USDA tracking ALL livestock
the USDA and "powers that be", including the following companies , (its long so I will attach it to the bottom of this message )
all stand to gain in one way or another by the new rules the USDA has decided to enact upon the US. Rules and regulations that are in violation of civil liberties. (but not to worry the USDA has seen the error of its own wording and is changing the format , but not the content) And is in the processes of enacting surveillance of all of the nations livestock. ALL, every chicken, llama, alpaca, horse, cow, sheep goat, elk (in tx) and will consider EVERY farmer who does not uphold this rule , in violation and will be considered a class C offense. In TN. the USDA has told horse owners , their voluntary new "passport" will allow better interstate travel and are granting a "microchip cupon" to those who sign up early !
Breed registries are "All for this" mostly because they are also "for " horse slaughter but they dot tell that tidbit. In TX this microchipping of privately owned animals is allready mandatory . the USDA touts a 50 state compliance by this year ! and they are proud of it ! they can now tell me , if I kill an animal on my land for my family to eat , that I must report it to them before I can eat it . My kids cannot take lambs to a 4-H event without them beuing RFID tagged in some way , as yet species undetermined. But they claim to wish to do this for the good of the "National herd" last time I checked, my little one angora goat, that the kids at our farmers day , like to pet and touch,
is not a member of the "national herd" BUT because of "reporting" all animal movement , and that report process rumored to be costly to the farmer, means my little ambassador, wont go off the farm again. sad for those kids who hadnt seen her before.
BUT that also means I may not go to the State fair and compete with my sheep. thats ALOT of reporting.
The USDA wants our animals tagged for export . But last time I checked , none of mine had booked a cruise or filed for a passport.
this is excessive control of the small farmer and a last ditch attempt by big agribusiness,
to control the global market including the one here at home.
below is a report recently to show the USDA dosent have a handle on much anyway , and when it comes to passing 10,000 lbs of ground beef thru a packing plant its a little late for a traceback microchip.. Finally, there are many places fighting against this, and I hope you will help us , the USDA wants to keep the public in the dark I think it needs a great bright light Thank you M. Gray NC
http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/NONAISin-theUS/
http://nationalpropertyowners.org/
http://NoNAIS.org/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Californians_Against_NAIS
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Texas_Citizens_Against_NAIS
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wisconsinites_Against_NAIS
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Kansans_Against_NAIS
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Washingtonians_Against_NAIS
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Missourians_Against_NAIS
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Iowans_Against_NAIS
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Tennesseans_Against_NAIS
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oregon_Against_NAIS
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oklahomans_Against_NAIS
http://groups.yahoo.com/NONAISin-theUS@yahoogroups.com
WASHINGTON (AP) - Investigators could not determine whether beef
slaughterhouses and packing plants obeyed safeguards designed to keep
mad cow disease from reaching humans, an Agriculture Department audit
found.
The 130-page audit, performed throughout 2005 and released Thursday,
turned up a case of mad cow disease last year in a Texas cow.
The department's inspector general didn't find that at-risk tissues -
brains, spinal cords and other nerve parts from older animals - had
entered the food supply.
But investigators found it impossible to say whether slaughterhouses
were following the rules, according to the report.
The report also faulted the department for not keeping records that
could help trace the source of an outbreak of disease.
"As a result, should serious animal disease be detected in the United
States, USDA's ability to quickly determine and trace the source of
infections to prevent the spread of disease could be impaired," the
report said.
and here is an article recently written by a spokesperson against the NAIS.
there are excellent resources for more information and I am sure she would welcome contact
Farm for LifeMary Zanoni, Ph.D.P.O. Box 501Canton, New York 13617mlz@slic.com
Small farmers and homesteaders have chosen their
way of life because they love their freedom-the freedom from
urban noise and congestion,
the independence from government and corporate interference,
the self-reliance of providing one's own shelter, water, food.
Now the USDA's NAIS-National Animal
Identification System-threatens the traditional freedoms of the
rural way of life.
The genesis of the NAIS
The NAIS is the brainchild of the National Institute for Animal
Agriculture (NIAA). Who is the NIAA? Primarily two groups-
(1) the biggest corporate players in U.S. meat production
(for example, the National Pork Producers, Monsanto, Cargill Meat);
and (2) the makers and marketers of high-tech animal ID equipment
(for example, Digital Angel, Inc., EZ-ID/AVID ID Systems, Micro Beef
Technologies, Ltd.). Beginning in 2002, the NIAA used 9/11 and
subsequently the BSE scares to lobby the USDA for a nationwide,
all-livestock registration and tracking system. The result is the
USDA's proposed NAIS, set forth in a Draft Strategic Plan (Plan)
and Draft Program Standards (Standards) released on April 25, 2005.
The Plan and Standards can be downloaded from www.usda.gov/nais.
Main requirements of the NAIS
The NAIS would require two types of mandatory registration. First,
premises registration would require every person who owns even one
horse, cow, pig, chicken, sheep, pigeon, or virtually any livestock
animal, to register their home, including owner's name, address, and
telephone number, and keyed to Global Positioning System coordinates
(for satellite-assisted location of homes and farms), in a federal
database under a 7-digit "premises ID number." (Standards, pp. 3-4,
10-12; Plan, p. 5.) Second, individual animal identification will
require owners to obtain a 15-digit ID number, also to be kept
in the federal database, for any animal that ever leaves the premises
of its birth. Thus, even if you are raising animals only for your own
food, you will have to obtain an individual ID to send animals to
a slaughterhouse, to sell or buy animals, to obtain stud service.
(Large-scale producers will be allowed to identify, e.g., large
groups of pigs or broilers raised and processed together by a single
group ID number. However, owners raising single animals or a small
number,
under most circumstances will have to identify each animal
individually
for purposes of slaughter, sale, or breeding.) If you own a non-food
animal such as a horse, you would need individual ID if you ever left
your property for shows or trail rides. The form of ID will most
likely be a tag or microchip containing a Radio Frequency
Identification Device, designed to be read from a distance.
(Plan, p. 10; Standards, pp. 6, 12, 20, 27-28.) In addition to this
"electronic identification," the USDA will allow "industry" to decide
whether to require the use of "retinal scan" and "DNA" identification
for all animals. (Plan, p.13.)
Within this system, for animals subject to individual animal
identification, the animal owner would be required to report:
the birthdate of an animal, the application of every animal's
ID tag, every time an animal leaves or enters the property, every
time an animal loses a tag, every time a tag is replaced, the
slaughter or death of an animal, or if any animal is missing.
Such events must be reported within 24 hours. (Standards, pp.
12-13, 17-21.) The USDA plans "enforcement" to ensure compliance
with the NAIS. (Standards, p. 7; Plan, p. 17.) The USDA has not
yet specified the nature of this "enforcement," but presumably
it would include fines and/or seizure of animals.
A more recent development is a movement, spearheaded by the
National Cattlemen's Beef Association, to "privatize" the
database which will contain all the premises and animal
identification information and tracking information.
As reported in Lancaster Farming, Aug. 6, 2005, p.
E 22, the NCBA has lobbied the House Agriculture
Committee to urge the USDA to put the NAIS database
administration into the control of the NCBA itself.
As explained below, such "privatization" will only
worsen the prospects for invasion of privacy and economic
pressures on small farmers and homesteaders.
Any benefits of the NAIS Are illusory
The NIAA and USDA claim two principal benefits of the
NAIS: first, enhancing export markets for U.S. livestock
products; and second, allowing traceback to farms of animals'
origin when animal diseases (such as BSE) are found. These
"benefits" are of no use to most small farmers and homesteaders.
Small farmers and homesteaders sell to their neighbors or consume
their animal products themselves-they don't profit from
"export markets." Small farmers and homesteaders raise their
animals in natural and healthy conditions-usually on pasture,
with minimal home-raised or organic grain, with plenty of space
for exercise and dispersal of waste-to assure that problems like
BSE and bacterial contamination won't occur in the home-raised
animals destined for their own tables.
Indeed, the NAIS "traceback" system would be much less effective
against BSE than a system of testing every slaughtered cow. Europe
and Japan perform testing of every cow. The USDA has refused such
testing; but surely the testing would be less expensive than a huge
tracking system covering every cow, horse, donkey, llama, alpaca,
pig, sheep, goat, pigeon, chicken, duck, farmed fish, etc., etc.
Moreover, the NAIS system would be of no use at all in dealing with
the most common types of meat contamination in the U.S., the
occurrence of pathogens such as listeria or E. coli in processed meat.
One example of such contamination can be found at
www.fsis.usda.gov/Fsis_recalls, 2005 recalls nos. 033-2005
and 040-2005. Those incidents involved over one million pounds
(enough to serve at least four million people) of ground beef
contaminated with coliform bacteria, distributed nationwide by
a single processor. Such instances of contamination are not
discovered until the meat has been distributed into the supply
chain. Assuming that a cow yields 500 pounds of ground meat,
the one million pounds in the foregoing recalls represent
meat from over 2,000 cows. There is no way to identify individual
cows from one million pounds of hamburger; no way to tell if any
contamination came from a cow, multiple cows, or from the processing
itself; and no benefit to consumer safety in such a situation from
the NAIS system. In sum, when meat becomes contaminated at a large
packing plant, millions of consumers in all 50 states can be exposed
to the dangerous product. In contrast, an incident of impaired food
at a small-scale farm or local processor might affect only a few dozen
consumers in a single county. Thus, by encouraging increased
consolidation of the meat industry, the NAIS would actually make
America's food supply more unstable and less safe.
It is therefore clear that the benefits of the NAIS are illusory.
Unfortunately, the harms of the NAIS are very real, and fall
primarily upon the smallest farmers, homesteaders, and consumers.
The harms of the NAIS are very real
The NAIS will drive small producers out of the market, will prevent
people from raising animals for their own food, will invade Americans'
personal privacy, and will violate the religious freedom of Americans
whose beliefs make it impossible for them to comply.
The NAIS will create an unfair economic burden on small farmers and
homesteaders, because animal owners will bear the costs of property
and animal registration. As the USDA frankly admits, "there will be
costs to producers" (Plan, p. 11); "private funding will be required...
Producers will identify their animals and provide necessary records to
the databases... All groups will need to provide labor." (Plan, p. 14.)
In sum, there is no realistic chance of government funding to cover
the costs of the program once it is established, and animal owners will
have to pay the tab for premises registration fees, individual animal
ID fees, reporting fees for events such as animals leaving a given
premises or being slaughtered, and for equipment such as RFID tags,
tag readers, or software needed to report to the database.
The proposed
privatization of the NAIS would only worsen the economic burden, since
a private database holder would certainly want to make some profit
from the system.
The NAIS would also, in fact, lessen rather than improve the security
of America's animal foods. The NAIS is touted by the USDA and
agricorporations as a way to make our food supply "secure"
against diseases or terrorism. However, most people instinctively
understand that real food security comes from raising food yourself
or buying from a local farmer you actually know. The USDA plan will
only stifle local sources of production through over-regulation and
additional costs. Ultimately, if the NAIS goes into effect,
more consumers will have to buy food produced by the large-scale
industrial methods which multiply the effects of any food safety
and disease problems. Moreover, the NAIS system will create
opportunities for havoc, such as the deliberate introduction of
diseased
animals into premises containing large numbers of a given species.
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the NAIS is its proponents'
lack of concern for individual privacy and religious freedom.
Consider that the NAIS plan is a compulsory registration with
the government of all people who want to raise their own animal foods.
