Posts Tagged NAIS Not Needed

Wisconsin Steps up funding for NAIS/Premises ID

Oct 19

Posted by admin in Codex Alimentarius, NAIS | No Comments

ppjg-48

Marti Oakley

Copyright 2009  All rights reserved.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Senator Kohl of Wisconsin who had a direct hand in setting up the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the USDA to force the Wisconsin farmers and ranchers into the NAIS/Premises ID and who also, along with Rep. Obey facilitated the cooperative funding agreement [bribery payment] cementing that contract with the USDA, just announced that $1,550,000 has been allotted to WLIC.  This was the consortium set up after NAIS/Premises ID was shoved through the Wisconsin legislature and promoted as a strictly “voluntary” program.

Recent developments lauded by many in agricultural circles as the “end of NAIS’ as a result of funding being withheld or denied on the federal level, apparently weren’t aware that the USDA through its for-profit activities as a sub-corporation of the federal corporate government, has nearly limitless sources of funds that can be used for any thing they deem appropriate.  With the agricultural industrial complex willing to supply any and all funds necessary to overthrow traditional farming and ranching in favor of industrialized operations, USDA has no shortage of funds that can be paid to bankrupted states in desperate needs of funds to continue operating.  So what if  traditional farmers are driven off their lands and forced to forfeit everything they have worked for so long as corporations can make a profit and states can pad their coffers with bribe money.

AgriView

Kohl Secures Funding for Wisconsin Projects in 2009 Agriculture Spending Bill

From article on Agri-view comes this excerpt:

“-$1,550,000 for the Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium – The Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium, though the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, leads the nation in developing a workable approach for premise registration, a critical element of livestock identification and tracking.  These resources will allow that work to continue.”

Apparently NAIS/Premises ID forced compliance is in full swing in Wisconsin and Senator Kohl appears to be quite proud of the fact that Wisconsin, one of three test states first bribed by the USDA to bypass Constitutional rights and protections not only on the federal level, but also in gross violation of the Wisconsin Constitution itself prides himself and his state on leading the nation in developing a “workable” approach to Premises ID and NAIS, both key components of Codex Alimentarius.

I can only presume that “workable approach” must mean the prosecution of those farmers and ranchers who have steadfastly refused to comply with this [voluntary] program and the subsequent persecution of an Amish farmer who objected on religious grounds, now forced to defend himself and his religious beliefs in court against a government machine that exists to end all but industrialized harmonization agreements and illegal and unconstitutional trade agreements.

The recent and first round of court proceedings against the Amish forced Wisconsin officials to admit neither NAIS nor Premises ID had done, or would do anything to increase the safety of the food supply.  With this admission, answers should be demanded as to why they entered into such an agreement, took the bribe money and persist in prosecuting those who refuse to convey ownership of their property to USDA acting as agent for the federal government.

Of course, Senator Kohl along with Representative Obey were instrumental in storing the data mined information on the gps location of all agricultural properties and owners, along with any other information they had mined, in the Oracle database, and moving that database off US soil into storage in Canada to make it unavailable to FOIA requests.  This move was made until a provision could be slipped not only into the 2005, but also 2008 Farm Bills making any such requests for information unobtainable by the very people logged into that database; with or without their knowledge.

No where in the Constitution of the state of Wisconsin, nor in the federal Constitution does the government have any right, other than power it has granted itself under fictions of law, to implement or otherwise force compliance to these programs.  Even the illegally ceded authority granted to unelected bureaucracies can not hold up to constitutional challenges.

At what point will Wisconsin property holders demand the right to be left alone by government?  At what point will they move to impeach from office these same public officials who have violated the public trust; assaulted their property rights and have conspired with the industrialized corporate complex to defraud them of their right to life, liberty and their right to own property free of government interference?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jolley: NAIS Staggers, Virtually Abandoned & Unwanted, Toward The Finish Line

Oct 5

Posted by admin in Food, NAIS | No Comments

Congress has decided to underfund the controversial National Animal Identification System for another year to with a meager $5.3 million. Chump change for the overspending D.C. pols, not even a rounding error when you look at the current state of federal funding. It’s just enough, I think, for them to have what’s called ‘plausible deniability’ when pro-NAIS groups come to the hill accusing them of killing the program outright.

Better to leave it to a slow, underfunded death.

