Make your own free website on Tripod.com

Welcome to Naisinfocentral and Animal Disease Traceability

Articles of Importance to NAIS pg 1

Home
Animal Disease Traceability
Hot Alerts-New
NAIS "Official" USDA Documents
USDA MEMO
What is Premises Identification?
What is Animal Identification?
What is Animal Tracking?
Senators Response to NAIS
USDA Premises Registration Numbers
Camelid Working Group
Cattle Working Group
Equine Working Group
Equine Citizens Working Group
Goat Working Group
Poultry Working Group
Sheep Working Group
Swine Working Group
NAIS on YouTube
United Nations System
Alabama NAIS
Alaska NAIS
Arizona NAIS-NO NAIS State
Arkansas NAIS
Australia - NLIS
California NAIS
CANADA
Colorado NAIS
Florida NAIS
Idaho NAIS
Illinois NAIS
Indiana NAIS
Iowa NAIS
Kansas NAIS
Kentucky NAIS-Voluntary
Louisiana NAIS
Maine NAIS
Massachusetts NAIS
Michigan Nais-Mandatory
Minnesota NAIS
Mississippi NAIS
Missouri NAIS
Montana NAIS
NEBRASKA NAIS-Voluntary
Nevada NAIS
New Hampshire
New Mexico NAIS
New York NAIS
New Zealand-NAIT
North Carolina NAIS
North Dakota NAIS- Resolution
Ohio NAIS
Oklahoma NAIS *Bill introduced
Oregon NAIS
Pennsylvania NAIS
South Carolina NAIS
South Dakota NAIS
Tennessee NAIS
Texas NAIS
Utah NAIS-Voluntary
Vermont NAIS-No funding request
Virginia NAIS
Washington NAIS
Washington D.C. NAIS
Wisconsin NAIS-Mandatory
Wyoming NAIS-Jt Resolution to Congress against NAIS
NAIS Cooperative Agreements
Traceability Equals COOL
Digital Angel
GIS Mapping
Are we all Mis-Informed?
Boycott
Bruce Knight
Quotes with a Capital V
Quotes
USDA Blunders
Approved Tag Resellers
Is NAIS Voluntary?
Talking Points for NO NAIS
USDA OPT OUT
RFID Chips
RFID pg 2
Digital Angel
What will it Cost?
Articles of Importance to NAIS pg 1
Articles of Importance to NAIS pg2
Senators on NAIS
Hay Growers
USDA DataMining
National Agricultural Statistics Service-NASS
National Farmers Union
4-H & NAIS
FFA & NAIS
Bird Flu
Vets & NAIS
State Government is Watching
Pork Magazine
12 Questions to ASK about NAIS
Reportable Diseases
Depopulation
BSE
SPS Agreements
Sustainable Development and or Agenda 21
Codex Alimentarius
A visit from the USDA
Current Equine Outbreaks
Flyers
Real ID / NAIS Comparison
No NAIS Sites
Dogs going NAIS
The Paradigm Shift: Total Transformation
Eminent Domain
Food Safety
What is the Hegelian Dialectic?
Delphi Technique
Are your pet foods "scientifically" made like you think?
NAIS is Censored by the Media
Guide to Good Farming Practices

Just today, I read this about Foot and Mouth . This is the most gut renching story I have ever read. I am horrified.
Please read the truth about what happend from the people, Read the truth about Foot and Mouth Disease.
Read why they depopulated. Oh this is horrifying!!!!!!
 

SD Stockgrowers Concerned – Illegal Canadian Cattle Discovered in the U.S.

Rapid City ~ The South Dakota Stockgrowers Association (SDSGA) hopes USDA will take the necessary steps to remedy a loss of revenue for a South Dakota producer who unknowingly purchased Canadian feeder cattle, says SDSGA President Rick Fox.

An independent South Dakota feeder was under the impression, in November of 2006, that he had delivered U.S. cattle to a slaughter plant in Nebraska, but found out differently when the packing plant denied him payment on seven head of the fat cattle, says Fox. “He bought calves in South Dakota, and fed them at home in his feedlot like he always does, so he was pretty surprised when he got a call from the packing plant telling them that seven head out of the load had been condemned because they were of Canadian origin. The offal on the entire load was also condemned, which meant another substantial loss in income. He did not realize that the cattle were from Canada - he had purchased them assuming that they were domestic cattle.”

Even though Canadian eartags were identified in the calves, the cattle have not been traced back to any particular farm or ranch in Canada. “Bureaucrats in Washington tell us that the U.S. cattle industry needs an individual animal ID program to allow for fast traceback, but the Stockgrowers believe that tracking of imported cattle should be a higher priority. Unfortunately, it appears that USDA is not keeping track of the cattle being imported from Canada - under USDA’s rules, these calves should never have been allowed to be sold in a South Dakota auction market. The Canadian officials apparently haven’t been able to trace back the movements and origin of the calves, despite the official Canadian tags found in their ears.

Fox says that USDA implemented a rule in 2005 to allow the importation of Canadian feeder cattle under 30 months of age, but only under very strict conditions. “The cattle are supposed to enter the U.S. in sealed trucks and be transported directly to an identified feedlot. They are then to remain in the identified feedlot until they are hauled to a slaughter plant in a sealed truck. The fact that these calves showed up at a salebarn in South Dakota, were allowed to intermingle with U.S. cattle, and were not represented as Canadian cattle, indicates that
USDA is not monitoring the very system it created.

“USDA’s mistake has really hit close to home – it has cost a South Dakota producer immensely. The Stockgrowers will keep working with him in hopes of recovering his lost income and preventing this problem from happening again,” said Fox.

Fox said that the Stockgrowers have sent a letter to USDA with three requests: 1) a full update regarding the progress of the investigation; 2) an explanation as to the non-compliance that allowed the mistake and; 3) indemnification for the feeder’s financial loss.

The South Dakota feeder hopes to recover his lost income and will be cautious about purchasing calves in the future. He also hopes USDA’s investigation will soon reveal whether this was an isolated case, or if herd mates or other calves entered the U.S. and were sold and co-mingled illegally. Fox agrees. “It’s tough to believe that there aren’t more calves that crossed the border with these.”

According to Fox, USDA has now proposed a further relaxation of import regulations to allow cattle from Canada that are over 30 months of age. “
It is ludicrous that USDA would even consider relaxing the very import rules that they are already having difficulty policing. Before they even think about allowing older Canadian cattle to be imported, I hope they can figure out a monitoring system that works.”

Fox said that SDSGA remains in opposition of the original rule to allow “under 30 month” cattle to be imported from Canada, as well as the proposed rule to allow importation of cattle over 30 months. “Canada has a BSE problem, plain and simple. USDA has placed U.S. producers and the entire industry at risk by allowing Canadian cattle to enter the country; they have further jeopardized our operations by not enforcing their import rules. The thought of relaxing the import regulations now to allow ‘over 30 month’ Canadian cattle to be imported is absolutely irresponsible.”

Our Tax Dollars at Work: Chasing a cow over 5 states because of a number!!!! No Mis-informtion, No Half Truths, just Facts!
Part 1
 
The government keeps repeating that the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) is necessary to provide 48-hour tracking to improve animal health. To some people, this sounds plausible. But even a little scratching under the surface reveals that these claims have holes a mile wide. My personal experience with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and animal tracking makes it clear that this will be just another program to increase the size of government, and place individuals at the mercy of bureaucratic whims, while doing absolutely nothing to actually address animal health.

On January 22, 2007, an Investigator for the USDA, Carl H. LaLonde, Jr., of Raleigh, N.C. came to our ranch. He showed me his gold and silver badge, and laid a health paper on my desk. He asked, "Do you notice anything wrong with that?" I looked it over, noticing it was a cow we sold a year ago. I remembered the cow. After a careful viewing, I said, "No, I am sorry I do not know what is wrong."

Reply, "You have exported cattle all over the world, and you can't see the cow doesn't have an ID number - it says there is supposed to be a number on the cow!"

Actually, the box on the form said, "Eartag no. or other official identification, name or description." When I pointed out that the cow's registered name was clearly typed, meeting that requirement, LaLonde interrupted, and insisted that only a "number" would do.

So here's the story: In June 2005, we purchased a herd of 472 registered Texas Longhorn cattle in Oklahoma. Each animal received a health certificate from P. L. Edmonds, DVM, of Morris, Oklahoma. In January 2006, we sold one cow, named Rosey Barb, to an Ohio producer. Her health paper was prepared, to ship her from Oklahoma to Dundee, Ohio.