Concededly, the Bill of Rights does not contain a constitutional
amendment specifically to protect one's right to produce one's own
food. But that is only because the generation of the Founders could
never have imagined that American government could evolve into a
system that would compel citizens to in effect ask for government
permission to produce their own food.
Further, consider that livestock animals are legally a form of
personal property. It is unprecedented for the United States
government to conduct large-scale computer-aided surveillance of
its citizens simply because they own a common type of property.
(The only exceptions are registration of motor vehicles and guns,
due to their clear inherent dangers- but they are registered at
the state level, not by the federal government. Moreover,
those registration systems predate the widespread use of
personal computers and the development of the Internet,
so even the car and gun registration systems were never
intended as the widespread threat to privacy and freedom
that they have become today.) Surveillance of small-scale
livestock owners is like the government subjecting people
to surveillance for owning a couch, a tv, a lawnmower, or
any item of personal property. Moreover, privatization of
the NAIS will surely result in the same gross abuses already
evident in private databases of financial information-the sale
of citizens' most personal data, without their knowledge, to the
highest bidder; and the vulnerability of citizens' information to
hackers and thieves, because the President and Congress have utterly
failed to subject the powerful private data industry to long-needed
protections for citizens' privacy.
The NAIS also violates America's tradition of respect for the
religious freedom of members of minority faith communities.
Many adherents of plain (and other) faiths raise their own food
animals and use animals in farming and transportation because
their beliefs require them to live this way. Such people obviously
cannot comply with the USDA's computerized, technology-dependent
system; and many of them also believe that scriptural teachings or
other religious tenets prohibit the marking of animals or homes
with high-tech numbering systems. The NAIS will force these
people to violate their religious beliefs, by compelling them to
make an impossible choice between abandoning the livestock
ownership necessary to their religious way of life, or accepting
the government's imposition of practices abhorrent to their faith.
The USDA’s planned NAIS timetable:
The following is the USDA's timetable, as set forth in the Draft
Strategic Plan and Draft Program Standards on April 25, 2005, for
implementing the mandatory NAIS. Essentially, the USDA timetable
would make premises identification and individual animal identification
mandatory as of January 1, 2008. Please note that there can be no
assurance that the USDA will not advance (or delay) the previously
announced timetable. In addition, the USDA timetable may differ from
that of individual states, which have had the incentive of grant
money from the USDA to establish pilot projects of premises and
animal identification. (For example, Wisconsin is attempting to
compel premises and animal identification by late 2005 or during
2006.)
April 2005-the USDA issued its Draft Strategic Plan and Draft
Program Standards for public comment. The public comment period
for those documents ended in early July 2005.
July 2006-the Draft Strategic Plan (p. 10) gives July 2006 as
the target date for the USDA to issue a proposed rule setting
forth the requirements for NAIS premises registration, animal
identification, and animal tracking. This will be a crucial
juncture for action by those who will be harmed by the NAIS,
because there will be a limited public comment period after
the publication of the rule, and objections expressed in the
public comments may persuade the USDA to modify or abandon some
requirements of the rule.
Fall 2007-the USDA plans to publish a "final rule" to establish
the requirements of the mandatory NAIS. (Plan, p. 10.)
January 2008-this is the most crucial date in the USDA's present
timetable, the date when premises identification and animal
identification would become mandatory. (Plan, pp. 2, 10.)
January 2009-"animal tracking" would become mandatory, including
"enforcement" of the reporting of animal movements. (Plan, p. 17.)
How to oppose the NAIS
There is still time to oppose mandatory premises and animal
identification. Small-scale keepers of livestock can take action
to create an effective movement in opposition to the USDA/agricorporate
plan. First, small-scale livestock owners should not participate
in any so-called "voluntary" state or federal program to register
farms or animals. The USDA is using farmers' supposed willingness to
enter a "voluntary" program as a justification for making the
program mandatory. (See Plan, "Executive Summary" and pp. 7-8.)
If a state or extension official urges registration of your premises
or livestock, question them about whether the registration is
mandatory or voluntary and about any deadline for registration; and
ask them for a copy of the legislation or rule establishing any
claimed authority to require such registration.
