Home

ANIMAL DISEASE TRACEABILITY final USDA rules for livestock moving interstate.

October 31, 2013

ppjg National Animal Indentification System , , , , , , , , , , , , 2 Comments

strip banner

new-logo25

Darol Dickinson,

Eye Witness ag.ed@nafaw.org

740 758 5050

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

EYE WITNESS REPORT October 29, Sugar Creek, Ohio ANIMAL DISEASE TRACEABILITY final USDA rules for livestock moving interstate.

Yoder, Apple Creek, Ohio, on the left. Veterinarians, state staff and ranchers were in attendance.

The Ohio State Veterinarian, Tony M. Forshey, officiated an ADT rule — cattle requirements overview meeting with producers on Oct 29. This was one of about a dozen in Ohio and similar to a few cow-smiling-e1270815298540hundred held in most states.

My appreciation of Dr. Forshey was increased as I watched him carefully articulate the maze of complicated and difficult federal rules for state veterinarians and animal producers. The tight rope he had to walk being forced to enforce federal rules and yet having “state rights” to tweak certain parts of the rule making process — his assistant called it “ability to relax” federal ADT rules.

If the Affordable Care Act is confusing, the facial expressions of Ohio farmers attending told the story. One major veal producer, RC Farms, said “I am not going to do it!” No reply was offered by Dr. Forshey as to the enforcements, fines or penalties for future non-compliance. (I sensed he did not want to go there in this crowd.)

New ADT changes and procedures defined include:

~ There are federal rules of ADT that are enforced federally and there are ways a state veterinarian can increase enforcements or “relax” these rules. Although the feds have a solid rule process, states can and may or may not relax or add to these rules. The state veterinarian has that authority. More

Animal Identification : It’s Baaaaack

May 16, 2011

Lynn Swearingen FARMING & FOOD, National Animal Indentification System, PROPERTY RIGHTS , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 3 Comments

Lynn Swearingen (c) copyright 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

_________________________________

“One should not forget however that NAIS still exists, just with an exciting new name : Animal Disease Traceability Framework or whatever it is being called this week.”

_________________________________________________

In what has to be one of the most laughable complaints to emerge from the UK in the past month (besides the “hat wars” at the Royal Wedding of course Dahling), there is “dismay” from the National Farm Union over a program remarkably similar to the now defunct National Animal Identification System.

The British equivalent of The Farm Bureau here Stateside, not so long ago words emerged from the leadership as to the effect of EID on the Brit’s Livestock Industry. Livestock Board Chairman Mackintosh says:

 “As a sheep producer myself I fully understand the threat to our industry that EID poses. The Board and I will do everything within our powers to delay implementation of EID until a workable and crucially a cost effective solution can be found taking into account decisions already made at an EU level,” he said.

Oh complaints have been made over the years before the implementation, but the EU continued to “encourage” participation while ensuring that all the concerns would be taken into consideration. Of course small-scale livestock producers have been fighting since 2003 against this program (see here a short synopsis), but now the “Big Boys” are a bit miffed. One wonders why?

Well first look at the little list of what must be done to “comply”:

Tag facts

• All sheep born or first tagged from 1 January 2010 (new sheep) must be identified with two identifiers bearing the same number

• Sheep still do not have to be tagged until they are nine months old or until they are being moved off the holding, whichever is the sooner The colour of the new EID tags and the matching conventional tags is yellow, but sheep producers may choose a different colour for the matching conventional tag if useful for on-farm management purposes

• Older sheep don’t have to be upgraded to EID if they don’t leave the holding and carry at least one old green tag More

The New “Cult” – Amish?

January 4, 2010

Lynn Swearingen 1st Amendment, 2nd amendment, Articles, Constitution, FARMING & FOOD, Government, National Animal Indentification System, Uncategorized , , , , , , , , 9 Comments

submit to reddit Tell a Friend 

By Lynn Swearingen  (c) copyright 2010

All rights Reserved

There comes a pivot point in our society. A moment that is frozen in time, cradled in the hands of history when no longer as a society we operate as a unit of common sense. When opponents meet upon a battlefield and decide whom will be the victor. As we look back en-masse the realization that we have gone too far descends upon us : at that moment each individual must look into their very souls and ask “What have we done?”

A moment such as the many that span the written history of the Human race is now unfolding in Wisconsin. The opponents are defined such as David and Goliath. Powerful, strong, large and undefeatable versus the meek and humble, inexperienced in battle. The arrogance and sneering Goliath in this situation is none other than Clark County District Attorney Darwin Zwieg. Our David is Mr. Emanual Miller, an Old Order Amish.

Mr. Zwieg, not content to respect the religious rights, as set forth in the Wisconsin Constitution and cited here: More

RFID Bling For Bovines – Just In Time For The New Year

December 29, 2009

Lynn Swearingen CODEX, CORPORATIONS, FARMING & FOOD, Minnesota, National Animal Indentification System, NWO , , , , , , , , , , , , , 2 Comments

by: Lynn Swearingen (c) copyright 2009

Just when you thought you’d heard it all, something comes along that makes you say “Hm. I just wonder”.

While surfing around the UHF-RFID livestock world, I came across a new and snazzy tag. Trust me folks – you want to pass on this one.

While a cutie-wootie-slick-forward-looking tag can be an extra bonus in selling (riigghhtt) – this one has the stink of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) plastered all over it. Why would one think that? Here we go (links are provided at conclusion for ease of  review):

USDA approves eTattoo from Eriginate as First Official UHF Identification Device (1) That headline should cause one to wonder and the opening comment begs for investigation:

“Eriginate Corporation announced today the approval of its eTattoo tag by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The approval marks the first ultra-high radio frequency identification tag (UHF RFID) and the first non-low frequency tag (LF) to be approved for use with the “840” Animal Identification Number (AIN)”

Just whom is on the board of this  “Eriginate”? (2)

Why surprise surprise the Director is one Mr. Doran Junek. As his bio (3) clearly states, he has all the bells and whistles required to position this firm for the first “approved” eTattoo:

Lobbying responsibilities – check
Member of the Bovine Species Working Group for NAIS – check
Affiliation (past or present?) with Cargill – Check
“Key industry Contacts” – Check

…but that’s just my opinion.

Of course as “Advisors” (4) go, the most interesting could be Gerardo Flores of famed NASA affiliation. Nah. While his specialty could ensure that once we go “solar system wide” the critters could be properly traced, that’s a few years in the future, so lets see….here’s an interesting character. More

%d bloggers like this: