Just Us N Texas
Well-Known Member
FYI...
Sharlyn
Homola Horse Haven
Home of HJ BeiJing (Bey Shah+ x Bint Nejran)
Umpqua, OR
www.HomolaHorseHaven.com
"God, grant me the SERENITY to accept the things I cannot change...
COURAGE to change the things I can... and the WISDOM to know the
difference..."
----- Forwarded Message ----
Farmers fear a barnyard Big Brother
Nathan W. Armes / For The Times
CONTEST: Brandi Calderwood and her steer were disqualified at the
Colorado State Fair because she had not registered in the ID program.
“It’s just way too much Big Brother,” her mother said.
A federal database of animals to fight disease outbreaks is a threat to
privacy and family operations, critics say.
By Nicole Gaouette, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
January 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- After days of parading around her beefy black steer in
the dung-scented August heat at the Colorado State Fair, Brandi
Calderwood made the final competition. For months, the 16-year-old
worked from dawn well past dusk, fitting in the work around school, to
feed, train and clean her steer. But just before the last round, when
the animals are sold, fair officials disqualified her.
They alleged that Brandi had not properly followed a new and
controversial rule that required children to register their farms with
a federal animal tracking system. After heated words, the Calderwoods
were told to leave. A security guard trailed Brandi and her mother,
even to the restroom.
"Emotionally she went through the wringer and didn't get the honor of
showing in the sale. For a 16-year-old, that's a big deal," said Cathy
Calderwood, Brandi's mother.
A Bush administration initiative, the National Animal Identification
System is meant to provide a modern tool for tracking disease outbreaks
within 48 hours, whether natural or the work of a bioterrorist. Most
farm animals, even exotic ones such as llamas, will eventually be
registered. Information will be kept on every farm, ranch or stable.
And databases will record every animal movement from birth to
slaughterhouse, including trips to the vet and county fairs.
But the system is spawning a grass-roots revolt.
Family farmers see it as an assault on their way of life by a federal
bureaucracy with close ties to industrial agriculture. They point out
that they will have to track every animal while vast commercial
operations will be allowed to track whole herds.
Privacy advocates say the database would create an invasive, detailed
electronic record of farmers' activities. Religious farming
communities, such as the Amish and Mennonites, fear the system is a
manifestation of the Mark of the Beast foretold in the Book of
Revelation.
And despite the administration's insistence that the program is
voluntary, farmers and families, such as the Calderwoods, chafe at the
heavy-handed and often mandatory way states have implemented it,
sometimes with the help of sheriff's deputies.
The result is a system meant to help farms that many farmers oppose.
"It's totally ridiculous," said Joaquin Contente, who oversees 1,700
Holsteins on his Hanford, Calif., dairy farm. Contente said existing
regulations in California and other states meant his cows and their
movements were well-documented.
"We already have a good paper trail. It will be more of a burden for
the small-to-average producer," said Contente, who worries about the
expense for an average-size farm like his.
Run by the Department of Agriculture, the system is meant to help
combat threats such as avian flu and mad cow disease.
"Right now, we have six different disease-eradication programs, and
they don't always communicate with each other, and they're paper
intensive," said Bruce Knight, a USDA undersecretary. "That worked fine
in the last century, but that isn't the way to run a rapid response
system in the 21st century."
Cattle groups were working on a registration system when, in 2003, a
mad cow disease scare in Washington state set the industry on edge. A
diseased Canadian cow entered the U.S. with 81 other cows, but only 29
could be found. More than 250 animals from 10 different herds were
destroyed in the investigation.
Foreign beef trade stopped immediately, with industry losses estimated
at $2 billion to $4 billion. Trade still has not fully recovered.
Within the cattle industry, the database is seen as essential to
restore U.S. exports in the international market. There are more than
100 million beef cattle and about 10 million dairy cows in the United
States. The world's largest beef consumer, the European Union, is
sensitive to mad cow disease because of outbreaks in Britain.
The first stage of the animal ID system involves free registration of
the "premises" where livestock are kept. That seven-digit number is
stored by the federal government, which had registered 440,997 farms as
of last week, out of 1.43 million.
The second stage, now under way, involves identifying animals with a
microchip or a plastic or metal ear tag containing a 15-digit code.
Federal officials aim to register cattle, bison, poultry, swine, sheep,
goats, deer, elk, horses, mules, donkeys, burros, llamas and alpacas.
Household pets are not included.
The third stage, not yet in effect, would require farmers to report
animal movements to the database within 24 hours.
Farms that move animals in bulk from feedlot to slaughterhouse can get
one animal ID for the entire herd. But smaller farmers who move and
sell animals individually would have to get each animal an ID at a cost
of about $1.50 apiece.
Small farmers are complaining about the cost of ID microchips and
technology readers, as well as the labor costs involved in tracking and
tagging animals.
"The small guy will get hit the hardest," said Pam Potthoff, of Women
Involved in Farm Economics, whose family runs a cow and calf farm in
Trenton, Neb.
Other farmers argue that a one-size-fits-all system is not appropriate.
"Where is the scientific proof that small farmers pose the same disease
risk as large confined feeding operations?" asked Judith McGeary, an
Austin, Texas, farmer and lawyer, who founded the Farm and Ranch
Freedom Alliance to fight the database system. "I could have been
convinced that there were benefits to this program if they had come
back and said here are the studies, here's the epidemiology."
McGeary, who raises grass-fed lamb, free-range poultry and laying hens,
said the program could cripple smaller family farms and organic
growers. "It will be impossible to report every death, every coyote
carrying off a chicken; you just can't," she said.
Some Amish and Mennonite farmers have left agriculture rather than
comply, said lawyer Mary-Louise Zanoni, who volunteers to work for the
farmers. They are troubled by a passage in Revelation 13:16-18. Those
verses tell of an evil force that will manifest itself as an outside
entity, like a government, that forces people to buy or sell things
under a numbering system. "We feel the premises registration, animal ID
issue, is an act of the anti-Christ," a group of Old Order Amish
farmers wrote in a letter to Wisconsin agriculture officials.
The USDA's Knight said he was aware of the Amish's concerns but
countered that one common-sense solution was to sign these communities
up for a premises ID and not for individual animal IDs. He dismissed
reports that Amish or Mennonite farmers had given up farming because of
the system. "This is rife with rumor," he said.
The administration originally wanted mandatory participation in the
database when it was unveiled in 2005, but an outcry from farmers and
ranchers forced a shift to voluntary registration. Agriculture
officials warned, however, that the program would remain voluntary only
if enough farms participated. One draft plan commits the department to
meet by 2011 "necessary levels of participation," defined as 70% of
animals in a species.
States and farm groups, such as the National Cattlemen's Foundation,
can implement the system as they want. In fact, President Bush has not
registered his Crawford, Texas, ranch or the eight head of cattle he
keeps, according to a White House spokesman.
Opponents of the ID system, however, say USDA actions are making the
program virtually compulsory. Since 2004, USDA has pledged more than
$51 million to states and farm groups to promote premises registration
-- but they must register a certain number of farms to get the money.
"They only get the money if they get the performance," said Knight, who
acknowledged "a great deal of resistance out there."
Some states have responded by registering farms in less than voluntary
ways.
Idaho, New York and Massachusetts issued premises numbers to livestock
owners unasked. Texas adopted regulations for elk that initially
required microchips and a report of any movements "by the close of the
next business day." Wisconsin told milk producers that cheese plants
could not take milk from farms without a premises number. North
Carolina announced that only farmers with a premises ID could receive
drought aid.
Michigan required any cattle leaving a farm to have radio-frequency ID
chips with individual numbers. When one farmer in East Jordan refused,
arguing that he sells from his 20-head herd only to people he knows,
the state agriculture department showed up with a search warrant,
sheriff's deputies and state troopers to tag and test his animals.
Many farmers also deeply resent the way USDA's youth programs,
including 4H and Future Farmers of America, are requiring children like
Brandi Calderwood to register.
"This is like the government saying your kids can't be in your
community soccer program unless you register your home with the
government," Cathy Calderwood said. "It's just way too much Big
Brother."
The Calderwoods and some other families had registered their animals
with the county fairground's number because fair rules had simply
called for a "valid" number. After disqualifying Brandi, officials said
she could stay if she registered her farm. The Calderwoods, opponents
of the database, refused.
Fair officials paid Brandi the sum she would have gotten for her steer,
but Brandi said: "It is too bad that the state fair had to ruin my
experience."
John Stulp, Colorado's agriculture commissioner, said that 480 other
fair-goers registered without complaint and suggested that some
resistance was simply a reaction to change.
Statewide, about 28% of the premises are registered, he said, but more
are needed to safeguard Colorado's $16-billion agriculture industry.
"We have a responsibility to protect and enhance our agriculture
industry," Stulp said. "Part of that is to make sure we rapidly respond
to some kind of disease outbreak or threat in our state."
