No Mandatory Animal ID

I think Leo McDonnell, Past President of R-CALF USA, needs to get his story straight. At a recent get together in Mississippi he told the gathered crowd;

“R-CALF USA does not support the proposed Animal ID system,” he said. “It is hypocrisy to put such a costly and burdensome regulation on the U.S. industry while we lower our import standards to countries that could expose us to higher disease risk.”

Now I've always been disappointed with R-CALF for there lackluster attitude towards NAIS. I thought maybe Leo's statement was a shift from their position to a stronger negative position of this issue. I was wrong. Here we find R-CALF's position on NAIS.

R-CALF USA is committed to working with Congress and the Administration on animal identification to ensure:

The industry is fully informed of the expected costs and benefits of any proposed system;

Producer input is taken into account and weighed fully before any mandatory system is created;

If a single tracking database is created and submissions of producer data are mandated, the system is exclusively managed by the federal government in coordination with state and tribal animal health authorities; and

Any national identification system builds upon the success of existing animal identification systems, and there should be strong support for such systems and pilot projects that comply with national standards and protect producer data.

(emphasis added are mine)

What Leo said, and the above position don't jive. He needs to get his story straight. R-CALF's position is to work with the USDA to ensure before the mandatory system is in place that producers are aware of the costs and can publicly gripe about it. They also want the government to handle all the data, where it can be subject to Freedom of Information Act requests by anybody, and that existing methods of identification be taken into account. How in the hell does this position match the statement "R-CALF USA does not support the proposed Animal ID system?"

IT DOESN'T!!!!!

Like I said, R-Calf needs to take a strong position of opposition on this matter and they are dropping the ball. Too bad, they could have really increased their membership with a firm stance on this one. There is a lot of opposition to this out there to capitalize on. R-CALF should be taking advantage of it.

Leo, maybe you need to review the position on NAIS you proposed, you are being a typical politician and talking out of both sides of your mouth.

Walter over at NoNAIS asked me "Can you tell me more about how many big producers do you think are against NAIS?"

I don't know what I can tell you for sure. I only know of one producer, very large (10,000 head of mother cows), in the area that is for NAIS. Everybody else opposes it. A good organization that has producers of all shapes and sizes that has many questions about NAIS is R-CALF USA. Another organization in the State of Montana that opposes it is the Montana Cattleman's Association. How the producers in these organizations break out big and small I can't say for sure but knowing some of the bigger members, there are quite a few of the bigger operators that are opposed to NAIS. Their opposition usually breaks out the same as mine, where do I benefit? Prove it. Whether all this opposition in our state is going to get anything accomplished I don't know but I wanted to be a voice out there talking about it.

I personally don't see the pay-off to having an NAIS system in place. A large operation, like a small one, has to put pencil to paper and figure out if an expense is going to pay for itself. I might sell multiple semi loads of cattle a year but nobody out there is giving me a premium for ID animals over the money they are paying now so where is the advantage? How the expense of the NAIS is going to pay for itself is beyond me. The only people that truly want this system is the big meat packers.

The big meat packers are why NAIS is going to be a mandatory system and not a voluntary system. The USDA is in bed with the big meat packers and the packers don't want to have to only slaughter animals with ID's for foreign markets at one time and then have to slaughter animals with no ID for the domestic market. This would mess up the way they just throw it all together and call it quality beef. This has been the meat packers opposition to Country Of Origin Labeling (COOL) also. Having to segregate what they slaughter would cost them money. Easier and cheaper for them to buy off the government and have the cost of a system on the little producers so they can avoid it entirely. So really this fight is the meat packers/USDA against everybody else who owns animals. Getting them to see and understand that is the problem.

The question I would have for producers of common cattle, sheep, goats, chickens or any other critter affected by this is what price premium are you getting for critters with id's in them? Not promises of premiums, actual premiums. I've seen very little of this and I don't expect to. That's why the smart operators are opposing this, there is no benefit.

Remember, an ear tag, ID number, or premise ID, never stopped a disease or guaranteed a premium for your animals.

So what is my favorite organization to hate, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), up to now. First they say they are abandoning the private database concept of National Animal Identification System (NAIS) when talking to the foes of NAIS, R-CALF, and then turns around and tells the U.S. Animal Identification Organization, the people who are setting up the private database, to continue it's work to build a consolidated database of all animals as envisioned. Sounds like they are trying to blow smoke up my ass if you ask me. Tell the foes of it what they want to hear and then continue on just as you are doing.

This whole NAIS issue needs to stay on the front burner where it can be seen by everybody and I am doing all I can to do this. NAIS does not mean food security. It means the death of small farmers and ranchers every where who can't afford the cost and abuse this system will bring to all of us, big and small. Remember, an ear tag, ID number, or premise ID, never stopped a disease. Proper health and nutrition by caring people, not factory farms, provide disease prevention.

USDA abandons private database concept for NAIS

USDA, after hearing strong opposition from the industry, has abandoned its earlier decision to allow a single private entity to manage the livestock movement database in connection with the National Animal Identification System (NAIS).

But that wasn't the only major announcement from the agency concerning NAIS:

The agency's NAIS coordinator, Neil Hammerchmidt, told last week's meeting of R-CALF USA that there won't be a mandatory ID program by 2009, as previously announced.

And, he said, USDA attorneys are researching whether they have the legal authority to require producers to report livestock movement to a private entity.

This sure looks to me like a bunch of Government speak. I will attempt to decipher it.

"Since people don't like the idea of a private database we will just have the government keep the database and announce that there will be no mandatory program reporting to a private database. This will lull all the opposition to this program, like R-CALF, into thinking it won't be mandatory program down the line in 2009."

Yes, all they are saying is that they won't have a mandatory program that reports to a private database, not that there won't be a program. We need to keep up the pressure on this issue to stop the USDA from handing over production of all our food to the big corporations and factory farms who support the NAIS system. Remember, no ear tag ever stopped a disease.

R-CALF Mtg: Australian Cattleman Tells Of ID Shortcomings

From cattle producer Athol Economou's perspective, Australia's national animal identification system is virtually useless, and the true costs are unknown.

Economou, also a representative of the Australian Beef Association, made his remarks Friday at the R-CALF United Stockgrowers of America's annual convention in Denver, as attendees were being brought up to date on the construction progress of the U.S. traceback system.

Many U.S. producers are wary of the new system, and Economou's comments didn't do much to calm their fears.

Under the Australian program is mandatory, Economou said, and was initiated independently by each state over time.

To sell an animal, the animal must have the property identification code on an ear and tail tag plus a vender declaration that includes what the animal has been fed and its veterinary history, Economou said. The vender declaration says the seller believes the animal is wholesome or it states the seller doesn't know.

Each time an animal is sold, the information must go to a central database, Economou said. In theory, the current owner is responsible for keeping up the information flow. Buyers and packers are required to inform the database either of the purchase or of the slaughter.

This isn't the first time I've read about how Australians aren't happy with their system and to watch out in designing ours. The funny thing is that the USDA keeps holding up the Australian system as an example of what we want to do in the US. Beware the NAIS. It's the government getting in our pockets and freedom for their benefit, not ours.

Herd Identification System (HIS).

[sarcasm]Interesting[/sarcasm] commentary from Mike John of the National Cattleman's Beef Association (NCBA), (the right arm of the meat packers) on the HIS.

As chairman, I have spent many hours working with my fellow commission members to move us toward a voluntary, producer-led solution to this issue.

Voluntary? How can a program that is mandated by the federal government be considered voluntary? Producer-led? The NCBA is led by the Meat packers, not producers so how can a program led by the NCBA be producer-led? Must be some good drugs around to make these statements.

He says critics like me are spreading lies about the system. I've never said a word above and beyond the ear tags don't stay in and I don't see that it is necessary to do, but lets approach his points.

NCBA’s just doing this to make money.

NCBA is not in this to make money, I agree. The NCBA is in on this because the meat packers want a system they can get information from to discriminate against producers of cattle that they deem to be sub quality or from producers that give them trouble. There is all ready anecdotal information (I can't find Internet links for it, sorry) that meat packers in Australia are doing just this so it's not a stretch to think the meat packers will do it here. Since the NCBA is controlled by the meat packers the NCBA is doing it.

USDA is handing this issue off to the NCBA.

USDA, NCBA, it doesn't matter, both organizations are controlled by the meat packers.

Cattlemen will be better served by a government system.

Hell, the last thing I want to see is the Government involved in this thing. One look at Hurricane Katrina ought to prove that to anybody.

If NCBA’s plan moves forward, it will have too much industry control.

NCBA does not plan to operate or control the national animal movement database once it is operational. Instead, we plan to turn it over to a non-profit, multi-species consortium that is independent of NCBA.

Prove it!!! I bet this organization they plan could be called the Independent Council of the Meat Packers, exactly who they are designing the system for.

Vendors will make all the money from this system.

It's a government mandated system, people who sell ear tags and tagging systems will make money. Who cares, if it wasn't a mandated system I wouldn't care.

We don’t really need animal ID.

If anyone still believes this, they simply are not paying attention to the industry. If you don’t believe that source verification is important, ask McDonald’s why they are paying a premium for it. If you don’t believe animal ID is important to our international trading partners, just look at the struggle we have endured to get market access back after being derailed by a single case of BSE. While we do not feel that animal ID should be mandated by the government, we believe the marketplace is already handing down an economic mandate that will provide cattlemen opportunities. To reap these benefits, cattlemen need a solution right now, not in three to five years.

As I've stated, I don't agree with this. I don't see where the HIS is necessary. My brand has worked good for years and the state of Montana can track cattle to me via the present brand in less than 24 hours. That's the goal of the system, so why do we need this expensive system using ear tags that isn't going to work properly, right now tests have it reading accurately less than 90% of the time, when the brand has worked good for centuries?

R-calf is starting to take a stance on this to get it out of the NCBA's hands. I applaud this and support them. If we have to do this, get it out of the NCBA's hands. Who's to administer it that producers can trust I can't say but I don't want to see the Government or NCBA involved.

I do have on question I would like to throw to the NCBA now. Why do you as an organization oppose Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) but support HIS? You support HIS because it lets the government/meat packers know where the cattle are coming from but oppose COOL which would let consumers know where their meat is coming from. Explain the difference to me? They look like the same thing in the long run.

Why the difference? I can answer this. The meat packers like to mix US ground beef with foreign sources of meat and they don't want to have to stop doing this and pawning the whole product off on consumers as US beef and COOL would stop them from doing this while HIS doesn't. NCBA=Meat packers. I told you.