First a bit about different farming philosophies.

Companion Planting, a favorite with organic farmers.

Native Americans were our first farmers, including the Cherokee, who adopted and adapted an interdependent farming system known colloquially as the Three Sisters. The main characters are corn, beans, and squash or pumpkin, called selu, tuya, and iya in the Cherokee language. Each of them provided foodstuffs, of course, but their role wasn’t singular. Farmers hilled up the three together in mounds, not rows. The cornstalks formed the center pole, giving the beans purchase to climb sunward. Nodules on the weblike bean roots returned vital nitrogen to the soil. Broad squash leaves shaded the ground, slowing evaporation, and the plant itself produced an allelopathic substance that reduced weeds when it washed off in the rain. Meanwhile, the prickly hairs on the ropey squash vines deterred marauding animals….

The Three Sisters

What is often left out, is this type of farming, although it is labor intensive produces more food per acre than mono-cropping according to a study by ETH Zurich.

Traditional farming.

This type of farming takes into account the type of land and the interplay of animals and plants. Crops are best on well watered, flat fertile land without rocks. (It is amazing how New England soil can GROW ROCKS each year.) Hay can be grown on more hilly & rocky ground. The steepest ground can be used for pastures, orchards or woodlots. Pigs can be run under the trees in orchards to eat the dropped fruit that are likely full of bugs or in woodlots to scrounge for acorns, insects and other eatables . They are also great ‘garbage disposals’. Chickens and other fowl do a great job of eating the bugs that attack crops and fruit trees. Manure and crop rotation keep the soil in good shape and if a field becomes poor, grass with clover (a nitrogen fixing legume) can be planted and livestock run on it for a few years to return it to productive health. Various sources suggest agricultural land is split into 70% pastureland, and 30% arable/crop land. Vegans seems to miss this point. Much of the land that is flat, is fine for pasture but too dry for crops. Plant Types: I. C3 Plants, Comparison With C4 and Cam Plants

Köppen Climate Classification Map

Monoculture farming

This type of industrial farming grows a single crop usually using lots of fertilizers, pesticides and water. Without crop rotation it exhausts the soil. In animals it is called CAFO “concentrated animal feeding operation” These CAFOs are based on feeding large quantities of TAXPAYER SUBSIDIZED grain in a confined area, where the animals are often fed antibiotics to prevent illness from crowding and the overfeeding of grain. The main goal is to make $$$ and not to preserve the land for the next generation. My farm lost over two foot of top soil in 50 years according to the 1945 county soil survey. This was thanks to monoculture tobacco farming. It was sold because there was no organic matter left in the soil and therefore would no longer produce a decent crop.

TIMELINE

1944 to 2009

The Milner Round Table called the Committee for Economic Development, was officially established in the USA in 1942 as a sister organization to the Council on Foreign Relations. “In its 1945 report “Agriculture in an Expanding Economy,” CED complained that “the excess of human resources engaged in agriculture is probably the most important single factor in the ‘farm problem'” and describes how agricultural production can be better organized to fit to business needs” Meanwhile “World Bank and IMF use the loans they provide countries to prescribe policies and major changes in the economies of these countries.” —The World Bank: Hazardous to Africa’s Health

IMF Structural Adjustment Programs: The globalization of poverty

Former employee Breaks Code of Silence on IMF crimes Mr. Budhoo’s Bombshell: A people’s alternative to Structural Adjustment

1948: failed attempt to create an International Trade Organization

1948 to 1994: The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)

SPS measures were found in the original GATT Articles, mainly Article XX “General Exceptions,” and later in the 1979 Tokyo Round Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, a plurilateral agreement known as the Standards Code. The intent of the Agreement was to ensure that when SPS (Sanitary and Phytosanitary) measures were applied, they were used only to the extent necessary to ensure food safety and animal and plant health, and not to unduly restrict market access for other countries (James and Anderson, 1998; Roberts, 1998).

Giselle of Alaska

1957 Poultry Products Inspection Act — These acts mandate sensory or organoleptic (sight, smell, and touch) inspection of all carcasses. This was why the USA used to have the safest food in the world.

1961 PVP is the Plant Variety Protection — The International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants: Gave seed companies a monopoly on only the commercial multiplication and the marketing of seeds.

1980 the Supreme Court decision in Diamond v. Chakrabarthy, 447 U.S. 303 enabled living organisms to be patented

1986 Global commodity prices slumped in the mid eighties Pressure from commodity exporters inspired a decision to pursue Agricultural Policy reform at Uruguay round of GATT. It was lead by Under Secretary of Agriculture Dan Amstutz. <=== A REALLY NASTY PERSON!

