CommunicationPractices inEngineering,Manufacturing, andResearch for Foodand Water Safety

IEEE Press445 Hoes Lane

Piscataway, NJ 08854

IEEE Press Editorial BoardTariq Samad, Editor in Chief

George W. Arnold Vladimir Lumelsky Linda ShaferDmitry Goldgof Pui-In Mak Zidong WangEkram Hossain Jeffrey Nanzer MengChu ZhouMary Lanzerotti Ray Perez George Zobrist

Kenneth Moore, Director of IEEE Book and Information Services (BIS)

CommunicationPractices inEngineering,Manufacturing, andResearch for Foodand Water Safety

Edited by

David WrightMissouri University of Science and Technology

IEEE PCS Professional Engineering Communication Series

Copyright © 2015 by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. All rights reserved.Published simultaneously in Canada.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or byany means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permittedunder Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior writtenpermission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to theCopyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750-8400, fax (978)750-4470, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should beaddressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030,(201) 748-6011, fax (201) 748-6008, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permission.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts inpreparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completenessof the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness fora particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written salesmaterials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You shouldconsult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss ofprofit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, orother damages.

For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact ourCustomer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762-2974, outside the United States at(317) 572-3993 or fax (317) 572-4002.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may notbe available in electronic formats. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site atwww.wiley.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available.

ISBN: 978-1-118-27427-9

Printed in the United States of America.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Contents

A Note from the Series Editor, ixPreface, xiList of Contributors, xiiiAcknowledgments, xv

1 Cowboys and Computers: Communicating National AnimalIdentification in the Beef Industry 1David Wright

1.1 Industries Collide, 11.1.1 Resistance to Technology in the Beef Industry, 31.1.2 Having a Cow over Mad Cow Disease, 31.1.3 Change Is Slow in the Beef Industry, 61.1.4 Communication Breakdowns and Coffee Shop

Policymaking, 71.1.5 Can We All Just Get Along?, 91.1.6 USDA Strategies for Communication, 10

1.2 A New Approach to Studying Complex Communication Issues, 111.2.1 Ethnography and Diffusion in the Beef Supply Chain, 131.2.2 Communication Theory, Linguistics, and Diffusion in

the Beef Supply Chain, 161.2.3 Linguistic Textual Analysis, 191.2.4 Diffusing Innovations in the Real World, 231.2.5 Diffusion and Communication Networks, 24

1.3 Results of My Investigation, 251.3.1 Alice at the Auction, 261.3.2 Backstage at the Sale Barn, 271.3.3 Buying the NAIS, 291.3.4 Down on the Farm, 301.3.5 Interviews with Members of the Beef Industry, 321.3.6 Interviews with Livestock Market Owners, 331.3.7 Rules from the Road, 381.3.8 Communication Gaps and Communication Theory, 401.3.9 Textual Analysis with Implicature and Pragmatics, 48

v

vi CONTENTS

1.4 Lessons of Beef and Bandwidth, 491.4.1 No Pardon for Jargon, 511.4.2 Alice Is Not in Wonderland, 521.4.3 The Telephone Game Still Happens, 531.4.4 It All Comes Down to Doin’ Business, 541.4.5 What We Have Here Is a Failure to Communicate, 561.4.6 Culture Is King, 581.4.7 The Situation Now, 59

References, 60

2 Children Communicating Food Safety/Teaching TechnicalCommunication to Children: Opportunities Gleaned from theFIRST® LEGO® League 2011 Food Factor Challenge 63Edward A. Malone and Havva Tezcan-Malone

2.1 Enhancing the Visibility and Recognition of TechnicalCommunication, 63

2.2 Literature Review: Teaching Technical Communication,Engineering, and Food Safety to Children, 65

2.3 Background: The League, the Challenge, and the Team, 672.3.1 First Lego League, 672.3.2 The Food Factor Challenge, 692.3.3 The Team: Global Dreamers, 70

2.4 Examples of Technical Communication Activities in FLL Projects, 712.4.1 Branding (Creating a Name and Logo), 722.4.2 Conducting Primary and Secondary Research, 722.4.3 Giving Presentations and Demonstrations, 742.4.4 Designing a Document, 77

