We already have some preliminary information based on this press release which also made it into my email box this morning:

Release No. 0053.10
Contact:
USDA Office of Communications (202) 720-4623

USDA ANNOUNCES NEW FRAMEWORK FOR ANIMAL DISEASE TRACEABILITY

WASHINGTON, Feb. 5, 2010 - Agriculture Secretary Vilsack announced today that USDA will develop a new, flexible framework for animal disease traceability in the United States, and undertake several other actions to further strengthen its disease prevention and response capabilities.

“After concluding our listening tour on the National Animal Identification System in 15 cities across the country, receiving thousands of comments from the public and input from States, Tribal Nations, industry groups, and representatives for small and organic farmers, it is apparent that a new strategy for animal disease traceability is needed,” said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. “I’ve decided to revise the prior policy and offer a new approach to animal disease traceability with changes that respond directly to the feedback we heard.”

The framework, announced today at the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) Mid-Year meeting, provides the basic tenets of an improved animal disease traceability capability in the United States. USDA’s efforts will:

Only apply to animals moved in interstate commerce;

• Be administered by the States and Tribal Nations to provide more flexibility;
• Encourage the use of lower-cost technology; and
• Be implemented transparently through federal regulations and the full rulemaking process.

“One of my main goals for this new approach is to build a collaborative process for shaping and implementing our framework for animal disease traceability,” said Vilsack. “We are committed to working in partnership with States, Tribal Nations and industry in the coming months to address many of the details of this framework, and giving ample opportunity for farmers and ranchers and the public to provide us with continued input through this process.”

One of USDA’s first steps will be to convene a forum with animal health leaders for the States and Tribal Nations to initiate a dialogue about the possible ways of achieving the flexible, coordinated approach to animal disease traceability we envision. Additionally, USDA will be revamping the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Animal Health to address specific issues, such as confidentiality and liability.

Although USDA has a robust system in place to protect U.S. agriculture, with today’s announcement, the Department will also be taking several additional actions to further strengthen protections against the entry and spread of disease. These steps will include accelerating actions to lessen the risk from diseases–such as tuberculosis–posed by imported animals, initiating and updating analyses on how animal diseases travel into the country, improving response capabilities, and focusing on greater collaboration and analyses with States and industry on potential disease risk overall.

More information on USDA’s new direction on animal traceability and the steps to improve disease prevention and control is available at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability.
-USDA Press Release No. 0053.10

I am glad to see more emphasis on disease prevention at importation. That is where the federal government should be focused. Almost all of the disease they are warning us against do not exist in the United States. The diseases would have to come in from outside. Protect our borders. Use the simplest of tools, quarantine and vaccines. This is a much more powerful and cost effective method of preventing disease than an elaborate hoax like NAIS.

I hope that Vilsack is serious about taking input from ordinary people and not just government, industry and vets. Disease prevention programs will live and die by the hand of the many, not the few. It is education that fights disease as has been historically proven time and again. Heavy handed mandates and regulations will simply produce scoff-laws, rebellion and unenforceable systems. He does not have the money or man power to drive every back road of America.

Mr. Vilsack mentions transparency - I would be very interested in a statistical breakdown of the feedback as well as the complete raw feedback from the sessions. How many people attended? How many commented at the session? How many of those were Pro-NAIS, Anti-NAIS, Other? Broken down by type (Consumer, Small Farmer, Homesteader, Larger Farmer, Corporate Ag, Government, Veterinarian…) How many commented outside of the sessions with written comments (email, paper, fax) and what was the break down there? By having the raw data as well as the USDA’s conclusions these could be independently reviewed and compared with videos of those same listening sessions. This would be most interesting given that several independent studies and polls have shown that the support for NAIS within the large industry is about 50% and the opposition to NAIS among farmers and consumers runs more like 92% with only about 4% supporting NAIS. Vilsack is offering transparency. The first step is to open up the data for peer review. I just received the response to a FOIA request I had made in early 2007 to the USDA. Not only are they almost three years late getting me the data but they only sent part of the data and acknowledge that. Not at all transparent.

I challenge Mr. Vilsack to make all the comments and recordings from the listening sessions and comment periods easily available on the web so that anyone can download them and verify the USDA’s assessments.

This does leave us with the terminal question of what to call this new inititative. NAIS, which sounds all too much like Nazi, is already taken and way too toxic. How about something a little less politically explosive this time like maybe AIDS (Animal Identification Disease System) or LOCO (Livestock Occupational Communication Organization)? That was sarcasm for those who were not sure. One must wonder about the people who would pick an acronym like NAIS and not try pronouncing it a few times to see if it sounds or maybe spells out too closely to other words with negative connotations. Apparently the USDA still has some lessons they need to learn from the marketing and communications department.

There was a time when the government officials and industry forces were sure that NAIS would become mandatory and fully implemented by January 2009. They claimed they would drive every back road and tag every animal. Times change. The USDA and Big Ag were faced with over 92% of the farmers opposing NAIS along with very strong opposition from consumers and homesteaders. NAIS has been withering and will hopefully die. Vilsack appears to be listening and the above is one more step in the right direction.

Sometimes forced government programs do die. Remember we were all going to be forced to use the Metric System back in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. It hasn’t come to pass. Neither did flying cars, thankfully. In the case of the Metric System it really was a better way (units of 10 measurement) but the public rejected here in the United States. Sadly in that case we now have both (look in your auto tool set) “Metric System and the “English Imperial System” which is worse than either alone.

