What is the ruling on branding livestock in their ears for identification purposes, and does the hadith: "No one is punished with fire except the Lord of Fire" apply to this?

The questioner : He says: The honorable Shaykh, the owners of livestock, namely camels and sheep, brand the ears of their livestock and call this a mark, branding them with fire. What is the ruling on this action? Knowing that they say, "We do this branding so that they do not get lost." Does the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) apply to this: And also, do they fall under the statement of Allah the Exalted when He informed about Iblis that he said: I hope for clarification of the matter, may Allah guide you.

The Shaykh : Yes, there is no harm in branding livestock in their ears, whether from camels, cows, or sheep, be they sheep or goats, because the ears are not part of the face. The branding that is prohibited is that which is on the face, for example on the cheek or on the nose. But if it is on the head, the neck, or the ears, there is no harm in it. This is not punishment with fire; this is the preservation of wealth with this specific mark for these people and this tribe, and there is no harm in it. The hadith prohibiting punishment with fire means that we punish the animal with fire, and this is not our intention. What is our intention? The mark. For this reason, the Rightly Guided Caliphs branded the camels of zakah and did not consider that to be punishment with fire.
Here is a matter that some farmers ask about: when the crop is finished, they set fire to what remains of the crop so that harmful regrowth does not occur in the future, even though the place may contain insects or birds or the like. Is this permissible? The answer is yes, it is permissible, because although it is possible that there is an animal in it, the one who burned the place with fire did not intend the animal; rather, that happened incidentally. For this reason, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) burned the palm trees of Banu Nadir in Madinah, even though the palm trees are not free from the young of sparrows or other birds, or from insects, because this was not intended. So there is a difference between what is intended and what is not intended. Indeed, it is permissible for us to bombard the lands of warring disbelievers with cannons, even though there may be in these lands people whose killing is not permissible, such as women and children, but this is incidental. A person should know that what is excused in the incidental is not excused in the independent thing.
And the conclusion is that branding camels in their ears is permissible, and this is not what Satan commands when he said: Because cutting off the ears of cattle means that when camels reach a certain age or produce a certain number of offspring, they brand them or cut off their ears as a sign that they have now become forbidden, because they have fulfilled their required number of pregnancies, so it becomes forbidden to eat them or ride them. This is what is intended by the verse. Yes.