Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Join us on:
We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board, ads are displayed, and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 6
  • 8
**NAIS**; also Codex Alimentarius, OIE, and WTO
Topic Started: Thursday, 29. December 2005, 11:26 (1,799 Views)
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart

Please, everyone, if you have the time, please make some phone or fax calls today.

Time is running out on this. I've cross posted several links to other horse forums and emailed everyone in my address book.

This is so important.


Call your representatives and congressmen, senators and even some in other states if you can find the phone #'s.


The number at the Senate switchboard is 202-224-3121.

Here's other useful names, addresses and phone and fax numbers.

Thad Cochran
Jackson Office
188 East Capital Street
Suite 614
Jackson, MS 39201
601-965-4459

Oxford Office
U.S. Federal Courthouse
911 East Jackson Avenue
Suite 249
Oxford, MS 38655
662-236-1018

Gulf Coast Office
2012 15th Street
Suite 451
Gulfport, MS 39501
228-867-9710

Roger Wicker
Washington, D.C. Office
487 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Main: 202-224-6253
Fax: 202-228-0378

Jackson Office
245 E. Capitol St.
Suite 226
Jackson, MS 39201

Gulfport Office
452 Courthouse Road
Suite F
Gulfport, MS 39507
Main: 228-604-2383
Fax: 228-896-4359

Pascagoula Office
3118 Pascagoula St.
Suite 179
Pascagoula, MS 39567
Main: 228-762-5400
Fax: 228-762-0137

Tupelo Office
2801 Wesst Main Street
Tupelo, MS 38801
Main: 662-844-5010
Fax: 662-844-5030

Hernando Office
2601 Elm St.
Suite #6
PO Box 385
Hernando, MS 38632
Main: 662-429-1002
Fax: 662-429-6002

Mississippi Department of Agriculture
Dr. James Watson
Mississippi State Veterinarian/Animal ID Coordinator
jimw@mdac.state.ms.us
121 North Jefferson Street
Jackson, MS 39201
Main: 601-359-1170
Fax: 601-359-1177

I don't have contact on
Dr. Jim Morehead American Association of Equine Practitioners

nor

Dr. Billy Smith American Quarter Horse Association

But they are on the working group for NAIS.

Let's get busy today and flood every phone and fax with our opinions on

NO NAIS



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart

Here is AQHA's contact info;

Mailing
AQHA
P.O. Box 200
Amarillo, Tx 79168

Overnight Delivery
American Quarter Horse Association
1600 Quarter Horse Dr.
Amarillo, Tx 79104

Phone
Customer Service
(806) 376-4811

Customer Service might provide further contact info on Dr. Billy Smith. I don't know but I will try at a later date. Right now I think my focus will be with the senators and representatives.

But I will threaten not renewing my memberships to the breed associations, both AQHA and AHA unless they stop supporting NAIS.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart


And http://www.aaep.org/

American Association of Equine Practitioners
4075 Iron Works Parkway | Lexington, KY 40511
Phone: 859-233-0147 | Fax: 859-233-1968 | e-mail: aaepoffice@aaep.org
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart

Quote:
 
Economic Impact of NAIS for Horse Owners

Karen Nowak © February 2009

Every horse owner knows that the current economic situation in the USA is impacting the horse industry. Feed costs are higher than they’ve ever been. In fact, any and all supplies/services used for our horses – from supplements to tack to farrier and vet costs are higher. At the same time, sales are way down. Horses are on the market for longer periods of time before they do sell and prices are rock bottom.


http://www.wiwfarm.com/doomsday.html
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

Here's the groundwork to implement this despite the current antiNAIS sentiment of the public. Looks like the USDA is going to backdoor it through the FDA:

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/new-report-calls-food-safety-antiquated-calls-reform/
New Report Calls Food Safety System Antiquated, Calls for Reform
Quote:
 
The report calls for the immediate consolidation of food safety leadership within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and ultimately the creation of a separate Food Safety Administration within HHS. Currently, no FDA official whose full-time job is food safety has line authority over all food safety functions. A speedy effort by the Obama administration to consolidate leadership within FDA, followed by Congressional action to create a separate Food Safety Administration, would both ensure immediate progress on food safety and create a platform for long-term success in reducing foodborne illness.
Quote:
 
Some key problems with the current structure of food safety programs at HHS include:
...
Inadequate technologies and inspection practices. ... And there is no system in place to keep inspection practices up-to-date with the constantly modernizing food production technologies and practices.
Quote:
 
Former Deputy Commissioner for Policy at FDA Michael R. Taylor, JD, ... Former Administrator of the Food Safety and Inspection Service at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. "... the time is ripe for building sustainable solutions to the problems in our nation's food safety system," he added.

