Tri-State Neighbor: South Dakota Farm Newspaper

To the Editor: This letter is in response to information regarding HB 1305, a bill introduced this legislative session that would have prohibited the state of South Dakota from participating in any component of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS).

I am a cattle and hog producer from Clear Lake, S.D., and I want to explain why I think the NAIS would be beneficial to our state's livestock industry.

Today, the NAIS is a voluntary system that our livestock producers can use to register their farm sites and livestock feeding facilities and obtain a premise identification number that our state animal health authorities can use to quickly notify producers of a potential disease outbreak or other animal health event that might put our animals at risk. Premise registration is free and does not require you to participate in the “animal identification” and “animal tracing” components of NAIS. Should a producer wish to participate in the animal identification component, an individual number would be assigned to that animal or, as with hogs and poultry, the animals would be identified by groups or lots.

USDA is required by law to keep this information confidential. Producers are not required to participate, but many have chosen to. HB 1305 would have prevented producers and state animal health authorities from participating. South Dakota's livestock producers should not be stopped from developing and implementing programs that best fit their operations, and at the same time, ensure the health and security of our state's livestock industry.

NAIS is not an unfunded mandate. The only costs associated with registration are the cost of postage to mail in the registration form, along with any incidental costs associated with identifying animals that most producers already pay.

It is also important to note that NAIS is not the only system that utilizes “premises registration” information. This information is necessary within many current livestock quality assurance and marketing programs.

For example, many South Dakota pork producers participate in the Pork Quality Assurance Plus program. PQA Plus is a program designed to ensure a safe and wholesome product for consumers. And, most of the major pork processors require their producer-suppliers to participate in PQA Plus. The PQA Plus program requires all producers to first register his/her premises in order to participate.

Another key issue that was brought up during the recent debate on HB 1305 is the importance of our state veterinarian's ability to implement and administer animal health programs that quickly respond to any animal disease outbreak, and minimize any disruption of interstate trade. The legislation that was introduced this session raised more questions than answers surrounding this issue.

The bill would have prevented our state veterinarian from entering into cooperative agreements with USDA or other states who may be participating in NAIS programs. By isolating South Dakota's animal health authorities, how can we assure ourselves that our livestock herds are sufficiently safeguarded from disease? Furthermore, how do we assure our consumers and fellow producers outside of our state boundaries that our animals have not been exposed to potentially harmful diseases?

Plainly put, HB 1305 was introduced to force all livestock producers in South Dakota to continue to operate strictly in a commodity market. This bill only perpetuates a narrow and unrealistic view of modern livestock production practices, and ignores the concerns and well-being of the ultimate consumers of our products. As livestock producers, disease traceability is crucial if we are to maintain the long-term health of our livestock and our economic bottom line.

In closing, I want to thank all of the groups and legislators that opposed this bill. As a cattle and hog producer in this state, and as a representative of our state's pork producers, I am encouraged that South Dakota's livestock producers may continue to be responsible stewards of animal health and prudent businessmen who implement and take advantage of good marketing opportunities.

- Paul Brandt

Clear Lake, S.D.

Comments »

Ann wrote on Mar 18, 2008 9:42 AM:

"
Mr. Brandt asks: "Furthermore, how do we assure our consumers and fellow producers outside of our state boundaries that our animals have not been exposed to potentially harmful diseases?"

First of all, how many consumers have contacted the SD state veterinarian with these concerns?

Secondly, states require a health certificate for export to another state. The certificate has the name, address, and contact information of the producer plus identification of the animal. If a health certificate is not sufficient for consumer and producer confidence why would a premise id, which is assigned to a location, but may have out-of-date or incorrect producer contact information make any difference?

As a consumer I am much more concerned about what happens after the animal arrives at the processing plant. The money wasted on NAIS would have been better spent on qualified inspectors.

"

susan wrote on Mar 17, 2008 4:16 PM:

" Remember that terrible FMD outbreak in England that caused the death of millions of healthy animals (only a few thousand were found to be infected) and the suicides of several farmers (farms were raped of nearly everything like tractors and even furniture)? Guess where the disease came from? It "escaped" from the local lab that was studying the disease. Hmmmm!!!!

In the USA there is a vaccine and there has not been an outbreak since 1929. Could it be perhaps, maybe even remotely, that the exisiting disease protocols ARE WORKING JUST FINE!!! "

steve's wife wrote on Mar 17, 2008 4:08 PM:

" "Producers are not required to participate, but many have chosen to."

Those who want to participate, let them...but do not force those who have no need of this program to participate.

"USDA is required by law to keep this information confidential."

