Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
National Animal
The National Animal Identifi cation System, or NAIS, is a controversial pro-
gram that would require every farm animal in the country to have Radio
Frequency IDs implanted, and every animal owner's property registered with
the government. The USDA's justifi cation for the program is that it will “pro-
tect the health of U.S. livestock and poultry and the economic well-being of
those industries” by enabling quick and effective tracing of an animal disease
to its source. However, the program was developed by industrial agriculture,
and it is not necessarily in the best interest of small farmers and livestock
owners.
The National Institute for Animal Agriculture (NIAA) is an industry-led
group that counts among its members some of the biggest corporate players in
U.S. meat production (for example, the National Pork Producers, Monsanto,
and Cargill Meat) and (surprise, surprise) the manufacturers and marketers
of high-tech animal ID equipment (such as Digital Angel Inc.; EZ-ID/AVID
ID Systems; and Micro Beef Technologies Ltd.). Beginning in 2002, the NIAA
used 9/11 and subsequently the BSE scares to lobby the USDA for a nation-
wide, all-livestock registration and tracking system. The result is the USDA's
proposed NAIS, set forth in a Draft Strategic Plan (Plan) and Draft Program
Standards (Standards) released on April 25, 2005.
When the program is fully implemented, the USDA says it will be able
to identify all premises on which animals and poultry are located, and all
animals that have had contact with a disease of concern, within 48 hours of
discovery. Yet no one has conducted any scientifi c peer-reviewed studies or
epidemiological models to analyze the effectiveness of the NAIS, nor has the
agency performed a cost-benefi t analysis, which it would normally do when
implementing a new program.
Initially USDA said that the program is “voluntary” at the federal level, yet
it has issued grants to the states to make it enforceable at the state level. It has
said its goal is 100 percent participation by January 2009 (and by that date it
was nowhere near meeting this goal). In fact, 4 years into the program, “par-
ticipation” is below its expectations (with only about 35 percent of livestock
producers registering), so in March of 2009, Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack
said that the USDA may pursue making it mandatory at the federal level. As
400