Small farmers and livestock owners can also help inform and
organize others. The USDA presently does not plan to finalize its
rules to establish mandatory ID until the summer of 2006.
(As stated above, individual states, such as Wisconsin, may
be planning earlier implementation, but even in such states,
widespread objection by animal owners can still affect whether
plans become permanent and whether reasonable exceptions may be
established.) Animal owners should contact breed associations,
organic and sustainable farming organizations, or general farming
interest groups and ask them to oppose the NAIS. Also ask such
organizations to start or support campaigns of letter-writing
to officials and of commenting on the USDA rules scheduled to be
issued in summer 2006 (and any similar state rules).
NAIS opponents can also individually write their federal and state
legislators. You can find contact information for both federal and
state officials through www.vote-smart.org or through the federal
government's site, www.firstgov.gov. Remember, the conventional
wisdom is that individual letters sent by postal mail carry more
weight than e-mails or signing on to form letters. But any input
is more useful than no input, so if you don't have time for an
individual letter, use e-mail, telephone, group petitions, or
any means you can. Also remember that both individual initiative
and group initiatives count, so even after you have sent a letter,
continue, if you can, to respond to calls for action asking you
to send additional messages to government officials.
In particular, the USDA's planned issuance of a NAIS rule for
public comment in July 2006 will be a crucial juncture. Be
aware of press coverage or action alerts at that time, and
when you hear that the public comment period on a NAIS rule
is open, please take the time to submit an individual comment.
Finally, if the time comes when the NAIS (or a state equivalent) is about to go into effect as presently planned, and you feel your rights are being violated, you can contact groups that may provide legal representation without cost. Some sources of information to try are: (1) Farmers' Legal Action Group, www.flaginc.org, 651-223-5400; (2) the American Civil Liberties Union, www.aclu.org; for the ACLU in your state, see the pull-down menu on the bottom of that page, under "your local ACLU"; and (3) www.abanet.org/legalservices/findlegalhelp/home.cfm, the American Bar Association's guide to legal services.
Alien Technology Corporation
8.2 AWID (Applied Wireless Identifications Group Inc)
8.3 Cansec Systems Ltd
8.4 Checkpoint Systems Inc
8.5 Cross Point BV
8.6 EM Microelectronics-Marin SA
8.7 EMS (Escort Memory Systems - Datalogic)
8.8 eXI Systems Inc
8.9 HID Corporation
8.10 ID Systems Inc
8.11 Identec Solutions AG
8.12 Inkode Corporation
8.13 Innovision Research and Technology plc
8.14 Intel Corporation
8.15 Intermec Technologies Corporation
8.16 LXE Inc
8.17 Matrics Inc
8.18 Moba (Mobile Automation AG)
8.19 NCR Corporation
8.20 OmniTek
8.21 Omron Corporation
8.22 Philips Semiconductors
8.23 RF Code Inc
8.24 SAMSys Technologies Inc
8.25 Savi Technology
8.26 SCS Corporation
8.27 SIRIT Technologies Inc
8.28 Symbol Technologies Inc
8.29 Syscan International Inc
8.30 TagMaster AB
8.31 Tagsys
8.32 Texas Instruments - TI-Rfid
8.33 ThingMagic
8.34 TransCore Inc
8.35 Trovan Ltd
8.36 Sensormatic (Tyco)
8.37 WhereNet Corporation
8.38 Zebra Technologies Corporation
Appendix A
Company Directory
Accenture Ltd
AccuCode Inc
Accu-Sort Systems
Acsis
Active Wave
Advanced Data Capture
Advanced ID Corporation
Ahearn & Soper Inc
Airgate Technologies
Alanco Technologies Inc
Alien Technology
AmaTech USA
Amskan
Apriso
Argent Tape & Label Inc
ASK
Atmel Corporation
Avery Dennison
Avicon Inc
AVID
AWID
Axcess Inc
Balogh RFID
BearingPoint
Bibliotheca RFID Library Systems AG
British Telecom (BT)
CAEN SpA
Canon Finetech
Cansec Systems Ltd
Cap, Gemini, Ernst, & Young (CGE&Y)
Catalyst International Inc
CCL Label
Celis Semiconductor Corporation
Checkpoint Systems
ClearOrbit Inc
Climarque Ltd
Codeway Ltd
Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC)
ConnecTerra
CopyTag Limited
Cross Point
CrossLink
Cubic Transportation Systems
Defywire Inc
Deister
Deloitte & Touche
Destron Fearing
DTE Automation GmbH
Dynasys Technolgies
EDS
ELGAB
ELPAS Ltd.
