Required RFID chips in all animals in U.S.

Quote

"Gary, I said "regulated", not "chipped". I just meant that there is already a lot of regulation and inspection dealing with livestock, and this would just be another kind.

And it is livestock, as we can all read from the website you posted."

Handy:

Currently, I don't have to install chips in the goats I sell at the sale barn. If I slaughter one to eat at home, I don't have to report to some Government agency, what happened to the goat.

Also, I don't want one in my dog. Just because some people don't take steps to keep their own dogs, cats, and livestock fenced in, doesn't mean I should have to spend money because someone else, won't keep track of their own animals. That is my point. There is a public school up north, that you have to eye scan and thumb scan yourself, in order to pick your kid up.

In the meantime, I can go into town, and see seventy five illegal aliens, standing in front of the United States post office, waiting on someone to hire them illegally, all in front of a U.S. Government building.

And they want to put microchips in my goats????
 
I'm sure when people start dying from eating infected Illegal Alien meat we might start looking in that direction.


I have no idea exactly what the people in favor of this are thinking, but it probably relates mainly to tracking animal populations that end up at market, so they can reconstruct what other animals they were in contact with before they were sold.

As the website says "livestock", I would be surprised if animals not intended for resale and slaughter would have to be tagged. So your private goats and dog don't really figure into this.


All government regulation is invasive. The FDA and USDA stick their nose into all sorts of places for public health reasons. If the cost of this program is nominal, is in place only for commerce purposes, and prevents the spread of disease, I'm all for it.

If it isn't any of those things, it isn't going to pass, and you won't have to worry about it. The US Beef lobby is not small, and will not stand by if this is going to really screw with domestic meat prices.


I think monitoring livestock is not quite comparable to monitoring you.
 
I'm pretty sure that livestock will be required to get chipped. In Europe, the controls are very strict for livestock. After the whole mad cow situation, each animal that was slaughtered had to be tagged showing everything from date of birth, age and date of slaughter, and the farm the animal was raised on. Every cut of meat is linked back to this animal via a control tag (barcode). If any meat is found to be contaminated, it can be recalled rather than simply discarding millions and millions of pounds of meat. While I'm sure there can still be screw ups at the meat processing plant, I feel that safety would improve by increasing controls.

RFID tagging actually has the capability for reading and writing information. If there are any illnesses or other types of information, it can be written to the chip. The slaughter houses can then store this information and link it to the batch number for every cut of meat that comes from that animal.

As for requiring RFID tags for domesticated animals, I can see that being required for dangerous breeds such as pit bulls, rottwilers, and dobermans as the dog can be linked back to the owner. Owners of the more dangerous breeds should be held responsible if their dog escapes and bites someone. Furthermore, the tags can tell whether the dog has had its rabies shots if it can be captured and taken to the vets. The other way to do it is kill the dog and test it for rabies, but I'm sure most dog owners won't be too happy about that.
 
Gary, I didn't say anything that should have reflected on your brains, unless, of course, you REALLY think that legislation is going to be passed requiring all domestic animals to be tracked by chip.

Of course there are people trying to clone humans. What does that have to do with tagging cats and dogs, etc.??
 
Handy said:
I'm sure when people start dying from eating infected Illegal Alien meat we might start looking in that direction.
Click to expand...

Nah, they just get their feces in the food, no body parts. Nothing to worry about.:rolleyes:

[/hijack]
 
Rivers:
Here is a link to the Texas Animal Health Commission, since you didn't believe the other link.
http://www.tahc.state.tx.us/agency/meetings.shtml

Yes, I believe it wilbecome implemented, even though in Texas we keep voiting down stupid assed ideas such as the Texas Tollway. It is being built anyway, just like the light rail in Austin that was voted down. They spend 18 million building a prototype transfer station for that, even though the folks in Austin had just voted it down.

Here is the danger. They are proposing we REGISTER OUR PROPERTY if we have one single head of livestock. Chickens, pigeons, goats cows, horses, turkeys, etc.

Next, will naturally be your dog, and your cat, as already suggested on this forum, as being a "good idea".

Maybe if I put it this way, you can recognize the dangers to right to privacy;
How long do you think it will be, after implementing that program, that some person who "cares about the children" decides that a good idea will be to put RFID chips in all guns, to make sure they do not leave the property they are assigned to?

Anyway, I just wanted to give you another site that I assume you may consider more repurtable than the "half brained" people that are complaining about it.
 
Gary,

Cars have been registered for most of a century, but guns still aren't. While we are all aware of the concept of the "slippery slope", the presumption that tracking agricultural livestock for disease abatement is going to immediately lead to the tracking of EVERYTHING is flawed.
 
Gary Conner said:
But nobody raising livestock likes it,
Click to expand...
You couldn't be more wrong if you tried, Gary.

Who likes this stuff? The Corporate Producers, that's who.

Anyone who bothers to read the entire proposal will immediately see that the people that will get bent-over will be the small producers. A large herd will require 1 registration number, whereas small producers will be required to register each and every head they have.

The entire cost of this stuff, all for the good of the American Consumer, will be borne by the little guys. The big guys costs will be minimal.

see this thread from December.
 
Quote:
"You couldn't be more wrong if you tried, Gary.

