In a remarkable turnaround, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has decided to provide an ''opt out'' procedure for people whose premises have been registered in the National Animal Identification System. Complaints have arisen in several states from people who say that their premises were registered without their knowledge. Until now, these people have been told the USDA has no provision for removing a premises once it has been registered.

A spokesman for USDA told the Liberty Ark Coalition late last week that since the NAIS was now an ''opt in'' voluntary program, the department had decided to also provide an ''opt out'' procedure. Although the protocol has not yet been fully defined, the spokesman said the procedure would require participants to write to the state NAIS coordinator and make a formal request to be removed from the NAIS. The state coordinator will confirm the validity of the request and advance the request to the USDA. The USDA will then, presumably, remove the name from the registry, according to the spokesman. State NAIS coordinators can be located here.

(Column continues below)

Carol and Calvin Whittaker are delighted to hear this news. They have tried unsuccessfully for several months to get their land removed from the NAIS registry. They are now filing the written request as specified by the USDA and the Liberty Ark Coalition is monitoring the process to measure the time required and the bureaucratic obstacles, if any, that must be overcome.

This new policy is met with great enthusiasm by the many people who oppose the NAIS, but it is also met with a large degree of skepticism. Since the controversial program was announced in 2005, with a timeline for the program to become mandatory by 2007, opposition has grown steadily. The USDA had to release a new strategy in 2006 and renounce the ''mandatory'' provision of the program.

While proclaiming that the program is now and will always be voluntary, the USDA poured money into states to encourage them to make the program mandatory at the state level. But opponents have convinced legislators in six states to introduce legislation prohibiting any kind of mandatory animal identification program and several other states are likely to follow with similar legislation.

Moreover, at its Oct. 16, 2006 meeting the United States Animal Health Association's Livestock Identification Committee issued a report (page 14) that recommends the USDA create a list of ''consistent'' states, which are states that:

''...have established by law, rule, order, or other means a requirement that all breeding age cattle be officially identified by means of official tag or registration brand or tattoo at each change of ownership, other than movements direct to slaughter, or movements through one approved market and then direct to slaughter."

Should the USDA adopt this recommendation, animal movement in ''non-consistent'' states could be restricted, not only by the USDA but by the states. To NAIS opponents this appears to be another way the USDA is saying to the public that the NAIS is voluntary, while behind the scenes doing everything in its power to force livestock owners to comply with the identification requirements.

The public relations campaign in support of the program claims it will stop or reduce animal disease outbreaks such as mad cow disease by providing the ability to trace a diseased animal to its source within 48 hours.

The Liberty Ark Coalition says this is a myth:

''Mad cow disease is not contagious, takes years to develop, and is completely preventable. NAIS is designed to do only one thing: provide 48-hour trace-back of animal movements. This is simply not relevant to protecting our food supply from mad cow disease. Moreover, the USDA has stated that it estimates that there are only four to seven (4-7) cows in the entire U.S. that have BSE, or mad cow disease, and that it's not even necessary to conduct testing to protect our food supply. Indeed, the USDA refuses to allow a U.S. company, Creekstone Farms & Premium Beef, to voluntarily test all of its cattle for BSE, in order to satisfy its customers' wishes. If BSE is not enough of a threat to justify (or even allow) testing, then certainly it cannot be the basis for requiring millions of animals to be electronically tagged and their every move tracked.''

Opponents of the program contend it was conceived by and will benefit only large meat packers and exporters and the technology companies that provide the identification and tracking equipment.

Opposition has grown dramatically as small farmers and ranchers realize their horses, chickens, pigs or cows fall under the USDA's jurisdiction and they will have to bear the cost and inconvenience of a program that will make no difference to animal health, and benefit only the large exporters and technology companies.

---

Related special offer:

"Size Matters: How Big Government Puts the Squeeze on America's Families, Finances, and Freedom (And Limits the Pursuit of Happiness)"