|
**NAIS**; also Codex Alimentarius, OIE, and WTO
|
|
Topic Started: Thursday, 29. December 2005, 11:26 (1,800 Views)
|
|
msequine
|
Tuesday, 19. August 2008, 10:43
Post #121
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/sep08/080901g.asp
Animal identification
- Quote:
-
Two resolutions dealing with animal identification received strong approval.
An ovation by the delegates followed their approval of Resolution 17, "Linking of Companion Animal Microchip Databases." It calls for the AVMA to actively promote the implementation of linking companion animal microchip databases. Dr. Larry Dee, delegate from the Florida VMA, which submitted it, said, "This does not change AVMA policy; it puts the issue on the action list. Personally, I think this is something we need to move forward on."
The statement included with the resolution noted that establishing linkages between the databases—or a national database or search engine—would dramatically simplify the ability to return lost companion animals. It states that for years, AVMA policy has supported the establishment of a single source for companion animal microchip database information recovery, but to no avail, and that the Association must take proactive measures to implement its policy.
Resolution 8, "Livestock Identification," received a 100 percent vote of approval. It resolves that the HOD support identification of livestock to enable trace back and trace forward of animals for disease control and eradication programs. Dr. Michael Whitehair of the House Advisory Committee, which submitted it, said, "As we look at the scope of veterinary medicine, we recognize as we play in the international arena it's important for us to have a policy ... especially in the area of food safety."
The statement with the resolution says that approval of this resolution will reaffirm AVMA support of livestock identification programs. The Association has two existing policies. The AVMA Policy on Livestock Identification recommends that a high priority be placed on using alternatives to hot-iron branding, such as radio frequency identification electronic technology. The AVMA policy titled National Animal Identification System supports an effective NAIS that comprises key elements it defines.
Could this be the beginning of NAIS Part II? Personally, I like the idea of being able to return lost pets to their rightful owners, but actively promoting microchips and linking them to a Nat'l database??? Hmmm, seems we've heard this song before.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Saturday, 23. August 2008, 07:47
Post #122
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
http://www.jbs.org/index.php/jbs-news-feed/7-jbs-news-feed/2188-farmers-and-ranchers-fight-nais-and-win Farmers and Ranchers Fight NAIS – and Win
- Quote:
-
Small farmers, big ranchers, home farmers, animal and pet owners, and food freedom advocates have come together to legally fight implementation of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Animal Identification System (NAIS). The results are encouraging.
Farm and ranch organizations, R-CALF USA being one of the leaders, along with the Farm-to-Consumer Foundation, NoNais.org run by farmer Walter Jeffries in Vermont, Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance, and even a few rural newspapers, along with some concerned attorneys, have done yeoman’s service in the fight to oppose the onerous and intrusive NAIS – the program initiated to track and monitor all animals and their movements.
- Quote:
-
Also, on June 4, 2008, the U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, ordered the USDA to suspend its plan to establish by June 9, 2008 a system of records entitled “National Animal Identification System.” The suspension was immediate and indefinite and was the result of a legal case, Mary-Louise Zanoni v. United States Department of Agriculture. Mary-Louise Zanoni is an upstate New York attorney and leading farm activist in the fight to protect the traditional rights of farmers. The suit was filed in an attempt to seek access to the NAIS database to determine its accuracy.
- Quote:
-
John Wallace, a candidate for Congress in New York’s 20th Congressional District, says the current NAIS program is not about preventing mad cow or other diseases since most contamination happens in the processing plants after the animals have been sold. It is, he says, “about helping big corporate agribusiness and RFID chip manufacturers make bigger profits at the expense of the small family farmers and ranchers. Protecting America’s food supply and preserving the country’s livestock’s resistance to diseases can best be protected by the continued decentralization of our nation’s food production and processing.”
Wallace’s conclusion is constitutionally spot-on:
"The current U.S. Department of Agriculture NAIS program means bigger government, more government intrusion, more regulations, more paperwork, more fees, more taxes and more federal spending. It will only result in less privacy, less freedom, less liberty, and less property and 4th Amendment rights for American citizens. It’s exactly the kind of unconstitutional federal program every American citizen and their elected federal representatives should oppose."
For a time it appeared that the NAIS program was going to be a steamroller crushing the rights of citizens. But courageous individuals standing up to the bureaucrats are demonstrating that activism in the name of liberty and freedom can indeed be effective in putting a stop to the march of big government.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Saturday, 23. August 2008, 07:57
Post #123
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
Don't be fooled by the suspension. It is a victory, but the USDA is continuing to push NAIS. Our representatives still need to vote AGAINST NAIS.
|
|
|
| |
|
grannycowgirl
|
Monday, 25. August 2008, 07:30
Post #124
|
Kaye
- Posts:
- 291
- Group:
- 2007
- Member
- #292
- Joined:
- 24 April 2007
|
Let's don't quit now, keep contacting state and federal congressmen.
|
My shop for unique gifts.
Horses always start, they never run out of gas, and they will not get you greasy.
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Thursday, 6. November 2008, 19:01
Post #125
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
Well, we knew that wasn't really the end of this didn't we?
- eMail from Liberty Ark
-
LIBERTY ARK ALERT A new memo out of USDA shows they are pushing ahead with NAIS despite the public protests and even state laws barring mandatory programs.
USDA recently issued a memo to its “Veterinary Services Management Team” that requires NAIS premises registration for various disease program activities. (Veterinary Services Memorandum No. 575.19, posted at http://www.libertyark.net/APHIS-PIN-Mandate-080922.pdf ) The memo includes activities such as vaccinations, testing, and applying official ear tags, for programs for every livestock species, ranging from brucellosis to scrapies to equine infectious anemia. One of the most important aspects of this memo is that people who refuse to have their farms registered will be registered against their will. Thus, USDA has officially abandoned the supposed “voluntary”ť nature of NAIS. Now animal owners who take government-required steps, such as testing and vaccinating their animals, may find themselves enrolled in the NAIS premises registration database with or without their consent.
TAKE ACTION!
The USDA’s action means we have to continue and redouble our efforts to educate state and federal legislators about the problems with NAIS, so that they put a halt to the agencies’ continued implementation. Take a few moments to call your Congressman today! Go to http://www.libertyark.net/tools.html for information on how to contact your legislators and materials to help.