The Keeping America's Food Safe report recommends:
...
-- Modernizing the mandate and legal authority of the HHS Secretary to prevent illness, which would include enforcing the duty of food companies to implement modern preventive controls and meet government-established food safety performance standards;



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alison-rose-levy/having-a-cow-and-eating-i_b_175211.html
Having a Cow and Eating it Too: The Real Deal on Food Safety
Quote:
 
The groundwork for NAIS was initially green-lighted at the FDA under former HHS secretary Tommy Thompson, who left his post two weeks later, eventually joining the board of VeriChip Corps, ... gave him cash and stock options.

While we've lost count on the Bush administration's malfeasances, it's unclear why the current administration would erect a new infrastructure that undermines small, suppliers of healthy foods, in order to enable large suppliers in perpetuating health risks.
Quote:
 
Livestock farmed in organic, sustainable, and small farm settings, are healthier, and safer from the myriad infections, wounds, and diseases common in agribusiness livestock. That's why many doctors recommend eating organic or locally raised, hormone and pesticide-free meat and dairy.

In contrast, pumped full of hormones and pesticides, herded into cramped and disease-ridden factory farms, and fattened on corn and animal byproducts, (unknown in animal diets before corporations dictated the menu) factory farm animals aren't healthy--and some doctors claim that their consumption may detract from human health via antibiotic resistance, pesticide toxicity, weight gain, endocrine disruption, and other factors.

So it's ironic that--in the name of safety, the FDA today moves to close the sane food loophole, while failing to address farming practices unsafe for animals and their human consumers.

The FDA plan, called the National Animal Identification System, or NAIS will require the costly insertion of microchips into all livestock to record and track their antibiotic use, medical history, and location via a global GPS system.

The compliance costs for NAIS could imbalance the careful economics of small, organic, and sustainable farms, driving many into bankruptcy. Unlike your local farmer, assembly line factory farms can easily install microchips. They support the NAIS plan, which conveniently undermines the competition (organic food suppliers are now the fastest growing food segment) while setting the mass producers up for global exports to foreign buyers.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart

I won't comply.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

Judge rules NAIS records protected by Privacy Act
Quote:
 
The ruling denies a request by Mary-Louise Zanoni of Russell, N.Y., who sought to enjoin the U.S. Department of Agriculture from tying NAIS records to the Privacy Act after USDA, on that basis, refused her FOIA request last year for information on premises that are registered in NAIS (Feedstuffs, June 23, 2008). Zanoni is opposed to NAIS because it requires family farmers and other livestock owners to provide the system with information about their farms and ranches. She wanted the information because she believed it would show that USDA has actually registered premises without the property owners' knowledge.



Posted Image
Posted Image
Join us on:
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

R-CALF Wants NAIS Abandoned
Quote:
 
R-CALF USA has asked Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack to completely abandon what they call the flawed National Animal Identification System. In a letter, R-CALF USA President/Region VI Director Max Thornsberry has recommended instead that Congress and USDA focus on targeted solutions to the legitimate livestock disease-related challenges faced by U.S. livestock industries. Thornsberry also recommended steps to meaningfully address legitimate food safety challenges, as are evidenced by recent and massive recalls of meat produced in U.S. slaughtering plants.

R-CALF USA recommendations focus on stopping livestock health issues at the border. They also include adoption of the surveillance and identification components of the preexisting brucellosis program, including the metal eartag and tattoo. R-CALF USA would also have...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/17974
Quote:
 
Rep. Rosa DeLauro, chairwoman of the House agriculture appropriations subcommittee, said in a phone interview today she has lost patience for a voluntary system that has registered only 35 percent of U.S. livestock facilities over five years and received $142 million in funding.

“We are tired of the foot-dragging on this issue,” said DeLauro, D-Conn. “We need to move forward on this.”
Wow, there's an "in your face" comment showing how little CONgress cares what their constituents want or need. FYI, Ms DeLauro is also behind HR 875, The Food Safety Modernization Act, which is currently receiving bad press due to vague language and possible criminalizing of backyard gardens.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

http://sl.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/livestock/news/crisis-for-us-beef-traceback-system/1479069.aspx

Quote:
 
DeLauro has long been an advocate of a mandatory program and has criticised the decision to make it voluntary.

