|
<Back
| Home | Basics |
Departments | Get
Involved | Site Map | What's
New
Title
NAIS Update
The Grassroots Fight Against NAIS Continues
By Judith McGeary
People oppose the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) for a
variety of reasons: the intrusion into our privacy, the burden on property
rights, the monetary cost, and the time and management burdens. Many
of us fear that NAIS, together with other government-industry programs,
will lead to the total control of our food supply by government.
A recent statement by the Michigan State veterinarian provided a disturbing,
concrete image for these fears. Dr. Steven Halstead stated: “USDA
would prefer that we have a system like Mexico’s, where to move
between states, cattle haulers are stopped at gates by armed guards.
Our program has a lot of components in place for tracking animals, and
they are effective. But nothing is as secure as a guy at a gate with
a gun.”1
Picture one of our raw milk farmers wanting to cross between Ohio and
Pennsylvania, only to be met by armed guards. This may be what the USDA
would like, but it’s not a system any of us want to live under!
So what is happening with NAIS? The last few months have seen multiple
developments at every level: Congress, government agencies, and private
entities. This article will review the highlights, and then discuss
what each person can do to help preserve our rights and our food supply.
NAIS In Congress
In the last issue of Wise Traditions, I discussed the problems with
connecting the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) to Country
of Origin Labeling (COOL). Representative Collin Peterson (D-MN) had
inserted a provision into the Farm Bill that would allow the US Department
of Agriculture to use mandatory animal identification to implement COOL,
allowing the USDA to tie the horrendously unpopular NAIS program to
the popular COOL program.
In June and July, WAPF sent alerts urging our members to tell Congress
to take out the provision for mandatory animal identification. The action
alerts also notified members about another very damaging provision in
the Farm Bill, Section 123, which would have pre-empted local and state
regulations of any agricultural or food product that USDA had granted
“nonregulated” status. This provision would have deprived
citizens of their rights to enact laws to protect health and public
safety at the local level and impacted efforts to regulate such things
as genetically engineered foods and crops. You can read the alerts at
www.westonaprice.org/federalupdate/actionalerts.html. (If you don’t
have email, you might consider setting up a phone tree with someone
who does, so that you can stay informed at critical moments in the future.)
In fighting these provisions, WAPF was joined by several other grassroots
organizations, including the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance and the
Organic Consumers Association. The public pressure forced the House
Agriculture Committee to reconsider, and both provisions were taken
out of the Farm Bill before it was approved by the House in July. This
is a victory worth celebrating!
At the same time, while the House did not mandate NAIS, neither did
it put a stop to it. Shortly after approving the Farm Bill, the House
of Representatives approved the 2008 Agriculture Appropriations bill,
which provides funding for USDA. The bill did not include funding for
NAIS under that name, but it did include funding for closely related
programs: the Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium and the
Farm Animal Identification and Records program. So while we’ve
made progress, the fight is not over yet.
During the month of September, the Senate will work on its versions
of the Farm Bill and Agriculture Appropriations bill. The Senate Appropriations
Committee recommended twenty million dollars in new funding for NAIS,
and the fight to reduce or eliminate that funding will be a focus during
September.
Government Funding For Private Entities
While Congress seems to be questioning whether NAIS is such a good idea
after all, the USDA isn’t slowing down much. It has announced
agreements with multiple private entities to promote NAIS. These efforts
include paying the Future Farmers of America (FFA) $600,000 in the coming
year. Of course, that money comes with strings attached, and FFA must
sign up a specific number of people in order to get each quarter’s
funding. Even before this grant was announced, the Colorado Extension
Service established a policy that all children participating in 4-H
or FFA events would have to register under NAIS. The same policy has
been established in multiple counties in other states, as well. This
use of children to implement NAIS over the objections of adults is deeply
disturbing.
Another group receiving USDA funding to promote the NAIS is the US Animal
Identification Organization (USAIO). The USAIO was created by the American
Farm Bureau, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Bison
Association, and other pro-NAIS entities to manage the “industry-led”
databases. In other words, the USAIO is intended to be the huge, centralized
database for all of NAIS, under the control of organizations and individuals
that have repeatedly placed the interests of multinational meat packer
corporations above the interests of farmers. Some grassroots activists
proclaimed a victory a few months ago when the USAIO became “inactive”
due to lack of participation, but unfortunately that proved to be simply
a temporary move, and the USAIO is back in full swing now.
Along with FFA and the USAIO, the American Angus Association and the
National Milk Producers Federation have also been awarded grants by
USDA to promote NAIS. If you are a member of any of these organizations,
consider either quitting or asking the boards for a membership vote
on whether they should be involved in NAIS. If you decide to quit, be
sure to tell them why you are leaving the organization, namely their
support of NAIS!
