Agriculture Appropriations Bill Links NAIS to School Lunch Program!

[Pepsi]

Agriculture Appropriations Bill Links NAIS to School Lunch Program!

US Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), chairwoman of the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, has inserted pro-NAIS provisions into the Agriculture Appropriations bill for 2009. According to her press release, the bill would require USDA to purchase meat products for the School Lunch Program from livestock premises registered with National Animal Identification System beginning in July 2009. This is a back-door method for mandating NAIS through the power of the purse strings. The bill also provides a total NAIS funding level of $14.5 million or about $4.8 million above 2008.

We must stop these provisions from going any further!

The full House Appropriations Committee will meet to discuss the Agriculture Appropriations bill on Thursday, June 26. After that, it will go to the full House. So we need everyone to call the Committee members and their own Representatives as soon as possible! We also need calls to the Senate Appropriations Committee, to keep them from following DeLauro's lead.

Take Action

1) Call or fax your US Representative. You can look up who represents you at www.congress.org or call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 or toll-free at 866-340-9281.

2) Call or fax the members of the House Appropriations Committee who come from your State. The members are listed at: http://appropriations.house.gov/members110th.shtml When you see a member who comes from your state, click on his or her name to get contact information.

3) Call or fax your Senator if he or she is on the Senate Appropriations Committee. The members are listed at: http://appropriations.senate.gov/members.cfm

With each person, ask to speak to the staffer who handles appropriations. If you get their voice mail, leave the following message, or something in your own words that makes the same points:

MESSAGE: My name is ____. I am a constituent [or live in your state, if you aren't in their district]. I am calling because the House Agriculture Appropriations subcommittee has inserted language requiring the School Lunch Program to only buy meat from farms registered in the National Animal Identification System. I am against NAIS, and I do not want it to be tied to school lunch programs. NAIS, which tracks live animals, will not improve food safety because most food safety problems start at the slaughterhouse and food processing facilities. Funding for NAIS, particularly any mandatory NAIS, needs to be stopped. Please call me back at _____.

When you talk to the staffer, be sure to make the same points as in the message, and expand on them with some of the talking points below.

For more information, contact the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance at info@farmandranchfreedom.org or 866-687-6452.

Talking Points

In addition to the message above, here are some more talking points about why the NAIS provisions in the Agriculture Appropriations bill should be taken out. Pick one or two to focus on, and put them in your own words!

* This bill uses the government's power to economically coerce farmers into NAIS. That is not a "voluntary" program.

* This bill throws good money after bad, supporting a program that is not sound economically or scientifically.

* USDA has presented no science to back up its claims that NAIS will address livestock diseases.

* The USDA has never completed a cost/benefit analysis to show that NAIS is worthwhile.

* NAIS will not improve food safety. The massive Hallmark/Westland beef recall this past year was caused by the slaughterhouse employees' failure to follow existing regulations for handling "downer" cows. Mandating NAIS on cattle producers will not make anybody obey the laws we already have.

* NAIS will not help Americans compete in the world market. If it is mandatory, or even adopted by most producers, those who participate will not get premiums for their meat.

* Pouring more money into the program is a waste of precious tax dollars that could be better spent on safety inspections at packing and processing plants, where most food contamination occurs.

* Using the school lunch program to force farmers into NAIS undermines the growing farm-to-school program, which helps children get fresh, local, and sustainably raised foods. Local farmers should not be forced into an unpopular program that has nothing to do with food quality or safety in order to provide food for our children.

* The claim that USDA has achieved 33% of its Premises Registration goal is wrong. USDA computes its percentage of premises registered based on farmers who answer the agriculture census. Hundreds of thousands of additional horse owners, families with a few chickens, suburbanites with a pet pot-bellied pig, and others like them are technically covered by NAIS, but USDA ignores them when it reports its supposed successes to Congress. The vast majority of people who will be impacted by NAIS either oppose it or are still unaware of it!

* NAIS has never been specifically approved by Congress. This massive program, which will impact millions of people, should be addressed through full and open debate, not snuck in through appropriations.

More Information

DeLauro's press release is posted at: http://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/DeLauroSubMarkup06-19... See pages 6-7 for discussion of the NAIS provisions in the bill.

DeLauro has supported tracking farms for some time. Her food safety bill from 2007 included tracking all food from its origin to consumer's plates. Her press release on the school lunch initiative states, "We will also strengthen Animal ID and the National School Lunch Program including language to provide market-based incentives to strengthen both the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) and the National School Lunch Program."

