National Animal ID System
After strong opposition from farmers and ranchers, USDA announced in February they will reconsider proposed privatization of portions of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS).
USDA maintains that the Animal Health Protection Act passed in the 2002 farm bill gives them the authority to develop a national animal identification system. But their attorneys are reconsidering earlier conclusions regarding the legal authority to require producers to report to a private entity.
There are manifold failings of USDA’s NAIS proposal, including:
- Privatization invites bias, perhaps even graft and corruption, and could be distorted in favor of meatpackers and to the detriment of farmers and ranchers.
- Privatization through the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and National Pork Producers Council is clearly no guarantee that such a meatpacker bias would not occur.
- No adequate safeguards have been proposed to ensure that NAIS information could not be used by packers to discriminate against small and mid-sized producers.
- Financial impacts on producers are inequitable – with much higher per head costs likely for small and mid-sized farmers and ranchers.
Animal identification for the purpose of keeping our food safe has merit. But USDA is proposing a system too easily corruptible; discriminatory and injurious to small and mid-sized farmers and ranchers; and too expensive for taxpayers, consumers, and producers.
post a question or comment here or contact John Crabtree, johnc@cfra.org
Center for Rural Affairs
Values. Worth. Action.
USDA maintains that the Animal Health Protection Act passed in the 2002 farm bill gives them the authority to develop a national animal identification system. But their attorneys are reconsidering earlier conclusions regarding the legal authority to require producers to report to a private entity.
There are manifold failings of USDA’s NAIS proposal, including:
- Privatization invites bias, perhaps even graft and corruption, and could be distorted in favor of meatpackers and to the detriment of farmers and ranchers.
- Privatization through the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and National Pork Producers Council is clearly no guarantee that such a meatpacker bias would not occur.
- No adequate safeguards have been proposed to ensure that NAIS information could not be used by packers to discriminate against small and mid-sized producers.
- Financial impacts on producers are inequitable – with much higher per head costs likely for small and mid-sized farmers and ranchers.
Animal identification for the purpose of keeping our food safe has merit. But USDA is proposing a system too easily corruptible; discriminatory and injurious to small and mid-sized farmers and ranchers; and too expensive for taxpayers, consumers, and producers.
post a question or comment here or contact John Crabtree, johnc@cfra.org
Center for Rural Affairs
Values. Worth. Action.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home