Home
Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Add to My Group
July 11, 2008 at 17:05:25

View Ratings | Rate It

NAIS - the Fourth Component

by Darol Dickinson (Posted by Linn Cohen-Cole)     Page 1 of 2 page(s)

www.opednews.com

 
Tell A Friend

The National Animal Identification System (NAIS) has been alleged as a three component program, however now a fourth component facade is starting to reveal itself.

The first step of NAIS is premises enrollment, next animal identification, and then coast to coast 48 hour animal tracing.

USDA Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs, Bruce I. Knight has promised that the NAIS program is easy to enroll and totally voluntary on the federal level, “if . . . enough livestock owners enroll so it does not have to go mandatory.”

The NAIS program has distributed thousands of “selling” USDA press releases quoting Knight. The constant controversy of NAIS has placed the Knight name among the top ten Internet bureaucrats according to Google, with Bruce Knight or Bruce I. Knight showing up over 17,000,000 times.

The fourth Component is meticulously touched by Knight, “If USDA decides to make all or parts of the NAIS mandatory, APHIS will follow the normal rulemaking process.”  With rules, laws, inspections, taxes, regulations, or licensing comes the fourth component......Enforcement.

Enforcement of NAIS is not a happy subject especially when the first component is still not setting well with the majority of producers.  However, it is a dead serious issue for animal owners who want to know what new enforcements are involved, and their price tag, before they permanently enroll.

In 2007 the US spent nearly one trillion dollars (from taxes and borrowed funds) in regulation enforcements, policing, investigations, and mandatory compliances.  Although this was a huge expense to the citizenry, the fines, collections, penalties, licenses, fees and private property confiscations from all law violations was an equally swelling amount; a number impossible to locate from federal published data.

The current “rule making process” for USDA is found on line at Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute, U.S. Code., Title 7 >Chapter 109> 8313.   Penalties. #8313 

(b) Civil Penalties, (1) In general (A) 

    (i) $50,000 in the case of any individual, except that the civil penalty may not exceed $1000 in the case of an initial violation of this chapter by an individual moving regulated articles not for monetary gain;
    (ii) $250,000 in the case of any other person for each violation; and
    (iii) $500,000 for all violations adjudicated in a single proceeding.

Penalties appropriate to the violation is a cornerstone fundamental of the US judicial system.  Enforcement is totally capricious with USDA.  One could be fined in county court $1000 for a 70 mph speed violation through a school zone, yet $50,000 for crossing a state line with one number incorrect on a USDA issued livestock health certificate—for a perfectly healthy child’s pony!  Dr. Max Thornsberry, President of R-CALF USA says, “The USDA is a run away agency out of control, with total disregard for U.S. citizens.”

Producers have been mystified by the massive amount of grants and funds (cooperative agreements) doled by USDA to get NAIS closer to full mandatory mode.  The nearly $150,000,000 invested to promote enrollment looks large, but ..... it would only take 300 violations of $500,000 each to quickly earn it back.

US leaders watch other government trends closely in creating new laws and taxation.  Europe has been a leader in pioneering thought for US policy.  Government animal numbering systems have been urged in a few countries prior to the marketing of NAIS in the US.  Australia is the only country to have implemented electronic tagging and tracking as is proposed by the USDA.  Australia is a prototype for enforcement also.

Stephen Blair, a Director of the Angus Society of Australia was recently fined $17,300.  He was prosecuted by Australian Minister McDonald for moving cattle from one of his ranches wearing  ear tags from his other ranch to a livestock auction. No diseased or stolen livestock were involved. It was a matter of a government rule violation.  This is a small example of the enforcement USDA could wield over US livestock producers if NAIS was exacted mandatory.

Part of the title for Bruce Knight, is “REGULATORY PROGRAMS.”  This probably helps explain his tigerish priorities for the income generating fourth component of NAIS—ENFORCEMENTS.

USDA enforcements are now, and will be a coerced obligation of all licensed USDA veterinarians.  Vets will be required to report all non compliance of their valued clients or be subject to immediate licensing reviews.  The USDA/APHIS policing division is the Investigative and Enforcement Services (IES) with headquarters in Raleigh, NC; Fort Collins, CO; and Riverdale, MD.  IES boasts of increasing thousands of “clients” with a 51% increase in case load and “more than a threefold increase in the dollar value of civil penalties” in one recent year. To enforce the ever increasing number of regulations, the government seeks to make ordinary citizens into their enforcers. Even today all neighbors, farm employees and friend or foe associates are encouraged on the IES web site to “Report potential violations, please contact IES.” Wisconsin tried to use bulk milk haulers to enforce NAIS against Amish dairy farmers in 2007. The Fourth Component is operational and extremely aggressive.

The Texas Animal Health Commission (TAHC) printed an information flyer to dispel negative NAIS exaggerations.  Question: Reports say you’re going to charge $1000 a day for not participating if it is mandatory.  Answer: The TAHC is a regulatory agency and has administrative penalty provisions in it’s law as a recourse for persons who refuse to comply.

The Fourth Component is Enforcements  It can be disastrously expensive.  The majority of US livestock producers don’t like the thought of imprisonment and exorbitant fines.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Stop NAIS entirely. Demand an investigation of filthy corporate feedlots and slaughter houses, the MEGA merger of JBS Swift, the corruption of the FDA and USDA which still allows known MAD COW material in chicken, fish, pig feed and pet food.

Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Editor

 

Book Recommendations for "Agriculture Destroying"
Methods of destroying rats (Farmers' bulletin / United States Department of Agriculture)
by David E Lantz

$5.00

Number of pages: 8
Publisher: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture

Proceedings of the Symposium on Current Research on Wood-destroying Organisms and Future Prospects for Protecting Wood in Use September 13, 1989, Bend, Oregon (SuDoc A 13.88:PSW-128)
by U.S. Dept of Agriculture

$99.99

Number of pages:
Publisher: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station

How EU and World Bank Policies are Destroying Agriculture and the Environment: v. 1: A European and Third World Perspective


Number of pages: 152
Publisher: Imprint unknown

Destroying bees and wasps (Circular / University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service)
by Elbert R Jaycox


Number of pages: 5
Publisher: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service

View All Book Recommendations

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
4 comments


The sustainable community is riding on stopping NAIS

Read Mr. Dickinson's article carefully.  The penalties here are much more extreme than the IRS.  They would obviously destroy small farmers.

Why is there no distinction between large operations and small?  Who is most vulnerable here?  Not corporations which must get only a single number for a herd of 100,000 animals and CEOs' personal homes are not affected, as farmers' are.  

This is not only about extreme injustice to American farmers but literal danger to all of us in terms of totalitarian control over our farmland and the end of all freedom to farm.  

Just as terrorism can not be the excuse for spying on us and for a series of laws that weaken democracy, diseases must not be allowed to be used as an excuse to take control over food and land. 

by Linn Cohen-Cole (76 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 189 comments [12 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Jul 11, 2008 at 8:36:46 PM

Recommend  (0+)

This is currently a hot issue in Congress

This article touches on one of the many reasons that farmers across the country are against NAIS.  The grassroots opposition has slowed the program down, which has made NAIS-proponents unhappy. So they are resorting to using the appropriations process to legislate. 

A few weeks ago, the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee proposed requiring the School Lunch Program to buy only meats derived from NAIS-registered farms.  In other words, they want to use low-income children as a way to coerce farmers into the program.  Sixty-two organizations signed a letter opposing this move:  http://farmandranchfreedom.org/content/files/SignOnLetter080625.pdf

The Senate Appropriations Committee might be taking the issue up this next week.  Stay tuned! 

by Judith McGeary (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Saturday, Jul 12, 2008 at 12:02:37 AM

Recommend  (0+)

Reply: Suggestions on what to do, Judith?

I am hoping to bring the whole issue of NAIS to the progressive community which doesn't even know it exists or what a threat it is to all their hopes for a sustainable agriculture.

 Suggestions on what to do, beyond the writing I am doing, would be welcome.  I thought writing and bringing stuff out was the way to go and from there, then bringing people together to fight this, but even saying "there is a totalitarian take-over of our farmland going on" hasn't yet woken up the left.

by Linn Cohen-Cole (76 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 189 comments [12 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jul 12, 2008 at 8:44:40 PM

Recommend  (0+)

NAIS promotes monopsony and monopoly

Mr. Dickinson raises the issue of penalties for violation of NAIS reporting. A penalty for failure to report or to report on a timely basis (24 hours) is something the USDA does not want to talk about. This is an especially crucial issue for the Amish communities who reject the modern forms of communication such as fax and internet. For the Amish I consider this an attack on their first amendment rights under the constitution of the United States.

 

 

As for the rest of us it will put many small farms out of business. Nais is an attack on all of us from farmer to consumer. While stomping on our first, fourth, fifth, and fourteenth amendments NAIS will raise the cost of food production and in the process foster monopsony through vertical integration. Under monopsonistic conditions, fewer goods are sold, prices are higher in output markets and lower for sellers of inputs, and wealth is transferred from the party without market power to the party with market power.

 

 

The consolidation in the food animal industry, as well as the continued growth of completely integrated operations (where the processor owns the farm, the animals, and the processing plant), has led to a situation where independent producers, whether contracting or selling on the open market, are beholden to big corporations. Growers often take out large loans to pay for land and equipment in anticipation of a contract from a big corporate integrator. Because the contracts are often presented in "take-it-or-leave-it" terms, the producer may end up with a large loan and no way to pay it off if the integrator revokes the contract.

 

 

Vigorous market competition is of vital importance to consumers: they benefit most from an open, competitive, and fair market where the values of democracy, freedom, transparency, and efficiency are in balance. Rural communities and consumers suffer from a loss of competitive markets as wealth is transferred from the party without market power to the party with market power. These situations require robust remedy and it is not NAIS laced with penalties.

 

 

Thomas Jones

Windt im Wald Farm

http://www.wiwfarm.com

by Thomas Jones (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments) on Saturday, Jul 12, 2008 at 10:10:29 PM

Recommend  (0+)

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

Most Popular Articles
in the Last 2 Days
(by Recommend Emails)

Rothschild's Federal Reserve Must Be Abolished by Allen L Roland

Photo Essay: Thoughts for the Fourth of July: Talking the Talk and Walking the Walk for Peace by Mac McKinney

Health Insurance Exec Whistleblower Wendell Potter Testifies Before Congress by Wendell Potter

Torture on the 4th of July by Lawrence Gist

Our Nation has a Great Deal to Learn from Phillip Butler about Morality, Law, and Torture by Lawrence Gist

A Not-So-Glorious Fourth Posted by Josh Mitteldorf

Capricorn Full Moon Eclipse 2009 by Cathy Lynn Pagano

Obama and "Pre-Emptive Capitulation" as a Modality of Democratic Governance by Herbert Calhoun

The Real Cause of the Current Financial Crisis by Joe Reeser

Tennessee's Law Allowing Guns in Bars Doesn't Go Far Enough by Grant Lawrence

Go To Top 50 Most Popular

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum