Implementation of Bovine Electronic Identification (Bovine EID) in Wales: summary of responses

Our consultation sought feedback from the farming community on the proposed implementation of Bovine Electronic Identification (Bovine EID) in Wales, focusing on the use of Low-Frequency (LF) ear tags. 

The key points to the consultation were:

• all calves born after the introduction of Bovine EID, at least one ear tag applied must be an official EID tag
• Bovine EID tags can be read visually and will be available as a flag, button or metal tag type
• cattle identification numbering format will change with the introduction of Bovine EID
• Bovine EID tags will be WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get -  number programmed on the chip will be the same number printed on the tag)
• no  plans to retag the existing herd
• timelines for official EID tag availability to be agreed at a later date
• implementation in Wales is not expected until 2027 at the earliest

Discussions surrounding the policy development and the implementation of Bovine EID in Wales have been ongoing since August 2011, when the European Commission adopted proposals on ‘Electronic identification of bovines to further strengthen food safety and animal health in the EU’. 

All livestock in Wales, are required to be uniquely identified with official ear tags (except pigs) and have their movements accurately recorded and traced throughout their lives. Within the EU, livestock ear tags are required to conform to international technical standards, including the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) standards for identification codes. 

The current cattle identification requirements in Wales are set out in the Cattle Identification (Wales) Regulations 2007. Livestock identification must be complied with by law and is integral for disease prevention, control and eradication and the protection of public health.

Currently all cattle must be identified with a tag in each ear, one is known as a primary tag, the other is the secondary tag. This will continue under Bovine EID.  Each animal has an official unique identification number which is assigned to it at birth (‘individual ID number’).  This number is printed on both tags.

Bovine EID will require one ear tag to contain an EID electronic chip encoded with the animal’s individual ID number.  The animal’s individual ID number will also be printed externally on the ear tag. The type of EID tag used can be either a flag, button, metal or a tissue testing tag.

The primary tag may be put in either ear and must be a distance-readable, large or medium sized tag. The secondary tag must have the same information as the primary tag but may also contain management information. The secondary tag must be in the other ear to the primary tag and can be a flag, a button or a metal tag. For calves born after the introduction of Bovine EID, at least one ear tag applied must be EID. The keeper can choose if this is the primary or secondary tag. Feedback from industry stakeholders suggests allowing keepers this flexibility will be welcomed.

Views were invited as part of an 8-week consultation which began on 19 June 2025 and ended on 14 August 2025. The consultation was published on the consultation pages of the Welsh Government’s website. Respondents were able to submit their views and comments in Welsh or English, by post, by email or through an online response form. The link to the consultation was emailed to a wide range of stakeholders.

All the responses have been considered and analysed, and this report aims to present the broad views and themes that were provided in responses to the consultation.

The consultation applied to Wales only.

The consultation received a total of 30 responses. 

Question 1 - Do you support the mandatory implementation of Bovine EID for newborn calves in Wales? 

This shows a strong majority in favour of mandatory implementation of Bovine EID for newborn calves in Wales.

Support for Bovine EID

Many respondents expressed strong support for the mandatory implementation of Bovine Electronic Identification (EID), especially for newborn calves:

• seen as long overdue and beneficial for management and data recording
• improves traceability, animal welfare, and disease control.
• aligns with digital by default principles and supports modernisation
• welcomed by industry groups like Welsh Animal Health Panel, NFU Cymru and FUW members
• support for flexible tag formats (flag, button, metal, tissue testing)
• endorsement of not retagging the existing herd

Concerns raised

Some respondents voiced concerns about the impact and rationale behind the policy:

• animal welfare concerns: tags may cause pain or damage.
• government overreach: perceived as excessive control, especially affecting small herds and conservation grazing
• political criticism: viewed by some as a move to differentiate Wales unnecessarily
• resistance to retagging the historic herd

Implementation suggestions

There were detailed recommendations to ensure smooth rollout:

• phased implementation with adequate training and support.
• Clear lead-in time and early communication of the switch-over date
• integration with market systems (EID Cymru) must be tested and funded
• tags must be readable both visually and electronically
• retrospective tagging should be supported to avoid dual systems

Cost implications

Cost was a recurring theme:

• concerns about higher tag costs and additional burden on farmers
• need for clarity on costs to livestock markets and government support for integration expenses
• farmers limiting tag orders due to uncertainty, leading to inefficiencies

Question 2 - Do you have any comments or concerns on using Low Frequency (LF) technology for implementing Bovine EID in Wales?

