Okay, Keep The Money – We Want Animal ID To Stay Voluntary
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
The House Agricultural Appropriations Subcommittee is reported here as threatening that if the National Animal Identification System doesn’t change to mandatory participation Congress won’t give the United States Department of Agriculture any more funding to operate the program. Okay, keep the money!
Now naturally, we aren’t in the decision loop for USDA and probably Congressional members, in support of Big Brother being able to trace every individual livestock, don’t care what we think, but the messages coming from farmers and ranchers throughout the country is that NAIS should stay as a voluntary program. It’s the same point of view that we have (and have had since the issue first surfaced).
Livestock producers who our federal government (and their agents for sign-up at the state level) would like to convince to sign-up haven’t been. Does this fact resonate with anyone who might be listening?
The primary benefit that is given for why livestock producers should sign up and get a mandatory tracking system operating is the protection our trade markets would have should there be a disease outbreak occur. Being able to track down the source, locations and contacts a diseased animal would have had is supposed to be our “protection”.
From experience of zealous government information gathers (Internal Revenue Service, Environmental Protection Agency – to name just a couple) why is it again that we think our “government” is going to protect us for our own good?
“Don’t worry about such nonsense” the sirens to sign up implore. There would be safeguards in place to keep the information from everyone but those who need it in time of an emergency. Why can’t that work out as well under a voluntary program as it would under a mandatory program?
The likely comeback would be that unless all are encompassed within the database, there might be a risk that a diseased animal wouldn’t be covered. With the program operating for the past several years, involving those who have signed up – how many animals have been traced down, using the system in place?
If the answer to that question is that the system hasn’t actually been in place to track animal movement, regardless of premise registration information and individual animal identification – explain how a government agency that can’t seem to get its operations underway should be trusted with doing a better job, just because of mandatory compliance.
Trust is normally earned by fulfilling the expectations of more minimal requirements before acquiring more responsibilities. The unwillingness for livestock producers to put enough trust in the system doing what it is supposed to do for us, should be an indication that going forward with a mandatory program is as misguided on an idea as the past performance has been deficient.
The House Agricultural Appropriations Subcommittee is reported here as threatening that if the National Animal Identification System doesn’t change to mandatory participation Congress won’t give the United States Department of Agriculture any more funding to operate the program. Okay, keep the money!
Now naturally, we aren’t in the decision loop for USDA and probably Congressional members, in support of Big Brother being able to trace every individual livestock, don’t care what we think, but the messages coming from farmers and ranchers throughout the country is that NAIS should stay as a voluntary program. It’s the same point of view that we have (and have had since the issue first surfaced).
Livestock producers who our federal government (and their agents for sign-up at the state level) would like to convince to sign-up haven’t been. Does this fact resonate with anyone who might be listening?
The primary benefit that is given for why livestock producers should sign up and get a mandatory tracking system operating is the protection our trade markets would have should there be a disease outbreak occur. Being able to track down the source, locations and contacts a diseased animal would have had is supposed to be our “protection”.
From experience of zealous government information gathers (Internal Revenue Service, Environmental Protection Agency – to name just a couple) why is it again that we think our “government” is going to protect us for our own good?
“Don’t worry about such nonsense” the sirens to sign up implore. There would be safeguards in place to keep the information from everyone but those who need it in time of an emergency. Why can’t that work out as well under a voluntary program as it would under a mandatory program?
The likely comeback would be that unless all are encompassed within the database, there might be a risk that a diseased animal wouldn’t be covered. With the program operating for the past several years, involving those who have signed up – how many animals have been traced down, using the system in place?
If the answer to that question is that the system hasn’t actually been in place to track animal movement, regardless of premise registration information and individual animal identification – explain how a government agency that can’t seem to get its operations underway should be trusted with doing a better job, just because of mandatory compliance.
Trust is normally earned by fulfilling the expectations of more minimal requirements before acquiring more responsibilities. The unwillingness for livestock producers to put enough trust in the system doing what it is supposed to do for us, should be an indication that going forward with a mandatory program is as misguided on an idea as the past performance has been deficient.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 6/16/2009 6:29 AM 
Categories: National Animal Identification
Tags: Livestock Tracing Animal Movement NAIS USDA Funding
Categories: National Animal Identification
Tags: Livestock Tracing Animal Movement NAIS USDA Funding
Comments