An Analysis of References to the National Animal identification System in the USDA’s 2007 Farm Bill Theme Paper
“Strengthening the Foundation for Future Growth in U.S. Agriculture”
by Mary Zanoni, Ph.D., J.D.
P.O. Box 501
Canton, NY 13617
315-386-3199
mlz@slic.com
Released on September 13, 2006, the USDA’s “Strengthening the Foundation for Future Growth in U.S. Agriculture” is the fifth and final USDA “theme paper” for consideration in the crafting of the 2007 Farm Bill. This theme paper deals with, among other issues, the protection of U.S. agriculture from diseases and pests. Therefore, it contains a brief discussion of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) and the supposed goals of NAIS. Most of this discussion, appearing at pages 27-28 of the theme paper, is very generalized; however, two points are worth noting: (1) a misleading reference to Homeland Security Presidential Directive-9 (HSPD-9) as a supposed basis for NAIS; and (2) a hint that the USDA may be moving further away from a “mandatory” NAIS.
1. Reference to HSPD-9. In the USDA’s ongoing fruitless search for some legal foundation for NAIS, the “Future Growth” theme paper mentions Homeland Security Presidential Directive-9 (HSPD-9) as establishing a “national policy to defend agriculture and the food system against terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies.” (Future Growth, p. 27.) The theme paper further states (at p. 27) that “under HSPD-9, USDA is also directed to develop a system to track individual plants and animals.”
However, a closer look at HSPD-9 reveals that the Directive does not in fact specify the full-blown NAIS system that the USDA has undertaken. HSPD-9 was released on January 30, 2004, well after the predecessor of NAIS, the U.S. Animal Identification Plan, had been developed by the National Institute for Animal Agriculture. HSPD-9 can fully specify a planned program when it wants to, calling for, for example, a “National Veterinary Stockpile” of crucial vaccines and drugs and a “National Plant Disease Recovery System” to coordinate pest control and promotion of resistant seed varieties. (HSPD-9, p. 3.) But HSPD-9 speaks of the capability of tracing animals only in general terms: “the Secretaries of the Interior, Agriculture, Health and Human Services, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, and the heads of other appropriate Federal departments and agencies shall build upon and expand current monitoring and surveillance programs to . . . . [inter alia] develop systems that, as appropriate, track specific animals and plants, as well as specific commodities and food.” (HSPD-9, p. 2.).
Thus, HSPD-9 calls for, at most, tracking specific animals — presumably, those imported from other countries or traveling in interstate commerce, that we might want to monitor for a specific disease risk. HSPD-9 in no way call for tagging and tracking every single animal of every livestock species in the entire country, down to a backyard chicken, horse, or goat. Furthermore, while a Presidential Directive may indicate how the Executive Branch is interpreting certain laws, a Presidential Directive is not a law unto itself — if Congress has not authorized any NAIS (and, as of this writing in Sept. 2006, it has not), no Presidential Directive could validly establish such a full-blown program.
2. Hint that the USDA is moving further away from a “mandatory” NAIS. We remember all too well the USDA’s release of its NAIS “Implementation Plan” in April 2006. In that Plan, we were told that the USDA is now concentrating on a “voluntary” NAIS, but the Plan also, along with Secretary Johanns’s explicit comments at the press conference announcing the Plan, indicated that anything less than “full participation” on a “voluntary” basis by all animal owners, would swiftly be met by the USDA switching to a “mandatory” NAIS cram-down.
It’s way too early for any celebration among anti-NAIS forces (keep your motivation up for the coming Farm Bill fight in 2007), but the Future Growth theme paper does discuss NAIS in a softer tone than that of the Implementation Plan: “The National Animal Identification System is currently being implemented on a voluntary basis through a cooperative State-Federal-industry partnership. This identification system will enhance the speed and efficiency of disease trace backs by standardizing animal movement record-keeping and using newer technologies. Upon full NAIS implementation, the goal is to be able to trace the movements of all exposed or infected animals entered in the NAIS within 48 hours of a disease diagnosis.” (Future Growth, pp. 27-28.)
Notice that mention of “animals entered in the NAIS”. Could that be the beginning of an admission that the USDA can accept that there will always be, in fact, some (or even many) animals that are not “in the NAIS”? And further, could that herald an admission by the USDA that it is beginning to consider a truly “voluntary” animal identification system — that is, a system completely run by and for private industry, with no government involvement and no government funding?
