This morning at 10 am I participated in a discussion with USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack about the USDA proposed National Animal Identification System (NAIS). As I publish this the meeting is continuing. Below is what I presented to the Secretary. My understanding is that a complete transcript of the meeting will be made available to the public. There were a few big producer organizations who were strongly pro-Mandatory NAIS but there were more organizations that were hesitant and opposing mandatory NAIS. It will be interesting to read the full transcript of the session and see what comes out of this.
Update 20090426: The transcript is now available.
Hello, I am Walter Jeffries from Sugar Mountain Farm in Vermont where our small family farm raises pastured pigs. You know me from NoNAIS.org I am a voice in the wilderness, in rural America. I hear from a great many other small farmers and homesteaders who are upset about NAIS for a great number of reasons. We need honesty, transparency and a totally voluntary privately created, managed and funded NAIS system. Government should have nothing to do with NAIS. NAIS must not be mandatory. Small farmers must not be burdened by NAIS.
NAIS does not prevent disease. Even USDA memos state this. Everything about NAIS is after the fact and may not be noticed until months have past. NAIS is not even particularly good at tracking disease. Prevention is the better solution. Don’t feed cows to cows and you don’t get BSE. Don’t abuse antibiotics and you don’t get MRSA. Don’t import animals without quarantine and testing and you don’t bring in FMD or other exotic diseases into our country. Prevention is the solution. NAIS is just an expensive boondoggle that makes more jobs for government, tagging companies and crushes small farmers with paperwork and costs.
NAIS is not about food safety or disease prevention. NAIS is about meeting global standards for trade. It is the Big Agricultural producers that do virtually all the exporting and benefit from NAIS. Realize that virtually all food born illness comes from big producers and almost all of that happens at the processors after the animals leave the farm. Big Ag wants trace-back for exports and as a marketing tool so that they can crack into niches of consumers now looking to connect with their food. It is Big Ag that should be privately creating their own truly voluntary trace-back and tracking system at their own cost. Government should have nothing to do with this.
Virtually all small farmers sell locally, do not export, do not import and do not benefit from NAIS. We already have 100% trace-back for our animals. Our customers know where their meat comes from - they can drive by and see it in our fields. We don’t need the cost or wasted time dealing with NAIS. A fundamental problem with NAIS is that while it benefits Big Ag it burdens small farmers and homesteaders.
Depopulation threats scare people into noncompliance. For Big Ag depopulation is not a problem - they just reorder new animals from the catalog. They are not raising unique genetics. They have insurance. The government reimbursements are sufficient for them. But for small producers and homesteaders with unique genetics the threat of depopulation is overwhelming to the point of pushing them to revolt and non-compliance. Depopulation is unnecessary because simple quarantine and testing is highly effective. A big fear of many people is that errors in the system, or malicious acts, will create depopulations or enforcements to retaliate against individual farms. There needs to be a system of checks and balances just like in our Constitution that prevents this. There is no need to rush in and kill off livestock. Use quarantine. Do open source testing. Share the lab results. Do not be secretive.
100% compliance with a complicated system like NAIS is impossible. Don’t make that a goal because you’ll never achieve it. Forcing NAIS will just create a lot of ill-will.
The Individual Animal ID vs Group ID is a major sore point with small producers. This allows Big Ag to get the benefits they want with little cost or effort while small producers are heavily burdened at high cost of tagging and tracking every animal and movement. This becomes one more subsidy for Big Ag that further exaggerates their unfair advantage in the market. Place the full burden of NAIS on Big Producers. The solution is simple - If NAIS is going to be mandatory in any form then it must require tagging and tracing of every single animal in Big Ag’s big herds. Everyone should be treated equally.
RFID tags have been demonstrated as unreliable in Australia and other countries where they are costing producers money both up front and in lost sales. RFID is a trigger point for many independently minded people who make up a very large portion of the small farms and homesteads creating resistance to NAIS. Drop RFID as any part of the specification of NAIS.
