Changes to branding legislation proposed for Queensland

Changes to branding legislation have been proposed by the state government, as Burnett rural identities say the moves could have serious implications for the cattle industry.

Branding changes could impact sale yard efficiency.

Burnett rural identities have shared their concerns over a proposal to overhaul the state’s branding legislation, saying it could have serious implications for the cattle industry.

Changes to the legislation could see livestock owners given the choice to brand or ear tag their cattle, a move that promises to remove the red tape from registering livestock.

Current legislation states all cattle must be branded for sale in Queensland, with limited weight and transport exemptions.

Eidsvold Livestock and Property co-owner Robert Bygrove said there are many benefits that come with a physical brand, including the ability to quickly and accurately trace the origins of a beast.

“At least if the cattle are branded you have another form of identification of ownership,” he said.

“Once you remove the brand, even with tags and other form of identification you lose the extra security of identification.”

Mr Byrgove said the changes could also impact the advertising aspect of saleyards, and potentially flow onto bigger stations across the region.

“There is an iconic tag with bigger stations in the region, and it highlights the selling ability of a lot of those properties and the brand does become quite iconic,” he said.

Ear tagging could become the preferred system of livestock tracking for owners.

Agriculture Minister Mark Furner said existing branding legislation is outdated, and no longer needed in today’s technologically-connected industry.

“Queensland’s Brands Act 1915 is more than 100 years old and has not been significantly changed in decades,” he said.

“Brands have traditionally been used to show livestock ownership but no longer serve the significant biosecurity function they once did.”

Proposed changes will offer a choice for livestock owners, who may continue to brand if they wish.

The changes would also bring in pricing and fee changes and Mr Furner said this was a necessary part of the legislation evolution.

“The current branding requirements also impose unnecessary costs on livestock owners, supply chain operators and government,” he said.

“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.”