Let us hope that with NAIS or what ever they’ll now call it we don’t end up in that land of Heck. Time will tell. Keep an eye on what comes next while continuing to give feedback and be involved in the process.

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”
-Thomas Jefferson

Update 20100205 11:34 AM - The NY Times has an article on this now.

Have at it, communicate and keep up the good fight!

Cheers,

-WalterJ

by Doreen Hannes

On Thursday, January 13th, 2010 there was a Senate Government Accountability and Fiscal Oversight Committee hearing at the Capitol on the usage of National Animal Identification System “840″ tags by the veterinarians at sale barns across Missouri.

The hearing was to allay the confusion amongst sale barns and determine whether or not the Department of Agriculture was following the voluntary parameters set for NAIS in Missouri by the usage of these “840″ tags.

The NAIS (National Animal Identification System) is a 3 part program. The first prong is Premises registration with a seven character number permanently assigned to a particular location housing or holding animals. The second prong is the use of these “840″ tags which necessitate a premise id number to be used. The third component is the reporting of movements from the ascribed premises and various other things such as vaccinations and tag replacements and “sightings”.

Near the beginning of December it came to light that many sale barn markets in the state of Missouri were using the 840 tags on cows going through chutes who had no official identification. It was reported that as of January 1st, 2010, all cows, with or without official identification, would receive the 840 tags when they went through chutes for health tests or pregnancy checks Different markets reported different criteria for this NAIS “840″ identification of cows. Some producers reported they were told they “had to” use the 840 tags in order to sell cattle at some sale barns.

In 2008, the Missouri General Assembly passed SB931, prohibiting the Department of Agriculture from mandating or otherwise forcing participation in NAIS, and allowing for the immediate removal from the program of anyone who was assigned a premises id unless they were part of a disease control program or an ongoing disease investigation.

This hearing was to clear up confusion on the law as it applies to both the state of Missouri and the veterinarians licensed by the state. Chairman, Senator Chuck Purgason, stated, “We want to clear up confusion, and to make sure veterinarians are not violating people’s rights regarding this program.”

Missouri State Veterinarian, Dr. Taylor Woods and Secretary of Agriculture, Dr. Jon Hagler, did not appear at the beginning of the hearing. A representative from the Department of Ag and a veterinarian with the State Vet’s office, Dr. Linda Hickle, appeared, but knew little of policy and stated that the Secretary and State Vet were not aware that they were to be present at this hearing.

Three other individuals testified at the hearing and during the last testimony, the State veterinarian and Secretary of Agriculture came into the hearing room.

They testified that they had no official written policy on the usage of the “840″ tags and had communicated with the market veterinarians by face to face contact regarding the allocation of the 100,000 “840″ tags the Department has received from the USDA. They stated they had no particular agreement as to the distribution and application of the NAIS tags, but that the application of the tags was to be at the discretion of the market veterinarian.

The Department was instructed by the Committee to write and distribute to all market veterinarians instructions on the usage of these “840″ tags and to inform the market veterinarians that the application of “840″ tags was to be done solely at the request of the producer in compliance with the law of the State of Missouri.

No instructions or inquiries were made into how any redress is to be achieved by those who may already have been put into the NAIS program without their knowledge or consent by buying or selling cattle through a market that was applying the tags to all cows from January 1st through the time of the distribution of the letter requiring compliance with the state law.

© Doreen Hannes
truth-farmer.blogspot.com

Unfortunately the author of the survey, Dr. Ann Swinker, has locked the results so they are hidden from public view. Openness and transparency always appreciated. Drop her an email politely asking her to open the results of the survey and to publish the raw data.

Hat tip to Darol.

Premises ID has not been implemented.

Animal Tagging has not been implemented.

Animal Tracking has not been implemented.

Over 90% of farmers and consumers were vehemently against NAIS both in independent polls and at the USDA’s own listening sessions in 2009.

Congress has defunded NAIS.

Proponents of NAIS, who benefit by selling tags and market monopolies through Big Ag, continue to promote NAIS quietly looking for back doors through which they might slip the noose over the necks of free farmers and consumers.

Be vigilant. Keep supporting small-scale local agriculture because that is where food security lies.

Have at it, communicate and keep up the good fight!

Cheers,

-WalterJ

“Food producers must be obligated to produce food that is free of pathogens.” Senator Feinstein said.

So Feinstein is planning to outlaw food. And we shall eat… irradiated cake?

I’m all for safe food, HACCP/PR, SSOPs and all that but it is impossible to have raw foods that are completely free of ‘pathogens’. Processing includes harvesting, washing, cleaning off outer leaves, shucking corn, slaughter, butchering, canning and all sorts of levels of production from the farm onward. Feinstein’s ill thoughtout proposal will ban food as we know it, increase the consumption of highly processed foods (bad for your health), lead to higher food prices for consumers (bad for your wallet) and destroy the small farmers and processors who can’t afford to do all the fancy testing she’s proposing (bad for national food security). In the end the only real winner are testing labs and mega-processors who can afford this and already focus on fake food.

I am reminded of this old poem from my childhood that came from my grandmother’s era when microbes were first becoming widely known: