Given that NAIS will do little or nothing to address disease problems, one has to look for the true reasons for this program.  In searching for the truth, it is helpful to look at who is advocating the program.

            First, the large industrial agriculture entities, such as Cargill Pork and Tyson, are on the working groups that developed this program.  These entities will reap all of the benefits from the enhanced export market, without bearing the costs that will be imposed on the people actually raising the animals and/or taxpayers. Moreover, by creating such a burdensome program, the industrial agriculture can rid itself of the small, but rapidly-growing, local foods movement that threatens its monopoly and its ability to complete the vertical integration of our food supply.

Indeed, the USDA has itself pointed to the export market as one of the main driving forces for NAIS.  Yet a voluntary program would suffice to address exports.  Such a program would allow the market to determine how valuable it is to track animals from birth to death.  Any farmer that wishes to export animals or food to other countries could enroll in the program; in turn, these exporters could refuse to buy from anyone who was not also enrolled in the tracking program.  There is no reason to impose the heavy burdens of NAIS on the thousands of farmers, ranchers, homesteaders, and companion animal owners who have no interest in being part of the international commercial chain. 

            Second, various technology companies also stand to profit from this program.  Global Vet Link, Micro Beef Technologies, and Digital Angel are all members of the National Institute for Animal Agriculture and involved in the working groups developing the details of the plans. Such companies not only make the microchips and radiotags, but charge for software and related equipment necessary to function.

            Third, the large associations support this program, even though most of their members are opposed.  While this is puzzling at first, it is yet again an issue of following the money.  The USDA has stated that the database with all of the NAIS information will be privately-held, to avoid Freedom of Information Act issues.  In fact, it appears that NAIS will actually consist of many databases.  The large associations already operate significant databases with information on livestock animal owners, and are perfectly positioned to become contractors and subcontractors for the NAIS databases.

Last, there are those who are being paid to promote NAIS.  In response to an Open Records Request, the TAHC provided the names of five entities that were issued contracts on December 6, 2005, in connection with NAIS federal cooperative funds from the USDA, for “outreach, training, and premises registration activities.”   Click here for the full list    When someone tries to convince you that NAIS is a good thing, check whether they are getting paid to say that!