At her first appropriations hearing with Vilsack, she put him on the spot, asking if he supports mandatory animal identification. DeLauro noted that her colleague, House Agriculture Committee chairman Collin Peterson (D., Minn.), already had said he does not favor spending more on the program "unless the Obama Administration supports a mandatory system."

Dodging the direct question, Vilsack said, "I am supportive of the effort for an identification system that will allow us to prevent or to mitigate problems."

He said he wants to "sit down with those who oppose the mandatory system in the very near term to work through whatever difficulties they have with the privacy or confidentially."
Quote:
 
Vilsack has again asked for an opportunity to meet with opponents of NAIS to see if their concerns could be addressed.

DeLauro says, "The clock is ticking. I don't know how long you're going to need to talk to these people, but it needs to be a very short conversation."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

http://www.porkmag.com/directories.asp?pgID=675&ed_id=7372

Quote:
 
Some other specie groups, including those in the pork industry and a growing number of congressmen support mandatory implementation of NAIS to ensure the health of the U.S. farm-animal population. USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack has said he will meet with groups opposing a mandatory animal ID program to determine the sticking points. The overall consensus is that action toward a solution and an effective program needs to move forward.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

http://eon.businesswire.com/portal/site/eon/permalink/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20090415005908&newsLang=en
Quote:
 
USDA Skirting Administrative Procedures and Other Acts to Make NAIS Mandatory
Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund Says Michigan Effort Part of USDA State-by-State Plan to Make NAIS Mandatory

The Fund last year filed suit in the U.S. District Court – District of Columbia against the USDA and the MDA to stop the implementation of NAIS. In recent court filings in response to motions filed by MDA and the USDA to dismiss the suit, the Fund charges that the USDA’s action in Michigan is part of a broader, state-by-state effort to make NAIS mandatory in violation of, among other statutes, the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

“The situation in Michigan is merely the most egregious example of how the USDA is bypassing the steps required under the APA for the implementation of such a massive animal identification program,” noted Pete Kennedy, acting president of the Fund.
Quote:
 
Kennedy noted that the USDA has also resorted to backdoor tactics in other states to coerce mandatory compliance with the animal identification program.

“Tennessee denied drought-stricken farmers disaster relief if they were not registered in NAIS, while children were kicked out of the Colorado state fair for not being registered. Ranchers in Idaho found themselves registered in NAIS without their knowledge or consent after filling out paperwork to keep their rights to their brands, while horse owners in New York were similarly registered after taking their horses in for routine disease testing,” he said.

But Kennedy also noted that where the voices of small farmers are being heard, the opposition to making NAIS mandatory is growing. Five separate state legislatures—Arizona, Missouri, Nebraska, Kentucky, and Utah—have already passed anti-NAIS legislation, and Texas is considering legislation prohibiting its mandatory implementation.

“With our suit, we’re asking for a judicial review of the USDA’s attempts to continue to implement NAIS without following proper procedure, since NAIS could put many small farmers out of business,” said Kennedy.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

NAIS vs. the Equine Owner
by R. M. Thornsberry, D.V.M., M.B.A.

Quote:
 
It is important for horse owners to know why NAIS is being forced on the equine industry within the United States. The United States and many other countries signed a World Trade Organization (WTO) treaty in the 1990’s which obligated the first world countries, which had spent literally millions and millions of taxpayer dollars to eradicate contagious animal diseases, to develop a system of individual animal identification. The individual animal identification was demanded by the Organization of International Epizootics (OIE), a WTO world wide governmental agency, tasked with developing trade rules and internationally obligated trade regulations that would force animal and meat trade between countries that had eradicated contagious diseases with those that had not eradicated contagious animal diseases. In other words, the United States, which had eradicated Equine Piroplasmosis in the 1980’s, a tick borne protozoal infection, would, by identifying all equines, be forced to trade with countries that had not eradicated Equine Piroplasmosis.

In general, the argument goes something like this: Once you can identify every equine at birth and trace their every movement off the farm from birth to death, a first world country that has spent millions of taxpayer dollars to eradicate Equine Piroplasmosis, can no longer prevent trade with those countries who have refused to spend the necessary resources to eradicate Equine Piroplasmosis.

