Posts Tagged fascism
Amish Farmer Raided (again)
Feb 23
AMISH FARMER RAIDED (again) 2024 | Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture v Amos Miller Organic Farm
PREVIOUS VIDEOS ON AMOS MILLER FEDERAL CASE:
https://youtu.be/JXfkX6_jM9g?si=Brcpq…
https://youtu.be/avyYvd_Ffs8?si=bjIKY…
CONTACT THE SHEPHERDESS: shepherdess(at)shepherdess.com
Videos Cited: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRS7e…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZES2b…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHugZ…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfWk_…
Articles Cited:
https://www.thelancasterpatriot.com/p…
https://www.thelancasterpatriot.com/s…
https://www.thelancasterpatriot.com/s…
Assist with Amos Miller’s Legal Fees:
https://www.givesendgo.com/supportamo…
Timestamps:
0:00: Recap of Miller Organic Farm Federal Lawsuit
2:55: 2024 State Raids and Sues Miller Organic Farm in 2024
Pennsylvania: State Raids Amish Organic Farm that Sells Raw Foods to Private Buyers
Pennsylvania State Troopers executed a search warrant and confiscated products at the Miller’s Organic Farm owned by Amish farmer Amos Miller. Miller’s all-natural farm, which only sells to people in its private member association (PMA), has been targeted by state and federal agencies in recent years for operating outside of agricultural regulations. The Millers do not pasteurize their raw milk, they don’t inject their animals with vaccines or other chemicals, and they don’t use fertilizer to grow crops. Raw milk from the Millers Organic Farm was blamed in 2016 for a listeria “outbreak” in 2014 that sickened one person in California and another in Florida, with the latter dying supposedly from the illness. Activists are concerned that the government is interfering in transactions between sellers of nutritious raw foods and private buyers who are in a private membership association (PMA) that operates in the private domain versus the public domain.
Footage out of Bird-in-Hand filmed by The Lancaster Patriot’s Chris Hume shows state agents executing a search warrant and confiscating products at the Millers Organic Farm owned by Amish farmer Amos Miller.
As reported by Hume on a GoFundMe page created in support of the Millers, “Under the watchful eye of Pennsylvania State Troopers, and the backing of a search warrant, agents of the state entered Amos’ property, spent hours inside his buildings, and then hauled off some of his products. The remaining products they are forbidding Amos from selling, effectively ending his business until further notice.”
While a precise reason for the latest raid has not been given, Miller’s all-natural farm, which only sells to people in its private member association, has been under the microscope of state and federal agencies in recent years for operating outside of agricultural regulations.
For instance, the Millers do not pasteurize their raw milk, they don’t inject their animals with vaccines or other chemicals, and they don’t use fertilizer to grow crops.
“The farm raises its animals and other pure foods the way nature intended and we are proud to be entirely chemical, cruelty and GMO-free,” the Miller’s website states.
“The animals are born and raised without antibiotics or hormones and they spend their entire lives naturally and stress-free out on pasture. All of the farm’s food is traceable, pure and grown on nutrient dense soil, under traditional time-honored methods.”
Raw milk from the Millers Organic Farm was blamed in 2016 for a listeria “outbreak” in 2014 that sickened one person in California and another in Florida, with the latter dying supposedly from the illness.
Miller has also been targeted by the USDA for slaughtering cattle without the proper federal permits and inspections, leading to fines and threats of imprisonment.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) on X Thursday criticized the state for raiding the farm, writing, “With all of the problems in society today, this is what the government wants to focus on? A man growing food for informed customers, without participating in the industrial meat/milk complex?” adding, “It’s shameful that it’s come to this.”
Multiple government agencies executed a search warrant on an Amish farm in Pennsylvania on Thursday. Government employees are seen on video hauling away several coolers of products from the organic farm. However, the lawyer for the farmer in question argues that the seizure of food was “patently illegal.”
Three Pennsylvania State Troopers and seven employees of the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture conducted an hours-long search of a farm in Upper Leacock Township. Police are seen on video ordering a reporter from the Lancaster Patriot to exit the building while the search was conducted.
Video of the raid shows government employees seizing multiple coolers from the Lancaster County dairy farm owned by Amos Miller.
The news outlet reported that the search warrant was issued by Magisterial District Judge B. Denise Commins on Wednesday. The search warrant purportedly included an affidavit of probable cause completed by Sheri Morris – acting Bureau director of food safety with the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture.
The Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture said it executed a search warrant as part of an investigation into two food-borne illness cases, according to Lancaster Online.
The potential cases stem from two underage individuals in Michigan and New York suffering illness after consuming raw eggnog and other raw dairy products from the Miller Organic Farm. Health officials in both states noted that the sickened individuals tested positive for Shiga toxin-producing E. coli.
The raid of Miller’s farm “sought, among other things, illegal raw milk and raw milk products, including eggnog,” the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture said.
The government agency declared, “Miller has never licensed his retail operation.”
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said of the raid on the X social media platform: “Looks like Amos Miller’s farm is being raided. With all of the problems in society today, this is what the government wants to focus on? A man growing food for informed customers, without participating in the industrial meat/milk complex? It’s shameful that it’s come to this.”
Massie is the co-author of the PRIME Act bill that “makes it easier for small farms and ranches to serve consumers.”
“Consumers want to know where their food comes from, what it contains, and how it’s processed. Yet, federal inspection requirements make it difficult to purchase food from trusted, local farmers,” Massie said. “It is time to open our markets to give producers the freedom to succeed and consumers the freedom to choose.”
Miller’s attorney, Robert Barnes, proclaimed that the seizure of food was “patently illegal.”
Today, the Department of Agriculture of the State of Pennsylvania suddenly came, without notice, raided Amos’ farm, and detained everything Amos had in the farm’s freezer. They did so in a lawless manner, without appropriate authority, in violation of their own rules and regulations, despite never objecting to the prior resolutions reached with the federal government, and despite a complete failure by the state to even reach out to Amos’ known counsel, Robert Barnes. The state’s own rules require advance notice, reasonable time frames for inspections, and a showing of credentials, none of which occurred here. Instead, the state unlawfully obtained a search warrant, based on materially false statements in an affidavit by a high-ranking state official in an agency with a known grievance against independent farmers like Amos, and, after the raid and finding no evidence of wrongdoing, then illegally ordered detained every item of food in one of Amos Miller’s coolers, including buffalo meat not even subject to federal regulation. The detention order is patently illegal under Pennsylvania law. Despite the constant harassment, Amos will continue to do all he legally can to provide the food his members deeply need. Amos thanks you for your continued support at this critical time for food freedom in America.
Barnies issued a statement after the search was conducted:
Miller has been in legal battles with the government for years.
In 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration scrutinized Amos over selling raw milk.
Two individuals suffered from listeriosis – one of whom died. Health officials traced the raw milk back to Miller’s Organic Farm.
The USDA came down hard on Miller for slaughtering farm animals without federal inspections of his operation. Miller argued that his farm only sold the meat to those with private club memberships to Miller’s Organic Farm, which he believed exempted him to federal regulations.
According to the Foundation for Economic Education, “The story reached a climax in March 2022 when a federal judge ordered Miller to cease and desist all meat sales and authorized armed U.S. Marshals to use ‘reasonable force’ to gain access to Miller’s farm so a court expert could inspect it.”
The expert and the U.S. Marshals took an inventory of all Miller’s meat on the premises.
Federal inspectors continue to investigate Miller’s farm every few months. However, Miller has often been in a standoff with the federal government over allowing inspectors on his farm.
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a civil action requiring Miller’s farm to comply with federal meat and poultry food safety statutes.
The Amish farmer initially faced fines from the government of $250,000.
By Doreen Hannes
February 18, 2010
NewsWithViews.com
As I reported after returning from the NIAA (National Institute for Animal Agriculture) meeting last August, rumors of the death of NAIS have been greatly exaggerated. (Read) The USDA has finally admitted that they have too much negative publicity surrounding the name NAIS, and that they actually have to do what they tried to do in the first place: get the states to do their bidding on ‘animal identification’ and ‘traceability’ according to World Trade Organization standards. So yippee. They are only going to exercise their rule-making authority to control interstate commerce. Well, that’s all they had the authority to do at the outset. So we should be giddy with excitement that they are openly proclaiming they will do just that now.
Should we be happier than a pig in a puddle because they openly stated that they will leave animals which never exit the state out of the new plan? They never had the authority to deal with those animals anyway…unless, of course, you take money from the USDA. Otherwise, that authority rests with your state. The USDA will continue to fund the states and work in a ‘collaborative’ way with states and industry (continuing the Public Private Partnership otherwise known as fascism) to develop the “minimum standards” that must be followed in order to participate in interstate commerce.
So, as many conversations with my compatriots in the fight against NAIS have alluded to, at last the USDA is pulling the commerce clause out and holding it up as their hammer for “minimum standards” that will be required by forthcoming regulations for ‘disease traceability’. And why has the USDA taken to calling it ‘disease traceability’ instead of ‘animal identification’? Because they only HAVE authority over the diseases! The FDA has authority over live animals on the farm, even though the majority of people don’t know this, and it is a very useful poker chip in the globalization game. It is called misdirection, and those of us who have been deeply involved in the fight against the NAIS are very aware of this agency’s use of misinformation, disinformation, subterfuge and general sneakiness in foisting upon us their WTO driven desire that will create captive supply for export of the entire domestic livestock population.