Congress had pumped up NAIS with $142 million since it began in 2004. With a war chest of that size, the USDA managed to register slightly more than a third of animal premises. Last year, the USDA got $14.2 million for NAIS, but registration increased by only three percent. To hear some tell it, more than a few of those registrations were either forced or done without prior knowledge. Before anyone throws a flag on that statement, I consider requiring a 4 H’er to sign up the family farm before he or she can show an animal at a state fair to be tantamount to forced registration and an almost unforgiveable breach of trust.

Steven Wright, an oddball comic, said “I intend to live forever. So far, so good.” We can say the same thing about NAIS. It was intended to live forever and we can repeat the sardonic “So far, so good” about it but the program will ultimately die, a victim federal mishandling of the concept and a serious misread of the attitudes of small farmers. Most of them are an independent, ornery bunch happiest when the feds stay within walking distance of the Potomac.

They are scared half-to-death when they hear some variation of “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.” They know federal help never comes without serious strings attached and trailing enough paperwork to keep them out of the fields for weeks on end.

Many of those who fought against NAIS are happy that the funding has been cut but still express concern that there are any dollars still behind it. In a surprisingly understated comment from the usually fire-breathing Bill Bullard, CEO of R-CALF, he said, “We’re disappointed with the decision.”

I think we can safely assume, though, that he will still go after the remnants of the program with hammer and tong, bayoneted rifle, nail-studded club and finally, knife and fork. Unless the USDA can pull off some last-second Hail Mary play, there will be a celebratory barbecue in downtown Billings, Montana.

Bottom line: Regardless of the original intent, when the vast majority of the people affected by NAIS replied all too often with a resounding ‘Hell, no,’ it’s time for it to go away.

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.

Comments? CRJolley@msn.com

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Congress allocates less for National Animal ID

Oct 4

Posted by admin in NAIS | No Comments

by George Lauby (North Platte Bulletin) – 10/4/2009

Bill Bullard - Photo by George Lauby

Bill Bullard - Photo by George Lauby

A conference committee in Congress has decided to fund the controversial National Animal Identification System for another year to the tune of $5.3 million.
That will be a significant reduction from previous years, but does not placate opponents of the still floundering, five-year-old program.

“We’re disappointed with the decision,” said Bill Bullard, the chief executive of the Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund.

Bullard was in North Platte Saturday at a convention of the Independent Cattlemen of Nebraska. R-CALF USA, ICON and 91 other groups asked Congress to eliminate the funds.

The critics say existing livestock records, such as brands, ear tags, veterinary logs and auction barn records do a good job of tracking cattle movements. USDA inspections at the borders are important to disease prevention, they say.

For instance, U.S. cattle have been free of foot and mouth disease since the 1920s. Another disease, brucellosis, has been largely prevented. If an occasional case appears, it is closely monitored and controlled.

In June, Nebraska and federal officials jumped on a single case of cattle tuberculosis in the northeast part of the state. To date 11,800 head have been tested, with no positive cases.

“The USDA is going from disease prevention to disease monitoring,” a speaker at the ICON convention said.

The program is voluntary, but state and federal authorities have urged it on and said inevitably every livestock owner will take part. The program is known as the “Locate in 48” program. The goal is to track a disease outbreak to the source herd within 48 hours.

But one speaker at the convention said, “If there ever is an outbreak of foot-and-mouth, no one would wait 48 hours to take action. They’d be on it right away.”

The Senate Appropriations Committee had approved $14.6 million for the NAIS program, the amount requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, but the House allocated nothing.

The appropriation is part of the Agriculture appropriations bill.

Bullard said the $5.3 million could shore up the program where it is less expensive and cumbersome, such as in factory-style hog, poultry and cattle feeding operations.

Congress has appropriated $142 million for the national animal identification system since it began in 2004. The USDA has registered only 35 percent of animal premises.

Last year, the USDA got $14.2 million to run the program, but registrations increased by only three percent.

The North Platte Bulletin – Published 10/4/2009
Copyright © 2009 northplattebulletin.com – All rights reserved.
Flatrock Publishing, Inc. – 1300 E 4th St., Suite F – North Platte, NE 69101

Tags: , , , ,

NAIS Non-Compliance Trial Update

Oct 2

Posted by admin in NAIS | No Comments

NAIS Non-Compliance Trial Update
Please Broadcast

Emmanuel Miller, Jr., of Wisconsin, is the first American to have been tried for NAIS non-compliance, on Wednesday September 23.  Wisconsin requires NAIS “premises” registration and many farmers, including Emmanuel Miller, Jr., have refused to comply. Pat Monchilovich, another who refused, goes to trial in October.