NAIS And The Government Accountability Office
The long-awaited Government Accountability Office report on NAIS was
finally released, and proved to be a disappointment.2 The GAO started
with the assumption that NAIS would be an effective means of addressing
animal disease, even though there is absolutely no evidence to support
this assumption! Working from that assumption, the GAO seriously criticized
USDA’s means of implementing the program. Disturbingly, the GAO
recommends that the USDA reinstate its targets for participation and
the threats to make the program mandatory if enough people do not “volunteer.”
Among other things, the GAO had been asked to investigate the costs
of NAIS, and its report criticized USDA for not doing a cost-benefit
analysis during the last four years. Yet, rather than doing its own
analysis, the GAO skirted responsibility by noting that USDA has finally
contracted with Kansas State University to do a cost-benefit analysis.
Unfortunately, one has to question whether the analysis will be very
thorough when it’s being done by a land-grant university supported
by the USDA.
Making A Difference
Overall, the news is mixed—Congress seems to be having second
thoughts about NAIS, while the agency and industry players keep forging
ahead. Yet even the partial victories in the fight against NAIS show
that we can make a difference. If it were not for the people who have
spoken out in opposition to NAIS, we would already have mandatory regulations
in Texas, Vermont, and other states, and Congress most likely would
have mandated the program directly. So keep up the good work!
Just as with WAPF, the first step is education— you teach, you
teach, you teach. So start by educating your community about what NAIS
is all about. Put out petitions or flyers at local businesses and livestock
events, write letters to the editor, or organize a town hall meeting.
Materials to help with your efforts are available online at www.farmandranchfreedom.org
and www.libertyark.net.
Education doesn’t stop there. Along with your community, you need
to educate your elected officials! I spent ten days in Washington, DC
in July, lobbying against NAIS, and I found that many Congressmen are
still ignorant about NAIS or are missing some important facts. The Farm
Bill will most likely be completed by the time you read this article,
but there will be many important battles in the months to come. Each
person reading this article can take important steps to help in that
fight. Here are some suggestions for how to be effective in educating
your legislators:
• Call them today. Calling at critical moments, such as the vote
on the Farm Bill, is important. But it’s best if the legislators
and their staffers understand the issue ahead of time. Educating them
is also critical to getting your legislators to introduce a bill or
amendment for our side, rather than introducing a bad amendment or bill
we later have to oppose.
• When you call, start by mentioning that you are a constituent.
Then ask to speak to the person who handles agricultural issues. Write
down that person’s name.
• If you are transferred to voice mail, leave a short message
about why you are calling, and ask them to call you back. Be sure to
leave your name, phone number, the fact that you are a constituent,
and the fact that you are concerned about NAIS.
• If your call is not returned within a few days, call again.
This time ask for the staffer by name (since you wrote it down the first
time). If you act like you already know the person, you are more likely
to get through, rather than being put into voice mail.
• Whenever you talk with a staffer, have a real conversation.
Don’t just tell them you’re against NAIS. Ask them whether
they have heard of NAIS and what they know about it. Finding out what
they know will help you determine what to say next. Keep the conversation
brief but explain who you are, why you’re against NAIS, and why
there are many better ways to address animal health and food safety.
• Mention that you support the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance,
and ask that the staffer talk with us to learn more about NAIS. This
information not only gives them a source for more details, but by letting
them know who we are, they will pay attention when we contact them.
• Follow up by sending the staffer a thank you note, either by
email or fax.
• Call me (toll-free 866-687-6452) or email me (Judith@farmandranchfreedom.org)
so I can follow up on the contacts you make. Tell me who you spoke with
(both the legislator’s and the staffer’s names) and a little
bit about their response. I can then provide additional information,
plan strategy with the legislators who are on our side, and be more
effective as your anti-NAIS lobbyist.
You can reach your legislators by calling the Capitol Switchboard at
202-224-3121 or toll-free 877-851-6437; or go to www.congress.org to
find out who your Representatives and Senators are.
You can use these same strategies for almost any issue you care about.
Our system of government relies on an informed citizenry to communicate
with the elected representatives. It’s up to each of us to make
that education and communication happen.
References
1. Paul Jackson, TB-free status delayed after state fails USDA review,
Michigan Farm News, June 15, 2007; www.michiganfarmbureau.com/farmnews/transform.php?xml=20070615/cover.xml).
2. The report is posted at www.gao.gov/new.items/d07592.pdf.
Judith McGeary is an attorney and small farmer in Austin, Texas, the
Executive Director of the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance, and a local
chapter leader of WAPF. She has a B.S. in Biology from Stanford University
and a J.D. from The University of Texas at Austin. She and her husband
run a small grass-based farm with Quarter Horses, cattle, sheep, and
heritage breeds of poultry. For more information about NAIS and what
you can do to stop it, go to www.farmandranchfreedom.org or call 1-866-687-6452.
We Will Not Comply: Two NAIS Resistors Lead the Way
by Deborah Stockton
Michigan cattleman Greg Niewendorp and Pennsylvania dairy farmer Mark
Nolt have taken courageous leadership positions by refusing to comply
with state attempts at invasive incursions into their farming practices.
In February of this year, Niewendorp sent a letter to the Michigan Department
of Agriculture (MDA) explaining in detail why he would not participate
in their dangerous experimental TB herd-testing and eradication program.
Several months ago Nolt chose to not renew his raw milk selling permit
with the state of Pennsylvania, even as he continued to sell milk and
milk products directly from his farm to his customers. With these actions,
both farmers refused to participate in the National Animal Identification
System (NAIS).
Behind both of these state programs (herd eradication and milk permitting)
lurks the spectre of NAIS, with its requirement of “premises registration”
first on its list of demands. A close look at the word “premises”
shows that the first definition, in reference to real estate, is: “The
part of a deed or lease that states the parties involved, the property
in conveyance, and other pertinent facts.” One must wonder at
the choice of the word “premises” over “property”
or other term where ownership is unambiguous. By complying with “premises”
registration, one implicitly acknowledges a property in conveyance.
When discussing NAIS, the question of property ownership is central,
and not only of the land itself, but also of the animals who live on
that land. NAIS shifts the role of the farmer as animal owner, to that
of keeper, similar to the way that industrial chicken house “farmers”
are not owners, but managers. After all, the government refers to the
identification number as “livestock premises ID.” However,
Niewendorp says, “We have discovered remedies for removing our
land and our livestock from premises ID. We are investigating several
avenues for removing this oppression from our livestock and our land.”
Greg Niewendorp In Michigan
Following is a brief summary of Niewendorp’s situation to date.
When Niewendorp submitted his letter to the MDA in February, they immediately
placed his farm in quarantine. In May, the MDA referred to his situation
as a stalemate. All was quiet until August 21st, when an attempt was
made to break the stalemate. A regulation agent of the MDA along with
two Michigan state policemen as law enforcement agents came illegally
onto Niewendorp’s property, past his detailed “No Trespassing”
sign. A state vet was lying in wait around the corner down the road.
Their goal was to coerce Niewendorp to test his herd. After escorting
them to the property line, Niewendorp spoke with them for several minutes,
conversing about respect with regard to personal and professional conduct.
Once they left, Niewendorp contacted the local sheriff, who should have
been informed and who is the proper and legitimate authority on local
enforcement issues, and related to him the morning’s events. Seven
days later, in a four-way phone conversation with the TB-testing program
public relations spokersperson Bridget Patrick, Michigan state vet Stephen
Halstead, and Pat Lockard, liaison to the Governor’s office, Niewendorp
informed them that his constitutional rights were violated and that
he chose to face his accuser in the open.
Later in a conversation at the local feed store with a fellow cattleman,
Niewendorp learned that his case might have been “turned over
to the USDA and the Federal Marshals.” I investigated and called
the MDA to speak to the vet who allegedly said this, but was told he
had been advised not to speak to me. The local sheriff, after hearing
Niewendorp’s concerns about possible federal enforcement action,
sent a letter to a number of government agencies, including the MDA,
Michigan State Police, the USDA, FBI, and the Federal Marshal service,
informing them that any enforcement action involving entrance onto Niewendorp’s
property would have to be through him, as the local enforcement agent
of the law.
Niewendorp is now openly criticizing the Michigan Animal Industry Act
of 1988, the so-called basis for the TB eradication program and for
NAIS and livestock premises ID. (Farm Bureau has worked very closely
with the MDA, as they do in every other state, to implement this NAIS
and premises ID program).
Niewendorp said, “Isn’t it interesting that the Animal Industry
Act is the vehicle through which this is being accomplished, as it has
been on the books for last 18 years and nobody has ever previously challenged
it. Having one’s rights violated can give a person the right to
criticize because we feel we have something better to offer. It is also
my intent to show that the statement that milk is a carrier of TB is
a bald-faced lie. The pasteurization laws from the 1930s have to be
overturned to allow the sale of Real Milk through private contract.”
Mark Nolt In Pennsylvania
Mark Nolt’s actions are based on the position that the private
contract sale of his raw milk and raw milk products to his close circle
of customers is a private matter between him and the individual to whom
he is selling.