Don’t exaggerate the registration numbers. The published numbers include tens of thousands of false, non-voluntary registrations that were made against people’s will. The numbers also include non-producers although it is stated that they are numbers of farms. Adding up the numbers of horses, sheep, pigs, chickens, cows and other farm animals suggests that the total number of Premises are really on the order of 10 million. Don’t falsify the numbers to make participation look better than it really is. Be honest, be transparent.
Don’t play with words. “Voluntary at the federal level” and then pushing for mandatory at the state level loses the public’s trust. Write in clear, concise, accurate English. Mean what you say.
Threats of fines just increase the resistance to the system. Classic negative feedback loop on resistant population. Try herding pigs and you’ll understand - as soon as they know you’re up to no good they resist harder, even if you mean well and want to take them to a better place. If you want cooperation, ask politely and offer positive benefits. If you say voluntary then you should mean it. Don’t turn around and make it mandatory through underhanded methods. I have worked with our local university extension program and state department of agriculture many times, sharing information about our farm truly voluntarily. But I’ll fight tooth and claw against coercion and threats of mandatory. That is how 92% of the 7.5 million small farmers and homesteaders feel. In other words, government needs to learn to politely ask “Please” and not “Please or else!”
We need honest and transparency. If Big Ag wants trace-back then let them create, operate and fund a truly voluntary NAIS system. Those producers who see benefit can then choose to participate. Those who do not want to participate must not be coerced. That is how a democracy works.
Had NAIS been truly honest and voluntary from the start, I would have participated. The question you must ask yourself is can you make it voluntary and convince me, and thus other small independent farmers and homesteaders like me, that you’re being honest and transparent? We must know you have our best interests at heart and are not simply in the pockets of Big Ag.
Thank you, Secretary Vilsack for this opportunity to comment on NAIS.
Hat tip to Sharon for a copy of the Agenda shown at top.
I listened also and then sent to AgSec@usda.gov the following comments with the request that they be added to the Public Record:
Thank you Mr. Secretary for the very first opportunity provided to small livestock owners and concerned American Citizens to speak to this matter.
I am Sharon Sabo, Founder of Illinois Independent Consumers and Farmers Association. I am speaking representing members from 67 of 102 counties in Illinois and 4
Illinois Livestock animal /auction barns covering 18 of the 33 proposed species to be covered under NAIS.
I speak not out of fear of NAIS as represented by some of the previous Mandatory proponents – but by the Righteous Indignation of an American Citizens Group to the steamrolling of small livestock concerns. Our data may be held at the public courthouse as the AVMA President stated, however the harvesting of said data is specifically prohibited and to mention the use of said data by the Federal Government to impose a Mandatory System would be a betrayal , an act of “Man Made Disaster” by our own government.
We oppose a Mandatory NAIS system and encourage a review of the currently successful programs being utilized at this time. The information presented by many before me of such a small sector of the Premises Registered on a Voluntary Basis does indeed send a message. As a former active duty Naval Communicator and Top Secret Control officer in London – I am aware that one must analyze why with the monetary input and so called “incentives” provided - have not coerced American Livestock Owners to participate in this program. We believe it is due to the loss of monetary income, interfearance of private property ownership and loss of Civil Liberties afforded us by the Constitution of the United States of America.
There will likely be people here today that will explain how vital the animal identification program is. How disease outbreaks will be prevented or stamped out quickly using the powers granted to them and this magic registration program. How the floodgates of foreign trade will open up to them if only they knew where my steer (and everyone elses) was born and slaughtered. If only it were that simple.
————————–
I provide the following specific example as to why NAIS at a mandatory level would not be effective remembering that because one Mandates a program does not guarentee success
—————
We are members of the Illinois State Beekeepers association. The Illinois Ag department is tasked with implementing the state Apiary Act. Arguably, Illinois has one of the finest, most comprehensive program in the nation with mandatory registration, a cadre of full time inspectors, and not only certification of colony movements across state lines, but even between intrastate counties. Inspectors are granted broad authority to enter properties, perform inspections, and on their own authority abate problems without so much as a warrant or prior approval of state of federal ag administrators. If registrations and aggressive inspections were the ramparts to defend against the spread of pests and pestilence, then Illinois bee population should be free of tracheal mites, varroa destructor, and hive beetles. It is not.
You may have been told that these are issues because there is a disease reservoir that is in the wild and beyond their control. That may be true. However, an avian flu outbreak could find its way into wild duck, geese, and quail populations. Brucellosis and tuberculosis may create a reservoir in deer population and reinfect swine and bovine. And then there is the real terror that proponents like to throw out there: foot and mouth disease. Let start out with the fact that there is no known repository of this disease in the continental US. Indeed the USDA maintains their research samples offshore on Plum Island. Foot and mouth disease is a classic example of fiefdom building by a bureaucracy. The Ag department gets funds for enforcing a ban on FMD vaccination in this country. Of course, they also receive funds to develop FMD vaccines the use of which is outlawed. Since farmers can’t use the outlawed vaccines that their tax dollars paid to develop, the Ag department gets funding to run exercises to practice the destruction of infected animal populations. Imagine a world where flu vaccines were outlawed, even though they were researched and produced, and Health and Human Services tattooed people and practiced community triage and digging mass graves. This is about the money and the power an positions that it brings to certain organizations and not about common sense.
I often explain to my children that preachers and politicians are measured by the eloquence of their words, while the rest of us tend to be measured, in the end, by our actions. Others here today are likely providing testimony as part of their job function, others here, like myself, are taking a day off work.
—————–
In closing – remember the words of Theodore Roosevelt:
“The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life. “
Comment Mrs. Michael Sabo — April 15, 2009 @ 10:06 am
VERY well put Walter, I wish you luck!
Comment LEE — April 15, 2009 @ 10:40 am
I hope you will send an edited version of this to the Valley News, Walter. Well done.
Comment Grace — April 15, 2009 @ 11:35 am
Thank you for being a voice in the wilderness Walter.
I’d like to see NAIS turned into a mandatory program for dog breeders to have to microchip their pups, then be held accountable for all the pups that end up in pounds, shelters and foster homes across the US. We currently have a German Shorthair Pointer we are either re-homing or bringing to a foster to rescue. I just wish the government would focus on this problem and fix it instead of wasting our time and money on NAIS.
Long week, with spare dog, forgive the rant.
[Be very careful of what you wish for. We breed, raise and train our own livestock guardian herding dogs (LGHDs). While I have chipped some for ID I do not want the government forcing me to do so. It should be the choice of the individual. We need less government and more personal responsibility. -WJ]
Comment Linda — April 15, 2009 @ 11:46 am
Walter:
I was so pleased when I heard you were being included in this meeting! You have been a voice of all of us and you did not disappoint!
God bless you and keep up the good work!!!
Karen
Comment Karen — April 15, 2009 @ 12:41 pm
Walter,
Thanks for your leadership on NAIS. You’re speaking on behalf of all smaller farmers who value freedom and independence.
Tim
Nature’s Harmony Farm
Comment Tim — April 15, 2009 @ 2:35 pm
Wow! I thought Walter was putting us on…but he was telling the truth…very well done Walter. I encourage everyone to refer back to an article at libertyark.net at “articles of interest” by R. Givens 11-16-06 on “The USDA Shell Game…” Keep your guard up…note what he says at the last of this article
Comment The Phantom — April 15, 2009 @ 2:49 pm
Thank You Walter!
Comment Tee — April 15, 2009 @ 3:02 pm
Most excellent!
Comment Michelle — April 15, 2009 @ 4:47 pm
IMPORTANT EVERYBODY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On the USDA web site it says and I quote it:
“I recognize many groups have provided input into the system previously,” said Vilsack, “but we know more today what kind of system will work, than when NAIS was first envisioned. And, I encourage stakeholders–both small and large–to embrace this opportunity to tell us what kind of system they feel would work and to talk about solutions. Over the coming months it will be my goal to personally dialogue with as many as I can–to hear firsthand how we can work together to develop a system that everyone can support.”