EM Microelectronics
EMS (Datalogic)
Enterprise Information Systems
Etenna Corporation
eXI Systems Inc
Farther Synergies
Feig Electronic GmbH
Flexchip
Fractal Antenna Systems
Franken Plastik
Franwell Software Inc
FreedomPay
Fujitsu Limited
Gempuls International SA
GenuOne Inc
Global ID
GlobeRanger Corporation
HID
HighJump Software
Hitachi Maxell Ltd
IBM Corporation
IconNicholson LLC
ID Systems Inc
Identec Solutions
IDMicro Inc
Impinj
Indala
Infineon Technologies AG
Inkode
Innovision
Inside Contactless
Integrated Product Intelligence Ltd (IPI)
Intel Corporation
Intellident Ltd
Intermec Technologies Corporation
Intersoft
Kennedy Group
LakeWest Group
Legic Identsystems Ltd
LitiUSA
Lockheed Martin
Lowry Computer Products Inc
LXE Inc
Manhattan Associates
MARC Global Systems LLC
Mark IV
Matrics
MeadWestvaco Intelligent Systems
Melexis NV
Microchip Technology Inc
Microsoft Corporation
Miyake
Moba
Moore Wallace
Mu-Solutions Venture Co (Hitachi)
National Label
NCR Corporation
NEC Corporation
NJM/CLI Packaging Systems International
Northern Apex RFID
OATSystems Inc
Odin Technologies
OmniTek
Omron Corporation
Open Tag Systems
Optum Inc
Oracle Corporation
OTI Global
Paxar Corporation
Phase IV Engineering
Phillips (Koninklijke) Electronics
Plitek, Llc
Power Paper
Printronix Inc.
Provia Software
Psion-Techlogix
Quelis ID Systems
QueTel
Rafsec
RCD Technology Corporation
RedPrairie Corporation
RF Code Inc
RF Saw Inc
RF Technologies
RFID Inc
RSI ID Technologies
SAIC (Science Applications International Corporation)
Samsung Electronics Company Ltd
SAMSys
SAP Aktiengesellschaft
SATO America Inc
Savi Technology
Scemtec
SCS-Corporation
Secura Key
Sefea (Swatch Group)
Sensormatic (Tyco)
Sentinel ID
Serviant
Shipcom Wireless
Siebel Systems
SIRIT Inc
SIS Technologies Ltd
Skyetek
Smart Code Corporation
Softronica
Sovereign Tracking Systems LLC
ST Logic Track
Stella
STMicroelectronics NV
Sun Microsystems Inc
Symbol Technologies Inc
Syscan
Tacit Solutions
TagMaster
Tagsys
TEK Industries
Texas Instruments - TI-RFid
ThingMagic
TIBCO Software Inc
TopFlight
Toppan Forms Co Ltd
Toshiba Corporation
TransCore, Inc
Traxus Technologies Inc
Trenstar
Trivalent Solutions Inc
Trovan Ltd
Two Technologies Inc
Unisys
VeriSign
Viaera
Vizional Technologies Inc
Wavetrend Technologies
webMethods Inc
WhereNet Corporation
WJ Communications
X-ident Technology GmbH
Xterprise
Zebra Technologies Corporation