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

 

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.