It’s also critical to get more state laws passed stopping NAIS. Stay tuned for more information on bills for the 2009 legislative session!
Four states already have laws that forbid their state agencies from mandating NAIS: Arizona, Kentucky, Missouri and Nebraska. Below is a letter from Senator Karen Johnson, who sponsored the Arizona bill, to the Arizona Department of Agriculture, in response to the USDA’s memo. Ask your state legislator to take a stand like Senator Johnson!
MORE DETAILS
USDA has failed to follow any of the administrative procedures required to create enforceable regulations when it issued this new step in NAIS. So whether USDA can actually enforce it isn’t clear. On the other hand, USDA has created the entire NAIS program without regard to following the rules administrative agencies must follow, so it’s likely that the state agencies will automatically follow the USDA’s memo. Here are some excerpts from the memo:
USDA is requiring NAIS premises registration “as the sole and standard location identifier”ť for activities relating to any disease regulated through the Code of Federal Regulations, for emerging or re-emerging disease, and for foreign animal diseases (page 1, Section II & III.A.1) People who refuse to voluntarily register their properties in NAIS will be registered against their will:
“If the person responsible for the premises chooses not to complete the form to register his/her premises, either the animal health official or an accredited veterinarian will collect the defined data fields.”ť (page 2, Section III.B.2) The memo applies to federal animal health authorities, state animal health authorities, and private veterinarians who are accredited for federally regulated diseases (page 1, Section I)
Any veterinarian who is accredited for a federally regulated disease is subject to the USDA’s edict to involuntarily register his or her clients: “A PIN is required for activities performed at a premises by a State or Federal animal health authority or an accredited veterinarian for any disease that is regulated through Title 9 of the Code of Federal Regulations.”ť (page 4)
The listed disease programs for which a PIN will be required include: Tuberculosis Brucellosis Johne’s disease Pseudorabies Scrapie Chronic Wasting Disease Low pathogenic Avian Influenza of the H5/H7 strains Communicable diseases in horses, asses, ponies, mules, and zebras, which would include equine Infectious Anemia Texas (splenetic) fever in cattle Scabies in cattle Exotic Newcastle disease and chlamydiosis Poultry health as addressed in the National Poultry Improvement Plan Swine Health
The activities that will result in being registered in NAIS include: Vaccinations Diagnostic tests Certifications (other than certificates of veterinary inspection) Application of official eartags or backtags (page 5) USDA states that PIN’s are not required for “participation in voluntary programs,”ť but does not explain which those would be (p.6)
The full memo is posted at: http://www.libertyark.net/APHIS-PIN-Mandate-080922.pdf
SENATOR JOHNSON’S LETTER:
KAREN JOHNSON DISTRICT 18 State Senator FortyEightth Legislature 1700 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2890 PHONE (602) 926-3160 TOLL FREE 1-800-352-8404 FAX (602) 926-3429 E-MAIL kjohnson@azleg.state.az.us
COMMITTEES: Education Chairman Appropriations Judiciary Natural Resources
October 31, 2008
Mr. Donald Butler, Director Arizona State Dept. of Agriculture 1688 West Adams Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Dear Director Butler:
During the 2007 legislative session, I sponsored a bill (SB1428) that prohibits forced participation in the National Animal ID System (NAIS) in Arizona. Governor Napolitano signed that bill and it has been the law now for more than a year. (See ARS 3-1207 and ARS 3-1214).
I recently received a copy of a Memorandum (attached) issued by the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture which indicates that veterinarians who visit a property are to “collect the defined data fields”ť in order to assign a PIN, “as defined in the National Animal Identification System Program Standards.”ť This pin is to be the location identifier for all Veterinary Services disease program activities and -- according to the memo -- must be assigned, with or without the consent of the property owner.
I’m sending a letter to Attorney General Terry Goddard asking him to intervene with the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture in this matter. I expect the law to be enforced in the spirit intended when it was drafted.
I would like to know how you intend to deal with this, since we have a law in place that prohibits forced participation in NAIS? I should tell you that I have been contacted by various Arizona residents telling me that they are being forced into premise registration, especially the cattlemen. I am calling on you to do everything in your power to see that this law is respected and that animal owners in Arizona are not compelled to “register”ť their property in a government data base. Please advise me on how you plan to handle this.
I look forward to hearing from you in a timely manner.
Best regards,
Senator Karen S. Johnson
cc: Attorney General Terry Goddard
Attachments KSJ:kw
CONCLUSION We need everyone to speak out against the USDA’s continued forcible implementation of NAIS! Put flyers out at your local sales barn and feed store, write letters to the editor of your newspaper, or host a public meeting in your area about NAIS! The USDA is relying on secrecy and apathy to push NAIS through, so it is up to all of us to work together to bring it out into the open and fight it.
Go to www.libertyark.net for more information and tools to help in this fight.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Thursday, 6. November 2008, 19:03
Post #126
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
I've attached the USDA Memo and a flyer you can eMail or print and handout at your local CoOps/feed/tack stores or post on their bulletin boards.
- Attached to this post:
APHIS_PIN_Mandate_080922.pdf (715.87 KB) fb_flyer.pdf (121.97 KB)
Edited by msequine, Friday, 7. November 2008, 07:38.
|
|
|
| |
|
grannycowgirl
|
Thursday, 6. November 2008, 20:29
Post #127
|
Kaye
- Posts:
- 291
- Group:
- 2007
- Member
- #292
- Joined:
- 24 April 2007
|
Thanks, Ruth.
|
My shop for unique gifts.
Horses always start, they never run out of gas, and they will not get you greasy.
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Friday, 7. November 2008, 07:40
Post #128
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
YW GC.
For anyone who is interested, I added a flyer to my previous post. Feel free to eMail or print and distribute it.
|
|
|
| |
|
LeLoo
|
Friday, 7. November 2008, 09:37
Post #129
|
Wild At Heart
- Posts:
- 10,328
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #14
- Joined:
- 25 June 2005
- 1. How Many Horses:
- 4
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- straight Egyptian, Al Khamsa Arabians
|
I've been reading it's no longer mandatory either. They are requiring vets to register premises if not already registered, against the owner's wishes, if they go out to do coggins or vaccinations.
I'll post some details and links later, no time right now.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Tuesday, 23. December 2008, 14:53
Post #130
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
http://www.wilsoncountynews.com/article.php?id=21583&n=agriculture-today-usda-memo-mandates-nais-premises-identification-for-2009
USDA memo mandates NAIS premises identification for 2009 December 9, 2008
- Quote:
-
... the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s ... backing away from an internal Agriculture Department memo that outlines how to force registration of real estate holding livestock, horses, or poultry under the USDA’s National Animal Identification System (NAIS). The Agriculture Department memo, issued on Sept. 22, dictates the procedure by which state agencies shall register animal owners’ properties, despite the owners’ objections, if the owners refuse to voluntarily register.
“The memo not only calls for mandatory registrations, but for branding individuals as ‘dissenters,’” said Col. (Ret.) Randy Givens, a founder of the Liberty Ark Coalition, an alliance formed to fight the animal identification program. “The USDA’s document states that people who refuse to ‘voluntarily’ register their property will not only be involuntarily assigned a registration number, but will also be assigned a special code that designates their refusal to ‘volunteer,’” he said.
- Quote:
-
After two groups, the Liberty Art Coalition and the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance (FARFA), made the memo public on Nov. 1, concerned animal owners promptly started calling their state departments of agriculture to inquire what it meant. In response, the agriculture department and pro-NAIS industry organizations such as the American Horse Council have launched a campaign to re-cast the memo.
“This is the usual response; they are denying the plain meaning of the memo,” said Judith McGeary, executive director of Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance and herself a small farmer. “In a recent letter, the American Horse Council declared that anti-NAIS activists did not understand the memo and that the memo was discussing plans for some unspecified time in the future,” McGeary said. “But the memo was issued by the agency, written in the present tense, with no caveats or limitations.”
- Quote:
-
McGeary questions, “What would they have done if activists hadn’t publicized the memo? The agencies’ pattern is to push NAIS behind closed doors, and to try to discredit any opposition by disclaiming the agencies’ own written plans once revealed. The agencies and businesses that will profit from NAIS are determined to push the program through by whatever means they can find. It’s past time for Congress and state legislatures to rein in these rogue agencies,” McGeary said.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Friday, 26. December 2008, 09:09
Post #131
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
http://www.wpr.org/news/newsheadlines.cfm
Critics of Livestock Registration Fear Mandatory ID Chips
- Quote:
-
By Gil Halsted Monday, December 22, 2008
(STATEWIDE) An Amish dairy farmer in Clark County is the first person in the state to be prosecuted for not complying with the state's mandatory farm livestock registration rules. But a family farm group says many other farmers have also refused to register because they don't want to implant radio frequency chips in their animals so they can tracked for disease.
The state's farm registration requirement became law in 2006, and was initially part of a federal plan to require all farm livestock to be registered so they could be tracked from birth to the slaughterhouse and eventually to a consumer's dining room table. But Wisconsin Department of Agriculture spokeswoman Donna Gilson says the feds have backed off on that plan. She says the state's premises registration requirement is not part of a plan to tag and track all animals in the state.
"There is absolutely no movement afoot in Wisconsin to make animal identification mandatory," says Gilson.
But Sauk County farmer John Kinsman of Family Farm Defenders says he's not convinced that either state or federal agricultural officials have given up on that plan. He says there are already private companies marketing ID chips to farmers for their animals. He also says farmers like Emmanuel Miller in Clark County – who’s refusing to register his farm because of his Amish faith -- are being denied milk licenses and threatened with thousands of dollars in fines if they don't register.
Kinsman says people from Pennsylvania, New York, Minnesota, Missouri, and Vermont have contacted his group, “very upset” and fighting state campaigns to “get your farm number."
Kinsman say he registered his farm soon after the rule was enacted but regrets it now because he doesn't want to be forced to register every one of his animals.
Meanwhile, Emmanuel Miller's next court date is scheduled for March 29th.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Friday, 26. December 2008, 09:39
Post #132
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
Flow Chart Chain of Command NAIS
- Attached to this post:
Nais_Flow_Chart.pdf (153.03 KB)
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Thursday, 1. January 2009, 07:50
Post #133
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America “Fighting for the U.S. Cattle Producer” For Immediate Release Contact: Shae Dodson, Communications Coordinator December 29, 2008 Phone: 406-672-8969; e-mail: sdodson@r-calfusa.com
Group Wins Major Animal ID Dispute; USDA Cancels Mandatory Premises Registration Directive Billings, Mont. – Just over a month after R-CALF USA sent a formal letter to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service-Veterinary Services (APHIS-VS) demanding that the agency retract Memorandum No. 575.19 issued on Sept. 22, 2008, APHIS-VS officially canceled that particular memo on Dec. 22, 2008.
Memorandum 575.19 mandated premises registration under the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) for producers engaged in interstate commerce and who participate in any one of the dozen or more federally regulated disease programs.
R-CALF USA told the agency in its Nov. 10, 2008, letter that the memo “constitutes an unlawful, final regulatory action initiated and implemented without public notice or opportunity for comment, as required by the Administrative Procedure Act,” and must be retracted.
“We caught USDA in the unlawful act of trying to convert what was promised to be a completely voluntary animal identification system into a mandatory NAIS, and the agency backed down,” said R-CALF USA President/Region VI Director Max Thornsberry, a Missouri veterinarian who also chairs the group’s animal health committee. “This goes to show how an organized group of cattle producers can effectively defend their rights if they stand and fight together.”
The cancellation memorandum issued by APHIS-VS on Dec. 22, 2008, states, “VS Memorandum No. 575.19 dated September 22, 2008, is hereby canceled.”
“This action by USDA confirms what we’ve been saying all along – that USDA does not have the authority to implement NAIS and it is using underhanded and unlawful methods to coerce independent cattle producers into giving up their rights to their property,” said Kenny Fox, who chairs the group’s animal identification committee.
“R-CALF USA encourages producers to not register their premises under the NAIS and to immediately request that their names and property be removed from the NAIS database if they had previously registered under USDA’s coercive actions,” Fox urged.
The new APHIS-VS memo further states that APHIS-VS “has an established procedure for producers who request their premises record be removed from the NAIS premises databases.”