The only official document available on the “NAIS not NAIS” program is a seven page Q and A available at the new page for “NAIS not NAIS” called Animal Disease Traceability. It’s only 7 pages, so if you have read the previous 1200 pages of USDA documents on this program, it’s a walk in the park.
One of the first questions that one asks when told “NAIS is Dead!”, (aside from “what’s it’s new name?”) is “What about all the people who are in the Premises Database with PIN’s already?” According to the 7-page document, they stay in that database.
How about animals that are already identified with the “840” tags for NAIS? They also stay in the database. What about the “840” tags themselves? Well, the USDA and States will keep using them.
Are they going to halt further registrations into the NAIS database? Heck no! They’ll keep registering properties and will also be using a ‘unique location identifier’ for this kinder, gentler NAIS that the States will run for us.
Why are they re-using the first two prongs of NAIS? Aside from the unstated fact that they are using them because they have to use them to be compliant with OIE (World Animal Health Organization) guidelines, they say it’s because of the tremendous amount of money spent developing NAIS already even though it is un-Constitutional.
How much money? It’s government math, so it’s likely done by consensus as opposed to literal whole numbers that add up- you know, like 2+2=4. Consensus would make it possible for 2+2 to equal 5. Anyway, figures cited by various officials are anywhere from $120 million to $180 million. Less than 60¢ per person, so almost nothing when compared to the monstrous 107 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities we are currently carrying. Believe me, when I say I am not for government waste at all, but when an agency has spent this much time and money on an unfruitful program, isn’t it better to simply fully knock it in the head instead of changing the name and playing “Hide and Go Seek” with the people who have adamantly opposed this program? Why couldn’t the USDA do the only truly Constitutional thing with this international-trade driven program and let those who want to deal in international markets do this to themselves through the Export Verification Services department of the USDA? Well, if they did that, not only would they have to actually be fully open and transparent, they would need to let the public in on the big secret that the United States is no longer in charge of its own policies, rather they are obligated to follow the Sanitary PhytoSanitary (SPS) directives of the World Trade Organization agencies, namely Codex Ailimentarius, the OIE and the IPPC (International Plant Protection Convention).
And we still have the very real issue of the massive database for premises registration (or the unique location allocator) having no public or verifiable oversight to check whether or not people who have been told they were removed were in fact removed from that database. So if NAIS is dead, why not allow the database to be annihilated? Obviously, they are still following the plan.
What about the states that have passed legislation designed to constrain NAIS from becoming mandatory within their boundaries? How will this new disease traceability program affect them? Well, since this is NOT NAIS and the regulations aren’t yet written, the states will have to wait to find out what requirements they MUST MEET in order to participate in interstate commerce. There’s your hammer.
So how powerful is the interstate commerce clause? Pretty dang powerful. And if people who dealt in the local food movement fully understood Wickard vs. Filburn, they would feel no consolation whatsoever from the USDA’s statement that they are not interested in regulating livestock that stay within the state.
In a nutshell, this 1942 Supreme Court case found that since Filburn had accepted money as part of the Agricultural Adjustments Act and then grew wheat to feed his own livestock, that he was not only subject to the regulation of the USDA by accepting that money, but also, since he grew wheat, he hadn’t purchased it, and had he not grown it, he would have had to purchase wheat which would have likely come through interstate commerce. Therefore, his planting of wheat affected interstate commerce and solidified the USDA’s jurisdiction over his actions.
If you transplant “tomato” for wheat you can see how sinister this ruling truly is. If you grow tomatoes, you won’t be buying them, so if you don’t buy them, and since the store bought tomatoes likely cross state lines in their movement, you are affecting interstate commerce by growing tomatoes….This is precedent, and it is a very, very dangerous precedent. So taking money or help from the USDA to establish your local farmer’s market is going to put you into a relationship that is highly precarious for freedom.
The interstate commerce clause was not designed to hammer states into submission to federal or international agency trade objectives, it was to stop states from unfairly discriminating against each other and to enable us to be a strong union of sovereign states that could actually feed itself and prosper. The only thing to do is to keep fighting with full knowledge and to get the States to exercise their duty to protect the Citizens from an overarching Federal government. We need states to completely free up direct trade between farmers and consumers and we need states to work together to create their own criteria for exchange of goods across state lines.
Do we have to ‘stay engaged’ in conversations with the USDA on this “New Not NAIS”? Yes, to keep telling them to go sell crazy somewhere else, we’re all stocked up here, thank you. They should tend the borders, control and actually inspect the imports, run the disease programs that worked and were not massive consolidations of power in federal hands, and for cryin’ out loud INSPECT the packing plants and stop trying to make consumers believe that farmers and ranchers are responsible for sloppy slaughtering!
Also, go ahead and leave a bunch of the milk chocolate rabbits for us. Chocolate is one thing we probably should import, but certainly not at the cost of our freedom and sovereignty.
