‘No mandatory NAIS’ | TSLN.com

‘No mandatory NAIS’

Aaron Nelson

TSLN photos by Aaron NelsonAround 300 individuals attended the Rapid City NAIS Listening Session Thursday, the largest attended session so far.

RAPID CITY, SD – By an overwhelming majority, those in attendance at the Rapid City National Identification System (NAIS) listening session Thursday said “NO” to mandatory animal ID.

The listening session was one of several such gatherings across the country sponsored by the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The intent of the sessions is to ask stakeholders for their solutions to overcome existing and new obstacles to implementing NAIS. The hope is to create a program producers can feel comfortable supporting.

But for many of those voicing their opinions at the Rapid City session, the best way to handle NAIS is to end it completely. Several others were fine with it being voluntary but in no way supported a mandatory program.

Only a handful of the approximately 300 participants on hand at the session were in favor of some sort of mandatory NAIS.

Before the session was opened to comments from the public, a pre-recorded video from Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack was played. He talked about the potential of increased marketability of the nation’s livestock to trading partners around the world, if a mandatory system is in place. He also wanted producers to think about the cost of a nationwide disease outbreak, and the crisis it could make without NAIS.

He also encouraged more discussion about this system and said this is just the beginning of many more talks in the future.

Recommended Stories For You

But the point of these sessions was to listen to the people and many of those on hand signed up to speak. Those who wished to voice their opinions were given a ticket and if their number was randomly drawn, they were allowed approximately three minutes to speak.

The first participant to the microphone was Christian Harvey, a South Dakota Stockgrowers member from Valentine, NE. Harvey asked all those opposed to mandatory NAIS to stand up, followed by all those for NAIS to stand. Nearly the entire room stood up opposed and Harvey counted only five standing in favor of NAIS.

“The last thing you are going to get me to do,” said Harvey, “is register my premises.”

Harvey’s sentiments echoed a long line of producers that followed from South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Nebraska and Wyoming.

Skip Waters of Wyoming gave his thoughts of what he thinks NAIS really is about.

“It’s about power and control,” said Waters. “It’s about personal, individual and property rights. It’s about imposing, undue, cause and burdens on producers. It’s about money – selling technology, tags, computers… It’s not just a bad idea, it’s a horrible idea. It’s ludicrous. It’s been pointed out it does not work around the world. So, you have to ask yourself, ‘Why are we doing this. If something’s not broke, why are we fixing it?'”

Harvey spoke of an ID system that is already in place, and already working. That system is the hot-iron brand, and several other speakers agreed.

“In South Dakota we already have a reliable, inexpensive, fail-proof animal identification system – it’s called the hot-iron brand,” said South Dakota Representative and rancher Betty Olson of Prairie City. “The hot-iron brand will never fall off, it will remain with that animal to slaughter… The cost for a lifetime ear tag, microchips [and] electronic tracking devices to livestock producers would be prohibitive. These costs would be enough to put many producers out of business but the legal expenses to the producers for failure to report livestock movement required by NAIS would put the rest of us out of business.”

RAPID CITY, SD – By an overwhelming majority, those in attendance at the Rapid City National Identification System (NAIS) listening session Thursday said “NO” to mandatory animal ID.

The listening session was one of several such gatherings across the country sponsored by the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The intent of the sessions is to ask stakeholders for their solutions to overcome existing and new obstacles to implementing NAIS. The hope is to create a program producers can feel comfortable supporting.

But for many of those voicing their opinions at the Rapid City session, the best way to handle NAIS is to end it completely. Several others were fine with it being voluntary but in no way supported a mandatory program.

Only a handful of the approximately 300 participants on hand at the session were in favor of some sort of mandatory NAIS.

Before the session was opened to comments from the public, a pre-recorded video from Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack was played. He talked about the potential of increased marketability of the nation’s livestock to trading partners around the world, if a mandatory system is in place. He also wanted producers to think about the cost of a nationwide disease outbreak, and the crisis it could make without NAIS.

He also encouraged more discussion about this system and said this is just the beginning of many more talks in the future.

But the point of these sessions was to listen to the people and many of those on hand signed up to speak. Those who wished to voice their opinions were given a ticket and if their number was randomly drawn, they were allowed approximately three minutes to speak.

