PPJG original post. Author: Marti Oakley © August 22, 2009 4:23 pm cst
This is such a crock even I can’t believe it. This is the actual public statement by USDA claiming they heard substantial support for NAIS/Premises ID. What were these people smoking?
“Officials with the Department of Agriculture said they heard
substantial support for animal disease traceability during a series of
public meetings but many animal owners indicated concerns. Cost,
privacy, bureaucracy, liability in the event of a disease outbreak,
and the religious implications of such animal identification are
behind ongoing opposition to the department’s National Animal
Those guys at the USDA are such jokers! And, after reading this press release from Wisconsin, the Wisconsin AG department must be in on the joke. The USDA listening sessions, each having been taped, shows that an estimated 95% of those attending were vehemently opposed to any such plan as the National Animal Identification System/Premises ID plans.
This small announcement has been picked up in various places but Wisconsin is one of those three test states that took cooperative agreement funding (bribery) to implement Premises Id through the state legislature. Wisconsin is now preparing to go into Phase 2, NAIS.
Did I mention that Wisconsin wasn’t included in the listening session tours? I wonder why?
It must have come as quite a shock to USDA representatives to be confronted with the high numbers of independent and family producers who showed up for each and every one of these sessions in every state where they were held. I say this because for the most part USDA reps stuttered and stammered and had a look about them as if they were about to face the gallows. Then to have these same participants, whom the USDA was sure would be awed simply by its presence, whom the USDA was sure were just dumb farmers and ranchers who didn’t know anything, stand up and pointedly and with knowledge explain that they knew, what the intent of these programs really were and what it would do to their operations, must have been a frightening experience for them.
Nothing is worse than the realization that you have seriously underestimated your opponent and the obvious misconceptions you had about them.
In fact, if USDA is that confused about what took place at these “listening sessions” and the “breakout sessions” meant to steer those simple minded rural folk into thinking or believing that NAIS/Premises ID was a good idea, You Tube is loaded with videos documenting the public anger and outrage over this attempt to run them out of business.
The only “substantial support” the USDA can truthfully claim was from the hired security guards that stood between them and the people they feared most: The farmers and ranchers they intend to put out of business on behalf of industrialized corporate agriculture, and international interests.
Just a side note:
The Pork Producers, Farm Bureau, and Dairy Industry via national organizations gave token support for the program; each of them listed as campaign donors to many of the politicians in the Ag Department.
Many of the larger producers most of whom belong to national organizations, speaking on behalf of members (who had no real idea of the impact this would have on their operations and many of whom are still in a state of shocked numbness,) claimed they needed NAIS to protect the security of their Industry. Ironic how the dairy and pork folks have their hands out for cooperative agreement funds (bribes) and many have signed MOU’s (memoranda of understanding) with the USDA. I wonder how these organizations will explain to their members how the government’s involvement in their industry was the cause of their financial problems to begin with…and they knew it.
USDA: You jackasses did NOT hear any substantial support for this ill advised plan. What you did hear was the growing backlash against government takeover of agriculture.
Did I mention that Tom Vilsack never made an appearance? Neither did Collin Peterson (D) MN, head of the Agriculture Committee in the US HOUSE who swore after the March AG meeting he would have NAIS mandatory by December 31 of this year. Now you would have thought these two guys would have been out pitching their plan. Maybe they were busy those days; probably having lunch with those good old boys from Monsanto or some corporate lobbyist looking to make a buck……or spend one.
(C) copyright 2009 Marti Oakley