R-CALF USA advocates that USDA should use and improve existing disease traceback methods including state-sanctioned brand programs that do not require individual producers to register their property under a national premises registration program in order to improve USDA’s disease traceback capabilities.
“There is no need to violate producers’ private property rights to accomplish this objective, and R-CALF will continue to work with Congress and USDA to improve our existing systems, but we will not tolerate the type of government intrusion on our industry that USDA envisioned with NAIS,” Fox concluded.
Note: To view/download R-CALF USA’s letter or the new APHIS-VS memorandum, please visit the “Animal Identification” link at www.r-calfusa.com or contact R-CALF USA Communications Coordinator Shae Dodson to request copies. # # # R-CALF USA (Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America) is a national, non-profit organization dedicated to ensuring the continued profitability and viability of the U.S. cattle industry. R-CALF USA represents thousands of U.S. cattle producers on trade and marketing issues. Members are located across 47 states and are primarily cow/calf operators, cattle backgrounders, and/or feedlot owners. R-CALF USA has dozens of affiliate organizations and various main-street businesses are associate members. R-CALF USA directors and committee chairs are extremely active unpaid volunteers. For more information, visit www.r-calfusa.com or, call 406-252-2516.
|
|
|
| |
|
LeLoo
|
Thursday, 1. January 2009, 09:14
Post #134
|
Wild At Heart
- Posts:
- 10,328
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #14
- Joined:
- 25 June 2005
- 1. How Many Horses:
- 4
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- straight Egyptian, Al Khamsa Arabians
|
hooray.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Thursday, 1. January 2009, 09:46
Post #135
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
I'm attaching a copy of the original Memo. It bears careful reading.
- Quote:
-
p.2 2. If the person responsible for the premises chooses not to complete the form to register his/her premises, either the animal health official or an accredited veterinarian will collect the defined data fields
p. 4. 1. When a location needs a premises identification number for a disease control program...it is important that the producer be given the opportunity to voluntarily register the location with the system the State is currently using.
2. If the producer does not wish to voluntarily register, it is still important to use the state premises registration system to the extent possible to obtain a PIN. ... 7. Premises registration records not voluntarily completed by the producer will be "flagged" accordingly.
Unfortunately, I don't think the fight is over by a long shot. They're not listening...just like they didn't when Americans were opposed to the bailout bill. I'm sure they'll pursue other avenues to try and cram this down our throats.
- Attached to this post:
Sep_08_APHISMemo.pdf (715.87 KB)
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Thursday, 1. January 2009, 09:59
Post #136
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
R-CALF USA’s TOP 10 REASONS to OPPOSE NAIS’ PREMISES REGISTRATION
- Quote:
-
1. Registering a premises with the Federal government without receiving just compensation constitutes a voluntary surrender of any constitutional rights – right of property and freedom from unreasonable governmental searches – associated with registered premises.
2. Registering a premises with the Federal government without receiving just compensation constitutes a voluntary submission to any invasion of private property rights and government intrusion into private business operations associated registered premises.
3. Registering a premises without entering into a contract that expressly limits the Federal government’s authority over the premises may result in subjecting the premises and its registrant to any and all future rules, regulations and policies that the Federal government may later decide to impose on such registrants.
4. Registering a premises under the guise of protecting against the spread of Foreign Animal Diseases effectively gives the Federal government a license to abandon the most effective means of preventing Foreign Animal Diseases in the first place – disallowing imports from disease-affected countries.
5. Registering a premises without entering into a contract that expressly prohibits the Federal government from allowing access to premises information could subject the registrant to unwanted exposure to other Federal and state agencies and animal rights extremists.
6. Registering a premises could result in greater legal exposure of cattle producers for events that occur after the registrant’s cattle leave the farm or ranch.
7. Registering a premises would result in the voluntary inclusion of the registrants’ farm, ranch, home, and cattle to a general system of permanent registration of personal property that currently is only applicable to items that could be highly dangerous if misused – automobiles and guns.
8. A registered premises alone provides no greater disease trace-back potential than simply knowing the owner of the animal or animals in question . . . unless there is far more to the Federal government’s plan than to simply obtain registered premises.
9. Premises registration is the foundational building block needed by the Federal government to immediately implement a full-scale, mandatory National Animal Identification System (NAIS), with little to no input from cattle producers.
10. Voluntary premises registration sends a strong signal to the Federal government that U.S. cattle producers give the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) a high approval rating for all the agency’s policies and actions that impact U.S. cattle producers – it demonstrates that U.S. cattle producers have the utmost faith and trust in the USDA’s past, present and future actions. R-CALF USA does not support USDA’s aggressive efforts to register U.S. livestock premises.
For more information, call 406-252-2516, or visit www.r-calfusa.com.
|
|
|
| |
|
LeLoo
|
Thursday, 1. January 2009, 10:00
Post #137
|
Wild At Heart
- Posts:
- 10,328
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #14
- Joined:
- 25 June 2005
- 1. How Many Horses:
- 4
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- straight Egyptian, Al Khamsa Arabians
|
Oh, I agree, this is just a small little win. I think everyone should stay on their toes watching and listening and speaking up when we can. We need to stick together and fight these underhanded tactics. That memo could have easily slipped by without notice. I'm sure that is what they were hoping.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Wednesday, 14. January 2009, 15:15
Post #138
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
In one of the "unwanted horse" threads, I said I would dig up some info on these. It's separate for now, but I'll combine it with the NAIS thread in a few days.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Hannes/doreen2.htm
NAIS SPAWNED BY INTERNATIONAL ENTANGLEMENTS
- Quote:
-
If you've been wondering where the insanity masquerading as our federal government 'food safety' and animal health protection regulations and laws are coming from, you can now say with certainty that they descend from the organizations within and tied to our international alliances.
- Quote:
-
...you had best be able to understand the impact on trade of the SPS and TBT agreements made through the WTO (World Trade Organization) and be able to relate the position of the United States in the OIE and Codex.
- Quote:
-
An introduction to acronyms is necessary. The players involved in the proposed National Animal Identification System being pushed by the USDA, and to be managed by APHIS (Animal Plant Health Inspection Service) are varied. First there is the WTO (World Trade Organization) which reached an agreement amongst participating countries several years ago in Uruguay called the SPS (Sanitary and Phytosanitary) and TBT (Technical Barriers to Trade) agreements.