2.5 The Food Factor Challenge as a Model of Food-Safety Education, 772.5.1 Fostering Food-Safety Habits in Children, 782.5.2 Promoting Dialogue Rather Than Monologue, 792.5.3 Generating Interest in Food-Safety Careers, 79

2.6 Conclusion, 80Acknowledgments, 81References, 81

3 The Role of Public (Mis)perceptions in the Acceptance ofNew Food Technologies: Implications for FoodNanotechnology Applications 89Mary L. Nucci and William K. Hallman

3.1 Accepting New Foods: Consumers, Technology, and Media, 893.1.1 Food Technology Acceptance, 903.1.2 The Role of the Media in Public Perceptions of Food

Technologies, 92

CONTENTS vii

3.2 Nanotechnology: Unseen, Unknown, 953.2.1 Nanotechnology in the Media, 963.2.2 Public Perceptions of Nanotechnology, 963.2.3 Perceptions and Acceptance of Nanotechnology, 97

3.3 Discussing New Food Technologies, 101Acknowledgments, 103References, 103

4 The New Limeco Story: How One Produce Company UsedThird-Party Food Safety Audit Scores to Improve ItsOperation 119Roy E. Costa

4.1 Food Safety in Modern Food Supply Operations, 1194.2 Safety Audits Cause Some Level of Controversy, 1224.3 New Limeco’s Journey to Safety, 122

4.3.1 Implementing Changes, 1244.3.2 Sanitation Issues, 1254.3.3 Gradual Safety Improvement, 125

References, 126

5 Communication Practices by Way of Permits and Policy:Do Environmental Regulations Promote Sustainability in theReal World? 129Becca Cammack

5.1 Communication in the Modern Environmental Movement, 1295.2 Background, 130

5.2.1 Who Is on the Receiving End of EnvironmentalRegulation?, 131

5.2.2 What Are the Effects of Construction and Storm Wateron the Environment?, 131

5.3 Studying Groundwater Regulation, 1335.3.1 Textual Analysis, 1335.3.2 Case Study, 134

5.4 Results of My Investigation, 1345.4.1 The CGP Fact Sheet Background Section, 1355.4.2 The CGP Rationale Section, 1365.4.3 Construction General Permit (CGP), 1365.4.4 A Targeted Case Study of CGP, 137

5.5 Discussion of Study Results, 142References, 144

viii CONTENTS

6 Influences of Technical Documentation and Its Translationon Efficiency and Customer Satisfaction 145Elena Sperandio

6.1 Considering Technical Documentation, 1456.1.1 The Problem with Integrating Systems, 1466.1.2 Enterprise Resource Planning Systems, 1476.1.3 Production Information Management Systems, 1486.1.4 Document Management Systems/Content

Management Systems, 1486.1.5 Translation Memory Systems/Computer-Aided

Translation, 1496.2 Data Management in Technical Communication, 150

6.2.1 Development and Diffusion of Data Management Tools, 1506.3 Technical Communication in Small Companies, 153

6.3.1 Workflow Advantages in Small Companies, 1536.3.2 Workflow Disadvantages in Small Companies, 154

6.4 Technical Communication in Medium-Sized Companies, 1546.4.1 Workflow Advantages in Medium-Sized Companies, 1556.4.2 Workflow Disadvantages in Medium-Sized Companies, 156

6.5 Technical Communication in Large Companies, 1566.5.1 Workflow Advantages in Large Companies, 1586.5.2 Workflow Disadvantages in Large Companies, 159

6.6 Translation of Technical Information, 1596.6.1 Translations in Small Companies, 1606.6.2 Translations in Medium-Sized Companies, 1626.6.3 Translations in Large Companies, 163

6.7 Consequences for Technical Communication, 1656.8 Assumptions About Technical Communication, 1666.9 Outlook, 168References, 169

7 Communicating Food Through Muckraking: Ethics, FoodEngineering, and Culinary Realism 171Kathryn C. Dolan

7.1 Muckraking and Promoting Food Safety, 1727.2 Culinary Realism and Food Safety, 173

7.2.1 Tubercular Beef in The Jungle, 1747.3 High Fructose Corn Syrup in The Omnivore’s Dilemma and In

Defense of Food, 1797.4 Literature as a Watchdog in Food Safety, 1847.5 The Effects of Literature on Everyday Practices, 186References, 186

Index, 189

A Note from the Series Editor

“Like most humans, I am hungry… our three basic needs, for food and securityand love, are so mixed and mingled and entwined that we cannot straightlythink of one without the others.”

