The Federal Animal ID Program

The USDA reports, “On April 27, 2004, Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman announced the framework for implementing the NAIS.” A year later the USDA released its draft plan for NAIS. Word soon got around about its specifics, igniting the “firestorm of criticism” that led to cow pies being flung at the Maine agricultural officials this year. 

Three Strikes and You’re Out of Business 

T he NAIS has three components: premises identification, animal identification, and animal tracking. Premises are all the places in the U.S. that raise cattle, deer and elk, goats and sheep, llamas and alpacas, poultry and pigs. The USDA wants each premise’s address, contact name, type of premises, and phone number. All premises will be assigned a seven digit premises ID number. All information collected will be fed into a state database linked to a federal database, which is connected to global positioning satellites. The USDA assures us that all data will remain private, used only for its intended purposes. Critics doubt this, especially since data will also be shared with “big boy” industry database owners. 

Animal identification involves tagging all the animals on all the premises registered—the USDA estimates there are 40 million such critters. Each animal will be assigned a 15 digit animal ID number. But an exception is being made for premises with a large amount of animals that are bred and moved in groups. In those cases these premises can get 13 digit “group/lot” ID numbers. 

Thus big operatiors will have to purchase only one animal ID tag for each “group/lot,” while small timers will have to buy one for each animal. A 2003 article in Beef magazine, “Bigger is Cheaper,” reported on a study by Kansas State University. The study, a joint Beef /KSU venture, calculated the cost per animal ID and associated technology. This was $24.66 for a herd of 62, compared to $3.99 for a herd of 1,250. The average national cattle herd is about 20. 

The study assumed the animal tag was a radio frequency ID, which can track each animal. This technology requires other equipment, such as software and electronic readers. The USDA says it is “technology neutral” on this issue and that other forms of ID, such as retinal scans and DNA, are under consideration by the industry.” 

In the third NAIS component, animal tracking, the USDA will use its Animal Tracing Processing System, “commonly known as the metadase system, that will allow state and federal animal health offcials to query NAIS and private databases during a disease investigation.” The USDA is currently entering into “cooperative agreements” with “private [i.e., agribusiness] database owners.” According to the May 16 Ag Weekly newspaper, under NAIS animal owners must report, within 24 hours, any missing animal or missing tag and any sale, death, or slaughter of any animal or any movement of an animal off or within a farm or homestead. 

The USDA now maintains that participation in NAIS is voluntary—a change from its 2005 draft—“while the system is being phased in.” But it also states, “If the marketplace, along with State and Federal identification programs, does not provide adequate incentives for achieving participation, USDA may be required to implement regulations.” Translation: make participation mandatory. 

I n an April 2006 press release, current Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns announced his agency’s timeline for implementation of NAIS. “We recognize this represents one of the largest systematic changes ever faced by the livestock industry,” he said. In the release the USDA stated, “The implementation plan continues to set an aggressive timeline for insuring full implementation of NAIS by 2009.” 

But reports on nonais.com and other websites detail USDA efforts to assign premises ID numbers (PINs) without the owners’ permission. At the end of May Walter Jeffries wrote, “A while back the USDA called me and tried to get me to answer questions so they could sign me up for a PIN. Today I got a call from the government again and the woman wanted to give me a PIN number. I asked what she was about and she would not say. She just said she needed to give me a PIN number. I refused and hung up on her. Farmers and homesteaders in other states have had the same experience.” 

Another recent report, from the Texas Animal Health Commission Watch, “Phone survey = Premises Registration SCAM,” confirms Jef fries’s assertions: “Everyone needs to be aware that there is a possibility that some USDA/TAHC ‘Hired Guns’ or unnamed subcontractors are in the process of conducting some sort of agricultural/farm survey. We have received word that this is going on east of Dallas. The phone number showing up on caller ID is from the 405 area code, which is in the Oklahoma City area. They call you up on the pretext of conducting a survey. Later you find out you have been voluntarily signed up on the premises ID tax roll. Do not be a victim.” 

As to the second component of NAIS, the USDA stated last April, “The animal identification phase is being implemented by March 2006 and 100 percent (40 million) of new animals tagged by 2009. 

In May Congressperson Ron Paul (RTX) introduced an amendment to the USDA’s annual spending bill that would have cut further funding for NAIS. That effort failed, but in a statement titled “Stop the National Animal ID System,” he remarked (in part) later that month: “The intrusive monitoring system amounts to nothing more than a tax on livestock owners, allowing the federal government detailed access to their private property…. Once NAIS becomes mandatory, any failure to report and tag an animal subjects the owner to $1,000 per day fines…. NAIS also forces livestock owners to comply with new paperwork and monitoring regulations. These farmers and ranchers would be paying for an assault on their property and privacy rights, as NAIS empowers federal agents to enter and seize property without a warrant—a blatant violation of the 4th amendment. More than anything, NAIS places our family farmers and ranchers at an eco nomic disadvantage against agri business and overseas competition.” 

Paul pinned his hopes on Senate action to defund and stop NAIS. But perhaps the real power to stop it lies in the strength of opponents mobilizing on their farms and homesteads, in their communities, through their blogs, websites, and discussion groups spreading information like a firestorm.