Support for LF technology

• LF is widely used, proven, and compatible with existing sheep EID infrastructure.
• Aligns with EU regulations and England’s implementation plans.
• Supported by farming unions and industry groups.
• Seen as robust, cost-effective, and aligned with international standards.

Concerns About LF 

• Limited read range and potential safety issues.
• Risk of future incompatibility and technological advancement.

Preference for UHF Technology 

• UHF offers greater read range.
• Scotland’s adoption of UHF noted as a potential model.
• Concerns about long-term costs of switching technologies later.

Cost implications 

• Expense of new readers and tags, especially for farms without existing LF equipment.
• Additional costs for markets, processors and across the supply chain.

Alignment with UK/EU standards

• Strong calls for consistency with England and alignment with EU requirements.
• LF is ISO and EU approved, facilitating trade and interoperability.

Future flexibility 

• Calls for Welsh Government to allow future UHF adoption.
• Interest in dual-frequency tags and readers as technology evolves.

Question 3 - Do you have any additional views on cattle identification and traceability in Wales?

Support for EID 

• Strong backing for EID to improve traceability and disease control.
• Seen as essential for future-proofing cattle identification.
• Support for maintaining visual readability and tag colour consistency.

Concerns about current system 

• Some feel the current system is adequate and question the need for change.
• Suggestions to improve existing systems rather than overhaul them.

Suggestions for improvement 

• Calls for better cross-referencing of TB tests and CTS data.
• Requests for clearer communication and farmer-friendly guidance.
• Interest in tagging methods that improve retention and identification.

Cost and implementation issues

• Concerns about costs for stakeholders across the supply chain.
• Questions around funding support and tag reliability.
• Need for assurance on manufacturing capacity and fair pricing.

Data integration opportunities

• Strong interest in linking EID with movement, health, and disease data.
• Support for a Welsh multi-species database and enhanced traceability features.
• Suggestions to include BVD status, vaccination records, and assurance data.

Question 4 - We have asked several specific questions on Bovine EID in this consultation but if you have any related feedback on cattle identification in Wales?

Support for simplicity and practicality

• Strong calls for a simple, low-bureaucracy system.
• Preference for Low Frequency (LF) technology due to ease of use and existing infrastructure.
• Requests for yellow tags for visibility and consistency.

Cost and financial support

• Concerns about additional costs imposed by Welsh Government changes.
• Suggestions for financial support or incentives, similar to schemes in Ireland.
• Emphasis on affordability for small-scale and upland farms.

Cross-border compatibility

• Repeated emphasis on alignment with England’s system.
• Importance of cross-border trade and avoiding duplication or confusion.
• Recommendation to avoid implementation during peak cattle birth and movement seasons.

Stakeholder engagement and communication

• Calls for ongoing engagement with farmers and other stakeholders.
• Need for clear, farmer-friendly communication about changes and timelines.
• Requests for mobile-friendly tools to support on-farm data management.

Technical and operational concerns

• Disappointment over the removal of the check digit, which aids visual tag reading.
• Concerns about tag readability for neurodiverse individuals.
• Questions about existing electronic secondary tags and their compatibility.

Data integrity and system reliability

• Concerns about removing cattle passports and relying solely on EID.
• Importance of 24/7 access to reliable data for markets and abattoirs.
• Support for a Welsh multi-species database that includes health and assurance data.

Question 5 - Which of the following best describes you as a respondent?

Welsh Language questions 6 and 7:

Question 6 -  What, in your opinion, would be the likely effects of the implementation of Bovine EID in Wales on the Welsh language?   

