|
Current News |
We Will Not Comply - Two NAIS
Resistors Lead the Way
by Deborah Stockton
Michigan cattleman Greg Niewendorp and Pennsylvania
dairy farmer Mark Nolt have taken courageous
leadership positions by refusing to comply with
state attempts at invasive incursions into their
farming practices. In February of this year,
Niewendorp sent a letter to the Michigan Department
of Agriculture (MDA) explaining in detail why he
would not participate in their dangerous
experimental TB herd testing and eradication
program. Several months ago Nolt chose to not renew
his raw milk selling permit with the state of
Pennsylvania, as he continued to sell raw milk and
raw milk products directly from his farm to his
customers. By extension, and also, they refuse to
participate in the NAIS.
Behind both of these state programs (herd
eradication and milk permitting) lurks the spectre
of NAIS, with its requirement of “premises
registration” first on its list of demands. A close
look at the word “premises” shows that the first
definition, in reference to real estate, is: “The
part of a deed or lease that states the parties
involved, the property in conveyance, and other
pertinent facts.” One must wonder at the choice of
“premises” over “property” or other term where
ownership is unambiguous. By complying with
“premises” registration, one implicitly acknowledges
a property in conveyance. When discussing NAIS, the
question of property ownership is central. Not only
the land itself, but the animals living on that
land. NAIS shifts the role of the farmer, or animal
owner, to that of keeper. Similar to the way that
industrial chicken house “farmers” are not owners,
but managers. It is, after all, being referred to as
“livestock premises ID.” However, Niewendorp says,
“We have discovered remedies for removing our land
and our livestock from premises ID. We are
investigating several avenues for removing this
oppression from our livestock and our land.”
When Niewendorp submitted his letter to the MDA in
February, they immediately placed his farm in
quarantine. In May, the MDA referred to his
situation as a stalemate. All was quiet until August
21st, when an attempt was made to break the
stalemate. Two Michigan state policemen as law
enforcement and a regulation agent of the MDA came
illegally onto Niewendorp’s property, past his
detailed No Trespassing sign and with a state vet
lying in wait around the corner down the road, to
try and coerce him to test his herd. After escorting
them to the property line, Niewendorp spoke with
them for several minutes, conversing about respect
with regard to personal and professional conduct.
Once they left, Niewendorp contacted the local
sheriff, who should have been informed and who is
the proper and legitimate authority on local
enforcement issues, and related to him the morning’s
happening. Seven days later, in a 4-way phone
conversation with the TB-testing program public
relations spokersperson Bridgt Patrick, Michigan
state vet Stephen Halstead, and Pat Lockard, liaison
to the Governor’s office, Niewendorp informed them
that his constitutional rights are violated and that
he chooses to face his accuser in the open.
Later in a conversation at the feed store with a
fellow cattleman, Niewendorp learned that his case
might have been “turned over to the USDA and the
Federal Marshals.” I investigated and called the MDA
to speak to the vet who allegedly said this, but was
told he had been advised not to speak to me. The
local sheriff, after hearing Niewendorp’s concerns
about possible federal enforcement action, sent a
letter to a number of government agencies, including
the MDA, Michigan State Police, the USDA, FBI, and
the Federal Marshal service, informing them that any
enforcement action involving going onto Niewendorp’s
property would have to be through him, as the local
enforcement agent of the law.
Niewendorp is now openly criticizing the Michigan
Animal Industry Act of 1988, the so-called basis for
the TB eradication program and for NAIS and
livestock premises ID. (Farm Bureau has worked very
closely with the MDA, as they do in every other
state, to implement this NAIS and premises ID
program). Niewendorp said, “Isn’t it interesting
that the Animal Industry Act is the vehicle through
which this is being accomplished, as it has been on
the books for last 18 years and nobody has ever
previously challenged it. Having one’s rights
violated can give a person the right to criticize
because we feel we have something better to offer.
It is also my intent to show that the statement that
milk is a carrier of TB is a bald-faced lie. The
pasteurization laws from the 1930s have to be
overturned to allow the sale of Real Milk through
private contract.”
Mark Nolt’s actions are based on the position that
the private contract sale of his raw milk and raw
milk products to his close circle of customers is
between him and the individual to whom he is
selling. Nolt has also experienced trespass and
violation of his constitutional rights. Some months
after Nolt chose not to renew his permit, his
property was raided by federal and state agents, and
$25,000 worth of milk, milk products and dairy
equipment was taken. Following the raid, On August
10, a group of Mark’s customers and supporters
organized a protest rally to draw attention to his
situation. The raid garnered media attention,
including a detailed and not unsympathetic editorial
in the weekly Lancaster Farming, “the leading
Northeast and Mid-Atlantic farm newspaper.”
Following is Mark Nolt’s reply to the editorial:
Mark Nolt and Greg Niewendorp’s property perimeters
are the boundaries of freedom for all of us. They
are leading the way to the life we all want. Let us
unite our will with theirs, together working for
what we believe, for the desire of our hearts.
Deborah Stockton is the Editor of VICFA Voice, the
monthly newsletter of the Virginia Independent
Consumers
and Farmers Association, and writes from
Charlottesville, VA.
http://www.VICFA.net
email:
editor@vicfa.net
|
|
|