The United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA-APHIS) no longer seeks to carry out their mandate to prevent the introduction of foreign animal and plant diseases into the United States. Currently, USDA-APHIS in supporting NAIS, spending millions of tax payer dollars to entice livestock and equine owners into the system by promoting the acquisition of a free Premises Identification Number (PIN)from their respective state departments of agriculture. Producers of cattle, and equine owners, are the two classes of livestock owners who have overwhelmingly refused to receive an internationally sanctioned encumbrance to their private property. The USDA says a PIN is the first step to ...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/Content.asp?ContentID=307495

LMA To Vilsack: NAIS Must Maintain Speed Of Livestock Commerce

Quote:
 
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- America’s livestock market operators are skeptical that the current National Animal Identification System (NAIS) plan will maintain the “speed of commerce” in livestock marketing – “an absolute necessity in maintaining a viable marketing system that serves tens of thousands of producers every day.”
Quote:
 
Robinson identified other LMA member concerns with the NAIS plan. These include:

…Low-frequency RFID tag and tag reader technology has been shown to be inadequate in preserving the speed of commerce in most market settings. There is also no clear evidence that high-frequency RFID is a better solution.

…USDA must identify a standardized ID technology that’s compatible from one livestock operation to another, before moving to a mandatory NAIS. The agency’s current “technology neutral” position will result in many incompatible, imperfect ID technologies and systems, bringing “enormous inefficiencies and cost” to the industry.

…A mandated ID program will likely require many markets to establish tagging services for their consignors who are unable to tag their animals on farm. That will lead to many other concerns for the markets, including added costs to the market, worker safety, liability, and animal welfare.

…The current NAIS plan does not indicate how USDA will pay for putting the plan into operation. That will lead to more resistance to the program.

…The cattle ID systems in Australia and Canada should not be used to justify a similar U.S. ID program. The U.S. cattle industry is also not comparable, in several key areas, to the nation’s swine, sheep and dairy industries – and any mandatory ID program should reflect those differences.

…It is time, Robinson said, to quit “muddying the NAIS waters with talk of value-added, trade, food safety and (country of origin labeling) benefits, and hone in on what” this effort “is really about…animal disease control and eradication.”

…An ID program too expensive or difficult to comply or bother with “is certain to put any number of small producers out of business, and further contract the industry.” That contraction and consolidation, as a consequence of a government-mandated NAIS program, “would be disastrous for rural America.”

…If USDA is committed to a mandatory ID program, starting with the so-called “bookend” ID and tracking system would give the industry time to adapt to any new ID system requirements. It would also allow advanced ID technologies time to “catch up with the realities of the U.S. livestock industry.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart

msequine
Friday, 17. April 2009, 09:22
http://www.cattlenetwork.com/Content.asp?ContentID=307495

LMA To Vilsack: NAIS Must Maintain Speed Of Livestock Commerce

Quote:
 
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- America’s livestock market operators are skeptical that the current National Animal Identification System (NAIS) plan will maintain the “speed of commerce” in livestock marketing – “an absolute necessity in maintaining a viable marketing system that serves tens of thousands of producers every day.”
Quote:
 
Robinson identified other LMA member concerns with the NAIS plan. These include:

…Low-frequency RFID tag and tag reader technology has been shown to be inadequate in preserving the speed of commerce in most market settings. There is also no clear evidence that high-frequency RFID is a better solution.

…USDA must identify a standardized ID technology that’s compatible from one livestock operation to another, before moving to a mandatory NAIS. The agency’s current “technology neutral” position will result in many incompatible, imperfect ID technologies and systems, bringing “enormous inefficiencies and cost” to the industry.

…A mandated ID program will likely require many markets to establish tagging services for their consignors who are unable to tag their animals on farm. That will lead to many other concerns for the markets, including added costs to the market, worker safety, liability, and animal welfare.

…The current NAIS plan does not indicate how USDA will pay for putting the plan into operation. That will lead to more resistance to the program.

…The cattle ID systems in Australia and Canada should not be used to justify a similar U.S. ID program. The U.S. cattle industry is also not comparable, in several key areas, to the nation’s swine, sheep and dairy industries – and any mandatory ID program should reflect those differences.

…It is time, Robinson said, to quit “muddying the NAIS waters with talk of value-added, trade, food safety and (country of origin labeling) benefits, and hone in on what” this effort “is really about…animal disease control and eradication.”