This is an enormous historic event, and a pivotal moment in the anti-NAIS movement.  Read Paul Griepentrog’s first hand report on the trial:
http://ppjg.wordpress.com/2009/09/27/the-lost-people-part-ii/

Further Information:
Paul Griepentrog Phone: 715.762.1875  Email: skfarms@centurytel.net

Paul Griepentrog, Wisconsin farmer and Vice-President of Wisconsin Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (www.WICFA.org), filed an amicus brief on Miller’s behalf and attended the trial.

We will continue to post updates.

Yours for freedom,
Deborah Stockton, Executive Director
National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (NICFA)
nicfa@earthlink.net
www.NICFA.org

National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association
Our purpose is to promote and preserve unregulated direct farmer-to-consumer trade
that fosters availability of locally grown or home-produced food products..
NICFA opposes any government funded or managed National Animal Identification System.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Wyoming withdraws from NAIS

Sep 11

Posted by admin in NAIS | No Comments

Livestock Board returns $140,000.00 in federal funds

Cheyenne — Wyoming

Livestock Board members, meeting in Cheyenne Aug. 21, voted to abandon their agreement to work with the U.S. Department of Agriculture in implementing its National Animal Identification System (NAIS).

According to agency director Jim Schwartz, the agreement amounted to $140,000 in grant money.

Schwartz says the decision by the board resulted in the agency’s lost ability to utilize those funds in developing what some had hoped would be a state-level program.

“I had signed the contract,” says Schwartz, “but hadn’t spent anything.” It’s now a matter of sending the money back. Asked if other states are taking similar measures, he says most see this year’s disbursement as the last they’ll be offered and aren’t refusing the funds. Congress, citing expenditures surpassing adequate progress, is amidst debates on the future of NAIS funding. If funding continues, it will likely be at a much-reduced rate. Many believe the whole animal ID issue is dead.

Gillette rancher and veterinarian Eric Barlow brought the resolution to reject the NAIS agreement. “After reviewing the work document which outlined what we would do with the money,” says Barlow, “it did not appear to me to be building on a national program or being used to establish or fortify any program the WLSB has implemented.”

Barlow says that some members expressed hope the funds could be used in advancing the agency’s computerization efforts. “Maybe we could have, if that’s what we would have asked for,” says Barlow. “Either someone didn’t ask for that or USDA rejected it.” Barlow says the way he read the plan of work the money would have been used to register premises, educate producers on NAIS and hire staff for a six-month period for the purpose of doing those things.

Brent Larson of Laramie and Liz Philp of Shoshoni, sheep producer representatives on the board, were the two dissenting votes to the resolution.

Larson says while he doesn’t support NAIS, he did see the opportunity to use the dollars to advance Wyoming’s programs. He wanted the agency to seek amendments to its agreement with the USDA on how the dollars would have been spent.

“I thought we could make it work for us,” says; Larson. “Why not rework the plan and use the; $140,000 to build something that would work for Wyoming?” Something that would be worthwhile?

Without the $140,000 grant the Wyoming NAIS Director’s employment would possibly not be funded.

Appreciating the need to preserve the market-ability of Wyoming livestock, Barlow says he suggested that staff form a working group, including; industry representatives, to look at existing programs and how they can serve as the underpinning of a Wyoming-based program.

Larson, given the $800,000 in budget cuts the agency took earlier this year, isn’t sure where the money for a state-level program will come from. It would have been good to keep the USDA grant if it had true value to help Wyoming livestock producers. The board voted to give it all back due to too many negative strings attached.

Quotes provided by Jennifer Womack, managing editor of the Wyoming Livestock Roundup. Send comments on this article to roundup@wylr.com.

Note: WYOMING REFUSES TO BE BOUGHT! Congratulations to Wyoming!! NAIS has provided generous funding for USDA offices in every state with minimal oversight in regard to premises enrollment.

States joining Wyoming have received the following “grant” funds not including 2009 funding: Colorado $4,896,995; Idaho $4,242,645; Kansas $3,882,270; Montana $2,110,256; Nebraska $3,749,005; South Dakota $3,155,907.

Although Wyoming has repented of their latest “grant,” funds, their hands are not totally clean. During 2002 to 2008 they have deposited from USDA a total of $2,054,538.