The press release makes it clear that DeLauro supports moving the entire NAIS program forward: "The bill's report details specific implementation milestones to shine the spotlight on APHIS's delivery of NAIS. The Committee worked in consultation with the agency, and we largely derived these performance measures from the agency's own NAIS business plan. We are going to move well beyond tracking the number of premises registered and follow more closely how APHIS is using the money. The NAIS milestones include (1) 48-hour traceability standards for specific species; and (2) program administration deliverables."

The actual bill language is not yet available. We will send a follow up alert when it is.

This is going to be another hard fight to win. Several key committee members in both the House and the Senate support a mandatory NAIS, and will be glad for anything that moves us towards that. So we need everyone to call! Tell your friends and neighbors what is happening, and ask them to call also.

Let your voice be heard!

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_13147.cfm

[noxagol]

what is NAIS?

[Pepsi]

National Animal Identification System

[moostraks]

It is just a way to force through a program most (that is most who are not big corporate farmers) Americans do not want!!!! Ugh!!!! People need to understand just how bad this program (NAIS) is to the individual. It will make it too expensive for anyone who is not making good money to comply. It requires a tremendous amount of government oversight into people's private lives. Please read up on this folks and do what you can to stop them from back door mandating this program!!!!

[moostraks]

I walked away from having farm animals about a year ago and had not looked into how this program was fairing. I knew they were supposed to be reviewing the efficacy of instituting the program and received a large backlash from private citizens. Should have known that did not kill the program but just made them seek for a way to force it through anyways....

[Pepsi]

This should be sent out to the remaining Ron Paul meet up groups.

[Zippyjuan]

What is NAIS? Its goal it to try to insure a safe food supply by being able to track sources of animans and hence any animal related outbreaks of disease or illnesses.
http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/about/nais_components.shtml

The National Animal Identification System (NAIS) is a modern, streamlined information system that helps producers and animal health officials respond quickly and effectively to animal disease events in the United States. NAIS is designed to:

Increase the United States' disease response capabilities
Limit the spread of animal diseases
Minimize animal losses and economic impact
Protect producers' livelihoods
Maintain market access
There are several ways for producers to participate in NAIS.

Premises Registration - Identification of the geographic location where animals are raised, housed, or boarded through a Premises Identification Number (PIN). More...

Animal Identification - Individual or group identification that remains with the animal for its lifetime. More...

Animal Tracing - Access to timely, accurate animal movement records to quickly locate at-risk animals in the event of a disease outbreak. Mor




If this system were successful and say an outbreak of some disease occcured, then the chances of tracking down the source of that outbreak are much better and a more limted recall of meat products could be instituted- instead of just blanket recall of all meat products which hurts producers with healthy stocks as much as the producer with the unhealthy stock. The smaller recall would also hurt consumers less and hopefully mean fewer outbreaks.

[noxagol]

And in the meantime create such huge operating costs and force many small time cattle farmers out of business leaving only the large corporate farms, YAY!

[Zippyjuan]

What is the percent of costs that are being added? How huge are they?

[moostraks]

What is the percent of costs that are being added? How huge are they?

They make it sound good but look deeper than the propaganda. Each animal will have to be tagged unless they are part of a large herd, so the small farmer has it worse than the corporations where most of your diseased animals/ improper handling actually transpires. You will have to have a vet tag the animals or pay for expensive tagging devices to tag the animals. Then your farm is to be gps identified with every animal described and documented. You have to notify immediately any animal that dies or is transported from the premises. The big farms are all for it because they know it will kill out the small farm competition and really since they can tag a herd they are out minimal costs....:mad:

[Pepsi]

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is busy implementing the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), a corporate welfare program for Agribusiness and surveillance technology companies. NAIS will drive family farms out of business, raise the price of your food, and increase red tape in nightmarish proportions.

NAIS will force owners of farm animals, even non-farmers who keep them as pets, to obtain a Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) number for each animal they own. Every time an animal moves beyond the premises it is normally kept, its owner will have to file a report. If a pet goat crosses the street, a report would have to be filed.

Even though the government misleadingly labels the program "voluntary" the Agriculture Secretary suggests it will become mandatory if animal owners don't, "volunteer."

This is very bad for animal lovers and hobbyists, and even worse for farmers trying to make a living. The cost of RFID tags will range from $3 to $20 for each animal. There are many other costs and registration fees associated with the program, and potentially heavy fines for incorrect reporting.