- Quote:
-
In laymen's terms what the SPS agreement says is that each member country can make regulations that must be met by other member countries in order to trade in agricultural goods with each other.
- Quote:
-
Then there was the TBT (Technical Barriers to Trade) agreement made at the same time in Uruguay. What that says is that developed countries must help less developed countries to advance technologically to be able to participate in trade with other member countries. Developed countries cannot require more than a country is able to achieve and the developed countries need to help the less developed countries to meet their own criteria through funding and other assistance.
- Quote:
-
...the OIE (Office Internacional Epizooities) or World Animal Health Organization, which although it is independent of the UN in origin works very closely with both the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN) and Codex Alimentarius which is a child of the UN and FAO. Codex can be best understood as being the global FDA and OIE as the global USDA. The Untied States of America has membership in both the OIE and the UN and therefore Codex.
- Quote:
-
OIE has also been increasingly involved with Codex and are working in concert on nearly everything at this time. Of particular importance to the subject of the NAIS (National Animal Identification System) is the issue of 'traceability/product tracing' and 'good farming practices'.
The OIE has a publication available on line called the "Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission" which is absolutely loaded with information regarding "traceability/product tracing" and Codex standards on the subject.
On page 41 of the TAHSC (Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission) it states that there is a critical relationship between animal identification and the traceability of animal products...
- Quote:
-
Also worth noting from page 41 is the following paragraph:
"The Competent Authority in partnership with relevant government agencies and the private sector should establish a legal framework for the implementation and enforcement of animal identification and animal traceability
- Quote:
-
In Appendix XXXIV of the Terrestrial Animal Health Standards document it states that VS (veterinary services) are the "Competent Authority" for animal identification and traceability in all member countries. It also does such fun things as role the words "animal identification system" into the word "animal identification" so that the smaller term may legally be referred to meaning an entire national or international system.
The European Union has made no real secret of the fact that their animal identification requirements are in line with both Codex and the OIE.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Wednesday, 14. January 2009, 15:16
Post #139
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
Anyone think this isn't connected to NAIS?
From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Alimentarius
- Quote:
-
The Codex Alimentarius (Latin for "food code" or "food book") is a collection of internationally recognized standards, codes of practice, guidelines and other recommendations relating to foods, food production and food safety. ... The Codex Alimentarius is recognized by the World Trade Organization as an international reference point for the resolution of disputes concerning food safety and consumer protection.[2][3]
The information below comes from a website about the banning of nutritional supplements through the Codex. Excerpts regarding the Codex and WTO are pasted below:
http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php?page_id=157
- Quote:
-
1) Started in 1962 by UN, Imposed by WTO Sanctions
Codex Alimentarius was created in 1962 as a trade Commission by the UN to control the international trade of food. Its initial intentions may have been altruistic but it has been taken over by corporate interests, most notably the pharmaceutical, pesticide, biotechnology and chemical industries.
Codex Alimentarius is backed up by ... trade sanctions of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Any non Codex-compliant nation would face huge economic punishment since they would automatically lose in any food-trade dispute with a Codex compliant country.
- Quote:
-
5) Serves Economic Interests ... Through WTO and Napoleonic Code
The World Trade Organization (WTO) intends ... massive economic sanctions if WTO-countries do not comply with Codex Alimentarius.
- Quote:
-
Once we “HARMonize” with Codex, by the way, we no longer have the right, while we belong to the WTO, to repeal or change that “HARMonization”!
http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php?page_id=155
- Quote:
-
7. Shrewdly, Slowly Raising Heat Codex will go into global effect on December 31, 2009, unless we, the People, take action and avert it. Right now, we are like a frog boiled slowly, the heat raised gradually so we won’t jump out of the water.
And these News Articles were pasted on the Washington State No NAIS website.
http://www.nonaiswa.org/?p=1886 First OIE International Conference on Animal Identification and Traceability
- Quote:
-
The purpose of the Conference is to support the implementation of the relevant international standards for identification and traceability in live animals and animal products globally.
http://www.nonaiswa.org/?p=1889 OIE Animal ID and Traceability Objectives and Themes
- Quote:
-
This conference aims to emphasise the importance and benefits of identification and traceability, to raise awareness of existing OIE and Codex standards, to determine future requirements for standards, and to provide advice and assistance on implementing standards, ...
- Quote:
-
The participants will come from relevant national administrations and animal research and production groups. Presentations will cover all sectors of livestock production as well as traceability of food products.
- Quote:
-
The conference will conclude with discussion and adoption of resolutions relevant to improvement of methods of implementation of animal identification and traceability.
- Quote:
-
The objectives that the Conference will aim to achieve in the various sequential sessions are as follow:
* Raise international awareness of the relevant international standards published by the OIE and the Codex Alimentarius Commission and the bridge between the traceability of live animals and the traceability of products * Give practical information and technical advice on how to implement these standards in different industry sectors and national contexts * Review latest experience in public and private identification and traceability systems, with reference to the relevant international standards * Provide practical advice and examples to help national Veterinary Services and other agencies to play their appropriate role in regard to animal identification and traceability * Identify the type of support that can be provided by international organisations and donors to Veterinary Services and interested parties operating in developing countries, as appropriate to their needs, as regards the implementation of the OIE and Codex standards * Launch a discussion on the future standard setting needs for animal identification and traceability * Discuss and propose research and development priorities relevant to animal identification and traceability
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Wednesday, 14. January 2009, 15:17
Post #140
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
http://www.newswithviews.com/brownfield/brownfield54.htm
- Quote:
-
Remember - the United States has signed documents with these member nations so we also are a member. As a member we must harmonize if we are to trade in agricultural goods. What if the United States refuses to implement a program of Animal Identification? World Trade Organization documents regarding the SPS and the TBT recommend disputes be mediated by the OIE or Codex.
It is plain and simple - this dictate is coming directly from the OIE - (world animal health organization) which is an off-shoot of the United Nation's Food and Agricultural Organization, and since the United States has signed documents creating membership in these foreign alliances, the US is obligated to create an Animal Identification program.