At the National Institute for Animal Agriculture’s ID Expo in August 2006, Secretary Johanns promised a significant document on NAIS would be forthcoming from the USDA during the coming months. It will certainly be a good thing if that document moves further in the direction of a truly voluntary system. But even if it does, NAIS opponents must not become complacent — the real dogfight will be during the 2007 Farm Bill process in the spring and summer of 2007. Every mega-industrial ag group in the nation will have a dog in that fight, and all opponents of NAIS will need to be in it, too.
Copyright 2006 by Mary Zanoni. This article may be distributed solely for personal and non-commercial use without prior permission from the author. Any other distribution or republication requires the author’s permission in writing and requests for such permission should be directed to the author at the address/phone/e-mail address above.
civilspaceremotesensing
See under Section 6.
Sounds like this ‘unclassified’ document allows civil surveillance from space under all sorts of possible scenarios.
Maybe the text of the 2007 Farm Bill is backing off the mandatory compliance with NAIS knowing we (and our animals) can all be observed in ‘real time’ from satellites.
Can’t help but wonder how the ‘classified’ version reads…
Comment donna — October 11, 2006 @ 2:36 pm
Below is a contact we all need to call, write or fax. Apparently he thinks NAIS is just fine…Please be polite, but firm and state your opposition to NAIS. I’m not sure where in the USDA hierarchy this guy is, but he’s got a bunch of letters after his name so you know he’s an “official something”
and probably his salary depends on the implentation of Nais (just my opinion there)
“You can’t let someone with six or eight or even 30 or 40 chickens put a whole state at risk,” he said in an interview. “You will not be able to hide. We’ll walk the street and check every yard.”
The preceding quote was part of an article published in Country Side Magazine (Nov. / Dec. 2006 issue) and is attributable to Dr. John Wiemers, USDA -APHIS liason to the working poultry group. He also said that since he had developed a working set of recommendations with input from ABA’s Pat Lacey he had not had a single letter objecting to NAIS….
Well folks let’s send this guy some letters, ring his damn phone off the hook and get his fax machine buzzing.
His contact information is John F. Wiemers, DVM, MS, USDA, APHIS, VS, National Animal Identification Staff,
2100 S. Lake Storey Rd., Galesburg, IL. 61401
Phone (309) 344-1942 Cell : (309) 912 - 0191, John.F.WIEMERS@aphis.usda.gov
I know his phone works, because I just called and got his machine…”we’ll walk the street and check every yard” ??? Sounds like he could use a copy of the bill of rights too!
Comment Bob Constantine — October 11, 2006 @ 3:50 pm
Donna, the USDA is already watching farmers with satellites, and I don’t think they’ll stop anytime soon.
In fact, I was playing around with Google Earth the other day, looking at my place, and it is scary how much detail–like from a month ago–can be seen. If that is the consumer’s version, what can the government see? Walter, wave!
[I’m waving but the reasons you can’t see me are two-fold: 1) all digital maps have our location wrong - how odd; and 2) I live in a visual hole that the satellites don’t seem to see into as they only show the course regional resolution. On the otherhand, we did have an A-10 fly, on of my favorite military planes, fly over early yesterday morning about 50′ over our house. I thought he was going to hit the trees or the ridge. We waved and he may have seen us as he was almost flying right at us at one point. My guess was he was practicing hugging the terrain, and we’ve got quite the variety to hug. Cheers, -WJ]
Comment Podchef — October 11, 2006 @ 6:42 pm
Weimers must be a spin master. He hasn’t heard any complaints lately?? He heard a roomful of people in July do nothing but complain. Where has he been since then? If I write to him, I don’t think I can be polite. He’s smarmy.
Comment Barbara — October 11, 2006 @ 8:09 pm
Here is article from BRUCE KNIGHT
link
Read the full article on line. I only cut what I thought would get people more in gear.
Choosing NOT to participate may limit your options when it comes time to sell your herd or your flock or your breeding stock. Choosing NOT to participate may opt you out of the export market. Choosing NOT to participate may mean—at some point—you’ll have to hunt harder and go further to find buyers or slaughterhouses willing to accept undocumented livestock or poultry—especially as NAIS becomes fully operational.
[Aye, Mafia Style Voluntary. -WJ]
Comment Gisela — October 12, 2006 @ 3:13 am
>>>>Choosing NOT to participate may mean—at some point—you’ll have to hunt harder and go further to find buyers or slaughterhouses willing to accept undocumented livestock or poultry
THAT is what the internet is for!
My site and many others have the reach to assist with that hunt to find buyers!