It also says:
USDA is seeking to engage stakeholders in an effort to hear not only their concerns but potential or feasible solutions to those concerns. The listening tour will seek input from communities throughout the country.
So we should all keep our eyes open for times when we can get on the public comment lists. Watch the USDA web site. If they come near then make it a priority to go to the listening sessions and speak at those sessions. Wear nonais tshirts. Get seen. It may be now or never as they cement their blimp!
Comment Kait — April 15, 2009 @ 5:09 pm
Secretary gets NAIS earful
Wednesday, April 15, 2009, 4:39 PM
by Tom Steever
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack listened to pros and cons of a National Animal ID System Wednesday during a meeting that included 28 representatives of various stakeholders that will be affected in some way by the system. NAIS is currently stalled because of a lack of voluntary participation as well a lot of opposition and concerns, but Vilsack isn’t giving up.
“I am hopeful that we can figure out ways in which we can minimize the concerns that were expressed today,” Vilsack told reporters following the meeting, “and look at creative ways to encourage more participation.”
The agency has been trying for five years to get a system going, and Vilsack wants to keep trying.
“I’m a new person to this job and so I come into it with a fresh pair of eyes,” said Vilsack in audio recordings provided by the USDA.
That suits cattle producer Chuck Kiker just fine. Kiker represented the U.S. Cattlemen’s at the gathering with the Ag Secretary.
“Hopefully (Vilsack) can bring something to the table that will bring everybody with some form of consensus so we can move forward with this,” said Kiker following the meeting.
Bill Bullard, CEO of R-CALF USA expressed his organization’s opposition to the system during the meeting.
“We believe NAIS is an invasive and unlawful encumbrance on commerce, and its effect is to impose additional production costs on every livestock producer,” said Bullard, whose group is still concerned about the system’s effects on cattlemen.
“NAIS would subject U.S. cattle producers to enforcement and compliance costs associated with the third-party management of a colossal database within which culpability would be difficult to determine,” Bullard told the meeting participants.
Vilsack plans a series of listening sessions across the country to get more input on a National Animal ID System.
Comment farmerscotty — April 15, 2009 @ 5:35 pm
Very well done Walter. You left nothing out that needed to be said and heard. I will be forwarding to others who feel the same.
Comment Lana — April 15, 2009 @ 5:36 pm
This tells us all we need to know about this process:
Vilsack told reporters following the meeting, “and look at creative ways to encourage more participation.”
He also said as much in his Congressional testimony. This stakeholder meeting is a classic trick to induce quiet compliance. But it is clear the goal at USDA hasn’t changed one bit!
Comment pete — April 15, 2009 @ 6:15 pm
Attended a tea party today, had a lot of fun showing my displeasure to my gov’t. My tea party sign was faced on the other side with, “Don’t tag me Bro’, NONAIS.org”. Many, many people asked what that was about, and as I explained, eyebrows were raised, and questions were asked. This happened in a very rural community in Kentucky. Almost none had any idea that this was going on. Thanks for being there Mr Jeffries. This is our America, fight apathy!
Comment Wayne Underwood — April 15, 2009 @ 9:39 pm
walter,good job!!! thank you.your friend nick. PS go to r-calf and read their statment. may be that they (usda)will now hear the cry of the people.hope so. just a thought.
Comment nick — April 15, 2009 @ 10:08 pm
Consider:
1) They say the small farmers can’t provide enough food to feed the world.
2) They say the big farmers can’t do it without a subsidy.
3) A major problem is the big farmers are trying to kill off the small farmers and take that last 15% of the market for themselves.
Ergo:
When the big farmers (USDA has a def.) exceed 75% of the market they lose all subsidies. Think of it as a choke chain.
Comment Adam — April 16, 2009 @ 4:16 am
Walter & Sharon:
Great responses! I’m glad Vilsack is listening. I hope he actually hears. My concern is that he’s still referring to us as “stakeholders”.