This is exactly what George Washington warned us against in 1796 when he gave his farewell address. Washington told us to "STEER CLEAR OF PERMANENT ALLIANCES WITH ANY PORTION OF THE FOREIGN WORLD." Thomas Jefferson stated during his 1801 Inaugural address, "ENTANGLING ALLIANCES WITH NONE." Our national leaders have forgotten American History and have us so entangled in foreign alliances that the noose is tightening around our economic neck and choking the life out of our sovereignty.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Wednesday, 14. January 2009, 22:51
Post #141
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
From the change.org website:
- Quote:
-
On the Tuesday, January 13th, USDA published in the federal register it's intent to designate '840' animal ID numbers as the only officially recognized animal ID numbers. Public comment is open and closes on the 16th of March 2009. I'd like to encourage everyone who has commented and/or voted on this idea at change.org to read the entry in the federal register and comment on the proposed rule. For those in states that have made mandatory implementation of NAIS In their state, this means that USDA will be forcing you into NAIS premises registration and individual animal ID at the federal level.
You can read the entry in the federal register here - http://frwebgate1.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/TEXTgate.cgi?WAISdocID=95934860372+0+1+0&WAISaction=retrieve
In the entry, there are instructions for submitting your comment to USDA.
The link above didn't work for me, so I found and I'm attaching the PDF file from the Federal Register.
- Attached to this post:
PDFgate.pdf (78.96 KB)
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Thursday, 15. January 2009, 16:51
Post #142
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
Regarding post directly above, here's a message from Mary Zanoni regarding the proposed legislation. (emphasis added is mine)
- Quote:
-
The proposed rule directly affects cattle, bison, sheep, goats, and swine. However, it will also bring a full NAIS closer for all species. Therefore, all owners of horses, poultry, and other species should also submit comments and urge their livestock/farming organizations to submit comments. Within a few days, Mary Zanoni of Farm for Life will send out a sample letter for people to consider as a basis for comments. The comment period is scheduled to close on March 16, 2009.
Commenting on this proposed rule is extremely important. Not only all animal owners, but also consumers of local/organic/grassfed foods, and everyone concerned with preserving a place for family farms in a world increasingly dominated by Industrial Agriculture, is urged to comment. Submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2007-0096 to submit or view comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically; or by regular Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery. Please send two copies of your comment to Docket No. APHIS–2007–0096, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A–03.8, 4700, River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737–1238.
Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS–2007–0096.
In regard to advancing NAIS, the four most important aspects of the USDA/APHIS Jan. 13, 2009 rule are:
1. As of the effective date of the final rule, the NAIS Premises ID Number (PIN) would be the only form of PIN allowed for certain official uses. (Note on timing -- the comment period is open until March 16, 2009. Then USDA reviews the comments and at some point can issue a final rule. That date of issuance would be the effective date for the mandatory assignments of the NAIS Premises IDs. However, a large number of unfavorable comments might result in the postponement, or even retraction or cancellation, of the rule.)
2. Although the system announced in this proposed rule supposedly permits the continued use of the National Uniform Eartagging System (traditionally, metal tags) and a "premises-based numbering system," in fact, these systems would be used in the same way as NAIS Animal Identification Numbers. The older forms of eartags and individual IDs would all be connected into the NAIS Premises ID database through the Animal Identification Number Management System ("AINMS," the USDA system that keeps track of what individual animal identification number is assigned to what farm or ranch). In other words, under the system of this proposed rule, anytime a farmer/rancher has metal tags applied to livestock (such as for TB or brucellosis testing), the farm/ranch will be placed into the NAIS Premises ID system and the numbers on the tags will be tied to the farm/ranch through the USDA's AINMS system.
3. Some requirements are being added for official eartags and these new requirements might make it very difficult or even impossible to obtain metal tags instead of the NAIS tags. The additional requirements include a "U.S. shield" printed on each tag, and tags mustbe "tamper-resistant and have a high retention rate in the animal." The APHIS Administrator must approve all tags. The NAIS tags now available already meet these standards. It is not clear that metal tags have ever been judged by these standards, so it is possible that the APHIS Administrator could fail to approve metal and other non-NAIS tags. Also, tag manufacturers will have a clear self-interest in abandoning production of cheap metal tags in favor of expensive NAIS RFID tags, so non-NAIS forms of tags may quickly become extinct.
4. The addition of a definition of the AINMS to the animal-disease program rules in the Code of Federal Regulations is huge. Previously the AINMS has only been defined in the non-rule NAIS informational documents (Draft Strategic Plan, User Guide, Business Plan, etc.) so it did not have any defined legal status. Now this proposed rule adds a definition of the AINMS and also provides that eventually the AINMS will be used to tie all types of "official" tags -- not just the NAIS 15-digit tags -- to a NAIS registered premises. The proposed rule accomplishes essentially a mandatory system for the first two elements of NAIS -- NAIS premises ID and NAIS individual animal ID. The only difference from the original NAIS plan is that now the metal tags and other traditional forms of individual ID have become additional forms of numbering/tagging that are used as part of NAIS.
Note that even if your state has passed a law to keep NAIS "voluntary," that will not necessarily save you from this rule. The Federal Register notice specifically states: "All State and local laws and regulations that are in conflict with this rule will be preempted." (p. 1638.) However, if you are working to pass a state law limiting NAIS in the present legislative session, keep working -- such a law could still be very important. It shows the opposition of animal owners and consumers to NAIS, which may help get the rule postponed or rescinded. In addition, the question of whether this rule would pre-empt contrary state laws in all circumstances may someday be open to legal challenge. But for now, your best defense against NAIS is to make sure you comment on the proposed rule.
Mary Zanoni P.O. Box 501 Canton, New York 13617 315-347-1100 Watch for Mary's sample letter to be posted in the next few days.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Friday, 20. February 2009, 13:29
Post #143
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
http://www.libertyark.net/alerts/aa-020209.html
- Quote:
-
Comments Urgently Needed:The USDA has proposed a rule to mandate premises registration under the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) for existing disease control programs. The draft rule covers programs for cattle, sheep, goats, and swine, but it sets the stage for the entire NAIS program to be mandated for everyone. It is critical that the USDA and Congress hear from the hundreds of thousands of people who will be adversely affected by the NAIS program. This includes anyone who owns even one livestock animal (including a single chicken or a horse), as well as consumers who care about local and sustainable foods, taxpayers who object to wasteful government programs, and advocates for a safer food system. STEP 1: Submit comments to USDA online or by mail. The comments must be received by USDA by March 16, 2009.You can submit comments online by clicking here. Click on the yellow balloon under “add comments.” Or mail two copies of your comments to USDA. Docket No. APHIS-2007-0096 Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS Station 3A-03.8 4700 River Road Unit 118 Riverdale, MD 20737-1238 Clearly state that your comments refer to Docket No. APHIS-2007-0096. (Sample comments are at the end of this alert.) STEP 2: Send a copy of your comments to your Congressman and Senators.