Comment Breederville — October 12, 2006 @ 7:17 am
Two comments on Mary’s article: the HSPD are not the authority for NAIS but as a comprehensive unit (all of them) do carry weight in gaining ground towards acheiving the same goals, especially when they knit them with other bills, laws, regulations, statutes.
Do not BELIEVE for one minute the USDA is backing down on to voluntary on our account. The UN mandate wants all of their treaties implemented, well, voluntarily, of course.
I just got back from a lengthy public disclosure under Freedom of Information Act and they want us to know the following: they are monitoring every article, forum and statement written on NAIS, they have your state profile and are networking with every state, they are aggressively moving forward-ON TRACK full speed towards your farm, they are inter-twining other regulations, laws, statues, on infintum, to the States acceptance of *financial incentives* then have no recourse but to implement a host of laws, acts, ect.. because they took the dollars and agreed, and lastly the Premises Database is federal. Not state, not private….it is federal, so it is written. Furthermore, the fed’s do not OWN your information either, they only administer and manage, just like the states. SO who OWNS your data and profile and the datbase?????? I have not seen one document from any agency yet claiming to have authority over Premises Identification database and data. Buyer BEWARE!
Ask questions, lots of them. Demand answers in writing, and like Mary, go to the written documents-take nobodys word for anything.
Take heart! I saw with my own eyes their fear of our action in written documents. Their ‘aggressive action’ means we are having an impact! Be of good cheer and step up your action plan to defeat this NAIS creature from the dark lagoon!
Comment Celeste — October 12, 2006 @ 7:32 am
First of all; Many thanks to Mary for writing the article. Her tireless efforts to keep spreading the word about the NAIS should be greatly appreciated by all of us.
I also attended the PA meeting in July 2006 where Dr. John Weimers was confronted by 70 plus opponents of the program. For him to state that he has had no letters from anyone opposed to the NAIS is ridiculous (Bob’s post). His own assistant told me on that very night that the office was swamped with letters and emails from people asking questions about the NAIS. Questions, by the way, which they are still unable or unwilling to answer.
At that meeting, Weimers stated on several occassions that the USDA wanted to be “practical” in its implementation of the NAIS. Yet he is quoted as saying, ““You can’t let someone with six or eight or even 30 or 40 chickens put a whole state at risk,” he said in an interview. “You will not be able to hide. We’ll walk the street and check every yard.”
(I thought the original quote was, “we will drive every road in the country and find every animal”…as previously reported on these pages.)
No matter…either quote shows a complete disregard for anything resembling “being practical”.
His office already has a track record of not answering correspondence that he has already received. But if he wants more letters from the opposition, then I think we should accomodate him asap. Just don’t expect him or his staff to answer.
Thanks again Mary for continuing to inspire and direct us. I hope that every reader has taken notice of her warning about making our voices heard while the 2007 Farm Bill is being drafted. That Farm Bill is absolutely crucial to our cause!
Comment Neil W. — October 12, 2006 @ 8:23 am
>>>>Choosing NOT to participate may mean—at some point—you’ll have to hunt harder and go further to find buyers or slaughterhouses willing to accept undocumented livestock or poultry
Or it may aid in selling livestock to people opposed to NAIS.
And, if not chipping my horses prevents them from being sold to slaughter, all the more reason not to do ID on them.
Comment Barbara — October 12, 2006 @ 10:16 am
>>>>SO who OWNS your data and profile and the datbase?????? I have not seen one document from any agency yet claiming to have authority over Premises Identification database and data
Celeste, what about the CFR’s I copied from the grant applications that we have up at:
LINK.
I thought that stated the grant issuers owned the data.
>>>>Premises Database is federal
I believe it is only federal due to the public/private partnership. The NGOs partner with our agencies merely to use the ‘federal department’ as branding.
VeriChip announced the database they had to interact with the microchipping back on May 2, 2002 in a press release.
The public/private partnerships are a mask to say, ‘there, that better?’
A lot of sites leaves their server and goes to different databases. People don’t realize it because they don’t know how to read website URLs.
Let me try to show you.
www.yourhome.com
That is a URL name. Think of your address where mail is going to.
When you’re on a site, and the URL domaiin changes, like this:
www.webapps.yourhome.com
You left the server. The webapps is a forward. The ‘yourhome’ is a database column name.
There are a lot of government sites that are doing this. Their splashpages are the same; but when you go to their searches or topic specifics, I’m noticing the forward names.
When I do source views, I don’t like what I’m seeing.
As for this database being federal….and seeing how many of their databases are URL forwards, I say bullpucky.
