and once again...The USDA Proposes Livestock Tracking System

[pips&peeps]

Not a big deal to me. I already send an NPIP form with all my out of State sales anyway.

To my knowlege the government thugs haven't contacted or tracked down any one I have shipped to.

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

IMO, it makes sense to track animals from the point they enter the commercial food market, but for animals that never enter it there should be NO tracking.

 

[wilds of pa]

I will hound Harrisburg to vote "NO" to any and all more government spending/programs ,..esp with poultry, when the way pa's programs are now, this state here really does nothing to help the small poultry producers like some other states do, why would we here in Pa even think of wanting more BS...

if you are intrested in a good read heres the link
Traceability for Livestock Moving Interstate
Document ID: APHIS-2009-0091-0001Document Type: Proposed Rule
Docket ID: APHIS-2009-0091RIN:0579-AD24
Topics: Animal Diseases, Bison, Cattle, Hogs, Livestock, Poultry and Poultry Products, Quarantine, Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, Transportation, Tuberculosis

Beginning August 11, 2011, USDA will be accepting comments on the proposed rule until November 9, 2011

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=APHIS-2009-0091-0001

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability/

 

[ivan3]

As a participant in the NAIS program (voluntary in Missouri, by law), let me tell you what occurred: First, I had a hard time signing up as `private owner of backyard flock' wasn't an option on the online form (not a big producer with interstate business, not a rendering facility). Got to know, through phone conv., Rose Foster at the State Vet's Office, who eventually figured out `what I was' - `other' category. Received quite a bit of good literature (still getting the Missouri Poultry yearbook) and, when one of our turks died suddenly, Ms. Foster called the Vet Path Lab at the University and the subsequent necroscopy was free. That is the complete, horrible, result of our participation.

Proposed program:

•Achieve basic effective animal disease traceability and response to animal disease outbreaks without over-burdening producers;
*ONLY apply to animals moving interstate;
*Be owned, led, and administered by the States and Tribal Nations with Federal support focused entirely on animal disease traceability;
• Allow for maximum flexibility for States, Tribal Nations, and producers to work together to find identification solutions that meet their local needs;
*Encourage the use of low-cost technology; and
*Ensure that animal disease traceability data are owned and maintained at the discretion of the States and Tribal Nations.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2011/08/pdf/QAtraceabil.VS.pdf

Cattle producers have expressed a couple of problems with the proposed system; one being brands - APHIS wanting to use a more universal marker - some locales do not maintain brand inspections - Eastern/Western States brouhaha will probably reach a compromise, the second one I'm in full agreement with:

during the past seven years (2003 – 2009), an incredible 67 percent of all bovine TB cases detected at U.S. slaughter plants were found in cattle originating from foreign countries, primarily Mexico. Until and unless USDA begins to demonstrate a sincere effort to prevent the continual reintroduction of dangerous livestock diseases like bovine TB from foreign countries by implementing appropriate border restrictions – an action USDA can readily accomplish at no expense to U.S. cattle producers, U.S. cattle producers – and R-CALF USA in particular – have no reason to trust that USDA’s loyalties lie anywhere but with international traders who want the U.S. cattle industry to shoulder the costs of foreign animal disease problems.

http://www.r-calfusa.com/Animal_Health/110304LetterToUsdaAnimalDiseaseTraceability.pdf

USDA/APHIS, when problems appear, `intrastate' are called upon by State Agencies, ala, the 2003 END outbreak in California (originated in `Gamebirds' -cough/cough- in backyard flock):

The 2002-03 END outbreak, originally confirmed in backyard poultry in Southern California, spread to commercial poultry operations in California and backyard poultry in Arizona, Nevada and Texas. The Governor of California declared a State of Emergency, the Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) declared an Extraordinary Emergency, and local emergencies were declared in San Diego, Riverside, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino Counties. A USDA and the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) Task Force was formed that involved over 7,000 individuals rotating in and out over the course of the outbreak. Trade restrictions resulting from the disease had negative impacts on California and U.S. poultry and egg producers. The outbreak, from discovery to eradication, lasted eleven months. The outbreak response led to the depopulation of 3.16 million birds at a cost of $161 million.

http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/ahfss/Animal_Health/newcastle_disease_info.html

I'm with the GAO: need to hire more Vets. Also more Federal funding for basic/applied research into advanced `lab on a chip' rapid diagnostic devices. This taxpayer doesn't approve of toting the freight after the train has gone off the tracks.​

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

The 2003 END epidemic began when a worker at a commercial poultry farm went to a cockfight (PLEASE folks, do not comment on this particular subject as it is not allowed on BYC, and will get this thread shut down!). He wore the same clothing to work the next day. And thus it began: NOT typical backyard flocks. Pretty sure the actual origin of the disease was Mexico.