I will copy your comments to take to DC with me next week.
Comment Barbara — April 16, 2009 @ 7:09 am
“Had NAIS been truly honest and voluntary from the start, I would have participated.”
NOT ME
[Perhaps I wasn’t clear. Truly honest and voluntary includes among other things being within the bounds of our Constitutional - which the currently proposed NAIS is not. I have worked with our state department of agriculture, local universities including state and the USDA on a number of things, freely providing them with information to help with research and such. In all cases it was cooperative and polite interaction. NAIS, on the other hand, is not. Instead they came at us with heavy handed threats and coercion. With costs and demands. It is essentially the exact same data. It is the attitude that is different. The fact is the college, the state department of ag, the USDA all know that we’re here, that we raise pigs and who we are. They don’t need to go threatening us about Premises ID. The fact that they did so raises hackles and suspicions that they are out for more nefarious ends. At this point, the USDA has done so much damage to their own reputation they are facing a very steep uphill battle. -WJ]
Comment irene — April 16, 2009 @ 10:34 am
I am reminded of your old post about good and evil. It deserves rereading in light of this meeting. Everyone should see it. Here it is link
Comment Jessie James — April 16, 2009 @ 1:09 pm
I agree with Walter on the means and ways the USDA went about trying to get people, uh, stakeholders, to be part of NAIS…they shot themselves in the foot.(actually, a whole half a body higher in their anatomy!)
Comment esbee — April 16, 2009 @ 7:36 pm
I noticed Billy Smith was on the agenda…he is from the quarter horse assoc. Both he
and he and Ward Stutz from AQHA are FOR NAIS…I have had words with Stutz about NAIS…they are for it for the purposes of exporting horses, which there are already ways to do so without NAIS. My horses are not in that game the big boys play…once again, the big guys drag the little guys through the mud for their own gain.
Comment esbee — April 16, 2009 @ 7:48 pm
I see that the American Horse Council was on the list of speakers. Why do I get the feeling that they weren’t representing the >90% of horse owners in the Western Horseman online poll?
Comment Barbara — April 18, 2009 @ 6:08 am
For AQHA it’s all about the sponsorship money. Nutrena and Purina sponsor them, and guess who those companies are subsidiaries of. The American Horse Council has never been anything but detrimental to the equine industry. They are just another self-feeding monster at the trough.
Comment Tee — April 18, 2009 @ 10:14 am
About the same time you were talking to the USDA, I was talking to one of my state congressmen about the NAIS.
http://smallfarmliving.today.com/2009/04/17/nais-political-action/
I told my congressman that he needed to get with the USDA and ask them why they are force registering individuals into a “voluntary” system. My congressman was newly elected in November so he’s a rookie in Congress, and he didn’t know anything about NAIS, but I was able to provide him copies of information from this website and several others to back up the sentiments of the small farm owners.
Comment Anna — April 18, 2009 @ 10:47 am
good commentary Walter…kudos.
I would still be wary, the fact that Vilsack is still considering the program is cause for concern, he states “trying to find a consensus everyone can agree on”.
NAIS needs to be scrapped completely, this should not even be a Federal program at Taxpayer expense.
Big Ag is pushing the Feds so they don’t have to pay for it themselves.
as Walter commented let the private industry pick up the tab and implement NAIS if they feel it is a necessary tracking system.
Fedex and UPS have their own system let Big Ag model NAIS after theirs and leave the feds and taxpayers OUT OF IT!
Comment Denise — April 20, 2009 @ 8:31 am
Farm Alliance:
statement
Comment Mark — April 20, 2009 @ 9:58 am
US Livestock Marketing & Management
The Source for Livestock News in the Alleys
April 21, 2009, high noon.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Livestock Auction Markets have grave concern over the talk of “mandatory” NAIS that rumbled out of the nations capitol last week. Market operators are skeptical that the current National Animal Identification System 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. Because of those and other concerns, the policy of the Livestock Marketing Association is that NAIS should remain voluntary.
Nancy Robinson, the LMA’s President for Government and Industry Affairs testified, “speed of commerce” means processing and marketing cattle on sale day within just a few hours, minimizing weight shrinkage, protecting the safety and welfare of market employees and the livestock they handle, and moving animals on to their next destination “with a minimum of delay.”
That was part of the message brought by Nancy Robinson to an April 15 discussion on the future of NAIS. The discussion was called by U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, and held at USDA. Those invited included “a selected spectrum of views” on NAIS, with a heavy slanted testimony toward USDA funded and animal health providers.
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, extra labor, worker safety, liability, and animal welfare.
In the industry thousands of cattle are sold in a single day. Most arrive the morning of the auction. Paper tags are glued to critter’s backs at the speed they unload from a semi. These numbers are cataloged by auction personnel and easily visible by buyers from a normal distance. This system has historically worked well, and economical. No cattle are lost, or else the management would be responsible.
The impossibility of a mandatory NAIS would require several more hours for tagging and computer recording. Instead of livestock arriving the morning of the sale and leaving the same day it would require consignments arrive a day early. This would create an increase yardage and handling fee. Each time a pound is lost by stressing it reduces the health and value. Pounds and minutes are dollars.
The current system works well millions of times a year. It has been fine tuned by cattle handling professionals for centuries. The current system doesn’t require trained computer technology, or electronic reading scanners. If there is an electrical failure the entire system, as currently used, can continue on schedule.
Market consignment fees include commission, brand inspection, health, and yardage. Currently these sale fees are $11 to $19 per animal. With a mandatory NAIS it is projected to go to $26 to $41. Not only would NAIS mandatory force markets to expand corrals to board cattle an extra day, purchase thousands of dollars in computer equipment, but also totally change the skill level of auction staff. If a computer error is made during the process, a hefty fine is proposed by NAIS planners.
LMA Information Director, John McBride says, “What it is going to do is make our people the policemen for NAIS, and of course they don’t want to be that.”
“So we don’t end up with a system people resist, people resent and that people figure out ways to get around it,” Sec. Vilsack told reporters, this is his goal. Vilsack acknowledged there are very passionate feelings concerning NAIS and he would like to sit down and discuss ways a mandatory program could be acceptable.
Most livestock and marketing organizations are being politically polite toward the Secretary—-but, unfortunately for NAIS—what they won’t stand for at all is the one part—-MANDATORY!
Comment esbee — April 22, 2009 @ 3:04 am
Theres a thread over on homesteading today about this where some is trashing nonais. I dont know enough to defend it.
link
[Since the person (#55) in question on that forum seems to have a long standing personal vendetta against me I will refrain from responding to his baiting. Others should feel free to correct him and I hope you will. Do keep things polite and accurate. Don’t fall for his trap of lies and distortions of the truth. -WJ]
Comment beeGrl — April 22, 2009 @ 9:22 am
Just wondering - if WI was having such an effective program on the entire “Mandatory NAIS no Premises ID = $5,000 fine” thing when the letters were sent out to livestock owners in Feb/March - why has legislation been introduced by Suder to switch the state back to Voluntary?
Could it just possibly be that by residing under State Control the fines will go to the State?
I think once WI found out that “Mandatory at the Federal Level” meant that the USDA might be collecting the cash while WI had to be-bop around the state Enforcing Federal Regulations (and thereby having to spend $) - it became alot more appealing to keep the program Voluntary.
In our state an effective point is that for every $5 Federal Funding - Illinois has to kick in $1 to promote Premises ID. According to some accounts it will take another $10 - $15 million federal dollars to get us “up to” critical mass in this state. So Illinois will have to kick in more cash to make this mandatory and then spend money to enforce Regulations that will fill the pockets of the Federal Fine collectors.
Illinois Legislators don’t like that so much!
Comment Mrs. Michael Sabo — April 23, 2009 @ 11:51 am