They will give you a pretty splash page, that is all.
[Breederville is very right. Just to add to the confusion there are virtual servers where multiple domains (yourhome.com) all point into the same physical hardware and distributed servers where multiple hardware serves the same domain. Google, and other larger users, have many pieces of hardware all appearing to the outside world as one machine at a single domain. These machines are often distributed around the world for security, redundancy and efficiency. I have multiple domains (NoNAIS.org, SugarMountainFarm.com, SugarMtnFarm.com, HollyGraphicArt.com, BlackLightning.com, etc) which all reside on the same physical hardware at VonNetwork but appear to the outside world as different systems.) To dig deeper you’ll need to use tools to look at IP’s and paths like DNSstuff.com. Happy Hunting… Cheers, -WalterJ]
Comment Breederville — October 12, 2006 @ 11:05 am
>>>>>>>>Premises Database is federal
VeriChip Press Release RE: the Database
Another point on this also. Remember, this Animal Identification thing came about due to this: “Animal Identification originated as a result of the United States making trade agreements with the European Union and WTO “
In order for this to be an interactive tool for international trade, the international community has to have access to parts of this database. The datafields have to be the same as the fields overseas. This is how the meats/plants trade will be tracked in trade. So, it has to be one BIG database.
The federal ‘brand’ logo, ie, USDA, FDA, CDC, ABC, ‘enter long list of acronyms’ here will only be the brand on the software here in the states.
people overseas will be using the same database and likewise have the custom software on their screen with their brand.
Comment Breederville — October 12, 2006 @ 11:21 am
URGENT: TYPO on Bob Constantine post…should be John.f.wiemers and not john.f.weimers. Note…this name is spelled “i” before “e”.
I made the same mistake in my post. But the email that I sent to john.f.weimers was returned. Correct is john.f.wiemers@usda.gov
[Corrected. -WJ]
Comment Neil W. — October 12, 2006 @ 12:44 pm
This gives me the creeps…I see that all but the last one are already on the Naughty list.
link
Excerpts from their website…
Our Mission…
IDairy consists of six organizations that serve thousands of dairy farmers. We have formed this coalition because we all agree that our industry will be best served when all dairy operations, and ultimately, all dairy cows, are identified in a national central database.
…….
Who Is IDAIRY?
Holstein Association USA, Inc.
NAAB is the national trade association for artificial insemination businesses.
National Dairy Herd Improvement Association (NDHIA)
The National Milk Producers Federation
The Professional Dairy Heifer Growers Association (PDHGA)
the American Jersey Cattle Association
[”US Jersey” = “the American Jersey Cattle Association” which is in the Naughty List. -WJ]
Comment V is for Victory — October 12, 2006 @ 1:31 pm
I don’t believe for a minute that the powers that be are backing down on NAIS. For example, I recently ran across a political ad for a Wisconsin state assembly candidate, Gary Tauchen, whose background includes founding the Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium.They have their own candidates running this fall! People, be very careful who you vote for. Investigate their backgrounds and know where they stand on NAIS.
Comment Jane B. — October 12, 2006 @ 9:56 pm
I also agree with Celeste that thinking for one second that the USDA is backing off and actually considering a fully voluntary program is a BIG mistake. When the top levels of government have already made agreements with other countries, the USDA is not the instigator of the NAIS program. The USDA is only doing what they are told to do from the people above them. To think that the USDA can sidestep the President, Congress, and Senate who have already made agreements with other nations to implement NAIS, is to not be seeing the whole picture correctly. While next spring will be important for all of us, we also need to remember the new attacks on the 2 farms in VA, accompanied by the fact that Wisconsin is already in a mandatory Prem ID status, and Pennsylvania is working on the final step to make it mandatory there as well. And how many other states are already mandatory for Prem ID?? We need to tread very carefully in words depicting an easing up of the fascist agenda we are witnessing this year with NAIS/RFID. As much as I appreciate Mary Zanoni’s efforts, I think it is important to look around at the country and its very recent developments, before making a supposition of possible easing off their totally sinister agenda. Mary Zanoni should be representing the Henshaw’s case- does anybody know if she is involved in helping their attorneys or not?
Comment Rene — October 12, 2006 @ 10:53 pm
Celeste, can you tell us more about this FOIA meeting and how it came about. Thanks.
