This is why we don't trade outside of our personally known group!!!

[jodief100]

Quote:
Schools already require that all students be immunized unless the parents fill out appropriate paperwork explaining why they are not (“we just do not believe in it” is an acceptable reason) Families with immune-deficient children who cannot have the vaccine have sued the school and the parents of children who were not immunized. These children became sick with measles and infected the immune-deficient child, who then died. I do not know how that lawsuit turned out. And I believe those with STD’s are require to register with Health Services, even naming their partners.

So what you speak of is already a part of our culture. We are all required to make efforts to stop the spread of even minor diseases. This policy helped us eradicate small pox, and polio is only endemic to certain areas of the world.

Out of curiosity, what actions are appropriate to protect the health of an immune-deficient child? I have not formed a position on this issue, I’m just interested in what you think.

I do not have an issue with requiring immunization, as long as you can opt out. It is requiring people to waive their constitutionally protected rights in order to live their lives the way they want I have issues with. The law where if you have chickens the government can come on your property to insect any time they wish violates the right against unlawful search and seizure.

Protecting an immune deficient child is a herculean task in itself. There is no way that child can be completely protected against everything that he/she may come in contact with. The child could have been exposed to measles going to the grocery store. There are limits to what the rest of society should be asked to sacrifice to protect others. Where those limits are in this case, I cannot really say. I personally think not getting immunized is stupid but I respect someone’s right to be a fool. If you require everyone to be immunized is that overreaching, maybe? Do we require everyone to wear masks in public? How about hand washing stations that are required before entering a building? Illegal to sneeze in public? I do not know where the limits are I just know that the cost of absolute security and safety is too high for me. If saving lives at all costs is the goal than cars would be illegal. So would baseball bats and roller skates. Should we lock up everyone with a communicable disease like Stalin did? Isolate AIDS patients in “leper” colonies as some have proposed?

I said it before; life has risks, more for some than others. There is a cost associated with everything you can do to reduce risks. Not just monetary costs either. I know, I design medical devices and we asses risks and costs every day. If we never released a product until ALL risks were eliminated there would never be any new medical devices. Since the work I do has dramatically reduced recovery times after neurosurgery I think most people would say the risk was worth it.

 

[JoAnn_WI_4-H_Mom]

Quote:
Is that really the case? I believe you have to have a NAIS/Premises ID if you are going to sell livestock or move it off your property for processing.

When I order a box of chicks to be mailed, no hatchery asks for the NAIS/Premises ID number. The Post Office does not require it. If I raise and process the birds at home, they never leave the property and a NAIS number is not required.

NAIS is voluntary at this time. I do not believe any part of it is enforced. Except the fair, I was asked for my NAIS/Premises ID when I took birds to a show. Otherwise, I know many backyard flocks with no ID, and no one has come around to confiscate their birds.

It is important to use this period of time to get the rules adjusted to be rational. I think everyone agrees (including the federal government)

The whole NAIS thing seemed like a great idea to someone in a large city sitting behind a large desk who has never seen a live chicken. It seemed logical to know where every small flock was, because if there were an outbreak of disease, they could easily draw a circle on the map and stop the disease from spreading by destroying all the flocks in the circle.

I DO NOT AGREE with this thinking, just trying to point out the thinking that makes these regulations happen. It helps when you have to talk to the officials about changing it.

The reason for putting all that language about allowing search and seizure and no compensation is because in the case of an outbreak, they felt they would need to act fast and did not want to be hindered by a family trying to defend the flock. Again I DO NOT AGREE with this thinking, however those being advised about infectious diseases might feel the language was necessary to make anything they might have to do "lawful".

The special accomodations that large businesses get are they can move large groups of animals as a single unit. The proposed laws state I, as a small operator, would have to complete paperwork for each bird I moved off the property, as my birds move between other groups of birds over time on my property. Large operators would file paperwork once for all 50,000 chicks as they were placed in the barn, and once when all 50,000 birds were moved to the processor. The logic is that if one bird in the 50,000 is sick, they all are, as they have spent their entire lives together and in isolation from other groups of birds. If I keep my broiler pens completely separate, or never mix my flocks, I could also reduce my paperwork.

There may be other special accomodations for large businesses, those are the ones I am aware of. If we do not think the special accomodations are sensible or fair, we can fight them by working with the agencies and elected officials.

Most communicable poultry diseases don't start in broiler barns as the birds only live 35 days (sad, but true)

Quote:
I think it is more likely the "government" realizes there will be riots in major cities if the food supply is reduced or made more expensive. No one wants to call out the national guard on their own citizens.

I cannot think of any activity or thing the government might want us to do badly enough that they would withhold food from my family to make me do it. I cannot think of how the "government" would benefit from such a position. I think they would rather keep us fat and happy (and possibly stupid) than "control" us.

More than half of the US population now resides in urban areas. It is impossible for them to be self-sufficient or know anything about the producers and processors of their food.

How do we ensure this majority of the population has safe food, while we in the hinter lands are still able to enjoy the self reliance we crave?

It isn't a matter of the government wants to tell you what to eat or what not to eat, they want to cover the city dweller who was sold a product as food from being made sick by it. I believe some small operators are snake-oil salesmen who will tout the virtues of raw milk without discussing drawbacks and safe handling. Many more small operators have pride and reputation to keep and would never do anything dishonorable.

 

[jmorriso]

I didn't take the time to read all 8 pages of this, but the posts I did read all made me think of a documentary I watched a week ago. If you all have the chance, watch "Food Inc.", its really makes you think about how our food industry has changed in our country, and how little people think about where their food comes from. Its a streaming watch instantly movie on netflix.

 

[Buck Creek Chickens]

Quote:
Tested by a independent, non-government paid tester. Yes he reports any bad tests to the government, but his wage is paid by a local group of interested parties.

Are you WI certified? or your test is only good for 90 day's, and your tester is not paid a wage unless he is part of a vet clinic or a part of the huge farms you are defending. Unless employed by a poultry producer or vet, WI tester's are independent and unpaid, except by the person being tested. Plus he doesn't report to the gov, he reports to DATCAP, the same people responsible for WI's NAIS.

slc wrote:

In Wisconsin its illegal to even have livestock. You have to register your land with the government if you have animals on it.

JoAnn_WI_4-H_Mom wrote:

Is that really the case? I believe you have to have a NAIS/Premises ID if you are going to sell livestock or move it off your property for processing.

When I order a box of chicks to be mailed, no hatchery asks for the NAIS/Premises ID number. The Post Office does not require it. If I raise and process the birds at home, they never leave the property and a NAIS number is not required.

NAIS is voluntary at this time. I do not believe any part of it is enforced. Except the fair, I was asked for my NAIS/Premises ID when I took birds to a show. Otherwise, I know many backyard flocks with no ID, and no one has come around to confiscate their birds.​

You say it is not illegal to own animals in WI, without an ID, but it is, it's on the books, if you do not have an ID you can get busted, if you do not have one, you are breaking the law, period. Hatcheries do not need to know your ID that is your responsibly not theirs. And WI NAIS is being enforced ask your local Dairy Farmer, he can not get a license to sell his milk unless he has an ID. Even though he is registered with the Milk license. Why does he need 2.

Plus NAIS is not a Voluntary program in WI it is Mandatory​

 

[JoAnn_WI_4-H_Mom]

Quote:
I defer to your better information.

I feel your statements are somewhat alarmist, but if they get more people to work on getting the regulations adjusted, then that is possibly a good thing.

I cannot feel good about people thinking WI is a totalitarian state with government agents running around destrying any improperly documented flock. I am not aware of that ever happening, but perhaps you know of some.

The fact that the law allows it IS scary and needs to be changed.

 

[JoAnn_WI_4-H_Mom]

If you want to talk about stupid regulations that need repealing, let's talk dairy price subsidies!

 

[Jared77]

I believe some small operators are snake-oil salesmen who will tout the virtues of raw milk without discussing drawbacks and safe handling.

Its up to the consumer to educate yourself on the products your buying. No different than buying "organic chicken" vs "free range chicken". Know what your buying and stop policing folks to the lowest common denominator. We know if we get pasturized milk the standards that its upheld to. Its easily researched, and you buy something that is not regulated and don't homework regarding the safe handling and concerns with raw milk from the person your getting it from then you have nobody to blame but yourself if you get sick. I'm not a proponant for raw milk just an advocate for a more intelligent consumer who knows what they are getting not just blindly buying a product.​

 

[scooter147]

We THE PUBLIC are to blame for this. We just let gov't big and small continue to make the rules they seem to think we need to live by. It's amazing the human species still exists.
I am still figuring out how credit card reform which was instituted to protect the consumer ended up causing the rates on my credit cards to go up. I know the answer as to why, because now I have to pay for the deadbeats who don't pay their debts because the credit card companies were making them pay fees and higher rates.

 

[Jared77]

If you want to talk about stupid regulations that need repealing, let's talk dairy price subsidies!

AMEN!!!!!​

 

[Amyable]

Quote:
And this is where something called Civil Disobedience comes into play. It's not illegal to own livestock animals in WI, but you are supposed to register with the state and obtain a premises ID if you keep any animals from a very long list (including non-food animals like alpacas and horses - which tells me it's not about food safety, as they claim.) Many Amish farmers were put in a very bad position; either register with a program that violates their religious beliefs or lose their dairy licenses.

NAIS is being repackaged as the Federal Animal Disease Traceability System. So we will have to work just as hard again to kill this God-awful law. These bureaucrats seem to think they actually own something when they refer to the 'national herd'. No, there is no such thing as a national herd, we are free citizens who have the right to own livestock without the gov't stamp of approval.