—M.F.K. Fisher, The Gastronomical Me

The IEEE Professional Communication Society (PCS), with Wiley-IEEE Press, contin-ues its book series titled Professional Engineering Communication with this collectioncurated by Dr. David Wright. This book, Communication Practices in Engineering,Manufacturing, and Research for Food and Water Safety, brings together the thoughtfulresearch and perspectives from professionals in different fields, all writing to the waysin which communication efforts affect the ways we think about food and water andthe ways in which it arrives at our doorstep. The rhetorical frameworks that providescaffolding for personal opinions, public policy, research and development, and adver-tising are intricate and fraught with human emotion (both good and bad). The power ofthese chapters is how the reach into the dialogue and deconstruct the communication’sunderpinnings.

From a larger perspective, this book is a welcome addition to the ProfessionalEngineering Communication (PEC) book series, which has a mandate to explore areasof communication practices and application as applied to the engineering, technical,and scientific professions. Including the realms of business, governmental agencies,academia, and other areas, this series will develop perspectives about the state of com-munication issues and potential solutions when at all possible.

The books in the PEC series keep a steady eye on the applicable while acknowl-edging the contributions that analysis, research, and theory can provide to these efforts.Active synthesis between onsite realities and research will come together in the pages ofthis book as well as other books to come. There is a strong commitment from PCS, IEEE,and Wiley to produce a set of information and resources that can be carried directly intoengineering firms, technology organizations, and academia alike.

At the core of engineering, science, and technical work is problem solving and dis-covery. These tasks require, at all levels, talented and agile communication practices. Weneed to effectively gather, vet, analyze, synthesize, control, and produce communicationpieces in order for any meaningful work to get done. It is unfortunate that many technicalprofessionals have been led to believe that they are not effective communicators, for thisonly fosters a culture that relegates professional communication practices as somehow

ix

x A NOTE FROM THE SERIES EDITOR

secondary to other work. Indeed, I have found that many engineers and scientists arefantastic communicators because they are passionate about their work and their ideas.This series, planted firmly in the technical fields, aims to demystify communicationstrategies so that engineering, scientific, and technical advancements can happen moresmoothly and with more predictable and positive results.

Traci Nathans-Kelly

Preface

This book is a collection of perspectives on both the history and the current state of foodand water engineering. More specifically, it represents some of the many ways that ourfood and water quality are affected by communication.

Despite our many technological advances, contaminated food and water continueto take lives worldwide. We tend to think of these events as happening in some far away,underdeveloped portion of the world. While it is true that countries with poor infras-tructure are subject to more incidences of contaminated food and water, we continue tosuffer the same types of problems in the United States and Europe. One does not have tolook far to find stories of lives being claimed by Escherichia coli in Washington State oroutbreaks of food poisoning at the 2014 Food Safety Summit in Baltimore, Maryland.

Technology certainly helps to lessen the impact of those outbreaks, and to trackoutbreaks of foodborne illnesses to their source more quickly. Similarly, stories from thepast serve as good reminders of previous failures. But technologies must be accepted byfood producers and the public to be of value, and lessons from the past are continuallymitigated by the need for profits and development. And in some cases, such as withgenetically modified foods, the very technologies we have created spur new debatesabout food safety and ethics.

Therefore, communication continues to play a vital role within food productionindustries as we struggle to implement new technologies within industry while main-taining policies that protect consumers. We hope that this book will help readers betterunderstand where we come from, where we are, and what is being done to improve foodsafety through communication.

David Wright

xi

List of Contributors

Becca Cammack has worked in the environmental and energy industries since graduat-ing with her B.S. in Geology from Northern Arizona University in 2000. After spendingfive years working in various roles and disciplines in the consulting industry, she joinedthe southern California energy industry as an environmental professional specializing inwater quality permissions and compliance. She presently works as Senior EnvironmentalScientist with Pacific Gas & Electric, Co., in northern California, where she supportsproject teams in their efforts to understand and comply with environmental permits andregulations. She has obtained a professional certificate in Technical & Scientific Writingand is completing coursework toward a Master of Arts degree in Rhetoric & WritingStudies, both from San Diego State University.

