"Boston Tea Party" Spirit Displayed at Animal ID Meeting in Conway –

Crowd Boos Government Speaker

Should you be unfamiliar with Animal ID,  Doreen Hannes, one of the speakers at the Conway  meeting explains it this way:.

 "The NAIS (National Animal Identification System), the shortest explanation that can be given of the proposed system is that anyone who has any type of livestock, say two chickens, will have to register their property, complete with global positioning satellite coordinates, microchip their chickens with an NAIS ISO11785 compliant chip, and report within 24 hours if said chickens ever leave the property, hatch out chicks (another chip required), go to the vet, or die.  No kidding .  It will require you to mark your animal in order to be able to buy and sell" 1  Any violation such as failing to report transfer of the animals could  result in $1,000 fine or more for each incident. 2

Another opponent of  animal ID describes it this way:  "The NAIS would actually subject the owner of a horse [or any other animal] to far more surveillance than the owner of a gun. You can freely take a shotgun to your neighbor’s property, but if your children ride their ponies there, that will have to be registered with the government." 3

Jane Williams, founder of ARAPA, Arkansas Animal Producer's Association, who organized the meeting,  told the  large crowd of 300 or more assembled in Conway on July 9, 2006.  "The proposed USDA (United States Department of Agriculture)  guidelines, published April 25, 2005, would prohibit an animal owner from taking an animal off of the owner's land unless that owner filed an application with the USDA for a FPI and then attached or injected an identification device in or on the animal on the farm or at a tagging facility."  This information  is included in her written "Testimony Submitted at the request of Senator Lincoln to the US  Committee on Agriculture." 4

The highlight of this meeting, opposing animal ID  at Conway July 9, 06, and certainly the most intense, was when Phil Wyrick, the government representative  spoke.  He basically tried to placate the audience and convince them he was one of them and that the government was there to help them. (He was wearing his cowboy hat while he spoke.)  About  5 minutes into his presentation he stated the USDA (United States Department of  Agriculture), who is responsible for this ID plan, was not their enemy.  At this point the crowd of about 300 revolted and erupted as the "Boston  Tea Party" spirit overtook the crowd.  They  booed and yelled questions at him. 

 When Wyrick  continued to try to speak, other comments were yelled out to him pointing out that the things he was saying  did not align with the NAIS draft.  It was evident that he was not getting anywhere with the crowd.  They were too informed and too angry for him to have a chance with them.   Wyrick is executive director of the Arkansas Livestock and Poultry Commission, a state agency that regulates livestock producers.

These people didn't accept for a minute  this "government expert" propaganda for truth like so many legislators and others have done and are doing.  They had studied the facts, had  the documents on hand, knew the page numbers for reference, and knew the material better than the government expert and knew how to confront him –and confront him they did!  After all, their very livelihood and freedom were at stake!

Doreen Hannes from Missouri with Liberty Ark Coalition followed Wyrick.  She was passionate, focused, and indignant over the intrusive and destructive plan the government is trying to impose upon US citizens.  She was articulate, blunt, and to the point.   She informed Wyrick that it really didn't matter what he had to say –  because when you deal with the government, it is the written rules and regulations that must be followed; and federal regulations trump state regulations and law.  Then she pointed out some of those rules and regulations in the NAIS guidelines that are contrary to what Arkansans are being told.  She asked how many had read the guidelines.  Many in the crowd had.  She held up the NAIS  guidelines and asked Wyrick point blank if he had read them.  He answered, " No, there are too many big words in it."   

Hannes pointed out that the NAIS draft guidelines say the animal ID  program will be mandatory on page 10  while people in Arkansans are being told it is voluntary and other falsehoods.  She stated that once the federal plan is in place, the state plan will have little relevance. (Research confirms that the National Animal Identification System, State-Federal-Industry Draft Strategic Plan 2005-2009, does indeed say under  the heading "Transition from Voluntary to Mandatory, Phased In Approach , "January 2009 – "The animal tracking component will become mandatory." p. 10.  On page  9 the guidelines reads, " USDA will follow the normal rulemaking process in changing the status of NAIS from voluntary to  mandatory.)  5 Link to these guidelines: http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/about/pdf/NAIS_Draft_Strategic_Plan_42505.pdf

"NAIS was spawned by international entanglements," Hannes explained, "not by consumers and the need for protection from diseases as the public is being led to believe."   She explained that we are now complying with the international mandates imposed by treaties that are violating  our own constitution.   WTO, SPS, TBT,  FAO, Codex, and OIE  (and how they interrelate with NAIS and the United Nations) were some of the acronyms and organizations she briefly discussed. 6

Evidently these so called  uneducated farmers in Arkansas were not supposed to read these technical documents! (Oh the power of the internet!)  They were supposed to believe the local experts. They are being told that every state is developing its own guidelines!  This is technically true, but  those guidelines will be useless once the mandatory federal guidelines are in place.

Hannes told how just a few days before she successfully worked with legislators in Missouri where legislators passed a joint Senate and House resolution to keep the animal ID program voluntary, and in an appropriation bill stated the Missouri Department of Agriculture could not make the program mandatory without state legislation being passed. 7

Hannes explained how the USDA was circumventing the legislative branch and allowing  the Secretary of Agriculture dictatorial power.  She referred to page 9 of the NAIS Draft  of guidelines which says, "The Animal Health Protection Act (AHPA) ….provides ample authority to establish and implement either a mandatory or voluntary system of animal identification."  Hannes does not believe this Act gives this authority, based on her interpretation of  the Act and does not believe it is constitutional.   Two Congresses have tried, but failed, to pass legislation that would amend the Act to provide for a mandatory electronic tracking system for individual heads of livestock. Currently, there are three bills in Congress, trying to give postdated authority to the NAIS - HR 3170, and two companion bills, HR 1254 & 1256. If USDA is correct in asserting that it has authority, why does Congress keep attempting to pass legislation to give it to them?   8

Joel Gill from Mississippi explained how Animal ID will not prevent disease.  Creekstone Farms in Kansas has actually  sued the USDA because they won't allow them to test for mad cow disease – not even  to satisfy Japanese import regulations so they can export their cattle. 9 (Research proves this is a true statement) Japan has enough confidence in the test  to require it and Consumers Union advocates testing every animal slaughtered in the United States. Gill mentioned  a new  blood test for mad cow disease that could be in use in about 3 years for live cattle. 10  Joel Gill is the Southeastern Membership Chairman for R-CALF USA, a cattlemen's advocacy group.While NAIS is now touted as needed for disease tracking, it was actually developed more than a year and a half before the first case of Mad Cow was found in the U.S.  Further, "the first two cases of mad cow disease in the US came from Canada, and the USDA did not make this known for two months after the finding, leaving the world to believe they were of US origin, causing loss of exports for US farmers," Joel Gill stated.  11

Cattle could be imported from other countries without the same standards as US. Cattle.     They can be chipped or tagged after they arrive here and then either mingle with the US cattle.  Nothing in the standards would prevent these cattle from being sent directly  to a slaughter house according to p 26 of the "Draft Program Standards".  Only the government could be blind enough to see that this  fact in itself  would defeat any possible disease control gained through animal ID  in the US.  It would also give many other countries an advantage in price competition since they don't have to pay for all the animal ID costs.  12

  Gill explained how unreliable the database would be, explaining how cattle in Australia  are taxed,  and how one man was taxed for 1,500 cattle that he didn't have.  Upon investigation it was learned that the Australia database had 11 million cattle on their database that didn't exist.  Australia's identification system became mandatory in July 05. 13

 In her written testimony to the US Senate Committee on Agriculture, on behalf of the Arkansas Animal Producers Association,  Jane William states and told the crowd, "Large animal producers could market their animals by lots and use only one tag per house of animals whereas the small producer would need to tag every animal. The cost of a tag for fowl might well exceed the value of the bird. The small producer would need to tag every bird. Thousands of factory housed chickens or pigs could be slaughtered under one tag. This provision of NAIS establishes an unfair economic advantage for large producers.  There are no controls over what identification devices would cost. We are told that an electronic tag for a calf would cost about $3.00; however, Australians were told the same thing and they are now paying $35 to $37 per tag. In England the cost is reported to be $69 per animal."  This would allow the large farmers to drive the small farmer out of business, Williams contends.   14

One opponent summed up the situation this way.   Now ask yourself this; would you rather eat a cow that has been tested free of BSE (Mad Cow) or would you rather eat a cow that has a brand new NAIS compliant microchip and not tested and proven clean for BSE (mad cow disease)   No brainier right?  Well, our government doesn’t think it is scientific to test because they are not allowed by treaty without permission from other treaty holders."  15

 Surely this Animal ID situation and Conway meeting brings to mind the passage from the Declaration of Independence. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness...it is their right, it is their duty."

Jane William said she sent out invitations and information to all Arkansas legislators and asked for a show of hands of any of them that were present.  Senator Jim Holt for Lt. Governor was the only one that was there to learn more about it.  This fact was not brought out at the meeting, but Arkansas US Representative Mike Ross co-sponsored two bills establishing a national electronic livestock identification system, H.R. 3787 in 2004, 108th Congress and H.R. 1254 in the 05-06 109th Congress. To read Ross's own comment on this bill, go to this link:    http://agriculture.house.gov/hearings/108/10824.pdf pages 16 and 17   To read the bills he co-sponsored, see footnotes..  16

            Doreen Hannes made an interesting comment during her speech.  She said first they experiment with the animals and then it will be the people.  Research confirms that some people "believe all gun owners should be required to have a microchip implanted in their hand to be able to own a gun."  Technology for this is already in place and being used in people. See this link for that article and scroll down to the end of the article for links to several other similar articles.   http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38038 17

Wonder why we are not hearing any of this on the evening news! 