You can find who represents you, and their contact information by clicking here.BackgroundThe U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has been working for over five years to force a National Animal Identification System (NAIS) onto American animal owners. NAIS is designed to identify and track each and every individual livestock and poultry animal owned by family farmers, hobby farmers, homesteaders, and pet owners across the country. USDA claims that NAIS is a disease tracking program, but has refused to provide any support for its claims. In reality, NAIS will:
- Usurp states’ existing, well-functioning disease response and brand inspection programs;
- Impose high costs and government surveillance on every farmer and animal owner for no significant benefits.
NAIS does nothing to improve food safety for consumers or prevent animal diseases. This program is a one-size-fits-all program developed by and for big Agribusiness. NAIS will increase consolidation of our food supply in the hands of a few large companies and put the brakes on the growing movement toward regional food systems. Despite promises to the contrary, the USDA’s new proposed rule would make portions of the NAIS mandatory for thousands of people in every state. This draft rule would mandate the first step – premises registration – for anyone who is involved in a federal disease control program. That includes tuberculosis, brucellosis, scrapie, Johne’s and more. The NAIS Premises Identification Number (PIN) will become the only form of premises identification acceptable for official USDA purposes, with no opt-out provision.The proposed rule would also limit official Animal Identification Numbers to the NAIS-compliant 840-numbering system, laying the groundwork for future regulations that would limit people’s options on the types of tags they could use. The proposed rule is not final yet. You can help stop it by visiting the Federal Registry and making a comment, and click on the yellow balloon under “add comments.” Be sure to send a copy of your comments to your elected officials, letting them know how you feel about NAIS. The grassroots movement has already successfully stalled USDA's plans for NAIS, which originally called for the entire program - premises registration, animal identification, and tracking - to be mandatory by January 2009. The proposed rule is an opportunity to get thousands of objections in the formal record, and have an even greater impact. It is imperative that people speak up to protect our right to farm and our food supply! ================================================ ================================================ Sample Comments
Docket No. APHIS-2007-0096 Regulatory Analysis and Development PPD, APHIS Station 3A-03.8 4700 River Road Unit 118 Riverdale, MD 20737-1238
Mail two copies to the address above, or submit comments online by clicking here.
Date: __________
Re: Docket No. APHIS–2007–0096I urge the USDA to withdraw its proposed rule to implement portions of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), Docket No. APHIS-2007-0096. I am a ______________________________________________ (State who you are - farmer, consumer, animal owner - and why this issue matters to you.) The proposed rule mandates the NAIS Premises Identification Number (PIN) as the sole means of identifying properties for official USDA purposes. The proposed rule also mandates the use of the NAIS numbering system (i.e. the “840 numbering system”) for eartags using official animal identification numbers. Tags using other numbering systems would be required to be linked to a NAIS PIN. The draft rule is seriously flawed for multiple reasons: 1. Does not substantiate the alleged benefits to animal health. USDA makes general claims about the benefits of identifying locations where animals are kept, but the agency does not address the capacity of existing programs to meet this purpose, nor how the proposed rule actually improves on the current ability to identify locations.
2. Ignores the costs and burdens. The proposed rule would substantially increase costs, and add intrusive governmental burdens, to the industry and the taxpayer. The costs include the development and maintenance of a massive database; the purchase of 840-numbered tags by animal owners; state agencies having to implement changes to existing programs; and increased federal government intrusion into the lives and daily activities of farmers and other animal owners.
3. Violation of individuals’ religious beliefs. Amish, Mennonite, and some other individuals have religious objections to the universal numbering system under NAIS.
4. Creates disincentives for people to seek veterinary care for their animals and participate in existing disease control programs. The proposed rule lists four animal disease programs - tuberculosis, brucellosis, scrapie, and Johne’s - and will impact others. These programs include provisions for veterinary care through vaccinations and testing. Animal owners who object to NAIS, may avoid participating in these programs, thereby increasing health risks to the public and farm operations.
5. Adds to the confusion. This rule is the latest in a series of ambiguous and often contradictory documents that the USDA has issued on NAIS. This has created enormous confusion over the intent of the USDA and problems for both animal owners and state agencies.The proposed rule is a significant step towards implementing the entire NAIS program. Thus, the agency should address the fundamental question of whether it should be implementing NAIS at all. In addition to the problems with the draft rule listed above, there are many additional objections to the entire NAIS program: 1. No significant benefits: USDA’s assertions that NAIS will provide benefits for animal health are not supported, and actually contradict basic scientific principles.
2. High costs for animal owners and taxpayers: These costs include: (1) the development, maintenance, and update of massive databases; (2) the costs of tags, most of which will contain microchips; (3) the labor burdens for tagging every animal; (4) the paperwork burdens of reporting routine movements; and (5) the costs of enforcement on millions of individuals.
3. Impracticality: The databases to register the properties, identify each animal, and record billions of “events” will dwarf any system currently in existence.
4. Waste of money: The USDA has already spent over $130 million on NAIS implementation, but has yet to develop a workable plan for the program.
5. Diverts resources from more critical needs such as disease testing, disease prevention through vaccination and improved animal husbandry practices, and disease detection in currently uninspected livestock imports.
6. Damage to food safety efforts: NAIS will not prevent foodborne illnesses, such as e. coli or salmonella contamination, because the tracking ends at the time of slaughter. Food safety is better served by focusing on programs such as increased testing for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE or “Mad Cow”), improved oversight of slaughterhouses and food processing facilities, and increased inspections of imported food. Programs such as NAIS that burden small, sustainable farmers will hurt efforts to develop safer, decentralized local food systems.
