Important Notice of Hearing

Liberty Ark Coalition Alert
February 28, 2009

The U.S. House Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry will hold a hearing on “animal identification programs” on Wednesday, March 11, 2009
The agenda has not been released, so nothing is certain at this time. Staffers have informed us that the Subcommittee will hear testimony from organizations about NAIS implementation generally, and that this is not a hearing to pass any bills. This is the first time in several years that any Congressional Committee will hear testimony about NAIS! We are working with other groups to try to ensure that the voices of people who are against NAIS will also be heard at the hearing.

Below is information on how you can take action, including a list of the Subcommittee members. After that is an update on NAIS in the Appropriations bill, so please read all the way through!

TAKE ACTION:

If one of the Subcommittee members is from your state, call that member. Or you can contact your own Representative and ask him or her to approach the Subcommittee member to urge them to oppose NAIS. If you’re not sure who represents you, click here.

When you call, ask to speak to the staffer who handles agricultural issues, and talk with them about your concerns about NAIS. Emphasize that you want them to ask hard questions of both the industry and USDA representatives, and to make sure that people representing those who oppose NAIS are also heard at the hearing.

Once the agenda for the hearing is released, we will send out another alert with more specific action points. And, after the hearing, it will be very important to follow up with the Subcommittee members to make sure they hear all of the facts that are likely to not be raised at the hearing! So stay tuned!

SUBCOMMITTE MEMBERS:

Below are the Subcommittee members, their party and state, and phone numbers. You can also send an email by using this format: firstname.lastname@mail.house.gov

We strongly recommend that you make at least your initial contact with the Ag staffer with a telephone conversation.

Name: Phone: Fax:
Mike Rogers (R-AL) 202-225-3261 202-226-8485
Dennis Cardoza (D-CA) 202-225-6131 202-225-0819
Jim Costa (D-CA) 202-225-3341 202-225-9308
Joe Baca (D-CA) 202-225-6161 202-225-8671
Betsy Markey (D-CO) 202-225-4676 202-225-5870
David Scott (Chair), (D-GA) 202-225-2939 202-225-4628
Leonard Boswell (D-IA) 202-225-3806 202-225-5608
Steve King (R-IA) 202-225-4426 202-225-3193
Walt Minnick (D-ID) 202-225-6611 202-225-3029
Frank Kratovil, Jr. (D-MD) 202-225-5311 202-225-0254
Adrian Smith (R-NE) 202-225-6435 202-225-0207
Tim Holden (D-PA) 202-225-5546 202-226-0996
David P. Roe (R-TN) 202-225-6356 202-225-5714
K. Michael Conaway (R-TX) 202-225-3605 or 866-882-381 202-225-1783
Randy Neugebauer, Ranking Minority Member (R-TX) 202-225-4005 or 888-763-1611 202-225-9615
Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) 202-225-5431 202-225-9681
Steve Kagen (D-WI) 202-225-5665 202-225-5729

APPROPRIATIONS NEWS

The 2009 omnibus Appropriations bill, HR 1105, passed the House on Thursday. The bill includes $14.5 million of funding for NAIS, which is significantly less than the amount requested by the USDA for FY 2009. Representative Obey (D-WI) included a statement in the record about the intended uses of the appropriations for USDA, including timelines and performance goals for NAIS. This statement does not mandate NAIS, but it implies approval of the USDA’s Business Plan, which includes using existing disease control programs to implement NAIS and achieve those performance goals.

Call your Senators and ask that they support an amendment to strip the NAIS funding out of the bill! You can find your Senators’ contact information here.

The good news is that it appears that the provision that would have required the School Lunch Program to buy meats only from NAIS-registered farms did NOT make it into the omnibus Appropriations bill! THANK YOU to everyone who called and wrote their Congressmen last summer and fall to oppose that provision!

To read the Omnibus Appropriations bill, go to thomas.gov and enter “HR 1105” in the search box. Click the option for “Bill Number” and then hit “search.” Rep. Obey’s explanatory statement can be read by clicking on the link for “H1653-H2088” under “Note” (towards the top of the page of the search result).


For more information, visit and support LibertyArk.net

Raw/Fresh Milk

There is a growing interest from consumers to purchase raw milk, or as producers call it, fresh milk. What does it mean? Isn't raw milk dangerous?

I used to believe that. I was taught that milk harbored all sorts of illnesses and germs, and that it was the root of all foodborne illness. I was taught wrong.  Raw/fresh milk is a wonderful thing, IF you know where it comes from. Milk that is harvested from conventional dairies, has a different set of "acceptable levels," than milk does that comes from raw milk dairies. That's because there is a  "default" application on most dairies, pasteurization. 

There is a reason for pasteurization in situations where lots of milk is going off to a centralized location to feed lots of people. It doesn't guarantee that it's safe, but it does take a step that renders it "safe," by cooking out the pathogens for some diseases. The trick, pasteurization kills almost all germs and enzymes, even those that are beneficial. There are germs such as Johnes, which are not killed by pasteurization, yet that milk is commonly sent on to consumers. For a long time it was thought that Johnes was a ruminant only disease, but there are now concerns that it might be related to Crohn's disease, which is on the rise in the US. 

