Posted on 01/24/2007 3:30:25 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Calvin and Carol Whittaker live in one of the most beautiful parts of Idaho, a little Northwest of Idaho Falls, in the community of Leadore (pronounced "lead ore" because it was a mining town when it was named). They have lived in the area all their lives, as did their parents. They have operated a ranch for nearly half a century, as did their parents. And they have been productive, law-abiding citizens.
Several months ago, Carol heard about a National Animal Identification System that would require registration of their ranch into a federal database, and the numbering of their livestock, and reporting of any movement of their livestock off their premises. The more she and Calvin learned about the program, the more they opposed it.
Last May, they received a notice from the Idaho Brand Board that it was time to renew their brand with the state. Calvin completed the forms and returned them to the Department of Agriculture Brand Board. A few weeks later, Carol received a card from the Idaho Department of Agriculture with a 15-digit identification number saying that their premises had now been registered with the National Animal Identification System.
John Chatburn, Deputy Administrator of the Division of Animal Identification for the Idaho Department of Agriculture says that the state of Idaho no longer registers ranches into the NAIS without the owner's knowledge. He admitted that early on, a former State Veterinarian had signed up people without their knowledge, but that the veterinarian was no longer employed by the state, and that the practice had ended.
Chatburn was familiar with the Whittaker situation. He said the Brand Board sent both a brand renewal form, and a premises identification registration form in the same envelope, and that the Whittakers had registered their premises voluntarily. The Whittakers said they were shocked when they received their registration number, and had no idea that they had registered in the NAIS program.
Carol contacted the Department of Agriculture and asked to have their premises removed from the registration. She was told that it was impossible to remove a premises once it was registered. Chatburn confirmed that the USDA's number allocation system has no provision for removing a premises once it has been registered. Even if the ranch or farm is sold to a developer, and the land is converted to hotels and apartment buildings, the land still carries the premises identification number assigned by the NAIS.
USDA boasts that 349,000 premises have been registered. No one can say how many of those registrations occurred without the owner's knowledge. Chatburn says that, in Idaho, there are between 15,000 and 20,000 premises registered, but again, no one in Idaho knows how many were registered without the owner's knowledge.
Chatburn says that although he knows of no way a premises registration can be removed from the NAIS database, he says an owner may request that the premises registration be "deactivated." He says the procedure is simply to notify the state Department of Agriculture, and ask that the request be advanced to the USDA.
The NAIS was introduced in April, 2005, as a voluntary program that would become mandatory, beginning in 2007, with premises registration, and then mandatory animal tagging with a government-assigned number in 2008, and finally, mandatory reporting of any movement of livestock animals off their premises within 24 hours, by 2009.
This program was supported by most of the national livestock associations and manufacturers of the technology required to implement the program. The American Farm Bureau Association was a strong supporter.
When the program became public, however, individual livestock owners rebelled, and formed organizations to oppose the program. The USDA had to modify the program by issuing a new "Strategy for the Implementation of NAIS" in April of 2006. Opposition continued to mount, and the USDA had to issue a new publication in June, 2006, saying that the program was voluntary, and would remain voluntary. And the American Farm Bureau Association had to change its policy from support for a "mandatory" program, to support for a "voluntary" program, at its annual convention this month.
The USDA is handing out money to states that are working to implement the NAIS at the state level. Wisconsin and Michigan, so far, have made the program mandatory. Other states are finding that grassroots opposition has encouraged state legislatures to prohibit a mandatory NAIS. Virginia, Massachusetts, Washington, Indiana, Michigan, Texas and others, have introduced legislation to prohibit a mandatory program.
There is no legislation pending in Idaho; the program there is purely administrative, at the behest of the USDA, which has given the state more than $1 million, according to Chatburn. At press time, The USDA had not yet confirmed Chatburn's belief that a registration can be "deactivated" if the owner requests it. Carol and Calvin Whittaker are still wondering how they got registered for the NAIS, when they thought they were simply renewing their brand. They still oppose NAIS, and are working every day to get free of the unintended registration, and to warn all their friends and neighbors to beware of anything received in the mail from the USDA, or the state Department of Agriculture.
-----------
Henry Lamb is the executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization (ECO), and chairman of Sovereignty International .
--------------------
Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.
PING!
This is the kind of omnipresent bureaucracy they loved.
>>>Are you sure the Nazis lost the war?
I say no. This is part of the Final Aim (Endziel).
ping
Maybe I should send these functional illiterates some papers to sign, giving me half their land for free.
If you can't read what you sign, before signing it, then the consequences are your problem. If you can't understand what you're reading, hire a lawyer to explain it to you before signing.
Need I say they get no sympathy from me?
We got our reistration matterials last month, with the notification on the registration card that it was voluntary. We didn't volunteer; instead, we tossed them into the woodstove.
Always a good decision! :-)
The NAIS is evil. It is designed to protect agri-business while screwing over the little farmer.
President Bush should issue an executive order blocking all registrations that do not have the land owner's permission. Even better block all current registrations and force the FDA to get written permission from every land owner that must be signed after the date of the executive order.
People have no idea how insidious the NAIS is. It has provisions to require people to identify any sort of livestock on their premises--even chickens and guinea hens, animals that come and go quickly as they are born, eaten, and/or become fox chow. You're going to have to inform the state when you take your horse off the property to trail ride or hunt or show. You're going to have to get every animal you own chipped. It's as bad as having government cameras on the road outside your house keeping track of whatever you do.
Always been that way, and always will.
Requiring, of course, a massive bureaucracy to enforce. A lot of folks just aren't going to bother - can you see the Latinos who keep chickens and goats going along with this? In a way, they are promoting the very conditions they say they're trying to prevent.
People have no idea how insidious the NAIS is. It has provisions to require people to identify any sort of livestock on their premises--even chickens and guinea hens, animals that come and go quickly as they are born, eaten, and/or become fox chow. You're going to have to inform the state when you take your horse off the property to trail ride or hunt or show. You're going to have to get every animal you own chipped. It's as bad as having government cameras on the road outside your house keeping track of whatever you do.""
I think it is a direct violation of both the 4th and 5th Amendments of the Constitution. I just asked for Brand papers here in N Nevada. I don't have them back yet, but if there is more than I paid for, I will be raising a stink about it.
I have been against this whole proposal since I first got info a year ago.
It is NOT a law--nothing has passed Congress or signed by Bush. This is entirely being pushed by unelected employees of the USDA, and I don't know how much they are being paid by the companies that produce the chips or the scanner guns we will be required to carry when transporting our horses, etc. Guns cost $800 each. I can ride off my property, and I refuse to comply.
Surprise, surprise - the manufacturers who stand to make a huge profit would support the program... duh...
And anyone wanna bet that the livestock associations were promised a generous kickback for promoting the tagging.... follow the money.
Actually, it sounds more like the old Soviet Union - you know - Nikita Khrushchev who said that they would destroy the US from the inside... And since the "end of the Cold War" we have continually bragged that we "won".... I'm not so sure about that now...
Should vs. what GW will actually do. Don't hold your breath. This program will create more jobs for illegals to come in and do - after all, Regular Americans won't want to chip all those cattle....
bump
I stopped by to ping YOU! ;*)
Sad thing is I got a form to fill out in the mail from this thing. It said it was mandatory. This was 2 weeks ago. I do not know how they thought to send me one. Maybe cause I am a member of the Farm Bureau. I do not do any farming. I buy my insurance with them.. I have only pets. 3 minuature horses and one minature goat. I had two sheep but some dogs killed them. Wonder if I would have to report their murder to the FEDS.
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.