[email protected]
Sharlyn
Homola Horse Haven
Home of HJ BeiJing (Bey Shah+ x Bint Nejran)
Umpqua, OR
www.HomolaHorseHaven.com
"God, grant me the SERENITY to accept the things I cannot change...
COURAGE to change the things I can... and the WISDOM to know the
difference..."
----- Forwarded Message ----
Farmers fear a barnyard Big Brother
Nathan W. Armes / For The Times
CONTEST: Brandi Calderwood and her steer were disqualified at the
Colorado State Fair because she had not registered in the ID program.
“It’s just way too much Big Brother,” her mother said.
A federal database of animals to fight disease outbreaks is a threat to
privacy and family operations, critics say.
By Nicole Gaouette, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
January 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- After days of parading around her beefy black steer in
the dung-scented August heat at the Colorado State Fair, Brandi
Calderwood made the final competition. For months, the 16-year-old
worked from dawn well past dusk, fitting in the work around school, to
feed, train and clean her steer. But just before the last round, when
the animals are sold, fair officials disqualified her.
They alleged that Brandi had not properly followed a new and
controversial rule that required children to register their farms with
a federal animal tracking system. After heated words, the Calderwoods
were told to leave. A security guard trailed Brandi and her mother,
even to the restroom.
"Emotionally she went through the wringer and didn't get the honor of
showing in the sale. For a 16-year-old, that's a big deal," said Cathy
Calderwood, Brandi's mother.
A Bush administration initiative, the National Animal Identification
System is meant to provide a modern tool for tracking disease outbreaks
within 48 hours, whether natural or the work of a bioterrorist. Most
farm animals, even exotic ones such as llamas, will eventually be
registered. Information will be kept on every farm, ranch or stable.
And databases will record every animal movement from birth to
slaughterhouse, including trips to the vet and county fairs.
But the system is spawning a grass-roots revolt.
Family farmers see it as an assault on their way of life by a federal
bureaucracy with close ties to industrial agriculture. They point out
that they will have to track every animal while vast commercial
operations will be allowed to track whole herds.
Privacy advocates say the database would create an invasive, detailed
electronic record of farmers' activities. Religious farming
communities, such as the Amish and Mennonites, fear the system is a
manifestation of the Mark of the Beast foretold in the Book of
Revelation.
And despite the administration's insistence that the program is
voluntary, farmers and families, such as the Calderwoods, chafe at the
heavy-handed and often mandatory way states have implemented it,
sometimes with the help of sheriff's deputies.
The result is a system meant to help farms that many farmers oppose.
"It's totally ridiculous," said Joaquin Contente, who oversees 1,700
Holsteins on his Hanford, Calif., dairy farm. Contente said existing
regulations in California and other states meant his cows and their
movements were well-documented.
"We already have a good paper trail. It will be more of a burden for
the small-to-average producer," said Contente, who worries about the
expense for an average-size farm like his.
Run by the Department of Agriculture, the system is meant to help
combat threats such as avian flu and mad cow disease.
"Right now, we have six different disease-eradication programs, and
they don't always communicate with each other, and they're paper
intensive," said Bruce Knight, a USDA undersecretary. "That worked fine
in the last century, but that isn't the way to run a rapid response
system in the 21st century."
Cattle groups were working on a registration system when, in 2003, a
mad cow disease scare in Washington state set the industry on edge. A
diseased Canadian cow entered the U.S. with 81 other cows, but only 29
could be found. More than 250 animals from 10 different herds were
destroyed in the investigation.
Foreign beef trade stopped immediately, with industry losses estimated
at $2 billion to $4 billion. Trade still has not fully recovered.
Within the cattle industry, the database is seen as essential to
restore U.S. exports in the international market. There are more than
100 million beef cattle and about 10 million dairy cows in the United
States. The world's largest beef consumer, the European Union, is
sensitive to mad cow disease because of outbreaks in Britain.
The first stage of the animal ID system involves free registration of
the "premises" where livestock are kept. That seven-digit number is
stored by the federal government, which had registered 440,997 farms as
of last week, out of 1.43 million.
The second stage, now under way, involves identifying animals with a
microchip or a plastic or metal ear tag containing a 15-digit code.
Federal officials aim to register cattle, bison, poultry, swine, sheep,
goats, deer, elk, horses, mules, donkeys, burros, llamas and alpacas.
Household pets are not included.
The third stage, not yet in effect, would require farmers to report
animal movements to the database within 24 hours.
