BRANDING of livestock has always been a given in Queensland, with rights assumed by graziers who for generations have left their unique mark on the beasts they own.
Late last year, the Queensland Government put forward a proposal for changes to the system and graziers are not impressed.
Tom and Joy Surawski own a 48.5ha property at Croftby and their bread and butter is managing 250 head of beef cattle.
The Surawski brand is M8K, a mark that has been synonymous with the family name since 1880.
“We have been at our property for four generations and this brand is our only means of identification for the future,” said Mr Surawski.
“If [the government] gets rid of brands we will have no way to identify our beasts if they stray,” he said.
“At the moment they have an NLIS database, and the only way to track is through branding and a computer chip in the ear.”
Minister for Agricultural Mark Furner said the Government was keen to hear from stakeholders on two proposed options.
“Either branding could remain mandatory, or producers could be allowed to decide whether or not to brand or earmark their cattle under a voluntary approach,” said Mr Furner.
“None of the proposals involve removing the ability to brand, rather livestock owners would be given the freedom to decide what’s in their own best interest.
“Queensland’s Brands Act 1915 is more than 100 years old and has not been significantly changed in decades.
“That’s why Queensland needs a modern approach to brands and earmarks that is more efficient for livestock owners and gives them a choice.”
Mr Furner said brands had traditionally been used to show livestock ownership, and they no longer served the significant biosecurity function they once did.
“With advances in technology, there are now far more effective ways of tracing livestock in the event of a disease outbreak,” he said.                                                          Mr Surawski has a different opinion when it comes to the implementation of new procedures for age old practices.
“The Queensland Government doesn’t really want to look after the brands file because at the moment they do it all,” he said.
“[The Queensland Government] want to charge to look after it and manage a database where you renew your brand every 12 months.
“I’d say that’s why they are trying to get rid of it, it’s just another job the government won’t have to pay someone else to do.
“They’re trying to cut their costs.
“I will keep using my brand whether its registered or not.
“I think they will start charging us for them to look after [the database] whereas it’s always been free.
“If they go down that track I’ll just abandon it altogether.”
Minister Furner said Queensland and the Northern Territory are the only Australian jurisdictions that mandated the use of livestock brands.
“The current IT system being used to support brands and earmarks is also outdated and requires replacement which has created an opportunity to review all of the rules around registering a brand or earmark,” he said.
“The current branding requirements also impose unnecessary costs on livestock owners, supply chain operators and government.
“The current fees do not reflect the cost of the staffing levels and IT system needed to administer brands, so we are proposing a more appropriate fee structure to support administration of brands and earmarks.
“Having a renewal fee will cover administration costs and free up unused brands for livestock producers who currently find it hard to register the brand they want.”