Posted on 06/26/2006 1:57:58 PM PDT by pubwvj
Today the Vermont House Agriculture Committee met with USDA represenative Dr. John Wiemers by telephone regarding the USDA's proposed draft of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). I greatly appreciate the questions raised by the Committee members to the USDA representative Dr. Wiemers this morning. They clearly pointed out the double-speak of the USDA which is being very slippery about this and other issues related to NAIS and Premise ID. The USDA is trying to reassure people out of one mouth while their other mouth, and written word, says something very different. The April 2006 USDA documents make the program appear voluntary but is filled with little catches like "at this time", "provided that they get compliance", "provided that their milestone markers are met", etc. The reality, as Dr. Wiemers made clear, is that the program is ultimately mandatory. Not only that, but as responses to questions by Representative Botzow pointed out, there are draconian penalties for homesteaders and small producers, although the USDA does not want to discuss that aspect. In Texas non-compliance is $1,000 per day per violation by statute (Title 5 Chapter 341 Section 341.048). In Vermont the penalty is $5,000 per day per violation (Title 6 Chapter 102 Section 1164).
Representative Johnson clearly nailed one of the USDA's leading word games. They like to claim that we on the internet and NoNAIS are spreading misinformation but when you dig into the documents it turns out it is the USDA that is lying. Dr. Wiemers' own testimony and the USDA documents clearly established that in the event of commingling, such as showing, 4H and group trail rides, people will indeed have to report to the USDA. This is an important point. The USDA has a number of subtle lies and one of them is that we won't have to report trail rides. Dr. Wiemers stated this early on. Yet in the written documents, and in Dr. Wiemers' statements today, it was clearly stated that if there is any comingling then reporting is necessary. Trail rides usually involve going onto a neighbor's property and often neighbors go on trial rides together. Shows, 4-H gatherings and other events are also an issue with this sort of mandatory event reporting. It is unconstitutional for the government to be controlling our association - mandatory reporting with penalties is a form of control. This is a clear violation of our basic rights as Americans and is part of the lie the USDA is promulgating.
Representative Zuckerman's question of "Will the USDA consider not making the program mandatory until there has been legislation to that effect by Congress" revealed the heavy hand of the Department of Agriculture. Dr. Wiemers refused to speak on that topic and claimed that there was already legislative oversight because Congress approves the USDA's budget. It surprised me that he was unwilling to even communicate the question up the chain of command. Representative Zuckerman pressed the issue asking "So you are firm in retaining the right to create a mandatory program" and Dr. Wiemers said "Yes." This attitude, that they are above the people and above the legislation, is part of why so many livestock owners are upset with the USDA. The regulators are only considering comments from the largest stakeholders, many who are not even livestock owners such as the RFID industry, and mandating a regulatory program that will be a heavy burden on small producers and a trampling of our Constitutional rights.
Representative Green questioned Dr. Wiemers regarding the resistance nationwide vs in Vermont to the Animal ID vs Premise ID. I felt that Wiemers did not clearly respond to the question. He basically brushed off resistance to the program as misinformation. In the USDA survey presented this month there is support for NAIS - among large producers. However, the feeling on NAIS among small producers and homesteaders is over 90% opposed. Unfortunately, the USDA does not seem interested in getting input from smaller stakeholders and instead has focused its attention on the large industry groups and big producers. This is understandable in one way, the big stakeholders represent 85% of our economic output of agriculture and benefit the most from NAIS. They have the big monied lobbyists to push their interests. The small stakeholders, on the other hand, are the ones who will be most heavily burdened and get the least benefit and representation.
Wiemers stated near the end that this all applied to interstate activity. This lead to perhaps one of the most interesting points when Representative Zuckerman asked if the program did not apply to intra-state activities. Dr. Wiemers answered, "Yes." This deserves serious followup because all of the USDA documents and Dr. Wiemers other comments make it clear they are intending to take this to the backyard level for all producers, even those who are raising meat only for their own table intra-state or inter-state. Page 3 of the April 2006 documents from the USDA make it clear that if we as a state do not voluntarily comply they will take measures to force NAIS down our throats. There is nothing voluntary about the threat of force.
Another very interesting point that came up was the USDA has no clue as to how many "premises" are out there. They are relying on inaccurate surveys by their department that have both over estimates and under estimates built into the system. Dr. Wiemers never did give our representatives a number despite all his heming and hawing. Research on the web pegs the number at around 2,000,000 farms nationwide but that does not include all the horse owners, hobby farms, homesteaders or pet livestock owners. What's your guess? Maybe it is better than the USDA's...
Perhaps the biggest issue to people is the government's whole depopulation plan. Depopulation is euphemistic govi-speak for non-voluntary killing off of all the sick and healthy animals in an area. Depopulation is not necessary, scientific or useful other than as a public relations tool of "Look - we're doing something!" Quarantine is sufficient. In the UK in 2002 with Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) the British government made the mistake of killing 6,000,000 animals unnecessarily. This devastated their country more than FMD ever would have done and they still have not recovered. Virtually all of those animals were healthy. Not only that but FMD is not fatal - it merely causes sores that puts the animal off feed for a short period. The animals recover and can continue to be productive. A government policy of depopulation, as outlined in GAO document 05-214 is unacceptable. They should not be killing healthy animals just because disease was detected. Maybe sick animals should be killed - provided they can not recover - but there is no way the government should be coming in and killing healthy animals. Even worse, as Dr. Wiemer pointed out the government will not be offering compensation or indemnity. This is a warrant-less search, seizure and confiscation without legal appeal - a direct violation of our Constitutional rights under the 4th Amendment and a unacceptable extension of Eminent Domain.
US Constitution - Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. -National Archives
Like Representative Zuckerman, I have wondered if this will become another federally mandated, unfunded program forced onto states like No Child Left Behind and other federal programs. I noticed that Dr. Wiemers refused to actually answer that question. Tax payers will pay for this at the federal level, the state level and in the grocery store. There are also large costs at the producer and homesteader levels. Wiemers says the program, right down to individual Animal ID and Trace-Back, will eventually be mandatory. Tags cost money. For people with mixed flocks they will have to tag every single chicken under the written rules being drafted by the USDA. Only large producers doing all-in/all-out style production get to take advantage of the Group ID program that uses one ID number for tens of thousands of animals. Small producers and rural folk raising their own are going to see a heavy burden in fees, tags, equipment and time. On a small farm we don't have the time to spend filling out yet more sets of government paperwork - we have real work to do.
Dr. Wiemers used the example of a credit card as a voluntary, universal, government coordinated program. He compared this to NAIS. I like that example. Nobody is required to get a credit card. Credit cards are not mandatory. They are market driven. Not everybody has a credit card. Credit cards are truly 100% voluntary unlike the USDA's proposed NAIS. Lets keep NAIS, Premise ID, Animal ID and Trace-Back all 100% voluntary and market driven. We should not have to have Premise ID, Animal ID, Trace-Back, etc to be able to grow food for ourselves. We should not even have to have any component of NAIS to grow food to sell to other people. The big point of NAIS is trace-back for the profit of large corporations and if consumers want it they can demand it. My customers have trace-back. They know their pork came from my pigs which were bred, born and raised on our pastures here at Sugar Mountain Farm in Vermont. The big producers who want to offer this assurance to their customers so that they can export to Japan or sell to consumers who demand Trace-Back will be able to have their premium for providing a value added service if NAIS is kept 100% voluntary. The rest of us should not be burdened for their profit.
From certain officials I hear genuine concerns about public welfare and being able to reach people for both education and alerts about disease outbreaks. I question the logic of Premise ID for this purpose simply because we already have the media and the Emergency Broadcast System. Why add another complicated, expensive, redundant mandate? Anyone who is not reachable by one of these forms of communication is not going to be a significant threat to society.
What ever happens, we need strict guarantees, in legislation at the federal and state levels, that we'll not be led down that slippery slope to NAIS or further erosion of our rights and privacy if we accept some form of Premise ID. The rest of NAIS and the horrors of depopulation are unacceptable. We need strong laws that will prevent this sort of heavy handed regulatory taking of our property, our rights and the invasion of our privacy. It is not the government's business if someone has a chicken. Grandma's egg hen is not a threat to society.
On a related note: It would also be nice if the USDA and the Vermont Department of Agriculture (VTDA) would stop spreading lies while at the same time incorrectly claiming that I am doing so. I suppose I should be flattered that they read my blog so carefully. Above I discussed a few of their lies. Steve Kerr is apparently spreading lies about me. I have been told that he has told people that my blog specifically is filled with lies. Word gets around and back to me. That is slander by a public official. I have repeatedly asked him, and other officials, to point out any errors in my web site yet they never have. We are in communication by phone, in person and by email so that is not the issue. I strive for 100% accuracy. Our public servants should do the same. I seriously question the competency of a public servant to hold his job when he is slandering citizens and lying to our legislature repeatedly. Maybe it is time for Kerr to step down and let the VDTA once again represent the interests of all Vermonters and not just big Ag.
Walter Jeffries
Sugar Mountain Farm in Vermont
Pastured Pigs & Sheep
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.