Today the Vermont House Agriculture Committee met with USDA represenative Dr. John Wiemers by telephone regarding the USDA’s proposed draft of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). I greatly appreciate the questions raised by the Committee members to the USDA representative Dr. Wiemers this morning. They clearly pointed out the double-speak of the USDA which is being very slippery about this and other issues related to NAIS and Premise ID. The USDA is trying to reassure people out of one mouth while their other mouth, and written word, says something very different. The April 2006 USDA documents make the program appear voluntary but is filled with little catches like “at this time”, “provided that they get compliance”, “provided that their milestone markers are met”, etc. The reality, as Dr. Wiemers made clear, is that the program is ultimately mandatory. Not only that, but as responses to questions by Representative Botzow pointed out, there are draconian penalties for homesteaders and small producers, although the USDA does not want to discuss that aspect. In Texas non-compliance is $1,000 per day per violation by statute (Title 5 Chapter 341 Section 341.048). In Vermont the penalty is $5,000 per day per violation (Title 6 Chapter 102 Section 1164).
Representative Johnson clearly nailed one of the USDA’s leading word games. They like to claim that we on the internet and NoNAIS are spreading misinformation but when you dig into the documents it turns out it is the USDA that is lying. Dr. Wiemers’ own testimony and the USDA documents clearly established that in the event of commingling, such as showing, 4H and group trail rides, people will indeed have to report to the USDA. This is an important point. The USDA has a number of subtle lies and one of them is that we won’t have to report trail rides. Dr. Wiemers stated this early on. Yet in the written documents, and in Dr. Wiemers’ statements today, it was clearly stated that if there is any comingling then reporting is necessary. Trail rides usually involve going onto a neighbor’s property and often neighbors go on trial rides together. Shows, 4-H gatherings and other events are also an issue with this sort of mandatory event reporting. It is unconstitutional for the government to be controlling our association - mandatory reporting with penalties is a form of control. This is a clear violation of our basic rights as Americans and is part of the lie the USDA is promulgating.
Representative Zuckerman’s question of “Will the USDA consider not making the program mandatory until there has been legislation to that effect by Congress” revealed the heavy hand of the Department of Agriculture. Dr. Wiemers refused to speak on that topic and claimed that there was already legislative oversight because Congress approves the USDA’s budget. It surprised me that he was unwilling to even communicate the question up the chain of command. Representative Zuckerman pressed the issue asking “So you are firm in retaining the right to create a mandatory program” and Dr. Wiemers said “Yes.” This attitude, that they are above the people and above the legislation, is part of why so many livestock owners are upset with the USDA. The regulators are only considering comments from the largest stakeholders, many who are not even livestock owners such as the RFID industry, and mandating a regulatory program that will be a heavy burden on small producers and a trampling of our Constitutional rights.
Representative Green questioned Dr. Wiemers regarding the resistance nationwide vs in Vermont to the Animal ID vs Premise ID. I felt that Wiemers did not clearly respond to the question. He basically brushed off resistance to the program as misinformation. In the USDA survey presented this month there is support for NAIS - among large producers. However, the feeling on NAIS among small producers and homesteaders is over 90% opposed. Unfortunately, the USDA does not seem interested in getting input from smaller stakeholders and instead has focused its attention on the large industry groups and big producers. This is understandable in one way, the big stakeholders represent 85% of our economic output of agriculture and benefit the most from NAIS. They have the big monied lobbyists to push their interests. The small stakeholders, on the other hand, are the ones who will be most heavily burdened and get the least benefit and representation.
Wiemers stated near the end that this all applied to interstate activity. This lead to perhaps one of the most interesting points when Representative Zuckerman asked if the program did not apply to intra-state activities. Dr. Wiemers answered, “Yes.” This deserves serious followup because all of the USDA documents and Dr. Wiemers other comments make it clear they are intending to take this to the backyard level for all producers, even those who are raising meat only for their own table intra-state or inter-state. Page 3 of the April 2006 documents from the USDA make it clear that if we as a state do not voluntarily comply they will take measures to force NAIS down our throats. There is nothing voluntary about the threat of force.