In August 2006, LaLonde arrived, unannounced, at Dundee, Ohio and quizzed the owner about the shipment of Rosey Barb. Being a first-time importer from Oklahoma, he was shocked. He was innocent of any wrongdoing. LaLonde did not ask to see the cow, health records, or if she was dead or alive - the issue was entirely about paperwork, not inspecting the animal, or protecting animal health.

In our conversation, LaLonde asked me who was driving the truck when Rosey crossed the state lines. He assured us the driver who had crossed into Ohio without legal paper work was in violation. I assured him I had authorized the shipment and no matter who the driver was, I was fully responsible.

LaLonde then said that the Oklahoma vet was at fault for omitting the number. Since the vet was licensed by the USDA, the government would punish him. We had physically transported the cow to Ohio without proper documentation, and would equally be in violation. A citation would be in order and the case would be recorded on our ranch records. I was required to fill out numerous forms admitting guilt and detailing each fact for further prosecution. Although I have never had a USDA violation in Ohio, ever, the next time something happens, I will be treated as a "second time offender." That will be considered, in USDA legal terms, "wanton, habitual disregard of the law." And all because a veterinarian wrote the cow's name on the form instead of a number.

I asked what would be done to Dr. Edmonds. LaLonde said Edmonds had no excuse. He knows this number is required, and understands the penalties if he does not fill out a health paper exactly correct. Dr. Edmonds would have a hearing, and he might even lose his license. I said it would be depressing to think a professional with a major large animal health practice could lose his license over one number. Investigator LaLonde smiled. His job was investigation and prosecution, not fairness or animal health. Dr. Edmonds prepared health papers for over 400 cattle for Dickinson Cattle Co. and left one number off of one certificate, and he will pay the price.

This was not an issue of BSE, TB, Bangs, a stolen cow, or forgery. It was one number. As of today, LaLonde has driven several hundred miles about this one single number. It could have been handled by phone.

This is USDA. This is what it can be like to have NAIS enforcers at the door. NAIS will penalize veterinarians, livestock owners, buyers, haulers and numerous livestock workers. One wrong number. What will it cost your family if we have a fully-functional NAIS?

It is the serious job of every USA livestock owner to oppose the total USDA program of NAIS. Do this for your family and children. NAIS is cold and ruthless. It is not about disease - it is about control. Call your state, federal and all elected officials who have authority to stop NAIS. Each farm/ranch has a few months left to fight for your freedom against wanton, unremorseful, full-time enforcement of the most feared USDA proposal in history: NAIS.

As Investigator LaLonde left the office,he smiled, shook my hand and said, "I love my job."

This is exact to the letter. Happened January 22, 2007, at Dickinson Cattle Co. Barnesville, Ohio. Submitted by Darol Dickinson.

 

For further proof here is the Certificate of Veterinary Inspection #73-1087096 Issued by Oklahoma State Department of Ag, Food & Forestry

http://www.naissucks.com/images/rosey_barb.jpg

 

Part 2 Posted 04-14-07

Group Questions USDA Enforcement Actions

Billings, Mont.R-CALF USA is seeking information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on why it appears that agency officials describe incomplete paperwork on perhaps hundreds of imported Canadian cattle as “minor record-keeping problems,” yet initiate enforcement action against a U.S. cattle producer, claiming animals were transported in interstate commerce without a valid health certificate.

The U.S. producer in question is Darol Dickinson, owner of Dickinson Cattle Co. in Barnesville, Ohio. The event in question is the transport of a 6-year-old Texas Longhorn cow and a bull calf from Oklahoma to Ohio in January 2006. The veterinary health certificate – issued by the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture – states the identity of the pair as “Rosey Bark-B” and “Bull Calf at side” on the form under “EARTAG NO. OR OTHER OFFICIAL IDENTIFICATION, NAME OR DESCRIPTION.’

USDA correspondence to Dickinson dated Feb. 26, 2007, from the Investigative and Enforcement Services (IES) branch of USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) states that Dickinson transported the pair without a valid health certificate because “the consignee portion of the health certificate was incomplete and no official identification was listed for the cow.” The IES correspondence instructs Dickinson that he can waive his right to a hearing and settle the matter by paying a $1,250 penalty by March 26, 2007. If Dickinson does not request a hearing or pay the fine by said date, the IES letter states that litigation will result, and furthermore, “…The penalty offered in this Stipulation is not relevant to the sanctions APHIS may seek, or that will be assessed after issuance of a formal complaint…”

Dickinson maintains that all charges are false for the following reasons:

1)      The animals were transported with an official Oklahoma State Health Certificate of Inspection prepared and signed by a USDA-licensed Oklahoma State Veterinarian.

2)      Information for the Consignee portion of the health certificate was indeed complete for a resident of a small rural village.

3)      All official identification for the cow was provided exactly as required by the printed form issued by the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture.

4)      He relied on the USDA-licensed professional to properly execute the government form in its entirety.

5)      The truck driver who transported the animals stopped at every port-of-entry crossing in every state required by law during the legal transport of these cattle.

6)      The truck driver is not a USDA-licensed professional, and therefore, unable to evaluate the official veterinary health certificate for errors.

“Apparently, USDA doesn’t think the veterinarian who filled out the health certificate for these animals did so in a way USDA considers to be correct,” said R-CALF USA President/Region VI Director Max Thornsberry, a Missouri veterinarian who also chairs the R-CALF USA Animal Health Committee. “We have written a letter to Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns protesting that fine, particularly drawing attention to USDA’s comment that all the cattle coming in from Canada without proper paperwork was a simple, minor paperwork infraction.”

R-CALF USA sent the letter to Johanns on March 23, 2007, requesting that the fine immediately be rescinded. Only today did USDA confirm to R-CALF USA that an investigation is ongoing and that the results will be forthcoming in the near future.

“USDA’s citation against Dickinson Cattle Company appears to be discriminatory, based on recent statements to the media by APHIS officials regarding the insignificance of improper documentation accompanying imported Canadian cattle,” Thornsberry continued. “It appears APHIS is holding Dickinson Cattle Company to a much higher standard than it holds individuals or entities that authorize the transport of imported Canadian cattle, and this is patently wrong.”

On Feb. 23, 2007, the Chicago Tribune published an article by Washington Bureau Reporter Steve Hedges, with the headline “USDA: Mistakes tracing Canadian cattle are ‘minor’”. The piece quoted APHIS spokesperson Andrea McNally as charactering problems with the documentation of imported Canadian cattle as only “minor record-keeping problems.”

“If that’s USDA’s position, then the citation issued to Dickinson for transporting U.S. cattle within the United States is wholly unjustified and discriminatory,” Thornsberry asserted. “Based on our understanding of the circumstances, Dickinson’s documentation was in substantial compliance, if not complete compliance, with APHIS rules and regulations. R-CALF USA is requesting that USDA take steps to ensure that U.S. cattle producers are not discriminated against by being held to a higher standard than that imposed on individuals or entities handling imported cattle.

“This heavy-handed USDA enforcement action focuses only on whether an animal identification number was included in the documentation – it had nothing to do with the health of the animals in question,” Thornsberry concluded. “R-CALF USA is concerned that this situation may be indicative of the control USDA intends to exercise over U.S. cattle producers under it proposed National Animal Identification System. If this is the case, then the U.S. cattle industry would be subjected to an unacceptable level of regulatory control by USDA.”  

Note: To view R-CALF USA’s letter, the veterinary health certificate, USDA’s correspondence to Dickinson and other supporting documents, visit the “Animal Health” link at www.r-calfusa.com.

Enter supporting content here

Premises Registration will be an "Official" USDA unique seven Character identifier.
 
In the New User Guide it states on Page 22:
The premises identification number (PIN) is assigned permanently to a geophysical location. If an owner or entity sells his/her farm, the next operators of the premises use the original premises identification number that had been
assigned to that location. If the seller buys a new location to build a new operation that never had livestock, he/she would register that location and obtain a new premises identification number (PIN).

Premises Identification = Encumbrance

Proud member
                                    of the Read the Bills Act Coalition

Comments on the site are very welcomed.. If you see something that is in error, point it out, if you have a document that needs posting, provide the information and if its state specific post the state.. This site is for all livestock owners..