Fw: [DISTRICT6NEWS] Re: [Dist8News] oppose NAIS - take action!

[Guest guest]

[DISTRICT6NEWS] Re: [Dist8News] oppose NAIS - take action!

Tony, I totally agree with you, the Mad Cow in WA was traced in less thana month to the stall she was born in, Vet across the southwest found the paint colt that was spreading VS, in days, back in '97quarantined the movement of animals in the counties, and the problem was stoppedThe Federal government doesn't have a way to track the foreignstudents that enter the US and never enroll in any type school. The I-9 designed to keep non citizens from being employed isn'tworking. The border are a one- way street that the politician canafford to close - for fear of alienating voters.>One point that should be understood is that the ID>comes into play when the animal (whichever species)leaves the >farm and goes into the sale channel or to an area of>commingling (such as a show)Are you saying if the animal never leaves the premises the premisesisn't required to be on the ID list?How many people take their animals to the Vet, that is leaving thefarm and coming in contact with animals - that the majority have some health problem otherwise why are they at the vets. You can bet that vet viits will be tracted.The whole thing doesn't make any sense, when the states are handlingthe scrapie ID just fine. The states eliminated Hoof and Mouth, years ago, just why is this National program necessary. As Tony states this is going to be costly for the small producer. When youget into the Federal government you get into the lobbying, that isdesigned to favor the major producers (that fees are a necessarybusiness expense, deductible from their taxes,) not in the bestinterest of the FFA/4Hproject and the homestead producer. Add theincrease in the fees and rates to register, and the majority of theDairy Goat owners I know, will be cut numbers. Not in the bestinterest of ADGA.pf> >> > In order to concentrate on family and business, I haven't been > receiving> > listmail for several weeks. A friend forwarded this information > to me, so I> > wanted to take a few minutes to respond.> > > > While each of us certainly has the right to express our opinions, > I hope you> > might reconsider the action suggested in this (and other, I > understand)> > messages.> > > > Many of us have worked very hard to have goats represented in the > discussion> > and evolution of the animal ID program. So, goats have surely been> > represented at the table when discussion has taken place. We have > been in> > agreement with many in the sheep industry with the fact that sheep > and goats> > have a lesser return per head than the larger species. Thus, the > economic> > impact of methods of ID needs to be considered as regulations are > put into> > place. We've also asked that field trials with goats be held so > that we can> > more completely evaluate the kinds of ID methods that would work > best for> > goats. Considerations such as retention and expense are high > priority for> > us. We have been heard, and plans are reflecting those concerns.> > > > Because we have been actively involved in helping to shape the > plan, we> > have raised the conciousness level of goats in general and our > needs in> > specific.> > > > There are many innacuracies being expressed. I certainly > understand how> > misinformation can be presented, as there are confusing articles in> > magazines everywhere. One point that should be understood is that > the ID> > comes into play when the animal (whichever species) leaves the > farm and goes> > into the sale channel or to an area of commingling (such as a > show). These> > are opportunities for disease spread, so knowing when animals are > placed> > into contact with other animals outside of the farm can be > important when> > quickly tracking disease spread. If the animals are born and die > on the> > farm without leaving, there is no ID requirement for reporting. > However, I> > believe it would be to our advantage to have the opportunity for > this> > information to be submitted to a national database voluntarily, if > we> > choose.> > > > The program is a lot less "invasive" that many people seem to > believe. The> > IDs currently recommended for acceptance for goats include tattoos > (which> > many registries already use for ID) and electronic chips that meet > ISO> > standards (would be optional for those who want to use them). The > current> > scrapie program ear tags are also acceptable at this time. What > will drive> > the actual method for the future will likely be the livestock > auction> > houses. They will want an ID method that is fast and easy as they > handle> > thousands of animals a day. For their needs, electronic IDs make > the most> > sense.> > > > As an example of how this "tracking" information might have been > helpful was> > recently brought to light after the hurricanes in the Gulf. There > were> > literally thousands of animals displaced and most had no IDs. Had > these> > animals been identified and a part of a national database, it > would have> > made it easy to find the owners. Unfortunately, many ended up > being> > destroyed.> > > > A national identification program will happen, and is already > being put into> > place. It would be much better use of our time to work with the > program to> > ensure that there continues to be flexibility with ID methods than > to spend> > time trying to stop implementation. If you want to make a > suggestion, how> > about asking that the national database be kept with USDA instead > of going> > into a privatized system. If it remains with USDA, we will > continue to see> > the opportunity to have goats represented at the table for > discussions. If> > it privatizes (which is what the secretary of agriculture is > suggesting), it> > is likely that only the large species organizations will be > represented in> > the future. So, I would strongly encourage you to ask that USDA > maintain> > the database, not a private organization.> > > > Thank you for the opportunity to provide other viewpoints.> > > > []