Another very interesting point that came up was the USDA has no clue as to how many “premises” are out there. They are relying on inaccurate surveys by their department that have both over estimates and under estimates built into the system. Dr. Wiemers never did give our representatives a number despite all his heming and hawing. Research on the web pegs the number at around 2,000,000 farms nationwide but that does not include all the horse owners, hobby farms, homesteaders or pet livestock owners. What’s your guess? Maybe it is better than the USDA’s…
Perhaps the biggest issue to people is the government’s whole depopulation plan. Depopulation is euphemistic govi-speak for non-voluntary killing off of all the sick and healthy animals in an area. Depopulation is not necessary, scientific or useful other than as a public relations tool of “Look - we’re doing something!” Quarantine is sufficient. In the UK in 2002 with Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) the British government made the mistake of killing 6,000,000 animals unnecessarily. This devastated their country more than FMD ever would have done and they still have not recovered. Virtually all of those animals were healthy. Not only that but FMD is not fatal - it merely causes sores that puts the animal off feed for a short period. The animals recover and can continue to be productive. A government policy of depopulation, as outlined in GAO document 05-214 is unacceptable. They should not be killing healthy animals just because disease was detected. Maybe sick animals should be killed - provided they can not recover - but there is no way the government should be coming in and killing healthy animals. Even worse, as Dr. Wiemer pointed out the government will not be offering compensation or indemnity. This is a warrant-less search, seizure and confiscation without legal appeal - a direct violation of our Constitutional rights under the 4th Amendment and a unacceptable extension of Eminent Domain.
US Constitution - Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. -National Archives
Like Representative Zuckerman, I have wondered if this will become another federally mandated, unfunded program forced onto states like No Child Left Behind and other federal programs. I noticed that Dr. Wiemers refused to actually answer that question. Tax payers will pay for this at the federal level, the state level and in the grocery store. There are also large costs at the producer and homesteader levels. Wiemers says the program, right down to individual Animal ID and Trace-Back, will eventually be mandatory. Tags cost money. For people with mixed flocks they will have to tag every single chicken under the written rules being drafted by the USDA. Only large producers doing all-in/all-out style production get to take advantage of the Group ID program that uses one ID number for tens of thousands of animals. Small producers and rural folk raising their own are going to see a heavy burden in fees, tags, equipment and time. On a small farm we don’t have the time to spend filling out yet more sets of government paperwork - we have real work to do.
Dr. Wiemers used the example of a credit card as a voluntary, universal, government coordinated program. He compared this to NAIS. I like that example. Nobody is required to get a credit card. Credit cards are not mandatory. They are market driven. Not everybody has a credit card. Credit cards are truly 100% voluntary unlike the USDA’s proposed NAIS. Lets keep NAIS, Premise ID, Animal ID and Trace-Back all 100% voluntary and market driven. We should not have to have Premise ID, Animal ID, Trace-Back, etc to be able to grow food for ourselves. We should not even have to have any component of NAIS to grow food to sell to other people. The big point of NAIS is trace-back for the profit of large corporations and if consumers want it they can demand it. My customers have trace-back. They know their pork came from my pigs which were bred, born and raised on our pastures here at Sugar Mountain Farm in Vermont. The big producers who want to offer this assurance to their customers so that they can export to Japan or sell to consumers who demand Trace-Back will be able to have their premium for providing a value added service if NAIS is kept 100% voluntary. The rest of us should not be burdened for their profit.
From certain officials I hear genuine concerns about public welfare and being able to reach people for both education and alerts about disease outbreaks. I question the logic of Premise ID for this purpose simply because we already have the media and the Emergency Broadcast System. Why add another complicated, expensive, redundant mandate? Anyone who is not reachable by one of these forms of communication is not going to be a significant threat to society.