The first participant to the microphone was Christian Harvey, a South Dakota Stockgrowers member from Valentine, NE. Harvey asked all those opposed to mandatory NAIS to stand up, followed by all those for NAIS to stand. Nearly the entire room stood up opposed and Harvey counted only five standing in favor of NAIS.

“The last thing you are going to get me to do,” said Harvey, “is register my premises.”

Harvey’s sentiments echoed a long line of producers that followed from South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Nebraska and Wyoming.

Skip Waters of Wyoming gave his thoughts of what he thinks NAIS really is about.

“It’s about power and control,” said Waters. “It’s about personal, individual and property rights. It’s about imposing, undue, cause and burdens on producers. It’s about money – selling technology, tags, computers… It’s not just a bad idea, it’s a horrible idea. It’s ludicrous. It’s been pointed out it does not work around the world. So, you have to ask yourself, ‘Why are we doing this. If something’s not broke, why are we fixing it?'”

Harvey spoke of an ID system that is already in place, and already working. That system is the hot-iron brand, and several other speakers agreed.

“In South Dakota we already have a reliable, inexpensive, fail-proof animal identification system – it’s called the hot-iron brand,” said South Dakota Representative and rancher Betty Olson of Prairie City. “The hot-iron brand will never fall off, it will remain with that animal to slaughter… The cost for a lifetime ear tag, microchips [and] electronic tracking devices to livestock producers would be prohibitive. These costs would be enough to put many producers out of business but the legal expenses to the producers for failure to report livestock movement required by NAIS would put the rest of us out of business.”

RAPID CITY, SD – By an overwhelming majority, those in attendance at the Rapid City National Identification System (NAIS) listening session Thursday said “NO” to mandatory animal ID.

The listening session was one of several such gatherings across the country sponsored by the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The intent of the sessions is to ask stakeholders for their solutions to overcome existing and new obstacles to implementing NAIS. The hope is to create a program producers can feel comfortable supporting.

But for many of those voicing their opinions at the Rapid City session, the best way to handle NAIS is to end it completely. Several others were fine with it being voluntary but in no way supported a mandatory program.

Only a handful of the approximately 300 participants on hand at the session were in favor of some sort of mandatory NAIS.

Before the session was opened to comments from the public, a pre-recorded video from Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack was played. He talked about the potential of increased marketability of the nation’s livestock to trading partners around the world, if a mandatory system is in place. He also wanted producers to think about the cost of a nationwide disease outbreak, and the crisis it could make without NAIS.

He also encouraged more discussion about this system and said this is just the beginning of many more talks in the future.

But the point of these sessions was to listen to the people and many of those on hand signed up to speak. Those who wished to voice their opinions were given a ticket and if their number was randomly drawn, they were allowed approximately three minutes to speak.

The first participant to the microphone was Christian Harvey, a South Dakota Stockgrowers member from Valentine, NE. Harvey asked all those opposed to mandatory NAIS to stand up, followed by all those for NAIS to stand. Nearly the entire room stood up opposed and Harvey counted only five standing in favor of NAIS.

“The last thing you are going to get me to do,” said Harvey, “is register my premises.”

Harvey’s sentiments echoed a long line of producers that followed from South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Nebraska and Wyoming.

Skip Waters of Wyoming gave his thoughts of what he thinks NAIS really is about.

“It’s about power and control,” said Waters. “It’s about personal, individual and property rights. It’s about imposing, undue, cause and burdens on producers. It’s about money – selling technology, tags, computers… It’s not just a bad idea, it’s a horrible idea. It’s ludicrous. It’s been pointed out it does not work around the world. So, you have to ask yourself, ‘Why are we doing this. If something’s not broke, why are we fixing it?'”

Harvey spoke of an ID system that is already in place, and already working. That system is the hot-iron brand, and several other speakers agreed.

“In South Dakota we already have a reliable, inexpensive, fail-proof animal identification system – it’s called the hot-iron brand,” said South Dakota Representative and rancher Betty Olson of Prairie City. “The hot-iron brand will never fall off, it will remain with that animal to slaughter… The cost for a lifetime ear tag, microchips [and] electronic tracking devices to livestock producers would be prohibitive. These costs would be enough to put many producers out of business but the legal expenses to the producers for failure to report livestock movement required by NAIS would put the rest of us out of business.”