These costs will destroy the already small profit margins of many farmers, driving them out of business. But these rules won't apply to corporate-owned factory farms! They will need just one Group/Lot ID number to account for scores, even thousands of animals.

NAIS will make it easier for Big Agribusinesses to export beef and other products. And it will bring huge profits to corporations that develop surveillance technologies. But domestically speaking, the economic cost of NAIS will be $15 billion a year, reflected in higher food prices.

NAIS addresses a "problem" of animal disease control that current laws and agencies already cover, and its remedy is to punish innocent family farms. Factory farms are at greater risk of disease outbreaks than are smaller farms, and most contamination occurs at the slaughterhouse or later in the process. To make matters worse, through computer hacking and counterfeit RFID tags, NAIS actually makes our food supply more vulnerable to terrorists and other criminals.

We're only scratching the surface. See our Background page for more about NAIS. And please use our form below to tell Congress to stop the Department of Agriculture from implementing NAIS.

http://action.downsizedc.org/wyc.php?cid=46

[Zippyjuan]

NAIS actually makes our food supply more vulnerable to terrorists and other criminals.
Terrorists and cows? Are they going to try to secretly insert some infected cow into our food system? Using them for suicide bombs? I don't get the possible connection there. Maybe smuggle in a terrorist disguised as a cow. That is going a bit far for trying to argue against the bill. People get tired of hearing that and it can turn them off from any other arguements you may make- however valid.

There will be per- farm costs such as registration (will registration fees vary depending on the size of the farm?), the purchase and maintainance of equipment as well as the time for the additional paperwork. Large farms can spread these costs further on a per-head basis than a smaller farmer can. Then there are the per- animal costs of the tags themselves. These effect all the same and are the smallest portion of the costs.

The biggest cost will be the establishment and maintainance of the data bases which will be done at state levels and then linked to a national data base. Fees for registration are supposed to be set by each state. The ability to have a group ID number does not only apply to large farms. Even a stable shared by multiple owners can have a single premise ID. Only animals who leave the property are supposed to be tagged so no pets wil have to be IDd. If it walks across the street, you do not need to file a report. If you sold it to the neighbor across the street, then you do.

I am not an expert or anything but it did not take long to look up this information. Nor do I say it is a good program or not. I am just trying to learn more about it so that I can make an informed decision about it. Both sides usually overstate their cases and the truth lies somewhere between.

[moostraks]

Hey Zippy...might not want to rush to judgement that those of us opposing are being radically one sided. This program has been a thorn for small farmers. I read the original requirements and was surprised by your comments that they said all will not be required to be identified. Thought that was odd as that was not their stance several years ago. Seems they are softening after such a backlash. They are also touting their interest in feedback, something they also were not much interested in several years ago!!!(they had specific framework for responding to them during a specified time period in which they were taking information to decide how to best implement this program) This is a bad program, and they can soften it as much as they like but once they get their foot in the door there will be no turning back.

Furthermore, how screwed do you think you would be if you can not ever consider letting go of any of the animals? It was a slight of hand by the government as most who own livestock would concede that you will eventually be selling/parting with some of the animals unless all you own is one pet. It is an incredibly invasive program the punishes those farmers who are not the major cause of disease outbreaks while giving a pass to big corporations. It eliminates competition as most small farms will have this be the straw that broke the camels back.

[moostraks]

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20071231/pentland_gumpert

"The USDA has backed off the original plan to make NAIS mandatory and fully operational by 2009 and now describes the program as "voluntary." While it may be voluntary on the federal level, the USDA has pushed states to make NAIS mandatory for their local farmers...

The USDA compounded public skepticism by encouraging states, with the enticement of federal funding, to impose the program on local farmers. Several states have followed Michigan's lead and implemented various aspects of the program in different ways.

In May, Wisconsin required dairy farmers to register their farms (the step preceding registration of animals). Those with livestock are given a unique number keyed to a GPS monitoring system before they can receive dairy licenses. Many of the state's estimated 10,000 Old-Order Amish claim that participation would violate their religious principles, which bar participation in government programs.

Scores of Amish farmers have abandoned dairy production and others have refused to participate, often forfeiting their licenses to sell milk as a result. Some of Wisconsin's most conservative Amish groups have reportedly considered a mass migration to Venezuela...

