Jeffrey Quick's Blog

I did not see chickens mentioned on the site you provided.

At least under the current plan, animals that never leave a premises do not need to be identified. If this is maintained in future versions, NAIS is doing the job preventing spread of animal-borne diseases.

Huh? Try the first sentence.


As for the exception you note,
http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/newsroom/factsheets/nais_qa_factsheet.shtml#20

Q. If a Person Raises Animals for His or Her Own Use and the Animals Never Leave the Owner's Property, Do They Need to be Identified?

A. Under the current plan, animals that never leave a premises do not need to be identified. However, animal owners are encouraged to identify their animals and their premises, regardless of the number of animals present, since many animal diseases may be spread whether an animal leaves its home premises or not. Examples of such diseases include West Nile virus, foot-and-mouth disease, vesicular stomatitus, and equine infectious anemia.

So, let's look at our best case scenario. We're free from interference IF we we have a closed herd or flock and are raising all our own young, with a frozen genetic pool AND we slaughter on-premises for home use. That pretty much wipes out homestead production right there, as the scale which would permit continuous closed production is larger than the bellies of the average family. If you get 25 meat chicks from a hatchery, you're going to have to have premises registration at the least.

The benefits are illusory. This is the same USDA which FORBID a beef exporter from VOLUNTARILY testing every cow for BSE. If small producers are driven out of the business, the food supply will become less safe, because more annimals will be commingled in unsanitary conditions.

And this is not even considering that it's none of the government's goddamned business what personal property I own.

And which .gov address are you viewing from, Mr. Anonymous?

Furthermore, last time I checked, NAIS had provisions for large producers to register large groups of animals that stayed together and were intended to be slaughtered together AS ONE ANIMAL. Thus the NAIS is totally worthless for disease monitoring/protection.

Clearly the real purpose of the NAIS is to cement the advantage of large-scale meat producers, not to prevent disease.

Where should I move? The US is turning into too much of a nanny state for my taste. Canada and most of Western Europe is even worse.

Furthermore, last time I checked, NAIS had provisions for large producers to register large groups of animals that stayed together and were intended to be slaughtered together AS ONE ANIMAL. Thus the NAIS is totally worthless for disease monitoring/protection.

Why do you think that is worthless? If the "group" is registered and a disease is detected, the entire group is destroyed. It would hurt the larger producers, not help them.

To the anonymouse from Case:

Don't move! Fight it out. As bizarre as this government has gotten, I still think it's the last best hope for freedom and civilization. You might buy a little time by moving to the parts of the West that haven't been Californicated. But Ohio can still be worked with, I think.

To the anonymouse from SBC:

When a disease is detected in a CAFO herd or other large operation, the herd is destroyed now, without NAIS. So the direct net effect for the large producer will be negligible.He will have expenses, but they will be spread over a large number of animals. Meanwhile, the smallholder will have to chip each animal, and even if herd identification were available, there would be a smaller number of animals to spread expense over, thus putting him at a competitive disadvantage.

Q. Can Animals be Identified as a Group?
A. Yes, an animal production system can use group/lot identification if the animal owner is able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of State animal health officials that, through group identification and production records, 1) traceback to all premises that have had direct contact with a suspect animal can occur within 48 hours, and 2) the potential for commingling does not exist. Each group will be identified with a unique and standardized number. Verifiable records will be required to further document premises identification and dates of movement.

(USDA, op.cit.)

There would be a smaller number of animals to spread expense over, thus putting him at a competitive disadvantage.

It is interesting that PETA has not got involved with this.

In relationship to "competitive intelligence", how is this any different than how our economy works now, especially when it relates to human health. The people that can produce and sell at a lower price, without harming people, get more business.

Well, yes, it is interesting . PETA probably thinks it is in the interest of their goals for mandatory NAIS to go through. And it probably is, though they also have to consider the effect of fewer people actively caring for animals, and what that will do to the culture as a whole. OTOH, politically they really can't come out in favor of NAIS either. To do so would be to lend their approval to animal agriculture, and coming out in favor of such Big Brotherdom would not help their piublic image either (not that they've been particularly concerned with good taste).

As for competition, I'm all for it...but I'm very against government weighting the scales for one side or the other. One of the beauties of a free market is that one can pretty much get any need or desire met, for a price. There are higher-quality alternatives to factory chicken and eggs. Under NAIS, quantity will shrink and prices go up. I've grown pasture-fed eggs, and there's no comparicon in quality. They probably cost me more in inputs than supermarket eggs. But they are also worth more. Right now I'm experimenting with a batch of Cornish Cross chicks. Input costs are at $2.05/bird right now. Assuming my feed holds out for another 5 weeks, my price/lb should be comparable to store chicken, and if last year's cull roosters from my egg birds are any indication, quality will be vastly much better. There's labor, but not much, and it's fun, and the wife and I have enjoyed sitting under the apple tree, killing chickens to the sound of automatic weapons fire from the nearby quarry (Gods, I LOVE the country!)

Very good site, congratulations!

I mostly agree with your views on NAIS, except the statement of inserting RFID into animals will cause them pain. Perhaps the initial procedure may cause pain, but is this permanent or is it more like going to get a shot at the doctor? Will the technology improve causing the initial procedural pain to decrease or be eliminated all together, therby enhancing the long-term benefits in the future?

Microchips can cause cancer and wander throughout the body. And the one to be used in NAIS is reprogrammable!

The Australian version of NAIS is a fiasco: 30% failure rate of chips and readers, the high fines the owners have to pay for computer glitches, 11 million phantom cattle in the database AND they are losing their global market!

The USDA has spent over 150 million of our tax dollars to push this program because corporate ag wants to be able to say the meat they sell meat on the global level is safe from mad cow or other diseases. But while corporate ag gets a free ride by having one lot number per groups of animals, me and other private animal owners will do all the work and costs of tagging and tracking our privately owned animals, and corporate ag gets all the profits and very few reporting events. In other words, I tell the govt when and where I ride my horse, pay for microchipping, lose title to my private property by signing up for the program, risk losing my healthy horse to depopulation should animal disease be suspected in a 140 sq mile area, just so corporate ag can tell Japan their product is safe. I am amazed that NAIS is not being covered on conservative talk radio....the one time I did call in the host poopooed me and accused me of wanting to get everyone else angry because I was. It was Mark Davis WBAP Dallas and he even supports smokers' rights, but thought I was crazy. And yes, I am angry at having my constitutional amendments broken, my freedoms taken away just to benefit big ag!!!! He just did not get it.