• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

NAIS: Proposed Rules on AIN 840

horsein

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
24
Location
AK
Your comments are needed to be heard on NAIS Everyone of us complains on this forum and now its your chance to submit those complaints. Comments already submitted may be viewed by you.

To submit your comments on the proposed rules for Official Animal Identification Numbering System
Go to Regulations .gov http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2007-0096

To Read the proposed rules on the very first line under Document ID APHIS-2007-0096-0001
go to Views and click on either the HTML version or the PDF version to read the rules


To submit your comments click on the Add comments the yellow balloon. We are under a new administration and the Obama team is looking into this. Please get your comments in.

The USDA states there is 1.5 million farms and only 485 thousand has registered, so where is the other farms on NAIS lets show them that the other half is against NAIS. Please forward this post to livestock owners.
 
Bumping up... Comments are needed on 840 tags... In order to get an 840 tag you will have to have a premises id.
 
PORKER said:
What Good is a 840 tag?????????????

840 is the "Country" or "Country of Origin" code for the USA..

Doesn't seem like a biggee to me. They are just trying to finalize some sort of tag numbering protocol to be able to trace the animals that have a tag.

Edited:

By the way,

This number...."840", is an ISO (International Organization for Standardization) number.

http://www.davros.org/misc/iso3166.html
 
In order to have an "840" tag you will be required to have a Federal Premises id number. And therefore permanently put in the National Animal Identification System. The premises id number stays with your private property (land) forever.

You should all be concerned about that!


The words "Unlawful to Remove" will also be printed on the back.
 
Congress discusses NAIS funding



Pat Kopecki
Wilson County News
March 11, 2009

As the comment-submission deadline of March 16 nears for the proposed changes in the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) as posted in the Jan. 13 issue of the Federal Register, members of Congress are deliberating bills that include funding for the identification program. One such bill, the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Bill (HR 1105), allocates $14.5 million.

A statement given by the bill's sponsor, U.S. Rep. David R. Obey of Wisconsin, is included in the Congressional Record and has opponents to the identification program concerned. The statement lists the intended uses of the funding for the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) in regard to the National Animal Identification System.

Obey, the chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, serves on 13 appropriations subcommittees, including the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies subcommittee. He gave the statement Feb. 23 — the same day the bill was introduced.

Obey gave a time frame for the rulemaking for the use of "840" tags (used to identify U.S. cattle) and the publishing of the proposed rules in regard to promoting the premise identification number. Also included are the timeline and goals to coincide with the Agriculture Department's Business Plan implementing the program (see sidebar for the timetable).

Obey also addressed the issue of the privatization of databases. This has been a major concern of a number of groups, including members of the Independent Cattlemen's Association. Members of the association believe these databases should be reserved for state or federal health departments only, because the program is to be used for the traceability of a disease outbreak within 48 hours.

Obey questioned why the use of private databases was not included.

"APHIS removed a key outcome milestone from its final animal disease traceability business plan that assessed the agency's progress on integrating tracking databases maintained by the state and private organizations," he said.

He directed the Agriculture Department's personnel to submit reports within
one week of each of the "milestone dates" for each species — cattle, goats, poultry, sheep, and swine — outlining the traceability objective. If the goal was not met, the reasons for delay are requested. He also asked the same for the administration goals set.

Other funding allocated in this omnibus bill includes $129 million for animal health monitoring and surveillance. This health-monitoring system includes programs such as the bovine spongiform encephalopathy surveillance, the National Animal Identification System, and the National Animal Health Surveillance System used for aquaculture, cattle, captive deer and elk, equine, poultry, sheep and goats, and swine.

The South Texas problem of fever-tick eradication was also provided with $9.9 million in additional funding. This increase of more than $2 million is to be used to initiate a five-year strategic plan to assist in the ongoing battle to move the cattle fever-tick quarantine zone south of the U.S. border.
 
3/12/09:
A New Dust Bowl From Washington?

by Patricia Stewart Page 1 of 1 page(s)

www.opednews.com


A new Dust Bowl faces America's farms, only this one isn't coming on the Jet Stream, like the Great One of the 1930's. It's coming from our government, threatening to bury our small farms under storms of paperwork, expenses and intervention.