© 2010 Doreen Hannes – All Rights Reserved
USDA Pretends to Kill NAIS
Feb 10
USDA Signals NAIS is Dead
2/8/2010
 |
| Max Thornsberry |
After a long-fought six-year battle, independent cattle producers have finally succeeded in stopping the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), which was an onerous plan conceived by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and promoted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), domestic and multinational ear tag companies, as well as multinational meat packers and their closely aligned trade associations.
The battle was extremely lopsided. USDA had millions of dollars of taxpayer money — over $140 million to be precise — to develop and promote NAIS and to persuade state departments of agriculture and cattle industry trade associations to recruit as many independent cattle producers as possible into the ill-fated NAIS program. According to the Web site www.usaspending.gov, the National Cattlemen’s Foundation, part of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), received over $2.1 million from the federal government in 2008 to promote NAIS.
Armed with millions of dollars and six years worth of joint government and processing-industry planning, how did NAIS get stopped?
The answer is that NAIS was stopped by the persistent, relentless pressure applied by a handful of non-conventional organizations that exclusively represented the interests of cattle farmers and ranchers, not the interests of the industrialized sectors of the U.S. beef supply chain. This was a David versus Goliath battle in which David won and the interests of independent cattle producers came out on top.
These recent victories by independent cattle producers, with far less political clout and economic power than their conventional beef industry trade association counterparts, strongly suggests that there remains a genuine reason for hope that independent cattle producers can reverse the present course of their industry — a course that is fast leading toward more and more corporate control over the U.S. cattle industry by beef packers that are capturing control over the live cattle supply chain, just as they have already captured control over both the poultry and hog supply chains.
The beef packers are now focusing their efforts on the feeding sector of the cattle industry by purchasing more and more feedlots (JBS recently purchased the nation’s largest feedlot company, Five Rivers Ranch Cattle Feeding, L.L.C.) and gaining increased control over the fed cattle market through the use of new cattle procurement tools, such as certain marketing agreements and formula-type contracts that effectively reduce the competitiveness of the fed cattle cash market.
As with every major policy issue victory, the real work begins now.
Now that NAIS has been scrapped, a new program needs to be developed to achieve improvements in the United States’ ability to quickly contain and control animal diseases. Independent cattle producers must remain directly involved in the development of this new program to ensure that it does not infringe upon their rights and privileges as did NAIS.
It is encouraging that when Agriculture Secretary Vilsack announced he was going to pursue a new approach to animal disease traceability, he also announced that the U.S. must strengthen its import controls to prevent the introduction of animal diseases at our borders. This is a high priority for independent cattle producers who intrinsically understand that we cannot continue importing diseases like BSE, bovine tuberculosis and brucellosis if we desire to maintain our industry’s reputation of producing the healthiest cattle in the world — a reputation that is the U.S. cattle industry’s competitive advantage in both the domestic market and the global market.
I encourage every cattle producer to take a new look at the relatively new organizations that have amassed uncanny successes for independent cattle producers despite seemingly impossible odds. Each of the organizations that brought us to where we’re at today is not likely to lead us in a new direction. But some of these new organizations will and they need your support to continue winning their fight to restore for the U.S. cattle industry the opportunity for U.S. cattle producers to maintain independent and profitable cattle-producing businesses all across the United States.
The future of the U.S. cattle industry is in your hands and will be determined by which organization you choose to support.
The NAIS that USDA was attempting to force down the throats of independent U.S. cattle producers, utilizing our own tax dollars, would have completely changed the way cattle farmers and ranchers do business.
While obtaining a premises ID number — the first step to a nationwide NAIS — required no effort, the second and third steps in the onerous WTO-mandated system would have been costly, difficult, and, I believe, would have generated rebellion on the range. Reporting the movement of every animal, once it left its birth farm of origin, was a completely unworkable system for producers, especially those operating in our most populous cow states, where the average cowherd size is 30 to 40 mother cows.
Imagine having to get your cattle in a chute, read the tags electronically, and report the numbers to USDA every time you moved a set of calves to another pasture, your Dad’s place, or sent a group of calves to the sale barn. Not only were you going to be required to read the tags electronically, but you were going to be required to report the tag numbers to the appropriate authorities within 48 hours of that movement, or you would be out of compliance and subject to enforcement fines: A range rebellion in the making, and completely unnecessary for a first world country like the United States.
At least for the time-being, the government has listened to the people. A spike has been driven into the heart of a one-world government’s dictatorial rule.
Maybe our Constitution is not dead?
