Home News Livestock Crops Markets Hay, Range & Pasture Home & Family Classifieds Resources This Week's Journal

Subscribe


AgriMartin
Journal Getaways
Reader Comment:
by jJane

"Thanks for sharing this story!"....Read the story...
Join other discussions.

Farm Survey


National Animal Identification System not supported by Congress

Congress is on the verge of putting on hold a national system to track livestock, telling the Obama administration it will not fund the effort until the U.S. Department of Agriculture does a better job implementing it.

The House passed a spending bill July 16, that cuts off funding for the National Animal Identification System, even as USDA officials take suggestions from farmers and others who will be affected by the program, which is aimed at halting the spread of diseases that can contaminate food.

Lawmakers are grappling with several issues, including whether the voluntary system should be made mandatory and, if it remains voluntary, how to boost participation beyond the approximately 35 percent of producers nationwide who take part. A group opposed to the system has sued the USDA, asking a federal court to halt the program's implementation.

The USDA has spent $142 million on the program since 2004.

Criticism of the program comes from two directions. On one are lawmakers such as Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., who pushed through the funding cut and has pushed for a mandatory system.

On another are groups such as the Empire State Family Farm Alliance, which has said the national system is unnecessary and will cost farmers several times the $3 to $4 per animal that officials have estimated.

The group said the federal system, as well as one being implemented by the New York state Department of Agriculture and Markets, are "among the most intrusive surveillance systems the government has ever created," designed to keep track of every head of any livestock animal, from birth or hatching to death.

That is just the goal the program's advocates embrace. They say a comprehensive system is needed in response to illnesses such as mad cow disease, swine and avian flu, which have sparked alarm in consumers and led to steep declines in sales of beef and pork even though scientists say such fears are exaggerated or misplaced. The system would allow the government to track each animal's movement throughout its life, possibly pinpointing where it contracted an illness within 48 hours.

Some farm groups say they worry that the government would overstep, killing entire herds or all of a farmer's chickens, for instance, if an illness were revealed. Many farmers oppose a mandatory system.

In addition, farm groups say the system will be costly to farmers--especially to small farms that would have to put tags on every animal. The largest farms, known as concentrated animal feeding operations, would be exempt from that requirement and would have one NAIS identification number for an entire herd.

But large agribusinesses favor the program, and New York Farm Bureau sparked some controversy in the farm community by supporting a mandatory system--although it has said its support depends on the system being as inexpensive as possible for farmers and on the confidentiality of information farmers share with the government.

Farm Bureaus in Missouri and other states have faced similar controversy as they follow the national Farm Bureau Federation's support of the NAIS.

The National Milk Producers Federation, representing dairy farmers' bargaining cooperatives, also supports a mandatory system.

A spokeswoman for the New York Department of Agriculture and Markets, Jessica Chittenden, defended the importance of an animal identification program to protecting food safety but had no information about how a cuttoff of the NAIS would affect New York's own program.

Yet the issue has caused little splash in some key New York congressional offices. A spokeswoman for Sen. Kirsten E. Gillibrand, D-N.Y., said her office has not heard much on the subject, even though the senator serves on the Senate Agriculture Committee, which oversees the USDA. A spokesman for Rep. Scott Murphy, D-Glens Falls, one of just two New Yorkers on the House Agriculture Committee, had no immediate information about his views on the subject, although he voted for the bill that cuts off funding.

In one of the stiffest challenges to the program, the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund sued the USDA to block the system and has said the department should focus instead on enforcing existing laws, including inspections of slaughterhouses, and should bar the import of animals from countries with known disease problems.

The USDA recently finished a tour of 14 locations around the country to take suggestions on the program. Officials are still considering those comments, which news reports and industry groups say were largely negative from producers.

"The USDA continues to confuse industry support for efforts to identify and eliminate animal diseases with support for NAIS, despite the fact that some 80 percent of the people who testified during the hearings testified against the department's animal identification program," said the group's acting president, Pete Kennedy.

Whether the department can reach decisions before Congress makes a final decision about funding remains to be seen. In public comments, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack has stressed that Congress is in early stages of setting the budget.

The Senate Appropriations Committee approved $14.6 million for the program, meaning a House-Senate conference committee likely will make the final decision. The Senate could vote on its bill this month but a final spending measure may not come until after the annual August recess.


Click for related articles N.J. suit puts farmland development under microscope
FAPC seminar focuses on food allergen issues
Officials: Tannery sludge not behind brain tumors
Staples to seek second term as ag commissioner
Obama officials urge Senate to act on climate
National Animal Identification System not supported by Congress
Records 2
Reader Comments
KNowak5170 — 07/25/2009 11:07:54
I find it hard to believe that Gillibrand is not aware of NAIS since she has met many times with farmers in upstate NY!
As to the NY Farm Bureau, they've lost plenty of members over their stance on NAIS - myself included!
Jessica Chittenden, of New York Department of Agriculture and Markets, shows her total ignorance of NAIS if she truly claimed it is a food safety program. Even the USDA admits it is not!
NAIS will do NOTHING to prevent or even detect Mad Cow Disease because the ID ends at the slaughterhouse. The ONLY way to protect the consumer from vCJD is to test every cow, as is done in other countries. The USDA flatly refuses to do this.
NAIS will do nothing for swine flu - as Barbara already explained, not will it do anything to prevent avian flu. Cutting down on the number of birds confined in closed spaces will prevent highly pathogenic avian flu for that form of industrial agriculture is nothing more than a massive "virus percolator" risking the health of humans as well as those of us who raise endangered heritage breeds of poultry.
When will you people wake up and realize that NAIS will put the vast majority of small farmers out of business?

Reader Comments
Barbara — 07/25/2009 10:07:44
I'm an outspoken opponent of NAIS and I find it necessary to correct some portions of this article. First, let me say that I've read every official NAIS document and attended several meeting with federal and state officials, so I feel well qualified to comment on the truth behind this plan in spite USDA's characterization of people like me as misinformed.
If lawmakers choose to mandate NAIS, it will be proof that they are not listening to the farmers and knowledgeable consumers of this country, who by a vast majority, have clearly stated that NAIS is unacceptable. In fact, the only proponents of NAIS are the government agencies and industry groups who will reap the benefits of an overreaching, overbearing, expensive, and clearly unConstitutional plan.

This next statement is just wrong!
"as USDA officials take suggestions from farmers and others who will be affected by the program, which is aimed at halting the spread of diseases that can contaminate food."
The only suggestions from farmers at all 14 listening sessions was to scrap NAIS. It can't be fixed or improved, and NAIS does not halt the spread of diseases associated with food contamination. Those contaminants happen during processing of the carcass. NAIS ends when the animal is slaughtered. Even USDA once admitted that NAIS is "not a food safety protection system".

Rep. DeLauro has never owned a livestock animal, so how is she qualified to tell millions of farmers that we are all "foolhardy" for not registering with NAIS? She gets her information from the people who created this plan to benefit themselves, but won't listen to any feedback from the farmers whose lives will be negatively affected.

Since swine flu is spread human to human, how would tracking swine help anything? If pork producers have lost money from swine flu fears, then the USDA needs to spend more money educating consumers and trading partners than chasing after pet pot bellied pig owners. They should also inform the public that most livestock diseases have no deleterious effect on the consumption of meat from that animal. Only mad cow disease is in that category and the disease is not contagious, takes years to develop and there is a test available that would ensure the safety of the carcass - if USDA was willing to use it - or allow its use - in more than 1% of slaughtered cattle.

48 hours to track the source of a disease has no basis in science. USDA has been asked to show their research that identifies that time frame as scientifically valid, but they've never produced it.

Small farms will bear proportionately higher costs than big businesses if NAIS is mandated. Even the flawed Cost Benefit Analysis admits that, while it makes up imaginary and hoped for benefits to make up for the cost and inconvenience. When cost exceeds the benefits, the CBA treats that segment of livestock owners as insignificant.

Farm Bureau is now widely seen by its members as selling them out. Many members have quit over that issue. Like other segments of the livestock industry, they have been bought and paid for to deliver their members to USDA.

The spokeswoman for NY Dept of Ag needs to read the 2006 USDA User Guide before she speaks. NAIS is NOT a food safety system.
(And to think that USDA says I'm misinformed - only if their documents are lying as much as they do.)

Most state and federal legislators know nothing about NAIS except what USDA tells them. When contacted, their responses are all very similar. They give USDA's description of NAIS and then tell their constituent that they are concerned about liability and database security and will keep their concerns in mind. Sometimes I wonder if they ever actually hear what we are telling them.

Allow me to clarify this statement:
"The USDA recently finished a tour of 14 locations around the country to take suggestions on the program. Officials are still considering those comments, which news reports and industry groups say were largely negative from producers."

USDA wanted suggestions. What they got were warnings not to proceed with NAIS. As one person stated, "what part of NO don't you understand?" The meetings were not just largely negative, they were overwhelmingly negative. Despite that, many of us feel certain that USDA did not really hear us. What was told them went in one ear and out the other. They have made it quite clear that they are only going through the motions of listening to us "limited resource farmers" which is apparently the only thing they learned at the meeting - that we don't like being referred to as "stakeholders" instead of "owners".

Add Your Comment
To post a comment on this story, enter your screen name and email address then click "Add Comment." Your email address will not be displayed.


66 Recommend | 0 Comments

Google
 
Web hpj.com

Copyright 1995-2013.  High Plains Publishers, Inc.  All rights reserved.  Any republishing of these pages, including electronic reproduction of the editorial archives or classified advertising, is strictly prohibited. If you have questions or comments you can reach us at
High Plains Journal 1500 E. Wyatt Earp Blvd., P.O. Box 760, Dodge City, KS 67801 or call 1-800-452-7171. Email: webmaster@hpj.com

 

Search HPJ





Inside Futures

Editorial Archives

Browse Archives