What about those 14 yr old computer geeks who like to break into secure data bases just for the fun of it. The USDA data base got hacked into last summer. "

naissayer wrote on Mar 17, 2008 3:56 PM:

" I have been all over the net trying to find positive or supportive comments about NAIS following articles like this one that say NAIS is a good thing. But overwhelmingly the comments are against NAIS. Do these people know something that the few who support NAIS do not know?
Indeed, if NAIS is so great, where are the grass roots websites espousing why we all need it and how it will be the greatest thing since sliced bread...instead I see many websites that are vehemently against NAIS. AND they use the words in the NAIS document to show all the holes in the NAIS program. Take a look at Australia...they hate their animal id program. "

Kenny Fox wrote on Mar 16, 2008 3:50 PM:

" To the editor: In response to Paul Brandt's letter to the editor I would like to point out that HB 1305 would not have prevented the state from establishing or participating in disease control programs and would not of prevented anyone from participating in the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). HB 1305 specifically states:

"Section 2. That chapter 40-3 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows: Nothing in this act prohibits the state from establishing or participating in disease control programs specifically designed to address a specific disease in a specific species of livestock.

Section 4. That chapter 40-3 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows: Nothing in this Act prohibits any person from voluntarily participating in the national animal identification system."

It is rather naive to think that premises registration is free and voluntary. Once a person has registered his or her premises it's only a matter of time before it's mandatory to tag and track every animal. It doesn't make any sense to register a premises and not identify animals. USDA has already spent 118 million tax dollars of yours and mine to bribe the states, FFA, breed organizations, NCBA, NPPA, Farm Bureau, and National Milk Producers Association in the form of cooperative agreements that mandate premises registration. This is just for registering premises! The data base for holding the names of registrants and the movements of all of the livestock in the USA hasn't even been built yet. Who knows what this is going to cost? Some estimates have went so far as to say the implementation of the NAIS will cost $500 million for the first 6 years. In June of 2006, A Farm Bureau spokesman said the price tag for the NAIS could run as high as $100 million a year.
Ohio and Colorado are coercing 4H children to register their parents property with the state and federal government in order to show their animals in the county and state fair! This is illegal solicitation of a minor and is absolutely appalling! N.C. won't let farmers have hay for a drought disaster program unless they register their premises. This is discrimination and is appalling as well! In Wisc. and Mich. premises registration and animal identification are mandatory.

Kenny Fox

Belvidere S.D, "

Barbara wrote on Mar 16, 2008 10:49 AM:

" Mr. Brandt's letter sounds like a USDA press release. Obviously he believes the slop that the USDA is feeding. NAIS violates several Constitutional amendments and won't work in the real world. Just ask the Australian rancher who gave this speech:
http://www.r-calfusa.com/News%20Releases/2008/080304-fight.htm
To know who wants NAIS, you only need to follow the money. Big Ag and the data technology companies that comprise NIAA will make a killing by using the warm, fuzzy feeling that NAIS gives to the uninitiated in their marketing, while destroying more small farms under unnecessary, burdensome regulations.
As the owner of a small horse farm, I do not need NAIS to tell me if I have a horse that doesn't feel well or if there is a disease of concern in my area. The only diseases I fear are the ones that USDA plans on allowing into this country because they have lowered importation regulations and don't know how to do a proper quarantine on imported animals. USDA needs to do their current job better, rather than impose useless, expensive, and invasive programs on small farms that aren't the source of disease. If industry wants to track their livestock, they should develop their own system that doesn't include the rest of us as hostages. "

Thomas Jones wrote on Mar 16, 2008 9:11 AM:

" You are nuts! The USDA is not required by law to keep this information confidential. Unless the Senate version of the Farm bill is passed and is singed into law and continues to have section 10305 in place the data on every farm and farmer will be open to a FOIA request. Do you want to have every news paper in the country plastering your information across the front page the next time some plant in Chino Ca screws up?

NAIS carries with it expenses that have not been discussed in the public. For example: you will need a computer, a broad band internet connection, a microchip reader, software both for the computer and for the microchip reader, man hours to document and report every movement of every animal that arrives or leaves the premises, sacrificing your first, fourth, fifth, and fourteenth amendment rights under the constitution just to name a few.

There are currently procedures in place for tracking and treating disease outbreaks. Proven systems that work and will not be enhanced by NAIS. Speaking as a consumer I feel less safe with NAIS.
"

wake up people wrote on Mar 16, 2008 8:26 AM:

" Tracking disease is not new. In 1938-Nazi Germany targeted one segment of society they thought responsible for spreading disease, the JEWS. A law was passed that ALL JEWS had to register their property.Every piece of property they own into a massive database. IT worked. The Gestapo knew exactly who to raid by the value of their art and jewelry. We know the rest of the story, a minor event called the Holocaust!

In the same time period, the Russian Communist Govt under Stalin starved millions of farmers in the most fertile part of the country because the law stated that ALL the farms and what was grown on them belonged to the government! They were not even allowed to eat what they grew!

"

texas person wrote on Mar 16, 2008 8:24 AM:

" The USDA is caliming that those who oppose NAIS are spreading misinformation. Yet how can it be misinformation to disagree with something? How can it misinformation to tell others what is in the NAIS document; registration, chipping and filing movement reports and possibly losing your critters to depopulation? The USDA claimed they wanted our input, yet when we did, they published a booklet on how to handle people who oppose NAIS.