The Milkweed
Dairy’s best marketing info and insight
P.O. Box 10, Brooklyn, WI 53521 – (608) 455-2400 (c) 2002 – 2008 The Milkweed all rights reserved
by John Bunting
$9,995.00? $9,995.00??? NINE THOUSAND, NINE HUNDRED, NINETY FIVE DOLLARS????? On December 28, 2009, critics of USDA’s goofy plans to mandate radio-frequency identification devices (RFIDs) in all livestock got just the fodder they need to set livestock country afire in protest: the price tag for this absurd government mandate — the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). Forget USDA’s “cost-benefit” analysis claiming that computer-chipped livestock ear tags would cost about $3 to $5 dollars apiece. The cost of those ear tags, even when purchased in minimum lots of 100, is peanuts, compared to the accompanying hardware necessary to use those ear tags.
$9,995.00. That’s the “bundled startup kit” cost offered with a discount of $1,905.36, when compared to the costs of the components in the “startup kit,” if those items were purchased separately.
$9,995.00 out-of-pocket costs so livestock producers may comply with USDA’s intended mandate to require all livestock in the U.S. to be monitored with ear tags containing computer chips? In Missouri, for example, a hotbed of anti-NAIS, the average beef cattle operator has 35 head. In these money-losing times for beef ranchers, how can Uncle Sam demand livestock raisers shell out a minimum of $9,995 for a “startup kit” for this foolishness.
The December 28, 2009 press release said:
“Eriginate™ Corporation announced today the approval of its eTattoo™ tag by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The approval marks the first ultra-high radio frequency identification tag (UHF RFID) and the first non-low frequency tag (LF) to be approved for use with the ‘840’ Animal Identification Number (AIN).”
This private electronic devise is approved by the USDA for use in the controversial National Animal Identification System (NAIS) program. USDA has promoted this program as a winning solution for everyone in animal agriculture.
Many persons in animal agriculture have objected for many reasons, including religious objections.
USDA has posted a cost/benefit analysis available at: http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/naislibrary/
documents/plans_reports/NAIS_overview_report.pdf
In the overview cost/benefit analysis, USDA explains the “Economic benefits in both the domestic and international marketplace resulting from enhanced traceability may be greater than the cost savings realized during animal disease control and eradication efforts.”
On page 5 of this same document, USDA states, ” Tags and tagging costs vary among cattle producers with 50 head from $3.30 to $5.22 per cow, depending on current identification practices.” Well, that cost/analysis is not exactly correct because the eartags are the only low-cost element in the system. In addition to the tags you need the reader or scanner.
eTattoo™ conveniently has a “starter” kit.
$9,995!!! That “startup kit costs $99.95 per animal!!!
This kit would be the basic requirement for a small family dairy of say 50 milking cows. Replacement tags, and they certainly will be necessary, are a low $395 per hundred.
eTattoo™ claims, “Tags will accommodate handwritten management numbers.” What exactly is missing here? Anyone might think these fancy tags would eliminate the need for “handwritten management numbers.” What will government bureaucrats and their anointed corporate beneficiaries conjure up next?
Get yours while supplies last at: http://www.etattootag.com
Company contact information:
Mailing address:
eriginate Corporation
PO Box 189
LeRoy, MN 55951-0189
Phone: (785) 694-3468
E-mail: Info@eriginate.com
Web site: www.etattootag.com
Harmful to small & medium farmers
Is USDA intentionally trying to destroy the nation’s small and medium livestock producers? USDA ultimately intends to mandate electronic livestock identification. Few small/medium livestock producers will be able to afford $10,000 for such technology. The margins in livestock have generally been negative. USDA has misrepresented costs for the NAIS program.
by Richard Oswald – 1/31/2010
Year in and year out, things here stay pretty much the same. We still have death and taxes. The sun rises in the east and sets in the west, and the North Star is always perfectly positioned above the neighbor’s barn.
But on rare occasions the finer aspects of nature (and people) become a bit less predictable.
The year ended in Langdon the same way it did in the rest of North America, with a Blue Moon. (That’s a full moon at both the beginning and the end of the month.)
It was that kind of year from start to finish. We had a late spring, an unusually cool growing season, rainfall that was nearly double the normal amount, an earthquake, and a difficult harvest followed by blizzards throughout December — all stuff that only happens once in a Blue Moon.
Once in a blue moon folks like me get to thinking that some of the out-of-whack things in America might somehow be getting better for our food — and the people who raise it.
The pork checkoff election
A few years back a lot of us were giving high fives when U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman took the unusual step of allowing pork producers to decide whether or not to keep the pork check-off — a mandatory fee paid into a marketing fund each time a hog is sold.
A majority of pork producers voted to repeal the check-off rather than continue funding the agenda of big pork processing corporations. That’s because packers and their best buddies had camouflaged themselves to look like producers instead of end-users.
Small producers were being sold down the river by big agribusiness.
Hog growers were working under contracts with the packers that were harsh and difficult to enforce. Hog raisers couldn’t find reliable markets, and those who tried to compete on their own with the big packers were giving up and leaving the farm in droves.
The revolt against the pork checkoff was one of those blue moon moments.
Glickman answered the will of the farmer, approved a referendum on the check-off, and when a vast majority of producers voted to end it, he certified the results. The check-off tax was dead.
Unfortunately, Glickman left town with the rest of the Clinton administration before the results of the referendum could be enacted. His Bush administration successor, Anne Veneman, set the election results aside, telling producers their voluntarily-funded checkoff project had now essentially become a mandatory federal tax.
For the most part we don’t get to vote on taxes in America. We only get to vote on the people in Congress who establish them. The pork check-off was different. It was voted in by the people who would pay it, and the same people voted it out (until Sec. Veneman intervened).
Sometimes the government just doesn’t seem to hear us very well. It happens over and over.
Mad cow disease
For example, U.S. beef producers wanted to certify their own beef as BSE (Mad Cow Disease) free. It seemed a reasonable request, since we were losing business outside the U.S. because other countries feared that they were importing BSE meat. But the big packers didn’t want that label because it would have allowed small producers to gain an advantage in exports, a coveted retail market.
Even though U.S. producers such as Creekstone Farms and Gateway Beef were going to test for BSE in every animal they sold, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said that only the government could test for BSE.
Of course, BSE didn’t come from U.S. beef, but from imports from Canada or Great Britain. The big meat packers didn’t want that to be accepted knowledge because beef imported from Canada and elsewhere can be a cheap source of profit.
Once in a blue moon things change, and “change” was the promise of the Obama campaign in 2008.
Things are definitely looking up, but change is easier to talk about than accomplish. When Mother Nature wants modification to the status quo she lets the chips fall where they may. When man alters things, he too often seeks a consensus of major players: titans of industry, bankers, ranking politicians, and the wealthy. They all want to be in the room together.
Guys like me are generally on the outside looking in, supplying at cost the pure basic commodities big business adulterates for profit.
National animal identification
That brings us to the National Animal Identification System.
The NAIS would require each farm animal to be tagged with a computer chip. Grassroots producers fought against mandatory animal ID throughout most of the Bush years. When President Obama was elected. there was celebration by farm groups because we thought NAIS was finally dead. Or was it?
Producers realized that NAIS ignored the real issues of food safety by putting small family farms at a disadvantage with big agribusiness. Under the NAIS proposal, a farmer with 50 cows and calves on pasture would have to tag all 100 animals.
But a feeder packer with a dozen 10,000 hog confinement buildings only had to report 12 numbers, one for each building. All that information was to be stored in a privately-operated database outside USDA with only “insiders” having access to the records.
NAIS never made sense. Virtually all food safety and pollution problems stem from imperfect processing and imported animals and food products (such as beef scraps from Uruguay), but the government was in effect saying small producers were mostly to blame. After all, NAIS was holding us to higher standards than the real food safety offenders. Animal ID was a way for corporations to shift the blame for their mistakes to farmers who had no control over what happened once their animals left the farm.
Producers geared up to fight NAIS the best they could by attending USDA listening sessions to testify against animal ID. Even when the testimony was overwhelmingly against NAIS, the USDA continued to move ahead with plans for implementation until some in Congress, like Sen. Jon Tester of Montana, were successful in cutting funding to the program.
Tester is a farmer, rancher and livestock owner who is also a U.S. Senator.
If money is the source of all evil, we definitely pulled NAIS up by the roots, persuading the House of Representatives to eliminate funds and the Senate to at least radically curtail them.
Or so we thought. Today, even with funding cut, government and corporate insiders are still talking about NAIS, waiting for their chance to bring it back to life.
I’ve heard that as our nation grows, we must all be willing to give up some of our rights for the good of all. I would agree that’s true when it comes to traffic lights or airport screening.
But food?
Big seed
These days it’s not too unusual for seed companies to sue each other. Lately a single seed company has gotten big enough to control 98 percent of the soybean seed market and 79 percent of corn.
The last time a single entity controlled that much seed was when Adam walked alone in the Garden.
That company, Monsanto, says it needs single-handed control and big profits to enable farmers to feed the hungry. Some farmers reply that all we really need to do our job is freedom of choice to buy seed without fear of economic retribution.
In a rare and uncommon turn of events, the Department of Justice has decided to investigate whether Monsanto’s unusual control of seed markets violates federal antitrust laws.
The last time the U.S. cracked down on this much corporate power was when Teddy Roosevelt played trustbuster 100 years back. That was many moons ago.
It used to be that rulemaking took place in the light of day.
For Americans, sightless regulators blinded by power have been a big problem in agriculture, banking, Wall Street, the futures markets, healthcare, energy… you name it.
But once in awhile, like now, if the problem is big enough, a little light from a Blue Moon is what is needed to start setting things right.
