**Rant** TSC and the NAIS!!!!!!!!

[Ridgerunner]

Boyd, I don't know if you qualify as a rebel but you sure love stirring things up. Good job!!!

I'm glad people have kept the NAIS discussions pretty well respectful and under control. It is a touchy topic for many. Let me add this internet site to help keep things moving along. It could make interesting reading.

NAIS Fact Sheets
http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/naislibrary/factsheets.shtml

In my opinion, NAIS is not intended as a conspiracy to get more government interference with our daily lives or to wipe out our rights and freedoms. There are some things in NAIS that you might construe as being a flaw. (How's that for saying it nicely?) If you find something in NAIS that you find objectional, please contact your appropriate elected representative, reference the specific section of a specific law or regulation, and explain your objections. I say appropriate representative because many of the provisions of NAIS and how it is implemented are state and not federal. I believe you are much more likely to get a favorable response if you can quote specific detail on what is actually there instead of some rant from some site I personally find objectional, however constitutional it may be.

Our government officials can sometimes get out of control. As much as I respect the military personnel and law enforcement officers, you do sometimes get bad apples. I'll offer Kent State as an example. And a district attorney trying to make a name for himself can sometimes show bad judgement. It's like in the military, you respect the uniform, not necessarily the person wearing it. And don't equate all the people with a few bad apples.

I have to tell this story. Many years ago, when I was a lad in the hills of East Tennessee, my father received a visit from the infernal revenooers. They wanted to know what he was doing with the large amount of sugar he had recently purchased. (The store owner reported him, as required by law.) Sugar, as many know, is used to make moonshine. Dad simply showed them a few shelves full of blackberry jelly. The infernal revenooers politely went on their way.

In my opinion, NAIS is about a few basic things. One is public health. When Americans start to die from tainted meat, it is good to be able to track that meat and know where it came from, regardless of whether it is from a multinational corporation or a local producer.

Another is to protect our flocks and herds. If there is a disease outbreak in the area, I want the officials to be able to track it and deal with it before it affects my flock. And if my flock is the one that is infecting others, I consider I have a moral obligation to take whatever measures I have to so that stops, not try to hide the situation.

The big reason for NAIS though, in my opinion, is money. Some people in the United States make a tremendous amount of money by selling agricultural products overseas. The agricultural products, including animal products, help our national balance of payments and create a lot of jobs for American citizens. The NAIS requirements are required so that we can export certain products to certain countries. It is part of international trade protocols. For example, in a recent outbreak of an avian disease in Kentucky, Russia and another country (can't remember which) immediately banned all chicken products from Kentucky. If it were not for the NAIS requirements on tracking which allowed the exporting company to know which parts of the shipment in progress was from Kentucky, then all chicken products being shipped from the US to Russia would have to be turned around and no new shipments started until the situation was sorted out. And it is big money and a lot of US jobs. I mean, if we sell almost $300,000,000.00 of chicken feet to China.... You might find this article interesting.

Chicken feet to China
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2009/05/02/business/050309bizchickendis.txt

I'm not an opponent of NAIS. I consider it a part of us behaving responsibly in the international community. Most of us are exempt from the provisions of NAIS anyway unless we voluntarily join, at least on the Federal level. Your state may have different rules. I'm only concerned with my state laws and the federal requirements. I have not registered and don't intend to. It is highly likely that something in NAIS, especially in the part that is the responsibility of your state, not the feds, is objectional to you and your individual rights since it is targeted at the big boys and we are basically insignificant in the sight of NAIS.

Obviously others on this forum disagree with my opinion. I believe that polite disagreement helps keep our country strong.

Live long and prosper!

Editted due to spelling

 

[kagedgoddess]

Quote:

And THAT my friends doesnt cost a cent to do. if your elected officails dont listen, vote for someone else. one person can and Does make a difference, without being rich.

PS. i didnt mean anyone specific On Here was breaking the law, i was specifically speaking of Double H farm, and they admitted their guilt.

