Archive for the ‘NAIS’ Category
LINCOLN, NH – A 100-group coalition — in letters to the U.S. Department of Agriculture and to Congress — urges that the National Animal Identification System be dissolved completely and that all 100 organizations look forward to working with USDA to enhance our nation’s animal disease preparedness in a manner that builds upon our past successes and respects the interests of U.S. livestock producers and consumers.
In the 2010 Agriculture Appropriations Bill, Congress reduced NAIS funding to $5.3 million, but did not specify how those funds were to be allocated.
The letter to Congress, sent Nov. 18, asks to support the limited use of NAIS funding to shut down the program, and to refocus the agency on measures that truly improve animal health.
The 100 groups recommend that USDA:
— Formally withdraw all pending rulemaking initiated by the agency to advance NAIS and pay the associated costs;
— Pay all existing contractual obligations and NAIS-related costs that USDA incurred prior to Sept. 30, 2009;
— Pay all costs associated with transferring the computer hardware acquired by USDA as part of NAIS to state animal health agencies, to enable state agencies to improve their ability to communicate among agencies in the event of a disease outbreak; and,
— Pay all costs associated with providing the people of the United States and Congress with an official, comprehensive report on all of the testimony USDA received at each of the NAIS listening sessions held throughout the country in 2009. ::: MORE HERE::
Working at the UCD Bioresources Research Centre, the researchers achieved a 97 per cent accuracy rate in experiments on identifying individual bird parts with barcodes.
The team which last year discovered they could identify individual sheep by their eyes and cattle by muzzle patterns, also believe they can identify laying hens by their comb profile.
Led by Prof Shane Ward, the group set out to find novel, accurate, tamper-proof and cost-effective systems to track and trace animals using among other things, biometric identification.
Biometric identification uses a physical characteristic that is unique to an individual such as a fingerprint, retinal or iris scanning and voice identification.
While laying hens do not have fingerprints, they discovered they have individual comb profiles.
The researchers developed specific biometric algorithms to isolate the comb profiles using mathematical modelling techniques.
According to a research update from Relay, which circulates research for the food industry, this method delivered an 84 per cent accuracy rate.
The group opted for barcodes for chickens and experimented with two types of barcodes, a miniature linear barcode such as we see on products we buy in shops and a two-dimensional data matrix barcode.
“They succeeded in printing the barcodes on to both beaks and legs of the chickens.
“The barcodes were read a number of times using a barcode scanner to assess its accuracy, speed and readability,” the report says. They also finetuned the best position for the barcodes and the optimal reading conditions for the scanner and the results obtained were promising with accuracy as high as 97 per cent.
“Although these experiments were carried out in the laboratory, real chicken body parts, sourced at poultry processing plants were used,” the research report continued.
“No animals were purposely culled for this research programme as per UCD ethical committee directives,” it says.
“In real life situations, ways will have to be found to imprint the barcodes on to live poultry whilst ensuring the safety and wellbeing of the bird,” it said.
The team has asked companies interested in the commercial opportunities to contact Prof Ward for more details.
THIS WEEK ON WAKING UP ORWELL :
“The emotionally charged matter of mandatory microchip registration for pet dogs and cats in San Marcos reached another boiling point Saturday afternoon at City Hall, where city staff gave its last of three information sessions about a new animal control ordinance.
Outside City Hall, a group calling itself “Citizens for Ear Tatooing Identification” (CETI) protested before the meeting.
Inside City Hall, CETI members and others pelted city staff with numerous complaints in the form of questions, touching on such worries as the new ordinance’s enforceability, over-reaching government, the risk of cancer from microchipping, religious objections, and the city’s dismissal of tatooing as an alternative.” – Andy Sevilla, associate editor
Judith McGeary is an attorney in Austin, Texas. She has a B.S. in Biology from Stanford University and a J.D. with high honors from The University of Texas at Austin. She began her legal career by clerking for the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Since then, her practice has focused on environmental law, commercial litigation, and appeals. She and her husband also run a small organic farm, with horses, cow, sheep, and poultry, based on the principles of holistic resource management.
Have you heard that they will try it in an animal before they try it on you? This is year 2008 and we now have the technology to free us or to enslave us.
This applies to mechanical snafus, hemmorrages, cancers, flesh infections, ruptures and digital test rigging, re-rigging, runs and re-runs on chip instillation and information readouts in ..animals. Namingly your pets. The closer “they” can get it to home, “they” will.
You wonder who sits around hatching this megalomaniacal deluded sci-fi garbage and the surreality of these situations – applied science to manage the human animal. It’s the same generation after generation. It’s a fistful of inbred white guys, their greed-drugged patsys and interlocuting sociopaths as constant company. Yes-Men with money. And now Yes-Women, like Nazi Pelosi, who has turned to routine thuggery instead of relying fairly on the people of San Francisco whom once trusted her.
Of course, I refer to the rash of violences sustained by vocal anti-war critic and campaign competitor Cindy Sheehan. Political competitors like Sheehan have been shut down, silenced and their speaking engagements cancelled for them by spine-free venue owners and promoters. One such festival was We The People Festival in which Sheehan, Cynthia McKinney, Jack Blood & a Los Angeles organic farmer were told that they were not to speak on City Grounds under threat of shutting down the entire event by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. GOOGLE: We The People Festival.
Here is what you need to know and remember: technology relies on use and personal adoption to work. If you don’t adopt the technology then it’s not going to be a “tool of the establishement”. So “they” really only have 2 options with microchipping :
A) Get you to “volunteer” for the technology adoption program
B) The shove-it-down-your-throat adoption program
The onus is on you in rejecting both programs if you don’t need to adopt their technologies. The tech engineers they employ will go do something else with their ingenuity and “they” can afford to take a hit, especially for trying to compromise the American public against themselves.
OK…here’s a great example from yet another-freaked-out-mother who discovers the evil future planned for who she cares for. You see the “voluntary” vs. “mandatory” elements of technology adoption here.
From Women-Not-Dabbling-In Normal – Read whole exerpt for Rep. Karen Johnson’s Letter
[The]USDA has failed to follow any of the administrative procedures required to create enforceable regulations when it issued this new step in NAIS. So whether USDA can actually enforce it.
USDA has failed to follow any of the administrative procedures required to create enforceable regulations when it issued this new step in NAIS. So whether USDA can actually enforce it isn’t clear. On the other hand, USDA has created the entire NAIS program without regard to following the rules administrative agencies must follow, soit’s likely that the state agencies will automatically follow the USDA’s memo. Here are some excerpts from
USDA has failed to follow any of the administrative procedures required to create enforceable regulations when it issued this new step in NAIS. So whether USDA can actually enforce it isn’t clear. On the other hand, USDA has created the entire NAIS program without regard to following the rules administrative agencies must follow, so it’s likely that the state agencies will automatically follow the USDA’s memo. Here are some excerpts from the memo:
“A PIN is required for activities performed at a premises by a State or Federal animal health authority or an accredited veterinarian for any disease that is regulated through Title 9 of the Code of Federal Regulations.” (page 4)
- Johne’s disease
- Chronic Wasting Disease
- Low pathogenic Avian Influenza of the H5/H7 strains
- Communicable diseases in horses, asses, ponies, mules, and zebras, which would include equine Infectious Anemia
- Texas (splenetic) fever in cattle
- Scabies in cattle
- Exotic Newcastle disease and chlamydiosis
- Poultry health as addressed in the National Poultry Improvement Plan
- Swine Health