Richard Oswald farms and writes from his home near Langdon, Mo. His column regularly appears at www.dailyyonder.com. Reprinted with permission.
The North Platte Bulletin – Published 1/31/2010
Copyright (c) 2010 northplattebulletin.com – All rights reserved.
Flatrock Publishing, Inc. – 1300 E 4th St., Suite F – North Platte, NE 69101
Copyright (c) 2003 – 2010 northplattebulletin.com
All rights reserved. Flatrock Publishing, Inc.
1300 E 4th St., Suite F
North Platte, NE 69101
So, I have to wonder where is USDA in this story? Aren’t they on site inspecting this meat? Where are they? How many of their inspectors have been fired over this? How many Supervisors have been sent to Fairbanks Alaska for the Reindeer inspection program? Probably none! I see USDA as a major source of this problem.
-Kidron
Jolley: Agonizing Over Another Too Large & Unnecessary Recall
01/19/2010 08:49AM
On Monday, Ann Bagel Stork, an editor with Meatingplace.com, reported that Huntington Meat Packing Inc, recalled approximately 864,000 pounds of beef products that may be contaminated with E. coli O157:H7. The USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service discovered the problem “while conducting a Food Safety Assessment, which ultimately prompted a further investigation of establishment records. The investigation is ongoing.”
The following products, consisting of all ground beef products produced by the plant from Jan. 5, 2010, to Jan. 15, 2010, are subject to recall:
• 40-pound boxes of “Huntington Meats Ground Beef”
• 40-pound boxes of “HUNTINGTON MEAT PKG. INC. BEEF GROUND FOR FURTHER PROCESSING”
• 40-pound boxes of “BEEF BURRITO FILLING MIX”
• 10-pound boxes of “IMPERIAL MEAT CO. GROUND BEEF PATTY”
• 20-pound boxes of “IMPERIAL MEAT CO. GROUND BEEF PATTY”
• 10-pound boxes of “El Rancho MEAT & PROVISION ALL BEEF PATTIES”
While it was distressing that the first recall of the New Year only took a few days to happen, there are several other non-reported issues that should strike the industry with the same impact as a 340 pound tackle hitting a 220 pound quarterback. Or a two ton wrecking ball smacking the side of a 100 year old building. Or listening to your dentist saying, “This is going to hurt a little bit.”
Issue #1: Why did it take an FSIS Food Safety Assessment to find the problem? Where were Huntington’s people? Do they need to bring in outside resources? Is every company in the U.S. that does grinding prepared for an immediate FSA?
Issue #2: Assuming no weekend work, they recalled nine days worth of product. Whatever happened to batch production? Doing it right should mean a day’s worth pulled out of commerce, maximum.
Issue #3: Test and hold (or as Ann Wells, Director of Scientific and Regulatory Affairs at the North American Meat Processors Association, corrected me months ago: “hold and test”) all of a sudden sounds like cheap business insurance.
The answer to Issue #1 is an FSA will find the weak link in your business. If you’re not ready for it right now, get the help you need. Right now.
The answer to Issue #2 is the same as the answer to Issue #3. Batch production/hold and test. Think holding and testing a day’s worth of production is too expensive? Huntington called back at least nine day’s worth of production instead of a single day. If you’re still a doubter, let’s go back to August 21, 1997 when the granddaddy of all recalls happened:
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The nation’s largest beef recall got a whole lot larger Thursday, as Hudson Foods moved to take 25 million pounds of ground beef off the market at the behest of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Chuck Jolley is a free lance writer, based in Kansas City, who covers a wide range of ag industry topics for Cattlenetwork.com and Agnetwork.com.
http://www.cattletradercenter.com/Jolley–Agonizing-Over-Another-Too-Large—Unnecessary-Recall/2010-01-19/Article.aspx?oid=976561&fid=CTC-TOP-STORIES-2009-08-20-11-55-54&hq_e=el&hq_m=595349&hq_l=2&hq_v=3b22d15db6
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Food Control is People Control
http://www.ruralheritage.com/stop_nais/readers05.htm
Stop National Animal ID
by Grant Hagan
When the Communists took over the Ukraine, the bread basket of Europe,
about 70 years ago, they destroyed or stole all food and animals, starving to death 7 million people. Today Zimbabwe, the bread basket of Africa, has had its farms destroyed and is on the verge of starvation. Is our country next?
Today Communism has become less visible. However, groups with the same
globalist views are nearing completion of their goals. Groups like the socialist Council of Foreign Relations [founded in New York in 1921 with the goal of ending American sovereignty, the membership of which has included several past presidents including Bill Clinton], the Trilateralists [a related group founded in 1973 for the purpose of seizing control of the United States government and consolidating its political, monetary, intellectual, and ecclesiastical powers], Skull and Bones [a highly secret Yale University society whose select members have included some of the most powerful men of the 20th century, including President
George Bush] are having great success creating a world dictatorship. Most of their power has been acquired from purchased government officials.