What ever happens, we need strict guarantees, in legislation at the federal and state levels, that we’ll not be led down that slippery slope to NAIS or further erosion of our rights and privacy if we accept some form of Premise ID. The rest of NAIS and the horrors of depopulation are unacceptable. We need strong laws that will prevent this sort of heavy handed regulatory taking of our property, our rights and the invasion of our privacy. It is not the government’s business if someone has a chicken. Grandma’s egg hen is not a threat to society.
On a related note: It would also be nice if the USDA and the Vermont Department of Agriculture (VTDA) would stop spreading lies while at the same time incorrectly claiming that I am doing so. I suppose I should be flattered that they read my blog so carefully. Above I discussed a few of their lies. Steve Kerr is apparently spreading lies about me. I have been told that he has told people that my blog specifically is filled with lies. Word gets around and back to me. That is slander by a public official. I have repeatedly asked him, and other officials, to point out any errors in my web site yet they never have. We are in communication by phone, in person and by email so that is not the issue. I strive for 100% accuracy. Our public servants should do the same. I seriously question the competency of a public servant to hold his job when he is slandering citizens and lying to our legislature repeatedly. Maybe it is time for Kerr to step down and let the VDTA once again represent the interests of all Vermonters and not just big Ag.
Walter Jeffries
Sugar Mountain Farm in Vermont
Pastured Pigs & Sheep
I think it is interesting that USDA and its proponents continue to say that those who are opposed to NAIS are “misinformed”. I think we are probably more informed about NAIS than they are about us. We comprise a larger cross section of the United States than the large producers do. There are more of us. We cover the entire range of education, training, experience and political action. Belive me even those of us who were not politically active before will be now. That will be the epiphany for NAIS-to see its biggest supporters simply voted out of office. They may have the intellectuals fooled. You can always fool an intellecutual if you play to his ego. But the rest of us know that saying something doesnt make it so. Who are you trying convince USDA? We know you arent telling the truth.
Comment Susie Stretton — April 20, 2006 @ 10:24 pm
So typical of federal programs; they always say these things are for the common good, but it is ALWAYS at the cost of our freedoms. Not trying to be a scare-monger, Mr. Jeffries, but you need to watch your back! When big government and big money are involved ugly things start to happen. You’ve already experienced a small part of that with the accusations by a government official of being a liar. Dirty tricks and foul play are par for the course with people of that sort. I respect and appreciate what you’re doing. Thank-you for keeping us informed! Sincerely, Dan Davis, White Pine, TN
Comment Dan Davis — April 21, 2006 @ 4:52 am
I’ve also noticed how the official statements I read and hear are different than what the draft plan states. And then they tell us that we are jumping to conclusions.
Comment Barbara — April 21, 2006 @ 8:16 am
Walter: WONDERFUL article! Wiemers remarks will prove to be invaluable when addressing folks about “where the USDA is heading with NAIS”. He is obviously not as talented as his boss when it comes to “not answering” questions. And it does appear that the committee asked much tougher questions than were asked of Sec. Johanns during the now infamous tele-conference.
SIDEBAR: I notice a recurring theme…that the anti-nais web sites are spreading mis-information. That same point was brought to my attention during my telephone conversation with an aid from PA State Senator Waugh’s office. But when I asked her to give me one example of the mis-information to which she was referring, she could not.
If any of you encounter this “mis-information” comment…press them to supply an example. I don’t know what’s being spread on the other sites, but there is no obvious mis-information on these pages (at least none that I have seen so far!) Keep up the good work Walter!
Comment Neil W. — April 21, 2006 @ 8:35 am
Thank you for all of the information on this conspiracy against the small farms. We have a small farm and only wish to raise a few chickens, cows and pigs for our own use. My husband is disabled and any way that we can grow our own food helps us a great deal financially. However, this program will defeat the purpose. Why would the government penalize us for being poor? It just doesn’t make sense. Thank you again for fighting for us.
