Estimated reading time: 5 minutes
A set of proposed regulatory amendments, to the Animal Improvement Act, 1998 (Act 62 of 1998) were published in the Government Gazette on 4 April 2025 for public comment.
These proposals have been met with some scepticism and concern among role-players the red meat industry, both from a point of view that the proposed regulations are seemingly linked to the wrong Act, but also in relation to the practical application of many of the proposed regulations.
Legal concerns
Dr Pierre van Rooyen, former CEO of SA Stud Book who currently farms on Rooyberg Boerdery near Brandfort, explains the issue regarding the appropriate Act as follows: “The proposed regulation addresses the wrong Act. These proposals concern the Animal Identification Act, 2002 (Act 6 of 2002) and not the Animal Improvement Act, 1998 (Act 62 of 1998).
“The salutation to the Animal Improvement Act reads: ‘To provide for the breeding, identification, and utilisation of genetically superior animals in order to improve the production and performance of animals in the interest of the Republic; and to provide for matters connected therewith.’ Clearly this Act is meant to regulate the animal stud breeding industry and not any unregistered animals from breeds not declared and generally referred to as ‘commercial’ animals.
“Yes, the genetic improvement of animals is indeed also meant to improve the production ability of animals in the broader livestock industry and not only registered stud animals of declared breeds. The aim of the Animal Improvement Act, however, is to regulate the stud breeding industry in order for commercial producers to improve their herds by obtaining superior genetic material from stud breeders.”
He explains that the Animal Improvement Act concerns only the stud breeding industry in South Africa. The definition of “animal” in the newly proposed regulations refers to the definition of “animal” in the Animal Improvement Act which states: “1. (ii) ‘animal’ means a kind of animal or an animal of a specified breed of such kind of animal which has in terms of section 2 been declared as an animal for the purpose of this Act.” Clearly this definition only implies registered stud animals because animals can only be registered from ‘declared breeds’ in terms of the Animal Improvement Act.
The Animal Improvement Act, and therefore its regulations, specifically refer to animals of breeds that are declared as ‘breeds’ and thus not for commercial animals in general.
A better legal option exists
Regulations regarding the identification and control of animals which are not classified under a declared breed under the Act, can therefore only be addressed under the Animal Identification Act.
“Nevertheless,” Dr van Rooyen points out, “all the intended aspects of animal recording relating to identification, ownership, notification of parentage, transfer of ownership, and the like mentioned in the proposed regulation, are specifically provided for in the Animal Improvement Act. All these aspects of animal recording and more, are exactly that which the Animal Improvement Act regulates for all animals from declared breeds.
“The Animal Improvement Act furthermore stipulates that all these recordings must be done on an international accredited animal recording system such as SA Stud Book’s Logix system, for instance, which is managed by a registered registering authority and are submitted onto the Integrated Registration and Genetic Information System (Intergis) on a regular basis. All of the proposed recordings are therefore fully provided for and available on official, accredited animal recording systems for all registered stud breeding animals from all the declared breeds.”
It is therefore an obvious conclusion, he stresses, that the proposed regulation cannot be a regulation of the Animal Improvement Act, but should be a regulation under the Animal Identification Act.
Feasibility concerns
Dr Frikkie Maré, CEO of the Red Meat Producers’ Organisation (RPO), has serious doubts about the feasibility of the proposed regulations. “Who is going to tag all the animals in the vast communal areas of the country, and who is going to pay for it?”
Especially commercial farmers are upset about the proposed regulations because it makes little sense from a commercial point of view, he says. One example is that, should an animal lose an ear tag, it must be reported to the nearest Department of Agriculture office or police station within seven days. This is clearly impractical.
“A grave concern,” he points out, “revolves around the use of the Intergis in this endeavour. The fact is that Intergis is a system aimed at the stud breeding industry and clearly does not have the capacity to accommodate a national commercial cattle database as well.”
A question of affordability
The chairperson of the Bovelder Cattle Study Group, Paul van Niekerk, also has grave concerns regarding the feasibility of the proposed regulations. His own herd, he says, have been tagged with radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags. While electronic ear tags certainly have a huge role to play in streamlining a cattle operation, the question regarding the costs involved remains.
“Who will pay for tagging all the cattle in communal areas, for example? A single RFID tag costs between R25 and R28. In addition, you will need a scanner which costs around R30 000, or else the tags are of no use. How many producers will be prepared or even able to pay these costs, especially given that more than half the cattle population in the country resides in the hands of resource-poor farmers in communal areas?”
The second point he makes revolves around the capacity of the National Department of Agriculture to administer the proposed regulations. As it stands, he points out, the state is currently not able to meet its obligations regarding the control of diseases such as brucellosis and tuberculosis.
On a very practical level, retired stud breeder Mike Nicolau points out that if you translate the cost of RFID tags into the cost of basic food stuffs, such as mielie meal and cooking oil, it becomes quite clear that there will be very little compliance among resource-poor farmers, simply due to affordability.
According to the notice in the Government Gazette, interested persons have 60 days from publication on 4 April 2025 to submit comments. – Izak Hofmeyr, Plaas Media
Readers can view the relevant Government Gazette, published on 4 April 2025, here: https://gazettes.africa/akn/za/officialGazette/government-gazette/2025-04-04/52448/eng@2025-04-04