Dear Antipitas:

You are a partially right on that point. What I meant was, family ranchers and small producers like me don't like it. Big factory farms and microchip producers will love it, I agree, because it will help put the small rancher out of business, and the producers of the microchips and factory farms will make a killing.

But factually, none of the small ranchers like it. By way of proof, I don't know if the news in your area showed the results of the Texas Animal Health Commission hearing yesterday morning, but there was nothing but hell raising going on at the hearing by local ranchers and property owners.

In fact, two of the Texas Animal Health Departments own commissioners admitted they thought it was ridiculous, intrusive, and would not effect the supposed stated purpose. And they did that on television.

(It was on the news in Austin, but I don't know if you saw it where you are)

They decided to delay implementation of the program, (even though it was passed as State Law, in HB 1361) due to the ridiculous burden of the proposal, and the fact that every public speaker that spoke, was against it.

Not one citizen that spoke there, was for it. And it was standing room only.

The program contains provisions that landowners must register their property (land) with the State as a livestock production property, and all information is to turned over to the Federal Government, so they can implement the NAIS program.

Problem being, that information is then public record, in one nice convenient database, listing your GPS location and property legal description and address. Thus setting a precedent, that private property, and it's contents, are available to anyone who cares to submit a FOIA request about your possessions.

The point I was trying to make, was this issue is a privacy issue. It's not about the animal. It is about the property itself.

The state law enabling the NAIS (National Animal Identification System) does nothing to protect the consumer not already done in the livestock industry, except violate privacy rights.

If I sell at the sale barn, they take my name, address, and tag the animal I deliver, so I can both (1) receive my payment, and (2) know whose animals sold, and where they came from.

But with this proposal, the commission gets to charge us a "registration fee", every two years. (By the way, that fee, is a "to be named later" type fee)
It is not a registration fee, it is a tax, because it is payed every two years. So basically, I will be taxed twice, on the same property. I don't like that either.

If someone suggested for public safety, that there be a public record of each firearm you own, your exact GPS location and address, made available to anyone who cares to submit a FOIA request, I bet on this board, there would not be many wanting to support, nor participate in it.

Depends on whose ox is being gored I guess. But Texas was the test area.

For those outside of Texas, your state will be seeing this proposed by your State legislature soon. Might be a good idea to talk to your State Reps.
 
So list all your animals as "free range".


I don't quite understand your concern, though. Your deed is on recond with a Lat/Long. Your property is probably zoned for ranching. What new information would you be giving up to the public?
 
Handy, just suppose that someone had a small parcel of property in the country. Now suppose that this someone had a couple of livestock animals on that property. Further, suppose that the property is zoned for ONLY 2 livestock animals of that type.

Along comes the chip.

Now, what happens if the property owner breeds his 2 livestock animals and gets a youngun? He's required to chip the baby and report it to the govt. Which IMMEDIATELY flags the property as being in violation of the zoning ord.

Uh oh, prop owner gets a citation and a fine and maybe even confiscation of the animal which is then sold and the State gets to keep the proceeds. Prop Owner also is now on record as a violator and will be scrutinized and watched for other potential offenses in the name of public safety.

Think it can't happen? Think I need more tinfoil? Think again. Did you know that Monsanto owns the patents on a lot of hybridized crop seeds and is trying to make the planting of non-patented crops illegal? They haven't suceeded in that yet but they're TRYING TO and what happens if they get it? You pay them every year to get seeds to grow food for yourself. No more heirloom crops, organics or "wild" produce either. Just the patented stuff - for a fee. Tell me how & WHY the poor are supposed to pay for food they can now get for free?

Yeah, the big producers are loving this proposal. One fee to them, one registration per "lot" of animals, and all the little guys get to pay and pay and pay for the priviledge of raising their own food. And their lobbyists are trying to GET this stuff passed - not fight it.

I believe that should this get passed, it will cause the revolution against our govt that's been waiting to happen for a long time. I know I'll be in the front line when it does.
 
No, I'm saying it's bad because it TOTALLY takes away the freedoms of the populace and grants them to large corporations while making the gen pop pay for the priviledge and gives the corporations a free pass.
 
+1 Rob P.

And Mr. Handy, just to be clear, the County Clerk's office only has the legal description of my property, not the latitude longitude in a handy GPS friendly database. Further, I can change the legal description of the property by having a survey performed. In other words, the property belings to ME.

A property Indendity Number issued by a State Governement Agency working in conjuction with the Federal Government on Federal Mandated legislation which requires Microchips to be inserted into every kid born on my property, is not something I am ever going to be "unconcerned" with. Especially since it does nothing, absolutely nothing, to effect the supposed health safety issue, as admitted during the hearing by one of the TAHA commissioners, in that hearing.
 
No need to be formal Mr. Connor. May I call you Gary?


I was speaking from my own property owning experience, where I had noticed the plot was referenced to lat/long.


I would have misgivings about this program as well, I just think you're overstating the potential damage. As far as disease control goes, it does have the potential positive of ruling out a suspect population when tracking shows that your herd never came into actual contact with a nearby infected animal - which could end up saving you money.

I don't like intrusive technology either, but the ability to track cell phones has benefits to the user as well. It's a trade off, but not necessarily all bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top