Farms that move animals in bulk from feedlot to slaughterhouse can get
one animal ID for the entire herd. But smaller farmers who move and
sell animals individually would have to get each animal an ID at a cost
of about $1.50 apiece.
Small farmers are complaining about the cost of ID microchips and
technology readers, as well as the labor costs involved in tracking and
tagging animals.
"The small guy will get hit the hardest," said Pam Potthoff, of Women
Involved in Farm Economics, whose family runs a cow and calf farm in
Trenton, Neb.
Other farmers argue that a one-size-fits-all system is not appropriate.
"Where is the scientific proof that small farmers pose the same disease
risk as large confined feeding operations?" asked Judith McGeary, an
Austin, Texas, farmer and lawyer, who founded the Farm and Ranch
Freedom Alliance to fight the database system. "I could have been
convinced that there were benefits to this program if they had come
back and said here are the studies, here's the epidemiology."
McGeary, who raises grass-fed lamb, free-range poultry and laying hens,
said the program could cripple smaller family farms and organic
growers. "It will be impossible to report every death, every coyote
carrying off a chicken; you just can't," she said.
Some Amish and Mennonite farmers have left agriculture rather than
comply, said lawyer Mary-Louise Zanoni, who volunteers to work for the
farmers. They are troubled by a passage in Revelation 13:16-18. Those
verses tell of an evil force that will manifest itself as an outside
entity, like a government, that forces people to buy or sell things
under a numbering system. "We feel the premises registration, animal ID
issue, is an act of the anti-Christ," a group of Old Order Amish
farmers wrote in a letter to Wisconsin agriculture officials.
The USDA's Knight said he was aware of the Amish's concerns but
countered that one common-sense solution was to sign these communities
up for a premises ID and not for individual animal IDs. He dismissed
reports that Amish or Mennonite farmers had given up farming because of
the system. "This is rife with rumor," he said.
The administration originally wanted mandatory participation in the
database when it was unveiled in 2005, but an outcry from farmers and
ranchers forced a shift to voluntary registration. Agriculture
officials warned, however, that the program would remain voluntary only
if enough farms participated. One draft plan commits the department to
meet by 2011 "necessary levels of participation," defined as 70% of
animals in a species.
States and farm groups, such as the National Cattlemen's Foundation,
can implement the system as they want. In fact, President Bush has not
registered his Crawford, Texas, ranch or the eight head of cattle he
keeps, according to a White House spokesman.
Opponents of the ID system, however, say USDA actions are making the
program virtually compulsory. Since 2004, USDA has pledged more than
$51 million to states and farm groups to promote premises registration
-- but they must register a certain number of farms to get the money.
"They only get the money if they get the performance," said Knight, who
acknowledged "a great deal of resistance out there."
Some states have responded by registering farms in less than voluntary
ways.
Idaho, New York and Massachusetts issued premises numbers to livestock
owners unasked. Texas adopted regulations for elk that initially
required microchips and a report of any movements "by the close of the
next business day." Wisconsin told milk producers that cheese plants
could not take milk from farms without a premises number. North
Carolina announced that only farmers with a premises ID could receive
drought aid.
Michigan required any cattle leaving a farm to have radio-frequency ID
chips with individual numbers. When one farmer in East Jordan refused,
arguing that he sells from his 20-head herd only to people he knows,
the state agriculture department showed up with a search warrant,
sheriff's deputies and state troopers to tag and test his animals.
Many farmers also deeply resent the way USDA's youth programs,
including 4H and Future Farmers of America, are requiring children like
Brandi Calderwood to register.
"This is like the government saying your kids can't be in your
community soccer program unless you register your home with the
government," Cathy Calderwood said. "It's just way too much Big
Brother."
The Calderwoods and some other families had registered their animals
with the county fairground's number because fair rules had simply
called for a "valid" number. After disqualifying Brandi, officials said
she could stay if she registered her farm. The Calderwoods, opponents
of the database, refused.
Fair officials paid Brandi the sum she would have gotten for her steer,
but Brandi said: "It is too bad that the state fair had to ruin my
experience."
John Stulp, Colorado's agriculture commissioner, said that 480 other
fair-goers registered without complaint and suggested that some
resistance was simply a reaction to change.
Statewide, about 28% of the premises are registered, he said, but more
are needed to safeguard Colorado's $16-billion agriculture industry.
"We have a responsibility to protect and enhance our agriculture
industry," Stulp said. "Part of that is to make sure we rapidly respond
to some kind of disease outbreak or threat in our state."
[email protected]