When opposition blocked one means of implementation, some states merely changed tactics, often pushing registration through lower-profile policies. In 2006 hundreds of farmers and ranchers descended on a Texas Animal Health Commission hearing to protest a plan to make premises registration mandatory. A few months after the high-profile defeat, the commission notified farmers and ranchers in a press release that, due to a low-risk bovine disease incident, it would require "identifying all Texas dairy cattle--regardless of age--with an official or TAHC-approved identification device prior to movement within the state."

Similar stories have surfaced in Massachusetts, Missouri and Tennessee.

"What is really unique about the NAIS is that people from the far left to the far right find it appalling," said Bergener. "As long as you're a populist, as long as you believe in independent people running the country instead of big corporations with conflicts of interest, you find the NAIS pretty appalling." "

[moostraks]

From the same article the government stance:"The USDA dismisses many of the program's critics. "Folks tend to make it more complicated that it really is," said Agriculture Undersecretary Bruce Knight in an interview. "The important thing is to have a system whereby in the event of catastrophic animal disease, we can identify everyone in the community and let them know what's going on, and do it within forty-eight hours. It builds off a long tradition of cooperation between American farmers and the federal government." "

Uhh...you did catch the part where they feel the need to identify everyone in the community in the event of a disease outbreak, right??? Baby steps...

As for stables with seperate owners of horses being allowed to share id's that is a farce. How many people have seperate horses share the same stables for the duration of their lives? If they are not born and raised at the premise (and then die there) then they will need to be identified.

[Zippyjuan]

From the same article the government stance:"The USDA dismisses many of the program's critics. "Folks tend to make it more complicated that it really is," said Agriculture Undersecretary Bruce Knight in an interview. "The important thing is to have a system whereby in the event of catastrophic animal disease, we can identify everyone in the community and let them know what's going on, and do it within forty-eight hours. It builds off a long tradition of cooperation between American farmers and the federal government." "

Uhh...you did catch the part where they feel the need to identify everyone in the community in the event of a disease outbreak, right??? Baby steps...

As for stables with seperate owners of horses being allowed to share id's that is a farce. How many people have seperate horses share the same stables for the duration of their lives? If they are not born and raised at the premise (and then die there) then they will need to be identified.

I do not read that as saying that they intend to use this or a similar system on people. They say they seek to be able to identify the source of a disease and notify people in the community of the source of the disease so that an apropriate responce can be made. The other option is to say that nobody can sell any cows if an outbreak occurs- even those who had healthy, properly cared for animals. That hurts smaller ranchers more than larger ones.

I posted arguements both in favor of and against the program. I think the benefits and fears are both overstated. Were I given the option to vote on it (which is not likely) I would be inclined at this time to say no. Some animals like dairy cattle are already tracked.

Shared stables- some people who own horses do not have enough space on their own property to house them so they use a local stable for that. The stable can use one ID number for all of the horses.

[moostraks]

I do not read that as saying that they intend to use this or a similar system on people. They say they seek to be able to identify the source of a disease and notify people in the community of the source of the disease so that an apropriate responce can be made. The other option is to say that nobody can sell any cows if an outbreak occurs- even those who had healthy, properly cared for animals. That hurts smaller ranchers more than larger ones.

I posted arguements both in favor of and against the program. I think the benefits and fears are both overstated. Were I given the option to vote on it (which is not likely) I would be inclined at this time to say no. Some animals like dairy cattle are already tracked.

Shared stables- some people who own horses do not have enough space on their own property to house them so they use a local stable for that. The stable can use one ID number for all of the horses.

The horses are the ones that need tracked. The premises id is one portion of the program, not the entirety of the program. They are wanting people to declare the animals and state where they are located. The manner in which you state it implies that the animals are not tagged but that the government merely wants an innocuous program to pass along helpful information to the public. This discounts the statement they want identify everyone in the community (with livestock ownership). You are skipping over the tagging any animal which is not born, raised, and dies on the property part which defines that any transported animal moved to a premise other than their birth needs chipped/tagged.

I am clueless as to how you are stretching this to mean track people, I mean very definatively they want specific control of the households which own livestock so they have absolute knowledge and control of people's personnel property. It is invasive, and prior to the recent website they were very much on the agenda of fining those not in compliance. It is people like Pepsi and I who have been so against this program that have managed to get them to back down off of the most extreme version they originally presented.

Just because you look into it briefly and want to act like we are extremists because you are seeing the modified version does not negate what the original plans were and that they are more likely just trying to back door achieve it through state mandates with federal bonuses for implementation....