Nolt has also experienced trespass and violation of his constitutional
rights. Some months after Nolt chose not to renew his permit, his property
was raided by federal and state agents who confiscated $25,000 worth
of milk, milk products and dairy equipment. Following the raid, on August
10, a group of Mark’s customers and supporters organized a protest
rally to draw attention to his situation. The raid garnered media attention,
including a detailed and not unsympathetic editorial in the weekly Lancaster
Farming, “the leading Northeast and Mid-Atlantic farm newspaper.”
Following is Mark Nolt’s reply to the editorial:
“The article quoted Bill Chirdon, Director of Food Safety at the
Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA) saying ‘selling raw
milk requires a big commitment and sanitation is so important.’
I agree. As a private farmer providing food for the people who put our
farm-raised food on their table, I am very aware of the importance of
food safety. Our customers are also very concerned about the nutritional
quality, the freshness and purity of their food.
“Our food is not sold in public stores or through public distributors.
“Is it against the law to sell farm-raised food directly to the
people who eat that food?
“In my research I found no lawful requirement for me to obtain
a permit from the PDA. I found many laws that protect my liberty in
both the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Bill of Rights of the US
Constitution. These liberties and rights were recognized as divine God-given
rights having been established at the time of Creation. Only knowingly
and willingly can we waive the use of these rights (such as by taking
a permit, license or by contract). When I revoked my last permit with
the PDA, I inquired whether they were aware of any waiver or document
that still bound me to their public regulations. They have tacitly confirmed
that there is no waiver of my rights.
“The August 25 article also quotes doctors with the Department
of Health stating that Salmonella poisoning was linked to raw milk from
a York County farmer who has had his raw milk permit revoked by the
PDA. They have accused him of having caused 29 cases of Salmonella poisoning.
[But as with] our farm, they have seen absolutely no evidence to verify
that anyone has become sick from their milk. (Our farm has been accused
by the Health Department of causing five cases of foodborne illness
with no evidence to verify the accusation). I am aware of many other
raw milk-permitted Pennsylvania farmers who have been accused of having
pathogenic bacteria in their milk who haven’t caused any illnesses.
The York County farm has been shut down for nearly six months. What
is the real cost of a permit?? My desire is that the truth can be known.
“Even though my rights are clearly spelled out and protected by
the constitutions, it is not my intention to be stubborn, just to preserve
these rights to earn a livelihood and do the work of my choice. Rather
than be forced to take a permit, I could give up dairying. I could seek
another avenue to support my family. But neither is it my desire to
cheat my neighbors, my community, nor my fellow farmers.
“Many people yearn to make a living on a small farm. Many folks
desire healthy food obtained directly from the farmer. Many people come
to us for a food recommended to them by their doctors or by a doctor’s
prescription. It behooves us all to fill this responsibility. It is
for this cause that I stand. I encourage your readers to support this
cause as well.”
Nolt has also written a letter to the Pennsylvania Bureau of Food Safety
and Laboratory, a division of the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture
(PDA), noting that the constitutional right to life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness, and the right to enter into private contractual
agreements, supersedes any regulations requiring him to obtain a permit
(or, by inference, participate in NAIS). Since the Bureau, in demanding
compliance with dairy regulations, has offered in writing to “answer
your questions,” Nolt justifiably demands that the Secretary of
Agriculture and other PDA officials acknowledge within ten working days
whether or not they must uphold the constitutions of the state of Pennsylvania
and the United States. If no reply is received within ten days, “my
statements in this letter shall be considered to have been admitted
and confirmed by you and the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture
to be true in law.”
Supporters of Nolt have submitted a “Petition for Redress of Grievances”
to the Secretary of Agriculture, demanding that Pennsylvania officials
support, obey and defend the constitutions of Pennsylvania and the United
States, stop all persecution of Nolt, cease interference in his business
of selling raw milk and raw milk products, supply notarized proof of
the illness his dairy products are accused of causing, and compensate
him for the seizure of his property during the raid.
Boundaries Of Freedom
Mark Nolt’s and Greg Niewendorp’s property perimeters are
the boundaries of freedom for all of us. They are leading the way to
the life we all want. Let us unite our will with theirs, together working
for what we believe, for the desire of our hearts.
Deborah Stockton is the Editor of VICFA Voice, the monthly newsletter
of the Virginia Independent Consumers and Farmers Association, and writes
from Charlottesville, VA. www. VICFA.net email: editor@vicfa.net
About the Author
<Back
| Home | Tour
| Calendar | Contact
Us | Funding | Join
Now
|