Response to USDA's "Guide for Small-Scale and Non-Commercial Producers"
By Judith McGeary*
On June 2, 2006, USDA published a "Guide for Small-Scale and Non-Commercial Producers." While this document is filled with feel-good statements that would lead many to think NAIS will not apply to them, it is short on substance and is not consistent with USDA's other documents or actions.
The True Meaning of Voluntary
The previous USDA NAIS plans are still in effect. USDA has not withdrawn its 2005 Draft Plan and Strategic Standards, nor the April 2006 Strategies for Implementation. When you read all these documents together, it is clear that NAIS is not a "voluntary" program. USDA is merely spin-doctoring, using a misleading word game.
The USDA has not adopted regulations making NAIS a mandatory program at this time, but that is only a temporary situation. The 2005 Draft Plan explicitly stated that the entire program "premises registration, animal identification, and animal tracking" was to become mandatory by January 2009. The 2006 Strategies document extended the timeline somewhat, but maintained that every animal owner in this country must participate: To have a successful animal disease management program, all producers and affected industry segments will have to participate eventually. The USDA established a January 2009 deadline to have 100% of premises registered and 100% of all animals under the age of 1 year identified, with the remainder of the program to be phased in. The USDA also stated:
"If participation rates are not adequate, the development of regulations through normal rulemaking procedures will be considered to require participation in certain aspects of the program."
In other words, while there are no federal regulations at this time, USDA keeps the threat of such regulations hanging over our heads.
Even now, NAIS is not a voluntary program. USDA is driving mandatory implementation by funding state NAIS programs with tens of millions of our tax dollars. Wisconsin and Indiana have already adopted regulations making premises registration mandatory, and Wisconsin is regularly referred to as the model implementation. Texas proposed mandatory regulations and has only put those regulations "on hold" for now. States all over the country are enrolling people in the premises registration program without those individuals' permission. And in contrast to USDA's assertion in this Guide that there "no enforcement mechanisms or penalties," Wisconsin's regulations provide for revocation of licenses and penalties of up to $1,000 for failure to register, while the proposed Texas regulations included fines of up to $1,000 per day and even criminal penalties. To claim that NAIS is "voluntary" is contrary to the normal definition of this term. The USDA is redefining words in the tradition of George Orwell's 1984.
Reporting Reality
The USDA's Guide also seeks to downplay the onerous reporting requirements. Yet, as noted above, the Guide does not state that it supercedes the 2005 USDA documents, which set out the reporting requirements. The published Program Standards provided that a laundry list of "events" would have to be reported within 24 hours. Although the Guide provides a list of half a dozen specific scenarios for which reporting allegedly would not be required, these scenarios do not materially reduce the burden on small and non-commercial producers.
For example, here are two "scenarios" in the Guide that would not require reporting:
- moving animals between pastures on the same property;
- accidental animal escapes.
Problem: these two scenarios don't shorten the long list of events that will have to be reported: the application of an ID tag, an animal's departure from or return to the property, the loss of an ID tag or re-tagging for any reason, the slaughter or death of an animal, or a lost animal. (Draft Program Standards at p.13.)
The Guide creates one very minor exception to the list of reportable events for animals that are born on the property, never leave the property, and are taken off only for custom slaughter for personal consumption. In practical terms, this exception is meaningless. The vast majority of individuals who raise food for themselves buy young animals, such as baby chicks or weaned calves, from other sources. Maintaining a breeding herd or flock is expensive and time-consuming, and not feasible for most individuals to do just for personal consumption. Thousands of people who consider themselves "small or non-commercial" producers buy and sell animals during their lives. This scenario is only relevant for government bureaucrats who have never raised their own food.
Confusion and Contradiction in Guide
The USDA's attempt to make people feel better about NAIS even leads it to contradict itself within the document. USDA states that "participation in local fairs and parades" will be exempt from reporting. But, elsewhere, USDA states that: "Reportable movements are those that involve a high risk of spreading disease, such as moving livestock from a farm to an event where a large numbers of animals are brought together from many sources." Local fairs and parades certainly bring large numbers of animals from many sources together! Along with not raising their own food, the USDA officials have apparently also never been to a local fair.
Tell Congress What You Think
The USDA concludes by encouraging people to submit comments to the working groups. These industry-appointed, non-representative groups are not the solution to the problems posed by NAIS. While it may be helpful to build a record of our objections to NAIS by writing the USDA and working groups, this is not a substitute for writing Congress. Ultimately, Congress controls what the USDA can and cannot do, and it is Congress that must hear our voices: Stop NAIS now.
A more detailed, point-by-point response to USDA's Guide is available at www.farmandranchfreedom.org/archives.html.
*Judith McGeary is an attorney in Austin, Texas, and the Executive Director of the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance. She has a B.S. in Biology from Stanford University and a J.D. with high honors from The University of Texas at Austin. She began her legal career by clerking for the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Since then, her practice has focused on environmental law, commercial litigation, and appeals. She and her husband run a small farm with horses, cattle, sheep, and poultry. For more information, go to www.farmandranchfreedom.org.