
Mary at warmwell
Originally from: Christine Ball
You would not believe the battle goatkeepers have been having to get to this compromise Mary. It was looking like we would be expected to tattoo TWO lines in the left ear to get all the info in and some of us with breeds that have small ears just knew we did not have space. Also two lines would be bound to hit blood vessels. We tattoo the right ear anyway and have done for years to register our goats with the BGS. Most goatkeepers do not like tags as goats tend to pull them out and tear their ears. The BGS Scottish rep managed to find sensible people to speak to at Seerad who worked out the arrangement below, and Defra have followed suit and agreed to our requests. I fail to see how not complying would benefit us as we need to be able to sell and transport our goats for various reasons which we could not do without the appropriate earmarks. Christine Ball.
Originally from: Mary Critchley
Christine. All due respect to you and others who have been fighting their corner but I think that all livestock owners should just say NO. Any decent union would back them to do just that.
Sorry if this shocks you – but the rules and regulations are bloody mad and help no one at all. Except perhaps a government absolutely determined to rid itself of traditional livestock farming.
Mary
Originally from: Chris
I watched some puppies being tattooed I thought it was horrific so is eartagging, is there a reason why you can't have chips like the other animals do, i.e. dogs,cats,fish,budgies and horses?
As you so rightly point out tags get caught, ears get torn, awful, presumably if you have a goat with a torn ear you can't show it anymore, and the chips could contain the info needed for movement etc.
Would this also not be a sensible alternative for farm type pets at
farm parks etc, I believe it is already done on many species in zoos. Chris –
pe-----Original Message-----
From: ...
Originally from: Christine Ball
Hi Chris.
Yes microchipping is currently being discussed by Defra and various societies. The problems include chips "migrating" and the cost of the readers. Goat earmarks are regularly checked by vets, at shows, semen collections, etc so many people would need readers however many of us think this is the way forward. Unfortunately such changes take time to organise and in the meantime our goats have to be identified for a range of reasons. Local goat clubs usually hold earmarking sessions where many members can take advantage of the club equipment and services. Last year this was not possible so many kids went unmarked and consequently unregistered. Earmarking adult goats is a much harder job than doing kids especially now we have to do both ears, but they have to be traceable to their holding of birth. Cheers,
Christine Ball (GoatsUK).
Originally from: Christine Ball
Hello Mary.
No it doesn't shock me, we are all entitled to our own opinions. I just think that to say "no" would be short-sighted. How would we identify our animals without earmarking or whatever? Cheers,
Christine (GoatsUK).
Originally from: Chris
The migration problem with the chips is minimal now, they don't move around, they redesigned them as in the erlier ones it wasw a problem. I don't think the cost of readers would be an issue, vets,defra officials already have them, and I think it would be entirely feasible for various groups to lease these if they were needed, however I can't see that a group would need to have them as it is only the necessary officials who would be doing the checking,.After all those us with dogs etc chipped don't need a reader.
regards
Chris
Originally from: Chris
I am somewhat puzzled by the comment you make "How would we identify our animals without earmarking etc" I would assume that you would know your individual animals so well that you would not need the addition of eartagging by Defra to assist you,also since you would have had some of these animals several years and they are effectively pets rather more than food animals surely recognising them individually cannot be a problem. I have always been amazed how a shepherd can identify all the ewes in a field and know immediately if one goes missing, presumably he isn't looking at the tags.
Chris
Originally from: Farmtalking
It's a nice idea Chris and probably true if the flock is just a few animals say possibly up to a hundred or so, but flocks of 2,000 or more, or herds of goats all of the same breed and it could be very difficult! One could never be certain of having absolutely the correct identity. At one time my brother kept over 1,000 ewes and he told me he recognised quite a few of them, usually because of unusual markings etc, but know all of them? – certainly not!
Digg
reddit
Google Bookmarks
Yahoo! My Web
del.icio.us
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
livejournal
Facebook
BlinkList