The report starts out on track; it identifies the report's purpose and the purpose of NAIS:
"The purpose of this study was to conduct a benefit cost analysis of the United States National Animal Identification System (NAIS)."
"The main purpose of NAIS is to enhance animal tracing to protect the health of US livestock and poultry."
The report calculates the cost of NAIS. Theoretically the report should compare the cost of our current animal health trace-back process versus a NAIS trace-back. So, how do the benefits of NAIS stack up to our current system? Is NAIS worth the cost? After over a year of analysis, and at a cost of $500,000 for the report, here are the highlights that did not make the overview:
This is particularly important for our assessment of NAIS costs and benefits as on significant potential benefit that NAIS may provide is: a) an increase in the likelihood of identifying critical animals/herds and
b) a reduction in governmental costs in responding to animal diseases. To thoroughly appraise these potential cost savings, solid estimates are needed of incurred governmental expenditures over a range of disease types and scopes that are further characterized by inherent differences in the traceability capabilities available in each response.
Oopsy - these Ph.D.s can be such teases.
Unfortunately, this detailed historical information simply was not available for this analysis.
Second, there is not sufficient historical frequency, nor diversity of events, to facilitate a "detailed, real world evaluation" of how even aggregate level governmental expenditures vary when different levels of traceability capabilities are present and utilized.
Heh. Things are not looking too good for NAIS in the animal health benefit department. It is kind of hard to claim a benefit from a hypothetical NAIS system, when a gaggle of researchers can't even figure out how much our current system costs. Anyone want to bet that the USDA will make the claim anyway?
On to the cost of NAIS! One of the potentially highest costs for NAIS is reporting every traceability event into a private database. Just how much will that cost?
Again, from our $500,000 taxpayer-financed "analysis":
The research team attempted to contact multiple RFID database providers to obtain costs per head of their databases so an average cost for data storage could be ascertained. Not surprisingly, this information was not readily given out, and the information that was expressed was not specific enough for this study.
To find a more accurate estimate, Kevin Kirk from Michigan's Department of Agriculture was contacted.
Mr. Kirk, who oversees the Michigan State AID database, provided the total data storage cost for Michigan producers. Based on this information, a per head charge of $0.085 was estimated. This per head charge was included anytime an animal was assumed to have its RFID tag read.
Wow - a WOW! A private-business processing fee that will cost less than the postage to send out the bill. Never mind about the costs for customer support, reporting, and processing costs - 8.5 cents! Where do we sign up?
Lesson learned: If the taxpayer-funded, private-business, NAIS database folks won't tell you how much they are planning to charge, just use your Call-A-Friend Lifeline - you will love the answer and feel like a million dollars. And speaking of a million the magic database number was used to estimate the cost of over 100 million tracking events.
That 8.5 cents is one heckuva handy number.
This report only gets better. A second cost is for actually reading the tag. Since the price of a reader must have been a tad bit steep, the authors of this report invented a new business - the Tag-Reading Outsource business. Based on a 50-mile round trip, the investment in computers and readers, the liability, and the perfect timing required to show up BEFORE the cattle are unloaded from a trailer, here is the cost as "analyzed" in our $500,000 report:
A search of the literature did not reveal any unsubsidized, custom rates for reading RFID tags; therefore a rate needed to be estimated. [...snip section with calculations] For example, the cost of reading five head is $1.87 per head compared to $0.98 per head for 50 head and $0.86 for 500 head.
How can anyone possibly dispute the analysis of a Ph.D. telling us that in order to scan two head of cattle someone will drive 50 miles round trip and charge us less than $4.00? For those raising cattle who enjoy losing money, or indeed for anyone who might enjoy starvation in a rural setting, the RFID Tag-Reading Outsource business sounds like a great side business for y'all.
Of course, some actually in the cattle business may marvel at the assumption of a 50-mile round trip. For you non-Ph.D.s out there, that's 25 miles one way. How many Tag-Reading Outsource companies do you suppose are going to spring up within an average radius of 25 miles? It's that far in some cattle country from one ranch house to the next. Pizza Hut wouldn't survive making deliveries that far away - and they charge more than four bucks.
The authors used a bunch more of their very special numbers to tackle fearlessly an imaginary FMD outbreak, and to make truly amazing predictions about the beef export business. Beef is the shrink-wrapped red stuff that you buy at the grocery store; not the same as cattle which may have a health problem. Read it for yourself and enjoy. The equine section is a total hoot.
Trust them, they are paid by the government. Sign up for NAIS, and we will all be safe and rolling in dough.
Links:
http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov...
http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov... |
