South Dakota bill prohibit any participation in NAIS fails this year

HB 1305 would have prohibited the state of South Dakota from participating in the NAIS.  It was approved, 8-5, by the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee, but was voted down on the floor of the House on February 12, 2008.

Although this is very disappointing, it's important to recognize that HB 1305 got much further than the 2007 bill to limit NAIS to a voluntary program only.  The grassroots opposition to NAIS in South Dakota continues to gain strength!

Take Action

1)  Educate your community.  Download materials from our Take Action page and put them out at feed stores, riding stables, auction barnsm co-ops, etc.   We need everyone to know about NAIS!

2) Talk to your elected officials.  Ask for their support for an anti-NAIS bill in the next session. If you don’t know who represents you, you can find that information at http://legis.state.sd.us/who/index.aspx

When you call, ask to speak to the staffer who handles agricultural issues.   Ask them what they already know about NAIS, explain your objections to it, and respond to the issues they bring up. Stay in touch through email after the phone call, so that they know you really care about this issue.

For more information, contact us at info@FarmAndRanchFreedom.org or visit the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association website at http://www.southdakotastockgrowers.org/

Talking Points for Calls

• NAIS will hurt South Dakota’s economy:
  • There has been no analysis at federal or state level that establishes the costs or benefits of NAIS.
  • Costs of the program include the cost of the tags, hardware, software, time and labor
  • Many small farmer and ranchers cannot afford these costs
  • Service providers (veterinarians, feed stores, auction houses, meat processors, etc.) will be harmed when the farmers and ranchers go out of business.
  • Remaining farmers will pass the costs on to consumers, lowering demand for local foods
• Neither the USDA nor the state agency has scientific proof that NAIS will improve disease control:
  • It does not address the cause, treatment, or transmission of disease, in domestic or wild animals.
  • It does not significantly improve on current methods for identification and tracking of disease. 
• NAIS is not necessary for the market.  Age- and source-verification is already available through the USDA's Process Verified Program
• NAIS will not improve food safety
  • USDA itself has stated that this is not a food safety program
  • Contamination of food with e. coli and other bacteria occurs at the slaughterhouse or afterwards, while NAIS will stop before that point.
• NAIS will not protect against terrorism and the technology is flawed
  • The microchips chosen by the state can be cloned, destroyed, or infected with computer viruses, and reprogrammed. Any terrorist or thief can use this.
  • The database of information, created by the state agency and available to USDA, will provide a target for hackers.
• NAIS infringes on people's constitutional rights, including due process, privacy, and religious freedom. 
• NAIS unfairly attacks the rights of pet owners and those who raise animals as food for their family.
• USDA states that NAIS is voluntary at the federal level, so there is no "federal mandate" requiring South Dakota to implement this program
• Other states are also rejecting or limiting NAIS, so South Dakota will not be disadvantaged by refusing to participate.
• Please support HB 1305

More Information

HB 1305 states: “ The State of South Dakota may not develop, implement, or participate in the national animal identification system (NAIS) or any component of the NAIS, including premises registration, animal identification, and animal movement tracing, or any similar source verification system other than the current South Dakota Certified Beef Program established  pursuant to chapter 39- 24. Any cooperative agreement between the state and federal government or any other state associated with any component of the NAIS is void. Any NAIS identification list or related database compiled using federal funds under NAIS is void.”

The bill does allow the Animal Industry Board to develop “specific programs for identification of animals,” but not for premises, “for the sole purpose of maintaining animal health and ensuring the safety of the food supply.”  While the Board might try to slip NAIS through other disease control programs under this section (as has been done in Michigan), the explicit and clear rejection of NAIS in the bill would help deter any such plan.

The sponsors of the bill are:
Reps. DeVries, Brunner, Gassman, Howie, Jerke, Lucas, Nelson, Noem, and Betty Olson
Senators Lintz, Duenwald, Maher, McNenny, Napoli, and Sutton

The Legislature's website is http://legis.state.sd.us/index.aspx

Members of the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee

All area codes are (605)

Thomas Brunner – Chair,  (p) 257-2153, (f) 257-2336
Thomas Deadrick – Vice Chair, (p) 337-3021, (f) 337-3811
Mark DeVries, (p) 344-2289, (f) 685-3561
David Gassman, (p) 523-2423 (home phone)
Clayton Halverson, (p) 237-0047
Dale Hargens, (p) 870-2142
Gordon Howie, (p) 393-2334, (f) 393-0118
Gary Jerke, (p) 583-4544, (f) 996-0310
Paul Nelson, (p) 983-5014 (home phone), (f) 983-5014
Carol Pitts, (p) 695-5770, (f) 866-803-6725
David Sigdestad, (p) 492-3521 (home phone), (f) 492-3521
Kim Vanneman, (p) 842-2751
Mike Vehle, (p) 995-1109

NOTE: Where the legislator did not list an office phone number, we’ve shown their home phone number.  Please be polite and call during regular business hours.

Talking Points from South Dakota Stockgrowers

1) COST TO THE STATE – to implement, maintain and enforce compliance:
This will become a fully implemented, unfunded federal mandate. In the Cooperative Agreements signed by the State Veterinarian, the state has to cost share 20% for the promotion of premises registration. Page 62 of the December 12, 2007 Business Plan reveals: “The Compliant Premises Registration Systems are premises registration systems that are maintained entirely by the state, including development and operational cost

2) COST TO PRODUCERS –is undetermined:
The USDA has not performed a cost analysis of the NAIS. The program will create significant costs in both time and money that will cause an undue economic burden on producers and the communities that depend on them.

3) COMMISSIONERS’ RESOLUTION:
The South Dakota Association of County Commissioners unanimously passed a resolution opposing mandatory State and Federal Animal Identification. At least seventeen individual counties have passed similar resolutions.

4) NAIS IS NOT A FOOD SAFETY PROTECTION SYSTEM:
NAIS stops at the packing plant floor, so it does nothing to increase consumer information, choice or trust. Page 2 of the December 2007 USDA/APHIS User Guide states: “NAIS is not a food safety protection system. The US already has a comprehensive system of food safety policies, testing and inspection requirements in place to ensure the safety of our product”.

5) CONFIDENTIALITY:
The USDA cannot guarantee the confidentiality of producer information in databases, because the databases will be maintained by states and private companies.

6) NAIS WILL NOT IMPROVE ANIMAL HEALTH:
Any effective animal health program must take into consideration the specific species of animal and the specific disease, including its cause, transmission, treatment options and prevention.

7) MANDATORY IN SOME STATES:
While the USDA states that NAIS is currently “voluntary at the federal level”, it has been providing funds to states to implement the program. With this federal funding, several states have implemented or proposed implementing mandatory programs. Moreover, some states have registered individuals in the program without their consent, or have used coercive measures to increase participation while claiming NAIS remains voluntary.

NAIS is likely to have serious unintended consequences on all citizens of the State of South Dakota – especially those who reside in rural communities. The potential cost of participation in NAIS will burden producers to the extent that some will abandon farming and ranching, impacting related businesses such as feed stores, auction barns, livestock supply stores, implement dealers and the real estate market. This in turn, translates into a loss of the tax dollars which support local economies, and ultimately, the tax base for the state.

We are not opposed to identifying our livestock, we have been doing it for generations. The government and the livestock industry already have systems in place for tracking animals. We do not need another huge government bureaucracy dictating how we run our business. We are opposed to NAIS (which is a federal program) having authority over our state, its producers and their property. 

Last updated January 28, 2008