Current Issues

2007 Farm Bill | NAIS

In 2007, Congress will revisit the Farm Bill, broad legislation that addresses a variety of issues related to agriculture, nutrition, ecology, energy and trade. Community Farm Alliance is working with several allied organizations to promote Farm Bill reform that promotes health and wealth both at home and abroad. These documents provide more information about our allied organizations and what they have to say about the Farm Bill:

• The National Family Farm Coalition's alternative Farm Bill, "The Food from Family Farms Act"

• The Farm and Food Project's "Seeking Balance in U.S. Farm and Food Policy"

• Oxfam's "Fairness in the Fields: A vision for the 2007 Farm Bill"

On January 23, 2007, KDA held a public hearing regarding regulations on the NAIS program. CFA member Adam Barr testified and submitted comments on January 31st. KDA withdrew the proposed regulations on February 1st. In another victory for Kentucky's family farmers, the Ag Development Board has decided to take back their November decision to require premise ID in order to receive cost share funding from the Tobacco Settlement Fund (see press release).

Adam Barr's Comments:

We believe that the proposed regulations tilt the scales in favor of large operations adversely affecting Kentucky's 77,000 family sized livestock producers. For example, healthy diversified farms with commingled animals cannot receive Group ID numbers under requirements set by USDA APHIS VS, which again is pushing for state adopted Animal ID programs like Kentucky has proposed. Of course, most Kentucky farms commingle animals.

Cost is a problem. It has not been determined what the cost will be to KDA or other agencies, nor the small, family-sized producer. What is certain is that we can expect farmers to be burdened with the purchase and maintenance of ID tags and numbers as well as the reporting aspect, which has not yet been addressed.

On my family farm there are 60 head of cattle and their calves, 6 horses, and various chickens. One farmer nearby has buffalo, sheep, goats, ostrich, cattle, chickens, and pigs. The new language in this proposed regulation establishes the framework for an NAIS program not authorized by the state legislature that would be fatal to the income of diversified family farmers like us around the state.

KDA must meet a Jan. 2009 deadline to have 100% of premises registered and 100% of animals under age 1 identified. USDA is driving this program with $33 million in appropriations for fiscal year 2007. Ky Extension offices are under pressure from KDA to register premises and they are being successful because the full scope of the NAIS program has not been revealed to the public.

We recommend more publication to farmers that registration of premises leads to Animal ID Numbers, which leads to tracking and reporting the movement, death, and birth of each individual farm animal within a 24 hour period. We ask for more clear, honest communication.

At the state and federal level there are already in place, regulations and programs that target specific animals and disease. These include the National Poultry Improvement Program, the Scrapies Program for sheep, and the Brucellosis program for cattle.

The new amendments are that the current regulations do not target specific diseases. It is just a defense against the possibility of disease in any farm animal. The current programs work thanks to KDA and the State Vet's Office. They work because they are focused and target a specific disease.

Cost and benefit should be considered. It will be quite expensive for KDA and the producer to tag and trace all animals and provide CVI even for healthy animals. We will not successfully eradicate a specific disease unless the program is disease specific, and allows for both prevention and response.

These proposed regulations are harmful to small-scale livestock owners in Kentucky with minimal impact to large-scale agribusiness, yet large confinement operations inherently pose a greater public health risk than pasture-based operations. We encourage an independent third-party cost-benefit analysis of implementing such regulations in our state. Lastly, we ask that the Kentucky Department of Agriculture and the State Veterinarian's office withdraw these proposed regulations.

^ Back to the top