…An ID program too expensive or difficult to comply or bother with “is certain to put any number of small producers out of business, and further contract the industry.” That contraction and consolidation, as a consequence of a government-mandated NAIS program, “would be disastrous for rural America.”

…If USDA is committed to a mandatory ID program, starting with the so-called “bookend” ID and tracking system would give the industry time to adapt to any new ID system requirements. It would also allow advanced ID technologies time to “catch up with the realities of the U.S. livestock industry.”
Very well said
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

http://deltafarmpress.com/legislative/animal-identification-0420/
Quote:
 
While NAIS has been voluntary, sign-ups haven’t been overwhelming. Politicians and government officials are now considering making the program mandatory. This has unleashed a torrent of criticism with privacy issues and the cost to small producers taking center stage.

During a mid-March hearing on NAIS, APHIS officials told the House Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry that the poultry and sheep industries have the best participation in the program.
Quote:
 
In a recent interview with Delta Farm Press, Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas said keeping NAIS a “voluntary program is fine, allowing people to opt in if they want. But it will be disproportionately burdensome on smaller operations. For the life of me, I can’t believe (USDA) wants to do that when everything out of their mouths is about encouraging small operations.”

Making NAIS mandatory “will put liability, once again, back on the producer for issues that are ongoing — largely driven by the media and resulting public outcry — related to food safety,” said Tim Gibbons, communications director for the Missouri Rural Crisis Center. “All the recent meat recalls and food safety scares were a result of what happened at the processing plants. Those problems didn’t result from anything producers did.”
Quote:
 
McCaskill’s letter touched on the claim that “NAIS will open markets currently closed to U.S. meat exports resulting in larger profits for producers. Yet, Brazil, the largest exporter of beef in the world, does not currently have an animal identification system.”

Gibbons complains the situation in Mexico is similar. “We’re getting hundreds of thousands of cows from Mexico. Those cows aren’t hooked into NAIS. We’re bringing those in and mixing them with our meat animals that are going to be subject to NAIS? How does that make sense? Why would we make our producers implement this costly system when cows and meat are coming in from all over the world where there is no such system?”

Vilsack recently acknowledged the unrest NAIS has caused in the farming community. In testimony before Congress and in press conferences, Vilsack said the program won’t move forward without approval from the congressional agriculture committees and the Obama administration.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart

I can't seem to decide if this is good or bad. There are some very valid, justifiable and true statements being made before CONgress now, more so than I have read before now. Hopefully someone will exhibit some common sense and accountability and squash this insidious bill. But, what if the Obama administration does get behind it?? That is scary. Will it move forward then, without these justifiable and true facts being considered? Very scary indeed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

During the hearing, CONgress' House Committee on Agriculture allowed all the big AgriBusiness reps and proponents of Premises ID to take all the time they wanted to present their cases. When it was time for those opposed to NAIS to speak, they were allowed five minutes OR LESS to disprove any claims made and presented as facts and to state their case for opposing NAIS.

Does that give you a clue where their heads are or what they plan to do? It was just a charade and waste of time, and it was done to appease "we the little people" :mad
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart

Gosh what are we going to do?? WE THE PEOPLE really have to take our country back somehow. I'm watching all these idiots in the legislature very very closely. They act like 2 year olds most of the time, bickering and fighting. Our car tags are about to sky rocket. All taxes more than likely. They need to donate about half their salaries to fill the deficits in the states budget. They do NOTHING to deserve the money they are paid.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

ALL taxes will most likely go up as all cities, counties, states, and the Federal gov't are hurting. There is NO MORE MONEY in our reserve (bansters got it all and want more), yet these so-called leaders continue to borrow more money. This time, I don't know where they'll get it as the last time we had a Treasury Auction there were no foreign buyers. That's how we finance our debt. If it continues to happen, we'll run into a real brick wall and devolve into third world status overnight. OK, I'm headed off on a tangent so I'll stop here before I :hijack
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart

I don't think it'd really be a hijack. NAIS is a first step in gaining control and getting more of our hard earned money. It's all related I think. Our wonderful U.S.A. is headed for much bigger trouble if something doesn't change. WE THE PEOPLE will be taxed and ID'd and controlled like zombies, as I think many of us have been already. It's truly ridiculous what we've let our govt get away with thus far. And the media, no truth, no facts, just what the govt wants us to be told. :(
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart

Tom Vislack? I can't be sure, but I think that is the name of they guy I called an "idiot" on the news last night talking about the "swine" flu. He was just stupid, IMO. As a nurse, and knowing what I know about the flu virus. In addition, they had a really knowledgeable doctor on the local news that had really said just the opposite of what this guy was saying. Everything out of his mouth just convinced me he was a nut. I wish I knew if it was really him, I think it was. :blink
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart

I did a search, saw a picture, it's not him.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

Perhaps a relative?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LeLoo
Member Avatar
Wild At Heart

No, I don't think. I guess I'd just heard or read the name before. The 'nut' I was referring to is a MS state guy, ball headed, older and real skinny. He was just talking nonsense about the "swine" flu being really "swine" and it's not. He just seemed, well, almost too . . . I don't know, "old" or maybe in early dementia to be rattling off on the local news. That's just my opinion though. :D

I just didn't put much stock into what he was saying.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

http://www.hpj.com/archives/2009/may09/may11/USDAreleasesNAIScost-benefi.cfm?title=USDA%20releases%20NAIS%20cost-benefit%20analysis

USDA releases NAIS cost-benefit analysis
Quote:
 
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service April 29 released the results of a comprehensive benefit-cost analysis on the National Animal Identification System.
Quote:
 
The objectives, as defined by the research team, were to estimate the benefits and cost of adopting NAIS by the livestock and poultry industries, as well as to determine how net benefits are likely to be allocated among industry sectors, consumers and government.
Quote:
 
Highlights of the study include:
...

For industry, the effect of not implementing some aspects of NAIS (maintaining status quo) may result in significant losses--as great as $13.2 billion annually due to reduced export market access.

Implementation of NAIS becomes more cost effective as participation levels increase and actually may not be economically viable at lower participation levels.
Quote:
 
Traceability is becoming a global standard that will likely affect the ability of the United States to compete globally.
Reader Comments
 
Barbara — 05/09/2009 09:05:52
Upon perusing the 442 page Cost Benefit Analysis, the first thing I noticed was that the acknowledgments thank two of the NAIS' architects for their support and assistance. That fact, along with the funding provided by APHIS, explain the biased findings.

The Analysis tells us what many of us already knew. NAIS will benefit big business and small farms will pay a higher percentage of the cost. Individually owned livestock is deemed insignificant for the purposes of this study.

The Analysis tries to find value in NAIS for horse owners, but states that the majority of those benefits will be for exporters and possibly racing. Again, no surprise. A disproportionate number of the members of the Equine Species Working Group represented the racing industry. The rest of the analysis as concerns equines is a desperate attempt to find other redeeming values for the vast majority of American horsemen, but it fails miserably. There doesn't seem to be a realistic understanding of how most of us use our horses. The Analysis also uses false statistics to make it appear that NAIS has more support among horse owners than the actual polls have shown. The numbers used are so misleading that USDA should issue a retraction for that portion of the study. It makes me wonder how many other statistics used are false or misleading.

This Analysis should not be used to justify NAIS. It should be trashed along with the rest of USDA's lies to the public.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

Codex Crash Course from HealthFreedomUSA.org
Quote:
 
Codex Alimentarius was founded in 1962 by the UN to establish international free trade foods. It is jointly administered by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) through annual and regional meetings.
Quote:
 
Codex pertains to every bite - and kind of - food traded internationally and allows high doses of pesticides, veterinary drugs, synthetic hormones, contaminants, artificial sweeteners, and other dangerous compounds and processes (like mandated irradiation of food) while it forbids health claims for food.
Quote:
 
Codex' decisions are heavily influenced by the desires of multinational special interest groups who send representatives to sit on national committees and as NGO delegates. Because Codex is so heavily influenced by corporate interests, its decisions are, in our opinion, often helpful to corporate well-being but strikingly detrimental to human and einviromental health.
Quote:
 
Codex sets advisory standards and guidelines which nations may adopt or modify. If they modify them without special protections, nations may be found guilty of setting up trade barriers by the World Trade Organization (WTO), and be assessed crippling financial penalties.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

NAIS study findings, accuracy questioned
Quote:
 
In a synopsis of the 400-page report titled "Benefit-Cost Analysis of the National Animal Identification System," the USDA states that this document provides "a condensed, high-level summary of the detailed report and focuses more on the results than the technical methodologies used by the research team."