Pledging to enroll producers in the NAIS program, the Wyoming effort was costing $1,119 per premise sign up. However, if Wyoming did a good job, USDA projected future funding would allow them to harvest another $7,151,717 additional.

Wyoming is to be honored by their own livestock producers and other states for setting the example of refusing NAIS demands. The strings attached by USDA appeared to be hanging nooses to ranchers in Wyoming, and many others agree.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ding Dong NAIS IS (not) Dead! How “Market Forces” Will Bring Local Producers Into Full Compliance

Sep 2

Posted by admin in NAIS | No Comments

Re-posted from The Complete Patient

DateTuesday, September 1, 2009 at 11:31PM

I’ve been reading reports that the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) is in trouble. Its funding from Congress has been cut. The listening sessions around the country sponsored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture were nearly unanimous in opposition. Is there truth to such conjecture?

Doreen Hannes, a Missouri farmer, has been an outspoken critic of NAIS for several years. She attended an agriculture conference last weekend that provided hints about the future of the program that envisions RFID tags being attached to each of hundreds of millions of farm animals across the country. The report makes for fascinating reading. Unfortunately, it isn’t encouraging.

by Doreen Hannes

How will the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) finally come to fruition?

I gleaned some answers to that tantalizing question this past weekend, when I had the dubious pleasure of speaking at the National Institute for Animal Agriculture ID Expo (the NGO pusher of NAIS) in Kansas City, Missouri, as the small producers representative on a panel, “Opportunities for Animal Identification.”

Having been to two other NIAA ID Expos, the most glaring change was the attendance being way down. As a staunch opponent of NAIS and one who has been working full time to stop it for years now, I found this a very pleasing sign.

I was allowed to speak on the condition that I not speak about NAIS. With the help of the question-and-answer segment of the panel discussion, I was able to say nearly all I wanted about NAIS based on my being a representative of small producers engaged in direct sales. I differentiated the philosophies and operations of small growers from those of industrialized ag, and drew the distinction between agribusiness and agriculture, explaining that we are not interested in the corporate agribusiness model.

What I gleaned from this panel, and other information coming from the NIAA ID Expo, is that NAIS may look dead, but really isn’t.  As in any good horror movie, the monster has super-psycho strength and, just when it seems to be defeated, it rises up and attacks again.

Remember, NAIS began as the National Food Animal Identification Plan, then became the United States Animal Identification Plan, and finally the National Animal Identification System. It will not continue to be called NAIS, but instead dubbed ‘animal identification’, as part of ‘food safety’, ‘social responsibility’ and ‘farm to fork’ initiatives.

The hammers for enforcement will be big ones and constrain small producers’ ability to market and sell their products– attached to indemnity payments, subsidies, conservation programs and access to movement certificates, or health papers.

In other words, “market forces” will force compliance on those who wish to stay out of this onerous system. There will still be ‘premises id’, but it may be changed to ‘unique location identifier.’  There will still be electronic and group ID consisting of 15-character numbers, but it won’t be to ‘NAIS’ standards, (ahem), and there will still be tracking, but it will be referenced as the ‘historical pedigree’ or some similar nonsense. It won’t be called NAIS anymore, but it will be NAIS by a different name. Be prepared for a chorus from the disinformationalists proclaiming the death of the dreaded NAIS. A little twist on what Mark Twain said is appropriate, “Rumors of NAIS’ death have been greatly exaggerated”.

Those who wish to keep NAIS at bay must realize that all of the food safety bills in Congress, and particularly HR 2749, which passed the House by an overwhelming margin, will codify ‘international standards’ under obligations to ‘international agreements’, and that means NAIS for everything. It will do nothing to improve food safety and everything to put the kabosh on the fastest growing segment of agriculture, the local food movement. We must assail the Senate and the House with the message that real food safety lies in decentralized, unconsolidated and diverse food production and distribution.

As I told the attendees of the NIAA ID Expo, “There are two kinds of people, those who want to be left alone and those who won’t leave them alone. Small producers and their customers definitely want to be left alone.”

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Stuck on Stupid – (USDA)

Aug 31

Posted by admin in NAIS | No Comments

PPJG original post. Author: Marti Oakley © August 22, 2009 4:23 pm cst

This is such a crock even I can’t believe it.  This is the actual public statement by USDA claiming they heard substantial support for NAIS/Premises ID.  What were these people smoking?

getimage~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“Officials with the Department of Agriculture said they heard

substantial support for animal disease traceability during a series of

public meetings but many animal owners indicated concerns. Cost,

privacy, bureaucracy, liability in the event of a disease outbreak,

and the religious implications of such animal identification are

behind ongoing opposition to the department’s National Animal

Identification System.”

Those guys at the USDA are such jokers! And, after reading this press release from Wisconsin, the Wisconsin AG department must be in on the joke. The USDA listening sessions, each having been taped, shows that an estimated 95% of those attending were vehemently opposed to any such plan as the National Animal Identification System/Premises ID plans.

This small announcement has been picked up in various places but Wisconsin is one of those three test states that took cooperative agreement funding (bribery) to implement Premises Id through the state legislature.  Wisconsin is now preparing to go into Phase 2, NAIS.

Did I mention that Wisconsin wasn’t included in the listening session tours?  I wonder why?

It must have come as quite a shock to USDA representatives to be confronted with the high numbers of independent and family producers who showed up for each and every one of these sessions in every state where they were held.  I say this because for the most part USDA reps stuttered and stammered and had a look about them as if they were about to face the gallows. Then to have these same participants, whom the USDA was sure would be awed simply by its presence, whom the USDA was sure were just dumb farmers and ranchers who didn’t know anything, stand up and pointedly and with knowledge explain that they knew, what the intent of these programs really were and what it would do to their operations, must have been a frightening experience for them.

Nothing is worse than the realization that you have seriously underestimated your opponent and the obvious misconceptions you had about them.

In fact, if USDA is that confused about what took place at these “listening sessions” and the “breakout sessions” meant to steer those simple minded rural folk into thinking or believing that NAIS/Premises ID was a good idea, You Tube is loaded with videos documenting the public anger and outrage over this attempt to run them out of business.

The only “substantial support” the USDA can truthfully claim was from the hired security guards that stood between them and the people they feared most:  The farmers and ranchers they intend to put out of business on behalf of industrialized corporate agriculture, and international interests.

Just a side note:

The Pork Producers, Farm Bureau, and Dairy Industry via national organizations gave token support for the program; each of them listed as campaign donors to many of the politicians in the Ag Department.

Many of the larger producers most of whom belong to national organizations, speaking on behalf of members (who had no real idea of the impact this would have on their operations and many of whom are still in a state of shocked numbness,) claimed they needed NAIS to protect the security of their Industry.  Ironic how the dairy and pork folks have their hands out for cooperative agreement funds (bribes) and many have signed MOU’s (memoranda of understanding) with the USDA.  I wonder how these organizations will explain to their members how the government’s involvement in their industry was the cause of their financial problems to begin with…and they knew it.

USDA: You jackasses did NOT hear any substantial support for this ill advised plan.  What you did hear was the growing backlash against government takeover of agriculture.

Did I mention that Tom Vilsack never made an appearance?  Neither did Collin Peterson (D) MN, head of the Agriculture Committee in the US HOUSE who swore after the March AG meeting he would have NAIS mandatory by December 31 of this year.  Now you would have thought these two guys would have been out pitching their plan. Maybe they were busy those days; probably having lunch with those good old boys from Monsanto or some corporate lobbyist looking to make a buck……or spend one.

(C) copyright 2009  Marti Oakley

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Who speaks for family farmers?

Aug 24

Posted by admin in Food, NAIS | No Comments

Who speaks for family farmers?

By: Rhonda Perry, Minuteman Media, Worthington Daily Globe

ARMSTRONG, Mo. — My family has farmed in Missouri for over a century and I currently raise livestock and grain on 800 acres in Howard County, Mo. But folks like me always seem to get drowned out in Washington, D.C, by commodity groups purporting to represent my interests. The American Farm Bureau bills itself as the “voice of agriculture.” A seemingly innocent-sounding group called the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) calls itself “the only nationwide expression of dairy farmers.” These organizations spend millions in lobbying and donating money to politicians. In the halls of Congress, in the federal agencies, and in presidential administrations, representatives from these groups exert undue control over the agenda for food and agriculture policy.

It is nearly impossible to convince D.C. politicians that these corporate interests do not represent the interests of family farmers. Until now. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently concluded 13 listening sessions to hear farmers’ input on the despised National Animal Identification System (NAIS) that calls for us to electronically tag and track the movements of every one of our animals. Factory farms, however, are allowed one group lot ID for their thousands of animals. Over $130 million of taxpayer money has been wasted on this radical, corporate-driven bureaucracy that originated from the National Institute for Animal Agriculture, a group comprised of — surprise, surprise — the Farm Bureau, National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), NMPF and agribusinesses such as Cargill. Only a gigantic outcry from farmers has stopped NAIS from becoming mandatory by its proposed 2009 date.

At listening sessions across the country, including one in Missouri attended by over 300 people, up to 95 percent of producers were united in their adamant disapproval of NAIS and how it would do nothing to address animal disease or food safety. The few folks in the crowd willing to go on record for their support of NAIS were uniformly from the likes of NPPC, Farm Bureau and NMPF allies. That should tell the media, Congress, USDA and the Obama administration to quit listening to these interest groups and quit thinking of them as representing family farmers!

Why do we have such a broken food system that allows for deadly E. coli in our meat and now peanut butter? Why have factory farms been allowed to proliferate like viruses in rural America? Because these interest groups have been allowed to use their false facade representing America’s “farmers” to con politicians into buying their disastrous policies, while simultaneously conning the media into thinking that they speak on behalf of those farmers. Now they have conned USDA, President Obama and members of Congress into thinking we need a mandatory NAIS program.

These same corporate farm groups have opposed more testing for mad cow disease, opposed increased inspection of meat processing plants where most food borne illnesses start and continue to thwart any efforts to address antibiotic abuses on factory farms. Meanwhile they advocate for free trade agreements that bring in foreign animals from countries with known disease outbreaks like foot-and-mouth and BSE. Thus, the folks most responsible for breeding animal disease are now trying to shift responsibility from corporate meatpackers and factory farms onto the backs of America’s independent family farmers through NAIS.

Since 2006, NPPC has donated over $350,000 to federal politicians and spent over $3 million in lobbying. NMPF has spent $2.2 million in lobbying, including for a mandatory NAIS, even while dairy farmers suffer their worst crisis since the Great Depression.

We are thankful that USDA took the time to listen to the voices of family farmers instead of relying on the same old corporate interest groups. Given the shocking chasm between our corporate farm groups and real family farmers, NAIS is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to bad farm policy that emanates from of Washington. So the next time you hear that “farm groups” oppose cracking down on antibiotics, or that they want to water down environmental regulations over factory farms or that we need another free trade agreement the likes of the one with Colombia, just remember whose interests these folks really represent–and it’s not rural America.

Rhonda Perry is a livestock and grain farmer from Howard County, Mo. She serves as Program Director of the Missouri Rural Crisis Center, a member of the National Family Farm Coalition.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

In Washington, Aren’t All Things Politics, Even NAIS?

Aug 20

Posted by admin in Food, NAIS | No Comments

Written by: Chuck Jolley — Cattle Network

Even if the gentle folk at the USDA can’t see the handwriting on the wall, the more politically astute in the House and Senate are quite capable of reading the bright red neon signage. First, Rosa DeLauro, chair of the House Ag appropriations sub committee, cut NAIS funding back to a chilly absolute zero.

The Senate originally proposed a paltry $14. 6 million — nothing more than a rounding error in the big bucks often tossed around inside the beltway – but Senators Jon Tester (D- MT) and Mike Enzi (R-WY) joined hands across the aisle and offered an amendment that slashed that number by half. If passed, NAIS funding would become an almost insignificant piece of the $23. 6 billion agricultural spending bill proposed for fiscal 2010.

Their amendment also limited use of those meager millions, slapping some serious handcuffs on Ag Secretary Vilsack’s failed effort to gain any industry support during his early summer cross-country listening sessions. Their reasoning?Congress had spent $140 million on the program and “gotten next to nothing.”

R-CALF and the Western Organization of Resource Councils, groups representing the rabidly anti-NAIS grassroots livestock producers, stood as one and applauded the Senate action. A standing ‘O. ‘Hurrah’s from the hinterland. WORC would have broken out the proverbial six pack for a party with their R-CALF friends just down the street in Billings, MT. They’ll keep the Bud on ice until the Senate agrees with DeLauro and zeroes out all funding, though, before dancing on the patio down at Tiny’s Tavern,

WORC’s Dan Teigan thanked Senators Tester and Enzi, for “taking the lead against this expensive, intrusive, and unworkable program. The conference committee should zero out all funding for the animal identification program. You don’t just want to slow down a runaway train. You want to stop it.”

R-CALF USA President Mad Max Thornsberry issued a surprisingly calm statement. “NAIS epitomizes what government should not do: it should not impose costly and highly intrusive regulatory burdens on private industry and private citizens without first considering alternatives, without first establishing a critical public need, and without first determining the effect that a significant government mandate would have on the culture and economy of the U. S. livestock industry.”

Teigan need not worry about that runaway train. The House and Senate just tore up the tracks. Doc Thornsberry can rest assured he’s helped defend the culture and economy of the U. S. Livestock industry. The actions of the House and Senate are a survival technique learned by most politicians; when attending a listening session, just shut up and listen. Those are voters doing the talking.

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.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

This family says – “No more fairs”

Aug 13

Posted by admin in NAIS | No Comments

They say a government program violates their private-property rights.

Cassidy Younggreen, 13, won awards for her goats at the Boulder County Fair last year, but this year she and her brother Ryan wont be there. They raise 30 goats, two llamas and 15 chickens.

Cassidy Younggreen, 13, won awards for her goats at the Boulder County Fair last year, but this year she and her brother Ryan won't be there. They raise 30 goats, two llamas and 15 chickens.

BROOMFIELD — Cassidy and Ryan Young-green won a passel of ribbons in the Boulder County Fair last year, carrying on a family tradition of putting their livestock up against any comers in annual county-fair competitions.

But this year, Cassidy, 13, and Ryan, 11, aren’t showing anything at the Boulder County Fair — not even their award-winning goats — because they would be forced to participate in an intrusive new government program, said their mom, Kellyjo Younggreen.

“They tell us you have to register, you have to register,” Younggreen said. “But I think this just goes too far.”

Some other farm families in Colorado feel the same way about a national animal-identification program that they say is a violation of private-property rights.

They are refusing to let their children enter their livestock in fair competitions — including those in Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Larimer and Weld counties and the Colorado State Fair — where entries must comply with the National Animal Identification System. NAIS is a U.S. Department of Agriculture initiative designed to help regulators track animal diseases.

“There are several instances of families across the state who are simply saying no,” said John Reid, a cattle operator in Ordway and member of the Colorado Independent CattleGrowers Association. “There is overwhelming opposition to this initiative everywhere.”

But proponents say the ID program will help prevent a national outbreak of livestock disease. Fair organizers also point out protesting families are few and far between.

In fact, they say, the number of fair participants is actually up this year.

“It seems pretty isolated to maybe two families and a (4-H) club or two,” said Richard Biella, president of the Boulder County Fair board.

Biella, too, was skeptical of the ID plan. But as an owner of Angus cattle, he became a fan because he says it could prevent health problems afflicting entire operations.

Cassidy Younggreen, 13, won awards for her goats at the Boulder County Fair last year, but this year she and her brother Ryan wont be there. They raise 30 goats, two llamas and 15 chickens.

Cassidy Younggreen, 13, won awards for her goats at the Boulder County Fair last year, but this year she and her brother Ryan won't be there. They raise 30 goats, two llamas and 15 chickens.

“I understand some people don’t feel comfortable with the program,” Biella said. “But truly, if the government wanted to find out about us, they only have to look at our license plates, punch in a couple of numbers, and they’d get all they wanted.”

At the center of the NAIS are premises identification numbers, or PINs. When livestock owners register for a PIN, they must give basic contact information as well as what species of animals are on their property and the type of operation.

So far, the system is voluntary. But a handful of county fairs in Colorado this year are requiring PIN registration for 4-H livestock that might go to market.

The state fair also requires PIN registration, but that hasn’t stopped 4-H families from entering competitions, said Gwen Bosley, animal ID coordinator at the Colorado Department of Agriculture.

“There are a lot of misconceptions out there about what this is all about,” Bosley said. “But once you explain that it is simply a way to protect animals from an animal health emergency, people understand. There might be a handful of families in the state who have dropped out of fairs because of this, but that’s about it.”

Kellyjo Younggreen, however, said a national ID program will only favor corporate farms because only one animal will be registered out of a whole section of the same breed of animals. Small operators like her — with a 5-acre operation of mostly chickens, rabbits and goats — will have to tag each animal.

The possible expense of such a program — and the notion her family’s operation will be part of a massive government database — makes her nervous.

“I just don’t like the scare tactics the government is using,” Younggreen said. “It feels like we are being forced into something we don’t need.”

Monte Whaley: 720-929-0907 or mwhaley@denverpost.com

Tags: , , , , , , , ,