Comment Darlene Morris — April 21, 2006 @ 9:47 am
Interesting. Do you have people you personally know that have personally heard that Steve Kerr saying that your website is full of lies? If so, I wonder what might be done if they gave you official statements to that effect and you had a lawyer serve a notice on Mr. Kerr about it, would it have any affect? Perhaps to detail such lies officially and in writing? An actual slander suit might be interesting (although I don’t think it would get that far). But that is more fun thinking probably.
[I’m in discussions about this. Can’t say more right now. -WJ]
Comment Kamatu — April 21, 2006 @ 10:36 am
Thanks for your penetrating analysis, Walter. The reason for Kerr’s attacks on your probity lie in the nature of your fundamental critique of NAIS. You consistent stick to your guns on the basic rights of individuals to their homes and property. This really scares the fascists. (YES, THE VT and US Departments of Agriculture are instruments of FASCISM - the control of the economy through government decree, without so much as a shred of the largely fictitious ‘legislative’ process, which is now driven by federal grants -control through funding) The ‘misinformation’ labelling is ‘newspeak’. THE REAL MISINFORMATION GURUS ARE THE GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS INVOLVED IN NAIS.
Another thing that frightens these bureaucrats is the possibility here of a libertarian alliance of the ‘right’ (Christian, private property defending, individualist) and the left (anti-corporate, back-to-the-land, communitarian). If the fascists see that opposition crystalizing in the way this blog seems to be accomplishing, they will back off for awhile. BUT they’ll be back with the first case of AI in North America. WITH their fear-mongering friends in the sensationalist oriented media. I commend all the individuals who make such salient comments here and my heart goes out to all who raise animals and crops in a responsible and sustainable manner.And a special thanks to you, Walter for this space. It is truly the finest political instrument I have ever seen on the internet.
Comment Alan LePage — April 21, 2006 @ 10:41 am
Thanks for the update, Walter. Thoughts and prayers are with you. You are doing good work.
No NAIS is a good NAIS!
Comment Grace Jaye — April 21, 2006 @ 1:40 pm
Darlene, because they want you dependent on them, they want control over you and the corporate sponsors of the government want you to spend your precious dollars buying food from them rather than raising it yourself. Every mouthful of food you raise yourself is stealing money from the coffers of the rich corporations who could have sold you that food. Shame on you! (Shame on me too.)
Comment walterj — April 21, 2006 @ 4:46 pm
one tag will suffice for the
whole pack of liars…..
good news::::
The arkansas legislature doesn’t
want NAIS….will get back to you when I know more…
siddartha@care2.com
Comment sid sargent — April 21, 2006 @ 8:47 pm
if it was possible to get the truth out of them
maybe we wouldn’t have to invent it…(joke)
As far as this website goes it
points to their lying websites
if you can get the password…..
Theirs certainly don’t point to ours..if i had a million bucks,I’d sue them for all of our
combined sleepless nights……
stuff still happens
mother earth isn’t dead yet
One tag fits all…….
Comment sid sargent — April 21, 2006 @ 8:59 pm
Thank you for speaking out and informing us of big brother again. Such a ‘free’ copuntry we live in that strives to be controlled by big business in another area. Please keep up the information and add me to your correspondence.
Comment Edward Geiger — April 24, 2006 @ 12:45 pm
Horse owners please read!
I am proposing a US ride in each of the contiguous 48 states to protest NAIS. Each state will have its’ own riders across their respective states. Each state will have a coordinator, a planned route and a group of volunteers, both riders and helpers alike. We will need volunteers, supportors and those familiar with municipality right-of-ways. If you would like to be involved please email me at NoNAIS@SacredHorse.com. Thank you.
