We're from the government and we're here to help II

In my post below I mention that the government has gone onto farms and destroyed animals unnecessarily and with no compensation. I've gone back to nonais.org and looked up the details. There is a lot more information there than was previously, and it is shocking.

The Henshaws were confined to their home for several days while government employees slaughtered the boars and sheep on their game preserve. This was after Mr. Henshaw was arrested on a trumped up charge. These animals showed no sign of disease, but evidently the Commonwealth of Virgina was concerned that they would not be allowed to transport animals through or out of the state unless they were killed.

A government employee had hunted at the preserve several months earlier and claimed that the pig he shot was infected with Pseudorabies, a highly virulent animal disease which kills new born animals. There is question about the validity of the sample given to test from this animal, if ever a test was conducted (no results have been released), and none of the slaughtered animals were ever tested. (As a matter of fact, Mr. Henshaw was ordered to destroy the few animals the government couldn't find and was ordered not to submit any blood for testing. He agreed, because at the time he was being held in his home, and they intended to continue to do so until all the animals were killed.) None of the piglets (who should have been dead or dying if the disease were present) showed any signs of infection. In fact, it took days for the officials to find and kill them all, since they were running through the property to avoid capture.

My personal opinion is that the Commonwealth was so worried about loosing their right to interstate animal commerce, that they wanted to get it taken care of NOW rather than follow proper procedure, wait for testing, and then proceed.

During the same period, at least one other property went through a similar procedure (I have heard of as many as 4-5, but I can't substantiate that). This is the kind of thing we can look forward to if NAIS passes, only on a larger scale.

We're from the government and we're here to help

Interesting article here, about the opposition to the National Animial Indentification System (NAIS), complete with government rebuttal.

My husband has a shirt with the slogan, "We're from the government and we're here to help." Below is a British soldier bayoneting a Minute Man. We bought it as a chuckle, since we reenact British and have an odd sense of humor. However, it has never been more apropos than today, when I read the above article in the USA Today.

I'll pick the article apart, but first the ending line. "As for arguments that the program is unconstitutional and a violation of privacy, 'I can't counter that,' Hoenig says. But he tells the farmers, 'In an emergency, you're going to be coming to people like me for help. So give us the tools we need to do our job.'"

Did you hear that? He admits that the program is unconstitutional and an invasion of privacy. But, we shouldn't care because, to paraphrase, he's from the government and he's here to help. Thanks for that bayonet, I needed it.

1. "Once potentially affected animals are found and identified, state veterinarians would be able to inoculate them, quarantine them or do whatever would be necessary to stop the spread."
   
   Whatever necessary includes killing uninfected animals, with no compensation to the owners. It has happened before, and there is nothing stopping it happening again.
   



2. "Clifford says the USDA this fall will begin an education campaign to try to persuade farmers to go along with premises registration. He says a lot of the opposition to the program is based on �misinformation� on the Internet, including that every chicken would need an ID under its skin and that every time someone took their horse out for a trail ride, they'd have to call the state. Neither is true, he says."
   
   Sure, it's not true *now*, but trail rides were going to be included in the plan, until horse owners freaked out about it. So, they dropped that part in hopes to placate them. And, it is technically true that every chicken does not have to be tagged. However, the only way to avoid tagging each and every animal is to have "lots" of animals that are always together. They have to be born the same day, brooded for the same amount of time, kept in the same pasture at all times, sent in to eat and sleep at the same time, taken to the vet together, etc. If they are ever separated they immediately have to be tagged and registered seperately. For the small producer, they effectively will have to tag each individual animal.

And, let's remember that the program isn't mandatory, unless you live in states where it is.

Things that make you go hmmmm....

Last night, as I was driving home from Whole Foods, a Chipotle commercial came on the radio. Now, I love Chipotle. Heck, I don't even mind McDonald's. McDonald's owns somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of Chipotle stock. I'm sure the amount varies, but it's definately a controlling interest.

So, the Chipotle commercial was going on and on about how they support sustainable agriculture and the small farmer. Sounds great, eh? There's only one problem. McDonald's is one of the biggest corporate backers of NAIS, as they believe it will aid in traceback in the event of meat contamination. Seeing as NAIS is the single biggest threat to the small producer today, I wonder how that squares with "supporting the small farmer."

Rocks, anyone?

More NAIS zaniness at NoNAIS.org. I have *plenty* of rocks to sell. Trust me. Now, just to get the sheep to go with them. Not sure what we're talking about, check out this previous post.

[Update 11:46-I just finished reading the rest of the page on their blog, and this is just disturbing. I want to believe in my heart-of-hearts that it's just some wacko, but from the domain registration, I'm just not sure.]

NAIS Doublespeak

The USDA has released a new publication, The National Animal Identification System: A Guide for Small Scale or Non-Commercial Producers. Others at NoNAIS.org have questioned the veracity of this publication vis-a-vis the actual government regulations currently in place. I'm going to go with the assumption that everything in the publication is the honest truth. It's still scary enough that way. I'll break down the areas that seem to be the most glaring:

1. "Participation in NAIS is voluntary." Today it is, but there are plans to make it mandatory by 2009.
2. "USDA's NAIS efforts will largely focus on commercial operations and animals…” (emphasis theirs). Okay, so that tells me that the majority of the regulations were put in place with large commercial producers in mind. This is supposed to make me feel better how? Knowing I may be subject to rules and regulations not designed for my position is hardly making me calmer.
3. "In all states premises registration is currently free." Note the currently. No guarantee that it will remain free, but a subtle carrot. If you register now, you may avoid the fees.
4. "If your animals never leave the farm of birth or are only moved for custom slaughter for personal consumption, you will not be asked to identify them or report their movement." So, if I have meat custom slaughtered for sale at the farmer's market, I need an ID. If I sell a lamb to a neighbor, I need an ID. And the one place where food contaimination is likely to enter the commercial market if I only produce for myself is the one place that doesn't require an ID. That makes sense.
5. "Reportable movements are those that involve a high risk of spreading disease, such as moving livestock from a farm to an event where a large numbers [sic] of animals are brought together from many sources." Okay, so trips to vet? Reportable. Hit the county fair? Reportable. Attend a breed show? Reportable. Even though each of these places would already have records of your prescence, you are still required to report? Why?
6. "Data concerning animal movements and locations will be held in multiple, secure databases managed by private organizations and state animal health authorities." Yes, I trust private organizations with my personal info. They *never* get hacked. (note sarcasm)
7. "Group/Lot ID is an option for animals that move as a group through the production chain (i.e., groups of pigs or chickens). USDA recognizes that tagging every individual animal is not always practical." Well, that's a load off my mind. *I'll* have to tag every animal, but the big producers get a break. Thanks, USDA.
8. "The primary purpose of the NAIS is to enable rapid animal tracing and disease containment in the case of an animal disease outbreak or other emerging animal health concern among US livestock and poultry." Oh, well, that's just great. Do you know how they "contain" disease outbreaks? They destroy any animal that may have had contact with an effected animal. So, if there is an outbreak of disease at the chicken factory down the road, they may "contain" it by killing my poultry simply because they are in the same area, even if they show no signs of disease. Thanks again, USDA.
9. "Under the NAIS, the following criteria describe non-commercial producers: ... 2. Individuals whose animal movements are limited to those moved directly to custom slaughter; movement within a single producer's premises; local fairs and local 4-H events." Okay, so it looks like we can go to the fair without registering, but breed shows still aren't exempt, and they are ambiguous about whether custom slaughter for sale is exempted. Looks like that organic meat you used to buy at the farmer's market is now going to be a lot more expensive.
10. "Voluntary registration of premises does not obligate producers to identify their animals or to report the premises-to-premises movement of their animals." True, for now. The plan is for mandatory animal registration by 2009.
11. I won't copy the entire list of "Scenarios that would not call for animals to be identified and/or movements reported in the NAIS," but if you look closely, they are all tied to animals' locations of birth. If they are ever sold (excluding trading poultry for some reason) they will be in the system. So, if you have a bad year and the coyotes get your lambs, welcome to the NAIS. You won't be able to purchase new ones without it. Also, this is going to lead to eventual problems with genetic viability on farms as producers only cross breed from their own animals and never introduce new genetic stock. Bye-bye endangered breeds.
12. I'm going to skip most of the question and answer pages, as they just reiterate what the document said earlier, but I want to focus on #16. "What about individuals' religious freedoms?" I'm glad to know the USDA is sensitive to my beliefs. I'm glad to know they won't be making Old Order Anabaptists use computers. However, what about my deeply held religious belief that I need to keep my animals out of government databases in case the Tribulation should come in my lifetime and I'm not raptured? The answer seems to be, well it's voluntary. But we all know that while it may be voluntary now, they are going to make it mandatory.

Judging from this, should NAIS be enacted in it's current form, the day is coming when I will no longer be able to take an animal to the vet, buy or sell animals, or market my animal products. And, that's assuming that everything in this document is absolutely true. Some of their statements here don't jive with previous statements, so I can't be sure.

news on the NAIS front

Well, it looks like the NAID may not make it as a mandatory program. However, if you read the comments to the article, several other things seem to be on the horizon. Firstly, the USDA has not given up. They continue to pressure people into getting a premisis ID via their various wings (mostly notably 4-H and the land-grant university extension system). Congress is pretty apathetic, as no one has been letting them know what their position is on the program. WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS! Let them know what a crappy idea this is and how it will lead to the loss of property rights, the freedom to farm, and the freedom to buy locally grown animal products. It will also lead to the loss of biological diversity, as farmers like me will be given the choice to not produce or to produce with a much higher overhead or in direct conflict to the law. Now is not the time to become complaicent about this as it would likely be the biggest Big Brother intrusion into family farming to date, and it needs to be stopped.

And speaking of Big Brother intrusions, check this out. I mean seriously, what have people got against farmers? If I didn't know better I'd say the whole thing was one big conspiracy. Now, for the record, I abhor factory farms. I abhor people who think that the best way to raise a cow is in the smallest, muddiest lot possible. I hate the chicken factory down the road where the chickens never see the light of day and we have huge issues with the flies from the manure. However, the government already has regulations in place to take care of this. As the state has gotten involved in egg production sites (I refuse to call these things farms, since one could show up in the warehouse district of any major city and you couldn't tell the differnce) things have gotten better. I still don't like it and I'd still like to see them go to the "factory free range" system where the chickens are kept in groups on small plots of land with small houses. It doesn't take up that much more space and would be a lot friendlier to the chickens and the environment.

But, I digress. At first it surprised me that the environmental lobby would be taking so much interest in regulating a natural, wholesome substance. But then I thought again. It makes perfect sense. These are the people who believe that keeping a cow in a pasture is infringing on its rights. These are the people who believe that Communism is the way to go. It makes perfect sense that they would want to clamp down on anything that smacks of being outside of government control. Especially when they can make money for their organizations in the process. Keep an eye on this. I don't think it's going to happen, but it could be the next big thing on the horizon.

NAIS and the nanny-state

Okay, so I'm a little slow on the uptake. I've been hearing about NAIS for a while now, everywhere from the news to Coast to Coast AM, but I've not really looked at it myself until today. Man-0-man, do I not like it. I find RFID to be creepy when it's in a calculator, how much more so when it is in the animal born on my farm. The Orwellian and Mark-of-the-beast overtones get under my skin.

Not to mention that it violates my fourth amendment rights like crazy. And, there's no good reason for it. Small organic producers are very unlikely to spread disease and are very likely to know exactly where the animals from there farm went in the event there was a disease. So, why should the government be using spy satellites to locate my animals and why should I have to report their movements? What possible public good could be served by invading my privacy in this way? It's absolutely ridiculous. The entire movement is backed by agri-business in cahoots with the RFID manufacturers.

If you don't have a farm, don't think it will effect you, there is a movement to monitor pets in the same way. If you want to chip your dog, great, that's your business, but the government should not have the right to make you do so. For more info...

http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/index.shtml-- The USDA site
http://nonais.org/-- One of the many anti-NAIS sites, with info on upcoming public comment periods and how to contact relevant government officials.