Fresh milk is a complete food, meaning that it comes with the enzymes that it's needed to break it down. In the case of milk, the main problem is lactose, often causing an intolerance as many people have insufficient enzymes, known as lactase, to break down the lactose into its parts, so the body can use it. But fresh milk comes with that lactase automatically, making it possible for those with intolerances to be able to digest the milk. For some, goat milk is easier because the fat is in smaller bits, making it easier to break down the components inside. 

Scientists in the US keep saying that there is no nutritional difference between fresh and pasteurized milk. To me, that makes no sense. Milk that is heated to Ultra high pasteurization temps, more than 200 degrees F, is useless in growing cultures for yogurt or cheese. The required nutrients are destroyed in that UHT processing. Even conventional heating to 163 degrees for 30 sec. known as "flash pasteurizing," damages the milk. Some people can even taste the scorch. When I heat my milk for making pasteurized cheeses or for yogurt, I heat it to 145 degrees for 30 minutes, which does kill the bacteria but with less damage the milk itself. However, whenever I can , I drink and use fresh milk from my goats. I wouldn't necessarily drink it from everyone's farm.

It is important to know what the farmer's practices are for handling the milk, the udder, the utensils and for storage. Fresh milk is actually more forgiving than pasteurized milk because the "good enzymes" that would fight off infection in the animal's udder are still active. But that doesn't mean they are going to work for me. 

If you are seeking fresh milk, please ask if you can watch how the farmer harvests that milk. If you live in an area with strong raw milk laws, please be respectful of how careful the farmer must be. 

Fresh milk is a great thing, if you can find it. If it's not legal where you live to sell it, please join the fight to protect raw milk by joining with Weston A Price, or RealMilk.com, the American Cheese Society, and Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund, that are working to make it more available to consumers. You have the right to buy it. Why is that the farmer isn't allowed to sell it to you? 

Long Time Away

Sorry it's been so long since I wrote. Honestly, I've tried several times but my computer hasn't approved of my blogging, so it just kept exiting out without asking. How rude!

I've mentioned NAIS a couple of times, and thought I'd take the time to explain it. It's a federal program that would register every piece of land where livestock travel, such as farms, schools, fairgrounds, and assign them GPS identifiers. Then, every farmer will have to tag every one of their animals, including horses, alpacas and llamas, with a RFID chip (preferred) which has a permanent identifier for that animal. Finally, whenever that animal loses its tag (happens all the time), breeds with an animal from a different farm (genetic diversity, good thing most of the time!), goes to a show, the vet, or goes unaccounted for, the farmer has to report to the government about that "event." If not, they face fines and/or incarceration.

Who invented such an insane scheme? The agri-giants who conveniently are exempt from the individual tagging and tracking, because as we all know, industrially raised animals are so much  healthier, always behave perfectly and never feel the stress of confinement, overcrowding or lack of humane care. (Sarcasm, for those who missed it). They wrote this program up prior to 9/11/01, probably because they were seeing the effects of small farmers, knew that their own practices caused problems, and wanted to control the competition.

Small farms are a $5 billion business in this country, and growing. The USDA has a very hard time taking care of the corporate giants, so we little guys are just pests. Pests that raise the healthiest foods, have the healthiest animals and actually promote global environmental healing, rather than having massive negative impacts such as CAFO's and lagooning manure.

The USDA has been promising for years that NAIS would remain voluntary, though their draft plan stated that it would be mandated in 2009 if there wasn't a 100% compliance by farmers/ranchers. Well, what part of voluntary is that? In January, prior to leaving office, the Bush administration put into action the mandatory aspects for goats, sheep and cows, using existing health programs. That regulation is now open to comments until March 16, 2009. Please visit

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2007-0096  

and let your feelings be known.

NAIS will not protect against food borne illness. Most of that happens inside the processing plant, not on the farm. NAIS does not reach into the processor at all. We have existing, affordable solutions to tracking food contamination down now. It's much easier in meat and eggs than it is in plants. These products need refrigeration, and have a stricter code of tracking than fruits and vegetables.

NAIS will not keep our animals safe. It will act as a deterent as farmers fear calling the vet because they might be reported if the tag has fallen off, or if they don't comply. Vets will be an official arm of the USDA, more than they are now. NAIS will chase infections, without stopping them. By making more technicians and vets available as consultants, farmers can take better care of their sustainably raised livestock than corporate farmers can. 

NAIS will not stop Bird Flu, Mad Cow, Foot & Mouth etc. The first two are diseases of corporate agriculture, where short cuts were taken, or animals are over crowded. Foot & Mouth in the UK was a government accident, in all of the recent outbreaks. The contamination was found to be caused by lax controls as technicians left the laboratory, or disposed of the contaminant down a drain with a crack, which fed into the groundwater. 

Please, help protect your local food, and quality livestock. Help  us stop NAIS! Spread the word, as the $$$ to support NAIS is much easier to find than the $$$$ to stop it.