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

Texas Postpones NAIS

Help Support Ranchers.net:

A

Anonymous

Guest
Farmers help postpone statewide mandate
Updated: 2/17/2006 11:13 AM
By: Veronica Castelo



Some farmers across Texas are crying victory. They helped postpone a plan by the state and federal government to identify and register livestock and poultry.

On Thursday, the Texas Animal Health Commission listened to concerns from more than 100 consumers and owners of poultry and livestock who spoke out against a proposed Premise Identification program. It requires anyone with livestock or poultry to register with the state and pay fees. Anyone who doesn't faces fines and criminal penalties.

One farmer said the program was invasive.

"I'm here to defend my grandchildren and everybody else's grandchildren who see this as another ripping off of their rights and the privacy of our own backyards to raise a goat or two or to have a couple of chickens back there. Those of you who are in favor of this are tearing our rights apart," he said.

Their message seemed to reach the commissioners' ears. Commissioner Roy Martinez was surprised at the turnout.

"I'm not sure this is the right thing to do yet. I didn't know that there was this much opposition to it," Martinez said.



Livestock ID plan postponed

The Texas Animal Health Commission will wait on a plan to have farmers register livestock and poultry.


The TAHC postponed their decision to adopt the program. Some members, like Commissioner Jerry Windham, even spoke out against it.

"I'll tell you this. I'm really not for this thing. I think we should delay this action long enough for the USDA to get their act together and for the Texas Legislature to hear from the people about what we're doing here," Windham said.

Last year lawmakers ordered the TAHC to come up with an identification plan. Commission Chair Richard Traylor said it had to be in line with federal goals for disease control and protecting animal health.

"This is not something we went out and asked for. These are expectations from the Legislature," Traylor said.

The nationwide deadlines for state compliance have been postponed and farmers say the state ones should be, too.

"Why is Texas proceeding with mandatory premise ID at this time when the USDA has backed off on its goal of mandatory compliance by 2008?" another local farmer said.

If the commission adopts the plan Texas will be the fourth U.S. state to mandate registration. While many farmers suspect the program will eventually take shape at the national level and trickle down, they do not believe Texas should be leading the way.

The commission will readdress the issue at their next meeting on May 4.
 

ocm

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
779
Reaction score
0
Oldtimer said:
Farmers help postpone statewide mandate
Updated: 2/17/2006 11:13 AM
By: Veronica Castelo



Some farmers across Texas are crying victory. They helped postpone a plan by the state and federal government to identify and register livestock and poultry.

On Thursday, the Texas Animal Health Commission listened to concerns from more than 100 consumers and owners of poultry and livestock who spoke out against a proposed Premise Identification program. It requires anyone with livestock or poultry to register with the state and pay fees. Anyone who doesn't faces fines and criminal penalties.

One farmer said the program was invasive.

"I'm here to defend my grandchildren and everybody else's grandchildren who see this as another ripping off of their rights and the privacy of our own backyards to raise a goat or two or to have a couple of chickens back there. Those of you who are in favor of this are tearing our rights apart," he said.

Their message seemed to reach the commissioners' ears. Commissioner Roy Martinez was surprised at the turnout.

"I'm not sure this is the right thing to do yet. I didn't know that there was this much opposition to it," Martinez said.



Livestock ID plan postponed

The Texas Animal Health Commission will wait on a plan to have farmers register livestock and poultry.


The TAHC postponed their decision to adopt the program. Some members, like Commissioner Jerry Windham, even spoke out against it.

"I'll tell you this. I'm really not for this thing. I think we should delay this action long enough for the USDA to get their act together and for the Texas Legislature to hear from the people about what we're doing here," Windham said.

Last year lawmakers ordered the TAHC to come up with an identification plan. Commission Chair Richard Traylor said it had to be in line with federal goals for disease control and protecting animal health.

"This is not something we went out and asked for. These are expectations from the Legislature," Traylor said.

The nationwide deadlines for state compliance have been postponed and farmers say the state ones should be, too.

"Why is Texas proceeding with mandatory premise ID at this time when the USDA has backed off on its goal of mandatory compliance by 2008?" another local farmer said.

If the commission adopts the plan Texas will be the fourth U.S. state to mandate registration. While many farmers suspect the program will eventually take shape at the national level and trickle down, they do not believe Texas should be leading the way.

The commission will readdress the issue at their next meeting on May 4.

I just wonder how they got the idea in the first place that producers wouldn't have a problem with the plan. Who were they listening to?
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
Neil and Alan Bright and Jerry

The TAHC postponed their decision to adopt the program. Some members, like Commissioner Jerry Windham, even spoke out against it.

"I'll tell you this. I'm really not for this thing. I think we should delay this action long enough for the USDA to get their act together and for the Texas Legislature to hear from the people about what we're doing here," Windham said.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
I. D. systems are great, but they should not be centralized where they can be manipulated by political forces to get political donations. They should also not be manditory. The less centralized authority we have here the better.
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
4,170
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan-Florida
I. D. systems are great, but they should not be centralized where they can be manipulated by political forces to get political donations.or *** or influence the price because of the known supply.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
2,066
Reaction score
0
Location
GWN
http://cattletoday.com/forum/about18824.html

Here is a couple of Texans who don't agree with you guys.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
Bill said:
http://cattletoday.com/forum/about18824.html

Here is a couple of Texans who don't agree with you guys.

Thanks, Bill. Not everyone agrees on this. I wouldn't mind an rfid tag at point of sale or sufficient records to that effect. Again, the information should not be so centralized as to allow this:

Thus far in our investigations, NAIS emerges as part of a grand plan to take beef down the same garden path as pork, while the corporate giants own or control the whole affair from birth channel to table fork. The only distinction is, unlike pork and poultry, most of the nation's beef comes from small producers running small herds on less than a hundred acres.

Those of you who decide to support this big business fiasco will rue the day when you find yourselves perpetually stuck at the break-even point, if that -- all while profit margins keep moving up the production line and into the pockets of those behind the hype and ceremony now being fed to the grassroots.

Who doesn't remember ten cent hogs and all those abandoned family-owned poultry operations scattered along every highway in the country? The more astute individual might have read about how state-owned, state-controlled farms fared during the Soviet Era.

How unfortunate that one has to make such a comparison. But how profoundly spooky that so many of America's small independent-minded (?) beef producers are happy to allow government intrusion onto and into their private premises.

I don't think that govt. is smart enough to do the manipulation but allowing their revolving door buddies at positions to do this is the potential problem. Remember, the Pickett fraud only swings the market, the market eventually (price that is) corrects itself. Knowing or influencing the swing can put you in the driver's seat.

As I said before, when the state govts. can do an accurate premise id on the wildlife population, then serious consideration should be given to their ability to handle livestock. Will they ever be able to prmise id wildlife? I think the answer to that is already evident.
 

Latest posts

Top