Judith McGeary, executive director of the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance, heads one of the groups which has followed NAIS closely and is concerned about the accuracy of the study.

Using the beef cattle section of the cost-benefit analysis, McGeary e-mailed the following comments May 12 regarding the report.

"The bottom line is that even the study acknowledges that the costs for small farms would, on average, be two and a half times higher than for large operations. And the study grossly underestimates the true costs for small farms, by improperly including more than half a million farms into one category," McGeary said.
Quote:
 
McGeary said a total of 585,050 farms account for the 1 to 49 category, while all the other larger operators or categories combined amount to 164,850 farms in the USDA study. She questioned why the study did not break the numbers down to reflect the true numbers of the smaller farms. As the cost-benefit study itself acknowledges, the cost goes up as the herd size shrinks.

A second issue McGeary addressed is the cost of the radio frequency identification tags (RFIDs).

"The assumptions made about the costs of reading the RFID tags are ridiculous," McGeary said.

The consultants conducting the study did recognize that the cost involved for the small producer is not economical. The study's theory, McGeary said, is that a new business will start " a custom tag reading business " that will be located "within 25 miles of each small farm."

"Based on those fundamentally flawed assumptions, they claim that someone with five head of cattle would pay only $9.35 ($1.87 per head) to have someone drive out to their farm and electronically read the tags," McGeary said.

The cost of the technology required for recording the identification numbers and the animal's change of ownership, or even death, was another concern McGeary identified that will add an additional burden.

"There are many people out there, including Amish, Mennonites, and elderly farmers, who don't currently have computers or Internet and would not use this equipment for any purpose other than NAIS."

One final concern of McGeary's is the cost of databases.

"The research team attempted to contact multiple RFID database providers to obtain costs per head of their databases so an average cost for data storage could be ascertained. Not surprisingly, this information was not readily given out," McGeary said.

The Michigan Department of Agriculture was the source of information for the study. The Michigan Agriculture Department "has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from USDA to require electronic tagging by Michigan farmers," McGeary said. "The study estimates that people will be charged only 8 and a half cents to enter data into the databases."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

http://www.feedstuffs.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=F4D1A9DFCD974EAD8CD5205E15C1CB42&nm=Breaking+News&type=news&mod=News&mid=A3D60400B4204079A76C4B1B129CB433&tier=3&nid=F2C9EA1185894CF5AA1B4C8EDA5B9DCD
Quote:
 
A voluntary animal identification system "won't work," and without an animal identification system, U.S. producers are chancing devastating losses from disease and lost export markets, according to David Byrne, former European Union commissioner for health and consumer protection.

Byrne can say this with some authority, having led EU livestock and poultry producers and member nations through the bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), foot and mouth disease and avian influenza epidemics in the 1990s and in more recent years and, in the process, having put in place the EU animal identification system. His actions also saw the amendment or establishment of laws and regulations governing food safety.

"We learned a number of lessons," he said, including the need for the rapid traceback of animals, feed and food to remove sick animals and unsafe feed and food from the system. He said authorities also learned that transparency is absolutely necessary.
LOL, "transparency is absolutely necessary" unless these outbreaks were caused by your bioLab accidents. Let's not mention that during this interview.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
msequine
Member Avatar
Originator

http://www.wilsoncountynews.com/article.php?id=23418&n=agriculture-today-auction-barn-fees-to-increase-with-nais
Quote:
 
Ranchers and others who will be affected by the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) are reviewing the Kansas State University benefit-cost analysis released in April 2009. One area of concern to the cow-calf operator is the added cost of tagging animals and what effect the tagging requirements will have at the auction barn, since a majority of cow-calf operators use local auction barns to sell their animals.

...

Those lacking the equipment to properly tag would have to use a tagging service at the auction yard.
Quote:
 
Robinson spoke of the added hours needed to market the livestock at the auction barns if a mandatory NAIS program is implemented. She also said that ranchers might have to take their animals to the auction one day earlier, instead of the same day, possibly causing additional shrinkage.

Auction barn fees, which include commission, brand inspection, yardage, and other costs, currently range from $11 to $19 per animal. If NAIS becomes mandatory and tagging the animal is necessary, the Livestock Marketing Association estimates a cost of $26 to $41. The added cost is attributed to the added corrals to board cattle an extra day, computer equipment, and a “change of the skill level of auction staff.”
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · News · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 6
  • 8


Use OpenDNS