1. Do you think that there are opportunities to promote any positive effects? 

2. Do you think that there are opportunities to mitigate any adverse effects?

Support for bilingual communication

• Many respondents support bilingual communication (Welsh and English) for all materials related to Bovine EID.
• Seen as a way to enhance the Welsh language and ensure inclusivity.
• Some noted that many Welsh cattle keepers are Welsh-speaking, and bilingual systems would support retention of Welsh-speaking families in agriculture.

No impact or no need for change

• Several responses stated “no effect”, “no impact”, or “none”, suggesting the implementation would not affect the Welsh language either positively or negatively.
• Some felt the Welsh language is already adequately supported.

Risks to Welsh language through agricultural decline

• One detailed response warned that government policies (e.g. TB testing regime) could drive small-scale farmers out of business.
• This could lead to a decline in Welsh-speaking rural communities, impacting both language and biodiversity.

Recommendations for positive impact

• Ensuring all guidance and support is bilingual
• Avoiding implementation during peak farming seasons
• Using yellow tags for consistency and visibility
• Providing mobile-friendly bilingual tools
• Offering financial support to mitigate costs

Question 7 - In your opinion, could the implementation of Bovine EID in Wales be formulated or changed so as to:

1. have positive effects or more positive effects on using the Welsh language and on not treating the Welsh language less favourably than English, or 

2. mitigate any negative effects on using the Welsh language and on not treating the Welsh language less favourably than English?

No impact or no change needed

• Several respondents stated “No” or “No effect”, indicating they do not believe Bovine EID implementation will impact the Welsh language either positively or negatively.

Support for bilingualism

• Some responses emphasised the importance of equal status for Welsh and English, especially in communications and support materials.
• Suggestions included ensuring forms and systems are bilingual, aligning with existing bilingual databases.

Cultural and identity considerations

• A few respondents highlighted the cultural significance of the Welsh language, noting its role in Welsh identity and the importance of maintaining its visibility in agricultural policy.

Practical recommendations

• One response proposed that guidance and databases be bilingual, ensuring accessibility for Welsh speakers.
• Another noted that support and resources should be equally available in both languages.

Question 8 - We have asked a number of specific questions. Do you have any related issues which we have not specifically addressed?

A large number of respondents did not provide an answer to this question (83%). Of those who provided an answer, the main points were: 

Frustration with bureaucracy and overregulation

• Strong calls to “let farmers farm” without excessive interference.
• Criticism of APHA cattle movement restrictions and bovine TB testing regimes.
• Perception that current systems are overcomplicated, costly, and politically driven.

Need for system integration

• Advocacy for a fully integrated livestock movement database covering cattle, sheep, and pigs.
• Desire for one unified portal linking BCMS, ScotEID, APHA, LIS and EIDCymru.
• Belief that such integration would reduce costs, simplify processes, and improve understanding among farmers.

Concerns about health and wellbeing

• Some respondents linked current policies to negative impacts on mental health and wellbeing.
• Frustration over lack of progress on issues raised in previous advisory groups.

Criticism of political motives

• Accusations that the scheme is politically motivated and lacks practical benefit.
• Specific criticism of Welsh Government’s approach to bovine TB, with calls for UK-wide badger culling.

Views on Welsh language

• Mixed views: some support its use in daily life, but caution against overemphasis in technical or policy matters.
• Calls for maturity and discretion in balancing cultural promotion with practical priorities

We are committed to implementing Bovine EID for newborn calves in Wales and to ensure implementation plans are aligned with those in England, where possible. An update on the agreed implementation date and specifications for official Bovine EID ear tags will be published in due course.

• British Meat Processors Association
• British Veterinary Association
• Caisley Eartag Ltd
• Monmouthshire County Council
• NFU Cymru
• Powys County Council
• Shearwell Data Ltd
• Stapeley Vets
• Farmers’ Union of Wales
• Welsh Livestock Auctioneers Association
• 13 responses were received from cattle keepers
• 15 respondents requested to remain anonymous

Action required

This document is for information only.

Further information and related documents

Large print, Braille and alternative language versions of this document are available on request.

Additional copies

This summary of response and copies of all the consultation documentation are published in electronic form only and can be accessed on the Welsh Government’s website.

Link to the consultation documentation: Implementation of Bovine EID in Wales

ISBN number: 978-1-80633-553-4