I am not sure if any statistics were kept on the numbers of backyard flocks that tested positive versus the number of commercial farms that did. If birds were located within a one mile radius of a place were birds tested positive, they were killed, regardless of whether they tested negative or positive.

 

[ivan3]

Sonoran Silkies wrote The 2003 END epidemic began when a worker at a commercial poultry farm went to a cockfight (PLEASE folks, do not comment on this particular subject as it is not allowed on BYC, and will get this thread shut down!). He wore the same clothing to work the next day. And thus it began: NOT typical backyard flocks. Pretty sure the actual origin of the disease was Mexico.

Pretty typical `stock' backyard flocks in certain neighborhoods in San Berdoo/Riverside in the late `50's-Mid `60's (grew up there - Norton/March AFB's) parents bought all our eggs/tortillas/tamales/etc. from private individuals running businesses from their homes.

Not much has changed (don't know if these costs were figured in to the total): http://www.puertorico-herald.org/issues/2003/vol7n30/fedsPay-en.html​

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

I was not saying that it did not affect those people, but that it affected hundreds of people who exhibit birds or have a small flock for eggs or pets. I very well remember the epidemic and how scared and upset many, many legitimate chicken (and other bird owners) were, and their stories of the devastation of having officials show up without warrants to immediately depopulate their birds. No opportunity to challenge on court. Mind you now, I am not talking about people whose birds were ill; I am talking about healthy flocks thta just happened to be located in the wrong area.

 

[wilds of pa]

Got this sent to me from the group::: Pennsylvanians_againstNAIS

guess if you like more goverment and farming regulations, you may not want to read this..

Are the raw milk raids to distract from something far more deadly to farming?

http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/20...ct-from-something-far-more-deadly-to-farming/

lil tid bit from the article link above
The USDA program was once called NAIS (the National Animal Identification System) but was so detested by farmers and ranchers that the government had to back off. They did, momentarily, since 90% of the farmers at Vilsack’s listening sessions were vehemently opposed. The USDA promised to take that into consideration.

They did. They changed the name to “traceability,” hoping to slip it through now, hoping farmers are worn out from the last go-round, hoping the public won’t notice, and perhaps hoping the raw milk raids will keep farmers, and the public who strongly supports them, occupied.


Older article
The Amish and the bailout
whose religion strictly forbids such participation in Premises ID...
....
Meanwhile, we have the peculiar fact that the USDA, which is pushing a massive surveillance system and recording of land location, supposedly to deal with dreaded animal diseases, is importing beef from other countries where there are active animal diseases we don't currently have here because our present system has been so effective. Even up to today, our farmers and ranchers are fighting the USDA to defend the health of their animals - from foot and mouth, Mad Cow, tuberculosis, and more. And it was ranchers who sued the USDA to test for Mad Cow and were refused.

So, if the USDA has been refusing to inspect for Mad Cow and even has been sued for intimidating food inspectors who wish to inspect and is pressing to bring in animals from countries where there are diseases, how serious are they about animal diseases?

http://yupfarming.blogspot.com/2009/04/amish-and-bailout.html

2007 Creekstone Farms Premium Beef Arkansas City, Kan ~VS~ United States Department of Agriculture
http://www.animallaw.info/cases/causfd2007wl1020786.htm

March 8, 2011 Creekstone Farms Premium Beef recall an Arkansas City, Kan., establishment
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_017_2011_Release/index.asp

Aug. 12, 2011 National Beef Packing Co. LLC, a Dodge City, Kan., establishment
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_017_2011_Release/index.asp

The recall includes boxes of meat with the following number inside the USDA mark of inspection Est. 262. Below are the various packaging identifiers provided by the USDA, however, the recalled meat may have been repackaged and sold under different retail brand names. .

Ground beef labeled "National Beef 80/20 Fine Ground Chuck," with a freeze by date of Aug. 12, 2011


Boxes of six 10-pound chubs with product code 483.

Boxes of eight 5-pound chubs with product code 684.

Boxes of 12 3-pound chubs with product code 782 or 785.

Boxes of six 10-pound chubs with product code 787.

Ten-pound chubs of ground beef with a freeze by date of Aug. 14, 2011


Boxes of eight chubs of “National Beef 81/19 Fine Ground Beef,” with product code 431.

Boxes of eight chubs of “National Beef 90/10 Fine Ground Beef,” with product code 471.

Boxes of six chubs of “National Beef 86/14 Fine Ground Round,” with product code 494.

The problem was discovered during routine microbial testing by the Ohio Department of Agriculture at a facility in that state that had purchased these products for further processing.

Another recent ground beef recall:
A Michigan firm recalled 360 pounds of ground beef because of possible E. coli contamination. The meat was shipped to Michigan restaurants and sold at a retail establishment owned by McNees Meats and Wholesale.
Each 10-pound bag has the following number inside the USDA mark of inspection: EST.33971.