7. Discourages involvement in farming or animal husbandry: Because of the costs and government intrusion, some people will choose not to stay in farming or go into farming. This will result in less competition, greater reliance in foreign imports, and poor quality at higher prices.I urge the USDA to withdraw the proposed rule to implement portions of the National Animal Identification System, Docket No. APHIS-2007-0096. Sincerely, Name: ___________________________ Address: __________________________ City, State Zip: __________________________
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Sunday, 22. February 2009, 16:43
Post #144
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
http://www.motherearthnews.com/Happy-Homesteader/Speak-Out-Against-NAIS.aspx
Speak Out Against NAIS
- Quote:
-
The draft rule covers programs for cattle, sheep, goats and swine. It also sets the stage for the entire NAIS program to be mandated for everyone, including anyone who owns even one livestock animal (for example, a single chicken or a horse). Learn more about the legislation in The Truth About the Animal ID Plan.
It’s critical that the USDA and Congress hear from the hundreds of thousands of people who will be adversely affected by the NAIS program. This includes not only animal owners, but also consumers who care about local and sustainable foods, taxpayers who object to wasteful government programs and advocates for a safer food system.
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Thursday, 5. March 2009, 13:28
Post #145
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
****COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES 16 MARCH**** This is it folks, Farm Bureau is about to weigh in on NAIS. This may be our last chance to make a difference. Please cross post this to every group you can.
A story entitled "USDA proposes official numbering system for animal identification" made front page in the FB (Farm Bureau) News. The PDF file of the FBNews can be found at:
http://www.fb.org/newsroom/fbn/current_issue.pdf
If they do as they have done in the past, Farm Bureau will send post cards to all of its members and encourage them to state their approval of the proposed changes. Their members number in the millions. If they only stimulate 5% of their membership to write we are doomed, and NAIS will become mandatory[/b]. That is why every comment we make is so important. Have your sons and daughters send comments as well as your neighbors and people you work with. Together we can do it!
Please send your comments to:
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2007-0096 (To add comments click on the very first comment "balloon" in the right hand column.)
It does not matter what you say at the comment website as long as it clearly states:
"I urge the USDA to withdraw its proposed rule to implement portions of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), Docket No. APHIS-2007-0096. "
|
|
|
| |
|
LeLoo
|
Thursday, 5. March 2009, 15:44
Post #146
|
Wild At Heart
- Posts:
- 10,328
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #14
- Joined:
- 25 June 2005
- 1. How Many Horses:
- 4
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- straight Egyptian, Al Khamsa Arabians
|
Comment Submitted Receipt Thank you. Your comment on Document ID: APHIS-2007-0096-0001 has been sent. Your Comment tracking number is *********** .
|
|
|
| |
|
LeLoo
|
Friday, 6. March 2009, 09:57
Post #147
|
Wild At Heart
- Posts:
- 10,328
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #14
- Joined:
- 25 June 2005
- 1. How Many Horses:
- 4
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- straight Egyptian, Al Khamsa Arabians
|
I don't see my comment and it's a bit confusing when you start clicking to read some of the public comments. I liked this one and will post it here to refer to when I compose my comments and letters.
- Quote:
-
840 code, AIN and other aspects of NAIS should all be a moot point by now. NAIS should be dead, buried and forgotten about already. The program is ILLEGAL.
Since NAIS does not promote food safety, in fact, in other countries similar programs have been detrimental to food safety issues; and since NAIS does not prevent the importation of diseased animals (legal or otherwise) into our country, due to shorter quarantines and fewer official testing operations for animal disease; and since NAIS unfairly promotes the development of more industrial-model farms to the detriment of traditional small American farms as well as individuals raising livestock for their own use; I would suggest the entire program be scrapped.
USDA claims there is no money left for brucellosis testing, and yet has hundreds of millions to spend on NAIS, which is nothing more than a trade agreement. There is no safety for livestock or humans in the plan anywhere.
Canada and Mexico have a problem (trade barrier issues) with our COOL program, though consumers in the US demand to know where their meat comes from. They both filed failed complaints with the WTO over it. COOL specifically, and for good reason, PROHIBITS programs such as NAIS.
The NAIS program has already driven many small farmers out of business in other countries, including, but not limited to Canada (hmmm!) and Australia. In Australia, leading authorities blame their equivalent (NLIS) directly for the increase in food-borne human illness and imported animal diseases.
Anyone who can read would understand that this program is also a violation of several Constitutional Amendments - and therefore is ILLEGAL in this country. Further, Administrative Procedure requires certain things to be done before imlementation... The cost/benefit analysis has never been made public, if it were even accomplished. There has been no environmental impact statement, and several other regulations have not been followed.
No official legal definitions of the terms "stakeholder" and "premise" have been included in the plan. Given definitions available in legal dictionaries, volunteering for NAIS signs over the property and everything on it to the USDA, and therefore to the federal government. Making the program mandatory at ANY level is extortion.
Why else would the USDA place within the APHIS/IDOA cooperative agreement from 2006 a line that tells the state to convince "farmers to register their farms as premises?" If farms are premises, they are not private property, land or real property, and they do not belong to the farmer. Farmers being "stakeholders" (legal definition is: the holder of property for its rightful owner), are tenants on their own land, at the mercy of the government and its agents.
Therefore, the use or non-use of the 840 AINs is a moot point - the program and its implementation both being against federal law.
AHPIS/Illinois Department of Agriculture cooperative agreement is attached.
I will not comply with an illegal program, and I don't care how many armed and uniformed people attempt to enter my private property.
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2007-0096
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Friday, 6. March 2009, 18:28
Post #148
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
Here's an easier one sponsored by the Organic Consumers Assn.
All you need do is fill out your info. They have an editable letter all ready to go which will be HAND DELIVERED to the USDA when you click the submit button.
|
|
|
| |
|
LeLoo
|
Friday, 6. March 2009, 18:47
Post #149
|
Wild At Heart
- Posts:
- 10,328
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #14
- Joined:
- 25 June 2005
- 1. How Many Horses:
- 4
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- straight Egyptian, Al Khamsa Arabians
|
|
|
|
| |
|
msequine
|
Saturday, 7. March 2009, 06:06
Post #150
|
Originator
- Posts:
- 10,179
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- 15 May 2005
- 2. Breeds Owned or Your Favorite Breed
- TWH, Peruvian
|
YW.
I didn't care much for the other one either -- especially the part where they show your name/location/comments online. I don't mind my comments showing, but my name/location is a different matter altogether.
|
|
|
| |