In the 1930's, the expansion of American agriculture, coupled with years of drought and shifting weather patterns, buried millions of acres of American farmland under blowing clouds and settling layers of dust. The result was the loss of thousands of small farms, and with that loss, thousands of families drifted west, seeking new homes, employment and a new start. All of this happened in the heart of the Great Depression, when more than 80% of Americans lived on small farms, growing their own food.

But today, though the atmospheric climate may portend a new Dust Bowl, there is a more imminent risk, our own United States Government. In the 1930's, the government created the Civilian Conservation Corps, Youth Conservation Corps and the Soil Conservation Service, to try and anchor our nation's soil to the ground, and give hope and guidance to those wishing to remain on the land. Other government authorities were created to assist these small farmers to continue farming, such as the Farm Credit Service. Why? Because there was a need to feed the people, to create housing, and to empower people at a time when many were disparaged because of the worsening economy.

Today, while the government assists large farms to continue the very practices that damaged our environment in the first place, it has also created the National Animal Identification System, or NAIS. This program, if fully realized, will financially punish the farmer who keeps a diversified, small farm. Not only will their land be branded by a Premises Identification Number, but the value of that land may be lowered because of that very brand. Potential buyers may decide they don't want to be under the "watchful eye" of the government and they will resist paying "the real price."
The growing numbers of sustainable farmers, who are answering the call of America to grow local, naturally raised food, will be ordered to permanently mark each individual livestock animal, regardless of why they are kept, or what the farmer intends to do with them. These tags may in fact cause illness to the animals that the farmer is trying to so hard to raise humanely. How? By implanting ear tags that will be ripped out, leaving injuries, scars and infections in their wake. How can a program be about "Animal Health," when it's very requirements are detrimental to the animal's health?


In this time when people are fearful of food safety, this "Food Safety Program" will endanger the healthiest protein supplies and will cost the farmer and his/her animals in both money and health.

The last component of NAIS is the reporting or tracking aspect. Every time an animal leaves its home "premises," such as going to the fair, a show, the vet, a classroom, or even meets an animal from a different farm, such as for breeding to keep genetic diversity strong, the farmer has to report that movement with 24 hours. If they fail to do so, they can be fined up to $1,000 or be incarcerated. There is no concession for not having a computer, for having religious convictions that conflict with the program, or for even having a mechanical breakdown making it impossible to return home in time to report.

While this "dust cloud" looms on the horizon for the nation's small farms, the industrial giants, who are practicing the same techniques that caused the original Dust Bowl, are exempt from individual tagging and tracking. Their confinement systems pollute their neighborhoods and their watersheds, abuse their animals through denying them proper exercise and housing conditions, and promote the very diseases that many people fear. Yet, they are given incentives to continue those practices by allowing them to tag and track their "inventory" by "lot numbers," as opposed to small farmers who identify their animals by name, and don't need a computer system to know how each one is doing.

So why invent a NAIS? It has been explained as being an answer to Terrorism, to Mad Cow Disease, to Bird Flu and to Food Safety. It is none of these things. Centralizing our food supply makes it easier for terrorists to harm us. Mad Cow Disease and Bird Flu are diseases of industrial agriculture, spread by confinement and bad practices. Food safety is an issue that is solved in the processing facility, with proper inspection, and consumer education. Sick animals are not allowed in slaughter channels now and proper enforcement will keep that from happening. The vast majority of food contamination happens inside the processing facility, not on the farm. The USDA says it needs a 48 hour traceback to be able to protect the animals, but we have existing programs, such as tattooing, branding, and other existing programs, that have already proven they are successful at doing that, without a NAIS.

Sustainable farms are part of the solution to healing the climate shift problem. Such farmers are attuned to the impact they have on their land, as they share the water supply, the air and often consume the produce of the farm themselves. They feed their neighbors, providing a sense of community and educating the next generation about how to feed themselves; they nourish the planet and grow a local economy.

When the Great Dust Bowl left, farms and towns were buried in layers of dirt. Families were uprooted and scattered to the winds and entire communities were lost. If this New Dust Bowl of government intervention is allowed to blow in, the growing population of small farms, preserving our rural landscapes and traditions, will be lost to the expense of compliance. All that will be left behind are the industrial farms who do not factor humane practices into their bottom line, and who have proven that it is their finances that matter, not their neighbors, their livestock or the land on which they operate. We will have lost the highest quality food available and will be forced to pay higher prices for our food as it will be concentrated in the hands of the agri-giants who authored this program in the first place.