RAPID CITY, SD – By an overwhelming majority, those in attendance at the Rapid City National Identification System (NAIS) listening session Thursday said “NO” to mandatory animal ID.

The listening session was one of several such gatherings across the country sponsored by the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The intent of the sessions is to ask stakeholders for their solutions to overcome existing and new obstacles to implementing NAIS. The hope is to create a program producers can feel comfortable supporting.

But for many of those voicing their opinions at the Rapid City session, the best way to handle NAIS is to end it completely. Several others were fine with it being voluntary but in no way supported a mandatory program.

Only a handful of the approximately 300 participants on hand at the session were in favor of some sort of mandatory NAIS.

Before the session was opened to comments from the public, a pre-recorded video from Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack was played. He talked about the potential of increased marketability of the nation’s livestock to trading partners around the world, if a mandatory system is in place. He also wanted producers to think about the cost of a nationwide disease outbreak, and the crisis it could make without NAIS.

He also encouraged more discussion about this system and said this is just the beginning of many more talks in the future.

But the point of these sessions was to listen to the people and many of those on hand signed up to speak. Those who wished to voice their opinions were given a ticket and if their number was randomly drawn, they were allowed approximately three minutes to speak.

The first participant to the microphone was Christian Harvey, a South Dakota Stockgrowers member from Valentine, NE. Harvey asked all those opposed to mandatory NAIS to stand up, followed by all those for NAIS to stand. Nearly the entire room stood up opposed and Harvey counted only five standing in favor of NAIS.

“The last thing you are going to get me to do,” said Harvey, “is register my premises.”

Harvey’s sentiments echoed a long line of producers that followed from South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Nebraska and Wyoming.

Skip Waters of Wyoming gave his thoughts of what he thinks NAIS really is about.

“It’s about power and control,” said Waters. “It’s about personal, individual and property rights. It’s about imposing, undue, cause and burdens on producers. It’s about money – selling technology, tags, computers… It’s not just a bad idea, it’s a horrible idea. It’s ludicrous. It’s been pointed out it does not work around the world. So, you have to ask yourself, ‘Why are we doing this. If something’s not broke, why are we fixing it?'”

Harvey spoke of an ID system that is already in place, and already working. That system is the hot-iron brand, and several other speakers agreed.

“In South Dakota we already have a reliable, inexpensive, fail-proof animal identification system – it’s called the hot-iron brand,” said South Dakota Representative and rancher Betty Olson of Prairie City. “The hot-iron brand will never fall off, it will remain with that animal to slaughter… The cost for a lifetime ear tag, microchips [and] electronic tracking devices to livestock producers would be prohibitive. These costs would be enough to put many producers out of business but the legal expenses to the producers for failure to report livestock movement required by NAIS would put the rest of us out of business.”

RAPID CITY, SD – By an overwhelming majority, those in attendance at the Rapid City National Identification System (NAIS) listening session Thursday said “NO” to mandatory animal ID.

The listening session was one of several such gatherings across the country sponsored by the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The intent of the sessions is to ask stakeholders for their solutions to overcome existing and new obstacles to implementing NAIS. The hope is to create a program producers can feel comfortable supporting.

But for many of those voicing their opinions at the Rapid City session, the best way to handle NAIS is to end it completely. Several others were fine with it being voluntary but in no way supported a mandatory program.

Only a handful of the approximately 300 participants on hand at the session were in favor of some sort of mandatory NAIS.

Before the session was opened to comments from the public, a pre-recorded video from Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack was played. He talked about the potential of increased marketability of the nation’s livestock to trading partners around the world, if a mandatory system is in place. He also wanted producers to think about the cost of a nationwide disease outbreak, and the crisis it could make without NAIS.

He also encouraged more discussion about this system and said this is just the beginning of many more talks in the future.

But the point of these sessions was to listen to the people and many of those on hand signed up to speak. Those who wished to voice their opinions were given a ticket and if their number was randomly drawn, they were allowed approximately three minutes to speak.

