Dear :
Agribusiness, specifically The National Institute for Animal Agriculture (NIAA), lobbied the USDA (after 9/11 and subsequent BSE scares) to create the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) supposedly to protect U.S. citizens and their animals from diseases. The NIAA is composed primarily to two groups – (1) large corporate producers and (2) the makers and producers of animal ID equipment. In April 2002 a task force composed of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and over 30 livestock organizations provided leadership in creating the animal identification system. Small-scale farmers involved in animal husbandry, homesteaders, and animal hobbyists were not represented. Language quoted from the Draft Strategic Plan
I am writing in opposition of the National Animal Identification System because:
(1) Should the NAIS become law, we will be forced to pay fees to register our farms and animals. “Even with public funding, there will be costs to producers.” (Plan, p. 11)
(2) We will be forced to report to the national animal records repository within a short-term specified timeframe the birth, death, loss of identification device, sale, or movement of any animal in our possession.
(3) We will be required to report to the national animal records repository when an animal we own attends a livestock show, participates in a trail ride, is transported to another farm for stud service, or takes part in a community parade, etc.
(4) Our personal information collected through NAIS could be disclosed – “…the USDA cannot assure the confidentiality of all the information at the present time.” (Plan, p. 15) Financial institutions were not able to keep this information confidential, so it is no surprise that USDA cannot guarantee confidentiality.
(5) The NAIS will violate the religious beliefs of minority faith communities by requiring them to become part of this computerized, technology-dependent system or abandon the livestock ownership necessary for their way of life. (Many adherents raise their own food animals and use animals in farming and for transportation. Some, by scriptural teaching, would refuse to take the “mark” of such a numbering system.)
(6) Our livestock would become part of the “national herd.” (Plan, p. 8)
Not only would small farm operators be negatively affected by the NAIS, but this legislation will do serious damage to feed store owners, farm supply houses, hatcheries that sell and ship day-old poultry, and other businesses frequented by farmers.
The most common types of meat contamination in the U.S. are the occurrences of pathogens such as listeria or E.coli in processed meat. When meat becomes contaminated at a large packing plant, millions of consumers in all 50 states are exposed to the dangerous product. Government should enact a law to closer scrutinize the large commercial food sources such as the giant broiler operations, the feed yards that produce beef, the large commercial turkey operations, and laying houses, etc. Because of over-crowded conditions and the general biological by-products of animal production, these are the places most likely to contribute in the spreading of infectious disease, not on the premises of small producers. If our government is indeed concerned with BSE, why does it not test every slaughtered animal?
Because small-scale farmers were not informed of this proposed legislation, it appears that they are willing to enter a ‘voluntary’ program as a justification of making the NAIS mandatory. We are not. Please protect the rights of those who have had no representation and, ironically, the very ones that have the most to lose – our very way of life.
Sincerely,