Congress has, for example, depleted our industrial base by giving the unelected elitists at the United Nations World Trade Organization complete control of our trade decisions.
The coming National Animal Identification System (NAIS) is another prime example of this legislative road to enslavement [Assault on Small Farmers]. When in full force NAIS will assign all animals a land base (farm) and each animal will have a radio frequency identification tag. Every time a cow is sent off its land base to a sale, or a horse is ridden off its land base, government permission will be required. The global positioning in the tag will give Big Brother the ability to spy on you. I’m sure Stalin and Hitler would have been envious of such a system.
Like gun control, food control is people control. In addition to animal control, the elitists, with their patented genetically manipulated seeds, are becoming our
only source of seeds. So, contrary to “It can’t happen here,” It is happening
here!
Grant Hagan lives in St. Marys, Pennsylvania. His letter appeared in the Summer 2006 issue of Rural Heritage.
Table of Contents
Subscribe Homepage Contact Us
rural heritage logo PO Box 2067, Cedar Rapids IA 52406-2067
E-Mail: info@ruralheritage.com
other articles on food control
http://www.answers.com/topic/food-as-a-weapon-of-war
http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/6731711.html
http://www.schillerinstitute.org/food_for_peace/kiss_nssm_jb_1995.html
http://2012truth.com/2009/09/07/the-looming-food-crisis/
Note: NAIS has won the award for 2009’s most DASTARDLY USDA IDEA. In Ag Sec Vilsack’s listening sessions, designed to find some common ground of appreciation for the USDA brain child, the bribe-riddled NAIS found accumulations of increasing retch with each of 16 town hall style meetings. Livestock people increased dislike with each interpretive spin from USDA. Although the livestock press, USDA state veterinarians and USDA universities defend full-blown NAIS, livestock producers were not willing to relinquish their meager profits for the red tape of a new government enforcement program.
When NAIS was not palatable federally, the USDA split the troops and provided over $150,000,000 in incentives for each state to take NAIS as a state enforcement project. When that costly idea slammed head-on to more resistance, in court and otherwise, now the USDA troops are dividing more. NAIS surveillance is becoming mandatory for certain disease studies. To try and forget the flawed thought of NAIS, new names are now being invented like “animal ID”, “information systems”, “food safety”, “animal health emergency management”, “animal security” and a host of other invented terms, just to sell the same old NAIS enforcement.
Beyond the millions spent to swallow NAIS, now many more millions are being spent to huddle government employees around new brain schemes to sugar-coat livestock surveillance enforcements. The article below is filled with costly processes that will be paid for by livestock owners and create more government jobs.
At a unique time in the history of agriculture production, when cost of goods are increasing, profits are reducing, the USDA is working at mach-speed to increase red tape and cost of doing business. Now, here it comes again, “One Health.”
NIAA meeting examines ‘One Health’
By Drovers news source | Monday, January 04, 2010
“One Health: Implications for Animal Agriculture” is the theme of the 2010 Annual Meeting of the National Institute for Animal Agriculture (NIAA), March 15-17 in Kansas City, Mo.
“One Health is a worldwide initiative focused on the interdependencies of human, animal and ecosystem health, and, with this concept comes significantly expanded roles and expectations placed on animal agriculture and professionals within animal agriculture,” states Dr. Tony Forshey, co-chair of NIAA’s Annual Meeting. “The general sessions and committee meetings at NIAA’s Annual Meeting will explore how the initiative may impact the various species and segments within production animal agriculture and animal health management.”
NIAA’s opening general session speakers will look at how the One Health initiative and strategies shift the focus from surveillance to intervention and prevention and how challenges need to be faced collectively rather than in individual silos and disciplines. The lineup of speakers will represent active members on the One Health Commission, representatives from the veterinary and human health community and representatives of animal agriculture.
NIAA’s 11 species-based and issue-based committees–which are open to NIAA members and non-members–will meet on Tuesday afternoon, March 16, and Wednesday, March 17. Issue-based committee meetings include animal care, animal health emergency management, animal health and international trade, animal production food safety and security, emerging diseases, and animal identification and information systems. Species-based committees include cattle, swine, poultry, equine, and sheep and goat. Each committee meeting features its own line-up of nationally recognized speakers.
“NIAA’s annual meeting is an ideal place for producers, animal health and management professionals, animal agriculture extension specialists and all of those involved in animal agriculture–cattle, swine, sheep, goats, poultry and equine–to gather and become better informed and involved regarding One Health,” Forshey adds.
A schedule of events for NIAA’s 2010 annual meeting, meeting registration, list of NIAA committees and hotel information are available at the NIAA Web site. Individuals are also welcome to call NIAA at (719) 538-8843 for information.