Roy E. Costa is Registered Sanitarian (RS) and President of Environmental HealthAssociates. He has more than 33 years of environmental health practice in the academic,government, and private sectors. Mr. Costa is a food safety consultant, educator, auditor,and expert with international experience. Mr. Costa is the author of recognized Internetfood safety courses and classroom-training programs and numerous publications in thearea of food safety.

Kathryn Cornell Dolan, Ph.D., is Assistant Professor at the Missouri University ofScience and Technology, Rolla, Missouri, USA, where she teaches early US literaturewith a focus on food studies, globalization, and environmental criticism. Her bookBeyond the Fruited Plain: Food and Agriculture in U.S. Literature, 1850–1905 is avail-able through University of Nebraska Press.

William K. Hallman, Ph.D., is Professor and Chair of the Department of HumanEcology at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA, and serves as thecurrent Chair of the Risk Communication Advisory Committee of the US Food andDrug Administration. An expert in risk perception and risk communication, his researchfocuses on food safety, food security, and public perceptions of controversial issuesconcerning food, technology, health, and the environment.

Edward A. Malone, Ph.D., is Professor of Technical Communication at MissouriUniversity of Science and Technology, Rolla, Missouri, USA. He has published arti-cles in the Journal of Business and Technical Communication, IEEE Transactions

xiii

xiv LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

on Professional Communication, Technical Communication, Technical CommunicationQuarterly, and most recently Journal of Technical Writing and Communication.

Havva Malone (nee Tezcan) has a Master of Science in Physics and is a part-timeteacher in Rolla, Missouri, USA. She started the Rolla School District’s first FLL team,Global Dreamers, and served as the team’s coach. She is currently working on a book thatcommunicates math concepts to primary and secondary students through photographs.

Mary L. Nucci, Ph.D., is Research Assistant Professor in the Department of HumanEcology at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA. Her researchfocuses on the public perceptions and communication of science in media and informaleducation.

Elena Sperandio lives in Berlin, Germany. After completing degrees in German andRomance studies and traffic engineering at the Technische Universitat, Berlin, and FreieUniversitat, Berlin, she cofounded 4-Text Global Translation & Localization Services,where she has since gathered more than a decade of experience in project management,translation memory systems, and quality assurance. She has detailed knowledge of theproblems faced by large companies in their struggle to provide good, consistent technicaldocumentation. In 2009, she became the CEO of 4-Text.

David Wright, Ph.D., is Associate Professor at Missouri University of Science andTechnology, Rolla, Missouri, USA, where he codirects the technical communicationprogram. He studies technology diffusion, technical communication history, and inter-national issues related to agricultural development. He has published articles in TechnicalCommunication Quarterly and Journal of Technical Writing and Communication.

Acknowledgments

This book has been a challenge on several fronts. At times I wondered if it would ever becompleted. We tend to forget that life happens regardless of whether we have a projectin the works. Special thanks goes to Traci-Nathans Kelly for helping to keep this projectalive through those difficult times and for helping to make this series a reality. She hasbeen an excellent guide for our team and an even keel throughout.

We also wish to thank Mary Hatcher, Kenneth Moore, and the entire team at Wiley-IEEE Press for their help in the publishing process.

Finally, on behalf of all of the authors, I thank the many family members andcolleagues that invariably become laborers in the publishing process. We are gratefulthat our thanks are enough for them.

xv

1Cowboys and Computers:Communicating NationalAnimal Identification in theBeef Industry

David Wright

1.1 Industries Collide

In May of 2005, I began working with a small software firm that develops softwarethat would allow data ownership and transfer on a granular level. The idea was thatrather than transferring entire documents or entire records, small pieces of informationcould be shared on the basis of permissions and commerce. To the firm, it seemed likea fine idea and a practical one. As I learned more, I discovered that the software wasbeing specifically developed in response to a push by the United States Department ofAgriculture (USDA) for a National Animal Identification System (NAIS) capable oftracking cattle moving through the supply chain. In theory, new technology and newmethods of doing business would speed commerce and, more importantly, allow forswift containment of any disease outbreaks that might threaten consumers.

Upon being assigned to the project, my first thought was that this seemed likea significant advancement for the industry. As the technical communicator on staff,my first task was to establish relationships with potential customers and begin to gatherinformation on what tools they would like to see included in a software product. Imaginemy surprise, then, when one of my first cattle auction contacts told me that he did notunderstand the NAIS and did not need to.

Communication Practices in Engineering, Manufacturing, and Research for Food and Water Safety, First Edition.Edited by David Wright.© 2015 The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. Published 2015 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

1

2 COWBOYS AND COMPUTERS

In his opinion, the NAIS was nothing more than an elaborate plot orchestrated by theInternal Revenue Service to spy on cattle producers throughout the country.

This individual was successful, widely respected, and by no means alone in hisopinion of the NAIS as a waste of time and money. His ideas about the true motives forthe NAIS were perplexing, to say the least.

Although the original NAIS plan was scrapped in 2010, that was not the end ofthe story. In April 2013, the USDA launched a new program designed to be much lessrestrictive and transparent to members of the beef industry; it would rely much less onthe use of computer technology in particular. Whether the new plan will enjoy morewidespread acceptance remains to be seen, but the USDA’s retreat from the earlierinitiative shows us that diffusing technology into an industry like the beef industry isnot simply a matter of producing that technology but an exercise in communicating newtechnology to members of that industry.

The story of the original NAIS plan’s ultimate failure within the beef industry isalso a warning to other industries and agriculture in general, in that it illustrates poten-tial difficulties when it comes to implementing widespread technologies. For technicalcommunicators, this means that we should be asking ourselves very pointed questionsnow:

� What do we need to know about this situation (and similar future situations) inorder to predict successful communications in the future?

� How can we best study industries and their technology?� How can technology diffusion be successfully enhanced through research and

targeted communications for specific audiences?� When conflicts between industries do arise, what is the best way to ensure suc-

cessful communication?

The story of the NAIS and the beef industry offers a preview of situations to comein which entire industries are resistant to new information technologies. Unfortunately,investigating the communicative failures that take place within supply chains is complex.Communications are not limited by form. They come in paper and digital forms, overcell phones, through policy statements from governmental agencies, and from industryalliances that wield great power over industry opinion. Finally, they come through theelusive art of personal communication. Stakeholders in some traditional industries areoften not available in chat rooms or on our e-mail servers or through any of the otherhigh-tech means of communication that have segregated us from each other.

This, however, does not mean that they do not communicate. These industries haveestablished, complex communication networks that often play vital roles in technologicaldiffusion. Technical communication must, therefore, develop methods that take intoaccount the various forms of communication that are now available while maintainingan ethnographic perspective and methodology that investigates industries at groundlevel. We need holistic approaches to understanding intricate problems. This chapter is

INDUSTRIES COLLIDE 3

one attempt to do so and to provide insight for the future. It also offers a set of tools forresearch that may give future technological deployments more success. Perhaps theseinsights will be useful to future practitioners and academics alike because of their directlink to the new technologies that show no signs of slowing down and continue to affectour lives at an increasing pace.

1.1.1 Resistance to Technology in the Beef Industry

The beef industry is steeped in tradition. It is an industry that does not change rapidlyand does not readily adapt to change without good reason. Moreover, sometimes thisindustry has been unwilling to adapt to new technologies even when there would seemto be very good reason for it. Some sections of agriculture (and I will focus just onthe beef industry in this chapter) have been slower to adopt new ideas and informationtechnology. There are many factors that go into the lack of technological diffusion seenin the beef industry, not least of which is the fact that industry leaders see no need fornew information technologies.

Yet, there have been substantial advances in other facets of the beef industry dur-ing recent years. For example, veterinary medicine has made remarkable advances inthe treatment and prevention of many diseases and common animal sicknesses. Nasalsprays, injections, and other treatments enjoy widespread use to prevent animal deathsduring transport and growth. Likewise, new techniques that include product branding,prepackaging, and efforts to make beef products healthier have radically changed supplychain management and distribution.