PSS, I am very glad this whole topic came up though. I was very confused about this whole NAIS thing. i have seen posts previously about it and when i googled, i would just come up with sites that said "nais bad, big brother yikes!" type things. but No facts. links to the bill were expired or broken, so i gave up cuz it didnt Effect me. (which is definitly the American way) Sorry and THANK YOU!!!!!!

 

[Wifezilla]

n my opinion, NAIS is not intended as a conspiracy to get more government interference with out daily lives or to wipe out our rights and freedoms.

I agree...but intent and practice are often 2 very different things.

Some interesting reading...
http://www.nicfa.com/Joel_Salatin_Testimony.html

"Interestingly, the single biggest impediment to adaptation of this model on a wider scale, giving consumers easier access to these superior birds, is neither predators nor weather extremes, but government food safety and inspection regulations. A federal law PL90-492 allows producer/growers to dress up to 20,000 birds annually
without government inspectors on site, as long as the birds are "unadulterated" and "sanitary." These two subjective terms have been widely construed by bureaucrats. Some states do not allow any open-air processing and some states do not allow even one bird to be processed without massive facilities. So far, not one case of food-borne pathogens has been reported among the thousands of pastured poultry producers, many of whom have voluntarily had their birds analyzed.
Routinely, these home-dressed birds, which have not been treated with chlorine to disinfect them, show numbers far below industry comparisons. At Polyface, we even tested our manure and found that it contained no salmonella."
http://ceplacer.ucdavis.edu/files/46809.pdf​

 

[GrayDragon]

It sounds like your issue is with the state bureaucrats rather than the federal law. The article you cited claims that the states (though it doesn't seem to list which states, I'd be interested to know) have enacted stricter regulations.

Perhaps you should be calling out the states that have these ridiculous strictures rather than railing against what actually seems to be a fairly good, reasonable federal law.

 

[Wifezilla]

It sounds like your issue is with the state bureaucrats rather than the federal law.

It's with both​

 

[michickenwrangler]

I know a lot of people on this forum prefer local mills to TSC and in theory I do too. However, the closest mill is staffed by ill-spoken, uneducated and utterly misinformed snaggled-toothed rednecks whose wives get into barfights on Peanut Night at the local taverns. Their prices are comparable to TSC--cheaper feed, more expensive fencing and supplies. More variety of livestock feed, fewer varieties of dog and cat food. I was going to that mill for Layena and TSC for other stuff. Our local TSC staffs very competent and helpful personnel. All the employees have livestock or farm. However, I don't really like the Dumor feeds.

Luckily, I did find a good mill just a mile away from TSC (the other mill was opposite direction) so I can make my rounds in just one trip.

 

[Big C]

We shop at our local TSC for fencing and other supplies, not for their feed products. DuMor is Purina seconds.
FYI, as of Oct 5 TSC will be stocking Purina:
http://www.tractorsupply.com/
We have a good relationship with our TSC. Our business is agricultural/retail related. We purchase items there for resale to our customers and also products for our farm.
We also get their broken bags of feed for free...
As far as the phone numbers/address info they collected on us it references our business.

If you want to change laws that regulate business, call your state and us gov reps, we do this on a daily basis...

As far as the cashiers at your local TSC they are just following store or company policy. You can easily bypass any irritation (of providing personal information) simply by talking to the manager of the store, or telling the cashier that you do not give personal information. They will comply with your request.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Quote:
I agree...but intent and practice are often 2 very different things.

Some interesting reading...
http://www.nicfa.com/Joel_Salatin_Testimony.html

"Interestingly, the single biggest impediment to adaptation of this model on a wider scale, giving consumers easier access to these superior birds, is neither predators nor weather extremes, but government food safety and inspection regulations. A federal law PL90-492 allows producer/growers to dress up to 20,000 birds annually
without government inspectors on site, as long as the birds are "unadulterated" and "sanitary." These two subjective terms have been widely construed by bureaucrats. Some states do not allow any open-air processing and some states do not allow even one bird to be processed without massive facilities. So far, not one case of food-borne pathogens has been reported among the thousands of pastured poultry producers, many of whom have voluntarily had their birds analyzed.
Routinely, these home-dressed birds, which have not been treated with chlorine to disinfect them, show numbers far below industry comparisons. At Polyface, we even tested our manure and found that it contained no salmonella."
http://ceplacer.ucdavis.edu/files/46809.pdf

I certainly agree. Interesting reading. Mr. Salatin certainly has a way with words. He is working hard to get the same relaxation in the pork and beef processing requirements that currently exists in the poultry processing requirements.