Comment Charie — April 25, 2006 @ 11:54 am
Great idea. You have mail. Contact Walter, he has my number for contact. Minnesota
“WHEN I COUNT MY BLESSINGS, I COUNT MY HORSES TWICE”
Comment Goose — April 25, 2006 @ 2:48 pm
Opra is fine But how about Bill O’Reilly on Fox News or Willie Nelson
Comment Betty Rodgers — April 26, 2006 @ 12:49 pm
HI,ID ALSO LIKE TO SAY THANKS FOR THIS SITE AND ALL THE WORK THAT YOU PUT IN,I DISCOVERED YOU BY ACCIDENT THE OTHER DAY AS MY DAUGHTER WAS GETTING READY TO SET UP A SITE, I TOLD HER LETS NOT REINVENT THE WHEEL YOUVE DONE A GREAT JOB,ILL CONCENTRATE ON HAMMERING THE NAIS AND HERE IN PA.SENATE BILL 865,TOGETHER WE WILL WIN THIS WAR,THANKS AGAIN TO YOU AND TO ALL THE GREAT AMERICAN PEOPLE WHO CARE ENOUGH TO STAND UP AND BE COUNTED GOD BLESS YOU!!!!!
Comment LEE — April 27, 2006 @ 3:19 pm
Last I heard Wisconsin was doing the best with 400% of their horse premises registered as per Dr. John Wiemer in testimony to the VT House Agriculture committee on 4/20/2006 - A record that’s hard to beat!
Comment walterj — July 13, 2007 @ 11:46 am
WOW! If they’ve already registered 400%, then that means they don’t need to register any more.
Comment Barbara — July 14, 2007 @ 9:09 am
Kind of sounds like the 10,000 phantom head of cattle in Australia.
Just proves that the USDA has been playing the numbers game by reducing the # of premises to make the sign up sound better. Perhaps they have underestimated the number and there are 4 or 5 times more premises than they think. That means sign up for other states might be less than 5%. Very possible.
Does anyone know where to find on the internet a current # of premise registrations per state?
[Actually, the 400% was prior to the USDA reducing the premises count estimate. To get a current list of state info from the USDA see this PDF document. Article coming soon. -WJ]
Comment Mary Beth Westcott — July 14, 2007 @ 12:34 pm
I just ran across this quote and I direct it to the Vermont Sheep and Goat Association:
To predict the behavior of ordinary people in advance, you only have to assume that they will always try to escape a disagreeable situation with
the smallest possible expenditure of intelligence.
~Friedrich Nietzsche
I spoke with two members of VSGA today in Craftsbury and neither of them remember that the scrapie id deal was up for vote by the membership. My conclusion is that the scrapie rules that go into effect 15 July were specifically crafted for the board of directors of the association.
Comment Henwhisperer — July 14, 2007 @ 1:20 pm
Henwhisperer,
Is there anything to be done to prevent the rules from being enacted?
WA is implementing Scrapie Rules for Goats–which I don’t have–which I think are ridiculous. The USDA and State Ag. Depts are taking a decent program–voluntary scrapie monitoring–and are ruining it by tying it into NAIS. Because of this I haven’t been able to buy breeding stock, won’t register my flock and will skirt the system when normally I would have been happy to participate.
I am hoping VT will be different than WA in this.
Comment Podchef — July 14, 2007 @ 5:21 pm
I don’t know, Podchef. They are so very mum on this. There is just one news article that I can find via news.google.com. You have to look very hard in the Ag Agency’s website to find anything about the rule. All this secretiveness make me very, very suspicious. Dr. Kerry Rood was on vacation all last week. I’m going to reach out to him this week.
Here’s the link to the new rule. It’s pdf. The link within for the APHIS Scrapie Disease information website is Not Found so the corrected link if you wanted to read it is here
This is the part of the Vermont rule that really concerns me because it brushes all sheep owners, small/private farmers, homesteaders, hobbyists, etc with the same brush as the board of directors of the VSGA:
II. Identification Requirements
b. A person who transfers ownership of a goat or sheep within Vermont shall provide for the goat or sheep official scrapie identification to its flock of birth.
Comment Henwhisperer — July 15, 2007 @ 8:05 am