Yet, in one technological aspect, the beef industry has been at a standstill. I speak ofcomputer and software technology in general and the slow pace at which the beef industryas a whole has adopted new methods of doing electronic business, even in the face ofpotentially disastrous consequences. While the beef industry seems perfectly willing toaccept some types of innovations, computer technology and animal identification havebeen shunned, at least by many segments of the beef supply chain.

1.1.2 Having a Cow Over Mad Cow Disease

Still, the resistance to technology would be more understandable if the matters at handwere those of general office automation designed to make daily tasks easier. But begin-ning in December 2003, when the first case of “mad cow disease” or BSE (bovine spongi-form encephalitis) was discovered in the United States, technology became a much moreserious concern for the beef industry. In fact, the market for US beef changed so muchthat beef exports fell from more than US $3 billion in 2003 to barely US $500 millionin 2004 [1]. The scare over the outbreak of mad cow disease led numerous countries toclose their borders to US beef, and the fears hurt domestic sales as well.

The debate over using technology in the beef industry began in earnest at that time.Consumers were concerned about BSE because of the deadly effects of infected beef onhumans. Adding fuel to the fire was a recent episode of BSE contamination, located inAlabama; USDA and state officials investigated five auctions and 36 different farms withDNA testing equipment in an unsuccessful effort to locate the source of contamination

4 COWBOYS AND COMPUTERS

[1]. Worldwide, more than 150 deaths had been linked to infected beef from numeroussources, and there may have been many other misdiagnosed cases in underdevelopedcountries. Cattle producers were also concerned. Similar incidents including outbreaksof foot-and-mouth disease have led to the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of cattle,sheep, and pigs in numerous countries (most notably the United Kingdom in 2001)because of inability to trace the disease to its source or contain the outbreak [2].

After the 2003 BSE outbreak, Japan cut off shipments of US beef, as did many othercountries including Canada and South Korea. The Japanese market was significant, aswas the Canadian market. Japan alone bought US $1.3 billion worth of US beef in 2002,but then promptly cut off imports after the outbreak. Likewise, South Korea, whichimported US $815 million worth of US beef, cut imports to zero. Although in 2006both countries resumed imports after thorough inspections of US processing plants, theywere still very wary of US ability to control and trace disease, and consumer/governmentconfidence in those countries has yet to return to normal as of 2014. Thailand, China,South Korea, and Singapore, all significant importers as well, still had bans on US beefas of 2006 [3]. While South Korea and Japan have relaxed their stance on US beefsince then, China (a major market) still bans US beef. The other countries still placerestrictions on those imports [4].

In the wake of the scandal, the USDA and beef industry professionals began toseek answers to both national and international concerns. But industry resistance to amandatory plan, coupled with a disagreement among industry associations, alliances,and businesses, crippled the proposed program and brought it to a standstill.

In addition to natural disease concerns, the fear of agriterrorism, which might pro-duce an introduced disease, became a real concern at about the same time. After theterrorist attacks of September 11, concerns led many citizens and government employ-ees alike to question the ability of terrorists to sabotage the US food system throughbiological means. Animal illnesses can spread rapidly and be difficult to trace [5].

In response, the USDA launched an initiative to implement a national animal track-ing system that would allow animals to be tracked and traced to their point of originin case of a disease outbreak. On paper, the idea was fairly simple. Animals would betagged with an electronic radio frequency tag that contains a unique 15-digit identifier.This tag would then be scanned into computer software that would store the number,along with other vital statistics (perhaps), in a database. Then, as the animal movedthrough the supply chain, database administrators could track the animal on the basisof that number by continually updating the animal’s location on the basis of new scan-ning information (presumably the animal would be scanned at each new location). Thisstrategy should have, in turn, allowed for swift containment of any disease or potentialharm to consumers and boosted both domestic and international confidence in US beef,because any animal’s location could be easily tracked and any animal’s place of origincould be known almost immediately.

Typically, after being raised on the farm for a given period of time, an animal movesfrom its place of birth to a livestock market, where it is sold to either an order buyer ordirectly to a packing company. (Note: many animals also move directly from the farmto a stocker or a packing company but most do not.) Figure 1.1 shows a typical beefsupply chain. If the animal is purchased by an order buyer, it typically moves to either a