Mr. Salatin mentioned PL90-492. I certainly appreciate the clear reference as it makes it easy to Google. It also makes it easy for people to check up on what I am saying below. PL90-492 is Federal. I am not going to look at the 50 different additional sets of criteria it would take to look at the specific state requirements. I’d imagine most if not all State requirements are more restrictive than the Federal. I’ve tried to list the different exemptions allowed under PL90-492 and make very brief comments about them. I have not listed all the criteria you have to meet. Obviously, the criteria to be met to qualify for these exemptions gets a little harder as you get to a bigger operation, but I tried to get the gist of it. And, to build a bit further on what Mr. Salatin says, an exemption does not mean there is no inspection. It means that a federal inspector does not have to watch every individual chicken go through processing. The Feds can inspect anybody they want to so they can see that the criteria to qualify for the exemption is being met. You’d expect them to concentrate on the bigger operations claiming exemptions and the ones they get complaints about, but they can check up on you to see if you are complying. I think many of us believe the government has a duty to try to keep the food products we buy safe for human consumption. I’d also guess that not all of us believe the government has that responsibility.

Now, for the exemptions to POULTRY.

Do you process poultry for sale as human food?
If no, this does not apply.

For your private use?
Personal use exemption
(if it is for your personal use, you are exempt)

Is the poultry you process delivered by the owner and you do not buy and sell poultry?
Custom slaughter/Processing Exemption
(You can set up a business that slaughters and processes for individuals. You can sell poultry you raised to a customer, then process it for him.)

Do you raise, slaughter, and process for sale as human food no more than 1000 per year?
Producer/grower – 1,000 limit exemption
(Record keeping to show it is less than 1,000 and you cannot ship out of state)

Do you process less than 20,000 per year and distribute to household consumers, restaurants, hotels etc.
PGOP Exemption
(Cannot sell at a retail store, cannot process someone else’s birds)

Are you a business that raises, slaughters, and dresses poultry or buy dressed poultry that you distribute as carcasses or parts?
Small Enterprise Exemption

Do you slaughter/process poultry for sale in a retail store?
Retail exemption
(Lot’s of criteria but this allows the meat department at the grocery store to cut up your chicken without a federal inspector watching.)

Mr.Salatin mentions "unadulterated" and "sanitary." These two subjective terms have been widely construed by bureaucrats. Some states do not allow any open-air processing and some states do not allow even one bird to be processed without massive facilities.
In my mind, he is distinctly referring to State limitations, not Federal. In the federal requirements, unadulterated means nothing like banned chemicals, dirt, or maybe a filler like sawdust is added to the product. I did not see anything really oppressive in that definition. If someone is restricted because of the sanitary definition in the Federal requirements, does this mean they are not handling and disposing of their garbage and sewage properly; the feathers, fecal matter, unusable body parts, wash water? Maybe they are not using approved chemicals to keep their processing area sanitary or washing it enough? Or are they allowing things you don’t want in the food to be there, sort of like the unadulterated thing? I’m not sure what federal requirement is considered oppressive. I really think it is going to be more of a State requirement that causes you heartburn. If you see anything in there that you think is unduly oppressive, please let us know.

The way I look at PL90-492, it is an attempt to keep heavy compliance requirements away from the small operations and concentrate on the big boys while still allowing them some leeway to not let the small operations get out of hand.

If I were a small operation, say a mobile chicken processor going from place to place processing chickens for people that do not want to do their own or butchering chickens for a few customers, I’d check into the requirements to keep myself safe so I don’t get sued or shut down if I happened to get inspected and to make my case stronger in case I am sued. But that is just me.

I have tried to look at this with an open mind but realize my thinking is influenced by my biases and prejudices. Please let me know where I am incorrect. Specific references instead of generalities appreciated.