Can we afford to lose our artisan cheeses? Our rural tourism? Our open space? Can we afford to have our children growing up continuing to believe that milk comes from cartons and that they are powerless to provide for themselves? Small farms create "empowerment zones" as the farmers, their neighbors and their customers have freedom of choice, availability of high quality food and a chance to make a living in small town America? Even urban planners are seeing the value of urban gardens, homesteads and community supported agriculture. Why can't the United States Dept. of Agriculture?

There is a hearing on March 11 that will discuss the animal identification system issue. There is a regulation pending in the Federal Registry, that would make NAIS mandatory for many farms, through existing animal health programs. That comment period closes on March 16, 2009. If NAIS goes through the sustainable farmer will either become an endangered species or a "pirate on the land," all in search of the freedom to raise animals in a humane, diversified, sustainable way. Please tell your elected officials that you want the tradition of the small farm to continue in America and that NAIS must not be enacted. We already face climate challenges greater than the Dust Bowl of the 1930's. We don't need a Government Dust Bowl on top of it.
 
TODAY

Washington, D.C. - R-CALF USA wishes to thank Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., for the letter he sent today to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to express his opposition to the agency's National Animal Identification System (NAIS), as it "fails to take into account the needs of the very farmers and ranchers who would be saddled with program implementation...Existing disease management and tracking programs in many instances already accomplish the task of identifying livestock...and mandating the use of technology will put a massive economic hardship on small, grassroots producers..."
Congress already has spent more than $128 million in precious taxpayer dollars on this very flawed system, and the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations measure included another $14.5 million for NAIS.

"We are extremely pleased to know that Senator Johnson's position is based on the direct feedback he received from actual livestock producers, which indicates he no doubt is truly listening to the concerns of his constituents," said R-CALF USA Animal Identification Committee Chair Kenny Fox. "We wish to emphasize once again that NAIS is not a solution for ongoing food safety problems as the increased incidences of meat recalls are from contamination at the meatpacker level, not the producer level."

Johnson's letter continues, in part: "...tracking each animal movement is exceedingly difficult, particularly given the production practices on acres in Western States, and would generate a substantial burden for ranchers and farmers. Movement between states has required, appropriately, additional documentation in accordance with the uniform recognition of livestock health requirements, but it makes little sense to me to track the recorded movement of animals on very minute levels.

"Ultimately, no animal disease mitigation efforts will be successful without ensuring that proper policy is put in place with respect to trade and the importation of livestock and product.

"In light of proposals concerning the importation of fresh meat and livestock from Argentina, a country which has yet to attain the same FMD-free status without vaccination as the U.S.; the importation of over thirty month (OTM) cattle from Canada, a country which has observed numerous Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) cases even after a feedban was put into place; or Tuberculosis cases which are traced back to Mexican feeder cattle, I question why U.S. producers are being saddled with additional animal disease management responsibilities when the USDA has proposed and has put in place policy which directly contradicts these efforts," the letter concludes, with a request for Vilsack's prompt attention to this matter.

"We appreciate Senator Johnson's understanding of the U.S. cattle industry and we hope he'll be able to convince Senators who have voiced support for this undertaking that NAIS is overly intrusive, unworkable, inefficient and a waste of taxpayer money," said R-CALF USA President/Region VI Director Max Thornsberry, a Missouri veterinarian who also chairs the group's animal health committee.

"R-CALF USA will continue to work with all members of Congress to make certain they don't idealize NAIS and assume it's a one-size-fits-all panacea to cure foreign animal diseases that might be introduced into the U.S. livestock herds," he concluded. "The U.S. cattle herd is the healthiest in the world. What we must do is aggressively prevent the introduction of foreign animal diseases, not assume we can manage those diseases with no harm to the U.S. cattle industry if such diseases are introduced intentionally or otherwise."

Note: To view/download a copy of Johnson's letter, please visit the "Animal Identification" link at www.r-calfusa.com.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top