Page 26 - Insurance Times April 2023

Muzzle Print (e-Tag) Polyurethane Ear-tag / RFID
1 Non-Invasive Invasive in to the ear or body of animal

2 No technical person is required hence low cost A technical/skilled person can only do tagging specially
RFID hence costly

3 No additional burden to sales team/vet/para-vet Sales team/ vet/para-vet have to carry ear tags and tag
to carry tag applicator or reader and physical tags applicators or readers
4 No cost for tagging applicators/Readers Additional cost for tag applicators/readers and substantial
cost for RFID tags
5 Mobile application can be downloaded by any It is not possible to give applicators or readers (in case of
number of persons engaged in the tagging RFID tags ) to all users otherwise it would be a very costly
affair or if not given then work efficiency will decrease
6 Identification of Cattle would never be questioned Sometimes Identification of cattle be questioned
at the time of Claim since muzzle images are particularly when tags are lost/tampered/mutilated
stored in Cloud server
7 There is no loss or damage to the e-tag There is physical loss or damage to the tags/RFID while
being used in the field
8 No question of damage to tagging applicator/ There is every likely of damage to Tag applicator or readers.
reader Readers are costly and irreparable.

9 E-Tag addresses the apprehension of cattle Invariably, worries are there with cattle farmers that the
farmers that milk yield will go down after putting milk yield will go down or animals will become sick after
the tag or cattle will become sick. putting the tag.

10 Digital data can be shared immediately with all Data of cattle along with tag numbers will come after a
required stakeholders gap of sometime

11 No Inventory to be maintained Physical inventory to be maintained and record of purchase
and distribution also to be kept. Reconciliation and physical
verification is also required.
At least a person is deputed to execute this activity
12 No question of unused e-tag since these are not Unused ear tags generally remain with the field level
procured from anywhere persons. Collecting back those unused tags has some cost.
So definite loss due to unused tags
13 No question of retagging There are 10-15% cases for retagging. Invariably retagging
invites the moral hazard issue besides the extra cost.

14 No tempering is possible Tempering is possible
15 Not required to put a condition of 'No-Tag 'No tag No Claim' condition is necessary to put in the policy
No Claim' in the policy
16 In addition there is solution for checking anti- There is no standards for checking anti-selection. It is upto
selection on pure scientific and technical ground the veterinary doctors to exercise physically. Practically
no anti-selection done in the field
17 Other parameters of cattle (health fitness) can This is not possible with physical tag
be estimated / ascertained

The Insurance Times April 2023 23