If NAIS is such a great program, why are there so many anti-NAIS websites popping up showing how NAIS will not be a good thing simply by reading the NAIS document? The GAO is currently running an investigation into all the problems in NAIS, even though they missed the most obvious one, like the fact the majority of the American livestock owners, who, when they find out about NAIS, overwhelmingly DO NOT want it!

"

esbee wrote on Mar 16, 2008 8:21 AM:

" While the USDA is giving corporate ag and factory farming all sorts of breaks, the rest of us who own even one chicken, even as pets, willl have to register our premises with the govt, microchip and file reports on all births, deaths and off property movements within 24 hrs or face huge fines. If disease is suspected the USDA can come in and depopulate a 6 mile radius (140 sq mi.) Reason- so big ag can tell the global market what a safe food supply we have and sell to japan...goofy, i know but it gets worse...see nonais.org for more info on how nais will affect all who eat! "

susan wrote on Mar 16, 2008 8:20 AM:

" Let's have a special program to make soccer moms feel safe about protecting their kids from disease because kids do carry and spread diseases and those germs are certainly on everything they touch. First they register their homes with the government, and identify all soccer balls and equipment by microchipping, heck, stick a chip in the kids, too. Then file reports with the government after every soccer game and practice, scanning what equipment was used. Then use this information to show the world that our professional big league soccer teams are disease-free and can travel to other countries to play soccer against other pro teams. Makes about as much sense as me reporting where I ride my horse so corporate ag can tell the world how safe our beef supply is from FMD or BSE!!!! But that is NAIS in the nuttiest nutshell you will ever see!!!! "

susan wrote on Mar 16, 2008 8:06 AM:

" NAIS may be beneficial to Mr. Brandt but he is a large producer. How can someone who owns a potbelly pig in suburbia be on the same level as someone who raises pork for market. Yet, under NAIS, the owner of that pet pig would be under more rules and regs than Mr. Brandt. They have to register their premise, thereby becoming a stakeholder, thereby putting title to that property in jeopardy.

That same pet pig would have to be microchipped at cost to the owner (though Mr. Brandt probably only gets one lot number per group of pigs. Mr. Pet Pig owner has the cost of vet call ($60?) chip and scanner ($500?) and computer to file reports movement and death events to the USDA. That same pig owner would have to file movement reports when they take their little piggy to the vet, a piggy show or for walks down the street if it meets or comingles with other livestock. Then if Mr. Brandt's pigs are found or even suspected of a disease, and that pet pot belly pig is within 6 miles of Mr. Brandt's farm, the pet pot belly pig would be depopulated along with the herd of pigs it never met. "

Gisela wrote on Mar 16, 2008 12:26 AM:

" Paul I am a consumer and NAIS has nothing to do with consumer confidence. Any plant such as Hallmark/Westland has rules and regulation including animal welfare already in place, heck they even have rules for processing cows. But did they follow them? Even you who raises hogs I would hope that you practice quality control, practice animal welfare and abide the by laws and regulations that are in place to produce food. It is the Plants that ultimately ruined Consumer confidence due to not following the rules and regulations already set in place. One only had to look at all the recalls and see that there are no small farmers, hobbyist on the lists. It is the plants that are not following your guided principle of being a good steward of animal health and producers of safe food.

Its amazing how you, the state vets and the USDA keep saying this is a voluntary program, its not and it will be implemented via tactics such as in transportation, its being implemented as mandatory at State Fairs, Its being implemented via Health certificates I do know one thing Paul that you have not read any of the documents, but have been fed what the Farm Bureau and pork producers have fed you. Read the documents and see what all livestock owners are reading and then you will see what we will have to go through. Do you even realize that this premises id number is permanently assigned to your property, even if you sell to someone who never intends to raise livestock..

Paul what makes you think that you are the only responsible steward of animal health? I certainly do not think a premises id is going to protect my animals. Only I as a owner is the true steward of animal health and I know my horses.

Even you will have to call a vet should one of your hogs gets sick unless you just take your hog and shoot it. No one is stopping the state vet from doing his job... The owner is the first responder to any disease issue and always have been. The owner knows their animals. When that animal is sick, down or what ever, it is the owner who calls the vet. Not the state vet but a vet. That vet then will determine and or test that the animal. If its a reportable disease it is the VET who notifies the state vet.... How in the world have you people managed for so long without NAIS is beyond my imagination..

Cooperative Agreements are a back door method that by pass the State Legislature and should be outlawed. These cooperative agreements if you do not realize are undermining your state sovereignty. Those cooperative Agreements are using our tax dollars to partner with private organizations. To further tax the people. You say there wont be a fee, mark my words nothing from the government is free and why should I have to pay when the laws are on the books. This program is the biggest money maker one can imagine and you are agreeing to it. You might want to get educated on the harm these cooperative agreements and or public private partnerships are doing to this country and its just not NAIS. So don't tout them to loudly.

You see you are the one who is being lead down the yellow brick road in believing that the NAIS will protect your hogs and eliminate any and or disease because you have a premises id that is assigned permanently to you land. Read the documents Paul and start thinking for yourself!
"

Comment on this story

Comments will be approved within 48 hours