Comment Texas Goat Gal — October 13, 2006 @ 12:58 am
Coming soon. You can email me privately: elisheva@w-link.net
Comment Celeste — October 13, 2006 @ 5:36 am
FYI-In theory the Presmises Identification database is sparate than the Animal Database. The Animal ID contains your Premises ID Number. You can’t get an animal ID w/o signing up for a Premises Number. When doing my FOIA hunt I was specifically looking for the documents on Premsies. I understand that really they are one, but to follow they trail I must make my requests within their infrastructure or no data.
Comment Celeste — October 13, 2006 @ 5:46 am
>>>FYI-In theory the Presmises Identification database is sparate than the Animal Database. The Animal ID contains your Premises ID Number. You can’t get an animal ID w/o signing up for a Premises Number.
Not necessarily. Those are just different fields. That skin software of the database commands tells the database how to work.
The software would have preset codes that tells the database what to run, look for and do.
This is just a minor difference of a user understanding the difference between a database and what software is.
Software is only a macro. Quick key. A big fancy mouse.
Software holds programming information.
Comment Breederville — October 13, 2006 @ 10:53 am
>>>>I understand that really they are one, but to follow they trail I must make my requests within their infrastructure or no data.
That I understand. I also doubt that the people you are intereacting with understand they are the same database.
They would get fooled by the software skin also.
Comment Breederville — October 13, 2006 @ 10:57 am
Think about this too.
The EPA and USDA wouldn’t be able to merge their grants under one umbrella like the: link
American Heritage Rivers
(That you found last night.)
If it weren’t one database.
The merger works because it IS one database.
Since it is the EPA dictating that the identification of the sources pollution be qualified to receive their grants…I say the USDA is merely a puppet for them EPA. A bought and paid for puppet.
Partnership:
link
EPA has labeled livestock and feed a nonpoint source.
They want all the nonpoint sources tracked.
They will achieve this with the animal identification, feedlot permits, permits to poop and they want no commingling of the livestock with wildlife or the tributaries.
If the money is taken from the grants, they are now under contract to do this.
Comment Breederville — October 13, 2006 @ 11:06 am
**Choosing NOT to participate may limit your options when it comes time to sell your herd or your flock or your breeding stock. Choosing NOT to participate may opt you out of the export market. Choosing NOT to participate may mean—at some point—you’ll have to hunt harder and go further to find buyers or slaughterhouses willing to accept undocumented livestock or poultry—especially as NAIS becomes fully operational.**
What if you don’t want to be part of the export market because your business isn’t that big? What if you don’t take your animals to slaughterhouses because you either slaughter them yourself for your own family’s use or you don’t eat them at all? And as to selling animals, I think that there will be enough people out there who are opposed to NAIS participation that that won’t be an issue. These people are *very* silly if they think these arguments in favor of NAIS convince me *or* scare me into compliance. Let’s keep up the fight, people! And stick it to this Dr. Wiemers guy (who I realize is not the guy who wrote the above quoted article) in particular for being a stooge!
Comment Rachael — October 13, 2006 @ 1:32 pm
Senator Larry Craig spent more of our money by sending out a large postcard and asked people in the ag communities to respond to some questions he has posed regarding getting this Farm Bill pushed through. People here should know that when I broached the subject of NAIS to Larry Craig, he admitted that he has been working EXTREMELY CLOSE WITH MONSANTO to get it pushed through. Larry wants comments sent to:
http://craig.senate.gov/
farmbill
I say everyone here should send him a note and let him know how we feel about him, Monsanto and any “Farmbill” they want to put upon us.
Comment K.C. — October 13, 2006 @ 8:07 pm
Question for Jane B. comment#14: Can you give us a link to NAIS info in WI. Election is comming up, and I haven’t found any officials or candidates that oppose NAIS here. Not supprising, since we were the first manditory state for premise ID. I have heard the processors will start requireing the ID# to take your animals. We currently take them out of state anyway, but that will be difficult for those that need to sell meat at farmer’s markets, or to anyone they don’t know. And with the tripling of property taxes, it makes staying on the farm without selling anything pretty difficult, even if you are very self-sufficient, and not in debt.
Comment Jan — October 14, 2006 @ 12:25 am
#24
Sorry I know of no good websites with general information about NAIS in Wisconsin. Everything seems pretty hush hush in this state. Much of what I know I read in the “Wisconsin State Farmer” but even there info is scant and slanted pro-NAIS. I will continue to post anything I do find out to this website.
By the way, hasn’t your township heard of use-value assessment? There is no way your property taxes should have tripled unless you’ve made major improvements recently. Agricultural property taxes in general have dropped in the last few years in Wisconsin. I’d go before my local board of review if I were you.
Comment Jane B. — October 14, 2006 @ 10:52 pm