The first participant to the microphone was Christian Harvey, a South Dakota Stockgrowers member from Valentine, NE. Harvey asked all those opposed to mandatory NAIS to stand up, followed by all those for NAIS to stand. Nearly the entire room stood up opposed and Harvey counted only five standing in favor of NAIS.

“The last thing you are going to get me to do,” said Harvey, “is register my premises.”

Harvey’s sentiments echoed a long line of producers that followed from South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Nebraska and Wyoming.

Skip Waters of Wyoming gave his thoughts of what he thinks NAIS really is about.

“It’s about power and control,” said Waters. “It’s about personal, individual and property rights. It’s about imposing, undue, cause and burdens on producers. It’s about money – selling technology, tags, computers… It’s not just a bad idea, it’s a horrible idea. It’s ludicrous. It’s been pointed out it does not work around the world. So, you have to ask yourself, ‘Why are we doing this. If something’s not broke, why are we fixing it?'”

Harvey spoke of an ID system that is already in place, and already working. That system is the hot-iron brand, and several other speakers agreed.

“In South Dakota we already have a reliable, inexpensive, fail-proof animal identification system – it’s called the hot-iron brand,” said South Dakota Representative and rancher Betty Olson of Prairie City. “The hot-iron brand will never fall off, it will remain with that animal to slaughter… The cost for a lifetime ear tag, microchips [and] electronic tracking devices to livestock producers would be prohibitive. These costs would be enough to put many producers out of business but the legal expenses to the producers for failure to report livestock movement required by NAIS would put the rest of us out of business.”

RAPID CITY, SD – By an overwhelming majority, those in attendance at the Rapid City National Identification System (NAIS) listening session Thursday said “NO” to mandatory animal ID.

The listening session was one of several such gatherings across the country sponsored by the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The intent of the sessions is to ask stakeholders for their solutions to overcome existing and new obstacles to implementing NAIS. The hope is to create a program producers can feel comfortable supporting.

But for many of those voicing their opinions at the Rapid City session, the best way to handle NAIS is to end it completely. Several others were fine with it being voluntary but in no way supported a mandatory program.

Only a handful of the approximately 300 participants on hand at the session were in favor of some sort of mandatory NAIS.

Before the session was opened to comments from the public, a pre-recorded video from Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack was played. He talked about the potential of increased marketability of the nation’s livestock to trading partners around the world, if a mandatory system is in place. He also wanted producers to think about the cost of a nationwide disease outbreak, and the crisis it could make without NAIS.

He also encouraged more discussion about this system and said this is just the beginning of many more talks in the future.

But the point of these sessions was to listen to the people and many of those on hand signed up to speak. Those who wished to voice their opinions were given a ticket and if their number was randomly drawn, they were allowed approximately three minutes to speak.

The first participant to the microphone was Christian Harvey, a South Dakota Stockgrowers member from Valentine, NE. Harvey asked all those opposed to mandatory NAIS to stand up, followed by all those for NAIS to stand. Nearly the entire room stood up opposed and Harvey counted only five standing in favor of NAIS.

“The last thing you are going to get me to do,” said Harvey, “is register my premises.”

Harvey’s sentiments echoed a long line of producers that followed from South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Nebraska and Wyoming.

Skip Waters of Wyoming gave his thoughts of what he thinks NAIS really is about.

“It’s about power and control,” said Waters. “It’s about personal, individual and property rights. It’s about imposing, undue, cause and burdens on producers. It’s about money – selling technology, tags, computers… It’s not just a bad idea, it’s a horrible idea. It’s ludicrous. It’s been pointed out it does not work around the world. So, you have to ask yourself, ‘Why are we doing this. If something’s not broke, why are we fixing it?'”

Harvey spoke of an ID system that is already in place, and already working. That system is the hot-iron brand, and several other speakers agreed.

“In South Dakota we already have a reliable, inexpensive, fail-proof animal identification system – it’s called the hot-iron brand,” said South Dakota Representative and rancher Betty Olson of Prairie City. “The hot-iron brand will never fall off, it will remain with that animal to slaughter… The cost for a lifetime ear tag, microchips [and] electronic tracking devices to livestock producers would be prohibitive. These costs would be enough to put many producers out of business but the legal expenses to the producers for failure to report livestock movement required by NAIS would put the rest of us out of business.”