In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

Debbie Pelley

dpelley@cox-internet.com

Footnotes and Documentation

1.  NAIS SPAWNED BY INTERNATIONAL ENTANGLEMENTS by Doreen Hannes  http://libertyark.net/articles/hannes-040106.html

2..  "Also Texans face $1000.00 fine" over a baby chick. http://nonais.org/index.php/2006/01/30/texans-to-face-1000-fines-for-possession-of-baby-chick/  and Guest Column, Fax Storm Against NAIS By Walter Jeffries, Feb 22, 2006 from Magic City Morning Star http://magic-city-news.com/printer_5397.shtml,  Press Release by attachment by Jane Williams June 15 with this subject.  It is an attachment on that email

4.  From Magic City Morning Star http://magic-city-news.com/printer_5397.shtml, Guest Column, Fax Storm Against NAIS By Walter Jeffries, Feb 22, 2006, 15:37 and Senate Testimony to US Senate Committee on Agriculture on behalf of Arkansas Animal Producer's Association (ARAPA  by Jane Williams July 26, 06  http://arkansasanimalproducers.8k.com/whats_new.html

5.  NAIS SPAWNED BY INTERNATIONAL ENTANGLEMENTS by Doreen Hannes  http://libertyark.net/articles/hannes-040106.html and also go to Comment 5 on this link: http://nonais.org/index.php/2006/04/11/downsize-dc-on-nais/

6. See # 1 above  

7.  "NAIS Update" http://www.acresusa.com/toolbox/reprints/Jun06_NAISupdate.pdf

8. "Animal Health Protection Act "(history of AHPA)   http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/highlights/section2/section2-3.html and "NAIS:  Are you Ready?" By Karin Bergener http://www.thegaitedhorse.com/nais.htm  See Federal Plan section..

9.   March 23, 06 4TH LD: U.S. beef producer sues USDA to seek blanket BSE testing+ http://www.tmcnet.com/scripts/print-page.aspx?PagePrint=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tmcnet.com%2Fusubmit%2F2006%2F03%2F23%2F1485639.htm

10. "Government To Greatly Reduce Testing For Mad Cow Disease" by Libby Quaid  http://www.tbo.com/news/money/MGBYVV0VVPE.html and Liberty Ark home page: http://libertyark.net/

11.  Section NAIS  History 101 "NAIS:  Are you Ready?" By Karin Bergener http://www.thegaitedhorse.com/nais.htm  Section NAIS  History 101 and "Animal ID Problems in Other Countries. http://arkansasanimalproducers.8k.com/whats_new_4.html 

12  NAIS Draft Program Standards p. 26 http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/about/pdf/NAIS_Draft_Program_Standards_42505.pd

13.  See "Animal ID Problems in Other Countries. http://arkansasanimalproducers.8k.com/whats_new_4.html 

14. See # 4 above  

15. Go to # 5 on this page.  http://nonais.org/index.php/2006/04/11/downsize-dc-on-nais

16.  For H. R. 1254   go to this linkhttp://www.govtrack.us/data/us/bills.text/109/h1254.pdf.  H.R 3787 appears to be almost identical to H.R. 1254.  To read Ross's own comments on this bill, go to  http://agriculture.house.gov/hearings/108/10824.pdf  pages 16 and 17.  Read Phil Wyrick's comments on page 66 at this same link.

17." Paying For Drinks With Wave of Hand" by Sherrie Gossett http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38038

Other Great articles on Animal ID

I. Liberty Ark home page: http://libertyark.net/ has one of the best, simplest explanations of NAIS with these topics covered

The likely outcome of NAIS

The Federal Plan

History

The Alleged Rationale: Disease Control

The Alleged Rationale: Disease Control

The Real Reasons

The Secondary Alleged Rationale: The Export Market

A Technological Nightmare

Eradication of Small Farms

Loss of the True Security of Organic and Local Foods

Destruction of Personal Property Rights as We Know Them

Extreme Damage to Personal Privacy

Insult to Animal Welfare

Burden on Religious Freedom

Extraordinary Costs without Value

 II NAIS:  Are you Ready? By Karin Bergener   Karin Bergener, who  is an attorney and agricultural law activist in Ohio, is author of an excellent long article that covers almost every aspect of  Animal ID.  Following are the topics she discusses at this link.   http://www.thegaitedhorse.com/nais.htm 

What is NAIS? (Premises Registration, Animal Tagging, Animal Tracking)

NAIS History 101

The Federal Plan

Have I Voluntarily Registered?

So Why Do We Need NAIS?

Problems with NAIS

System Reliability

System Compatibility

Enforcement

The Database Myth

Constitutional Issues (Property, Privacy, Religious Freedom

So Who Wins with the NAIS?

Shifting to State Actions

THE RESULT OF NAIS

Movement Against Animal ID

 

    III  NAIS  Spawned By International Entanglements by Doreen Hannes is the best article on the international entanglements  and international agreements and treaties and history of NAIS. http://libertyark.net/articles/hannes-040106.html

 

Debbie Pelley

dpelley@cox-internet.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Hit Counter