Deer Industry News #36 June 2009 - Deer Industry New Zealand

conferenceFrom left: Ed Noonan, Sharon Love, Earle Wells, Bill Taylor and Tony Pearse. Executive Committee has instigated a review of the NZDFAposition on NAIT.Executive committee remit“That this 34th NZDFA AGM review the current NZDFA positionstatement on NAIT, as presented to the NAIT Governance Group(April 2009)”Taylor/NoonanThe emergence of this remit has marked a further softening inNZDFA’s official stance against the NAIT concept and the mandatoryinclusion of deer by 2011, although concerns still remain (see alsoreport on the Branch Chairmen’s meeting in this issue).The April 2009 position is outlined in full in the 2008/09 NZDFAAnnual Report, which was published in the April/May issue of DeerIndustry News.Chairman Bill Taylor explained that the current NZDFA positionwas formed over a period of three years, and that circumstanceshad changed somewhat since this process started, making a reviewappropriate. “The purpose of the remit is to move things slightlyahead to a somewhat more supportive position.”At the Branch Chairmen’s meeting the previous day, a NAITdelegation had also hinted at a softening of attitudes about theimplementation of the system with ability to negotiate some of theconditions and technical practicalities around tagging, timing andthe possibility of an alternative direct-to-slaughter RFID tag. Thedelegation had emphasised that the key to success was cooperationfrom all quarters to get things working.Most deer farmers now accept that NAIT will happen, but concernsremain about the “devil in the detail” such as dates for taggingfawns and the types of tags to be used. The open hostility to NAITfrom most DFA members seen in previous years had subsided thisyear, but concerns remain, nonetheless.To ensure debate was well informed, Producer Manager, Tony Pearse,a member of the NAIT Technical Advisory Group, gave the meeting abrief refresher on how NAIT is designed.He reminded farmers NAIT would be linked to a government propertydatabase, FarmsOnline, and that cattle and deer were to be first offthe block because they are already linked under the Biosecurity Actand the NPMS. Other species will be able to be “clipped on” to thesystem under separate legislation. It will be ultimately a one-tagsystem, possibly by 2013. The AHB will still run a separate databasefor its purposes, but it is intended that there won’t be separateNAIT and AHB tags. Therefore NAIT should be cost neutral based oncurrent systems, but farmers may choose to have a separate visualmanagement tag. NAIT tags will also be the basis of the electronicASD form. (For further information on current NAIT plans, refer tothe Branch Chairmen’s meeting report in this issue.)John Scurr reiterated the DINZ position of strong support for NAITand encouraged a change of position by NZDFA. “We’ve heard fromthe marketers. We need this system.” He said that while there is acost involved, it is a small price to pay for market access. GettingNAIT established without sheepon board at the start wouldmake it easier to get the systemrunning, he said.Mike Holdaway noted that theindustry strategy was to targetthe premium end of the market,and this is a segment thatdemands traceability.Mike McCormick supported thisview, but was worried that theNAIT Governance Group had notbeen listening to deer industryconcerns.Mike McCormick – concernedNAIT Governance Group notlistening to deer industryconcerns.David Stevens said concernsabout the timing of mandatoryintroduction, the need to payheavily to manage the low riskinvolved with direct-to-slaughter animals, the usefulness of the lowfrequencyRFID technology proposed and the equity of cost sharingshould be non-negotiable in a review of the NZDFA position.Mark Hawkins queried the current status of electronic tags assecondary AHB tags. Tony Pearse said there was a verbal agreementwith AHB that the electronic tags are acceptable and that theofficial sanction was imminent .Andrew Peters said he was still opposed to NAIT which is “justanother job I’ll have to do”, and said it had been poorly sold to theprimary sector. He said exporters had not convinced him that therewould be a premium on his product for implementing NAIT. “Weneed something that works for deer and our industry.”Alastair Porter raised concerns about the wording of the remitas it stood, suggesting that an AGM could not effectively review aposition statement. He proposed an amendment to the remit so thatit read:“That this 34th NZDFA AGM request that the NZDFA ExecutiveCommittee commit to a review of the current NZDFA positionstatement on NAIT, as presented by request to the NAITGovernance Group (April 2009)”Porter/Denley14Deer Industry News