NAIS—Where Is the Science?
by Judith McGeary

As opposition to the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) continues to grow, government and industry officials repeatedly claim the program is necessary to address animal disease. But disease, in both livestock and humans, is a reality we have lived with for millennia.

We can get rid of the problem of livestock disease if we become vegans, use no animal products, and have no animals for companionship. We can get rid of the problem of human disease if we arrange our society around telecommuting, avoid all social gatherings, and wear gloves and face masks whenever contact with other humans is unavoidable.

Why don’t we do these things? Because they don’t make sense to most people. Every action we take imposes some cost, whether in terms of money, time, lifestyle, or freedom. In making decisions we look at the disease risk, our options for alternative actions, the benefits to be gained, and the costs.

So how did the government make the decision to implement the NAIS? What are the risks it addresses? What benefits will we get? And what are the costs? When faced with a massive government program that will affect millions of people, we would expect these questions to be answered with epidemiological studies and detailed cost­benefit analyses.

• No Scientific Evaluation
• No Cost Analysis
• We Must Do More

Judith McGeary is an attorney in Austin, Texas, and the executive director of the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance, an organization representing independent farmers, ranchers, livestock owners, and homesteaders. This article appeared in the Winter 2007 issue of Rural Heritage.