Launched in 1986, the General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade (GATT) Uruguay Round of international trade talks has been dominated by a confrontation between the US and the EC over farm policy reform. Both sides proclaim their commitment to devising a GATT regime which will bring an end to the anarchy in world agricultural markets, yet neither is willing to address the underlying cause of the present malaise: structural over-production in their own farm sectors and the resulting accumulation of surpluses. The use of export subsidies to put these surpluses on to world markets caused developing countries severe trade and food security problems in the 1980s; and a Uruguay Round deal is unlikely to bring any relief. What it will do, however, is introduce new regulations which, enshrined in international trade law, will restrict the right of developing countries to manage their own food systems. Most importantly, the use of trade measures to control food imports and price support measures to promote staple food production could be severely constrained, or banned, by a ‘farm superpower’ GATT agreement. http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a769339885~db=all (Defunct URL)

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4005919

Kevin Watkins

The U.S. comprehensive proposal for agricultural trade reform in October 1989 covered:

*     market access: convert all nontariff barriers to bound tariffs;
make substantial cuts in these and existing tariffs over 10 years;
use tariff rate quotas and safeguard measures to facilitate transition;
-     export competition: phase out export subsidies over five years;
prohibit export restrictions on foodstuffs imposed because of short domestic supplies;
*     internal support: phase out most trade-distorting measures;
discipline those that interfere less; permit those with small
trade effect that meet specific criteria;
*     sanitary and phytosanitary measures: place these under an international process for dispute settlement and harmonization.  http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1999/12/30/000178830_98101901511298/.../multi_page.txt (now unavailable to the serfs)

1991 PVP monopoly has applied to seed multiplication and also to the harvest and sometimes the final product as well. Previously unlimited right of farmers to save seed for the following year’s planting has been changed into an optional exception. Only if national government allows, can farm-saved seed still be used, and a royalty has to be paid to the seed company even for seeds grown on-farm. (https://web.archive.org/web/20110113061506/http://www.grain.org/seedling_files/smar2002.pdf)

1993 Opening cattle port of entry at Santa Teresa NM built, owned, operated by Chihuahuan cattle producers, who operate both sides of the cattle port-of-entry Accounts for 25% of Mexican cattle imports. This is where cattle diseases like TB that were eradicated, in the USA crept back in. http://www.nmfirst.org/townhalls/TH27bkgrrpt.pdf http://www.choicesmagazine.org/2004-1/2004-1-05.htm

http://www.nmborder.com/livestock.html

http://www.scribd.com/doc/1466874/USDA-ao282

1993 FAO prepares “the Global Strategy for the Management of Farm Animal Genetic Resources” ftp://ftp.fao.org/ag/cgrfa/cgrfa11/r11w9e.pdf (Unavailable)

New URL for Updated version as of 2007 https://www.fao.org/3/aj335e/aj335e.pdf

1993 Published: International HACCP guidelines developed by the Codex Alimentarius, a joint Programme of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). revised in 1997. http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y1579E/y1579e03.htm

1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/agecon/trade/nine.html

1995 World Trade Organization (WTO) formed. Former Cargill Vice-President, Dan Amstutz, drafts the original text of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture. https://archive.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/after/2003/0430freemarket.htm

“Measures to trace animals…to provide assurances on…safety ..have been incorporated into international standards… The Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures…Aims to ensure that governments DO NOT USE QUARANTINE AND FOOD SAFETY REQUIREMENTS as Unjustified trade barriers… It provides Member countries with a right to implement traceability {NAIS} as an SPS measure.” <== Well there went your disease prevention methods. Thanks Dan.

Dan Amstutz

WTO SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES

“Development of risk-based systems has been heavily influenced by the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures ”

WTO

OIE report Oct 2008
http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/mcode/en_chapitre_1.6.1.htm

Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) introduction of intellectual property rules on plants, animals and seeds under WTO’s Agreement “could damage the livelihoods of these 1.4 billion farmers worldwide and undermine food sovereignty and food security ” Joint Communication from the African Group to the Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (2003)

September 1995, Catherine Bertini, Executive Director of the United Nations World Food Program, and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, stated “Food is power. We use it to change behavior. Some may call that bribery. We do not apologize.” UN’s 4th World Conference on Women: Beijing, China. http://ngin.tripod.com/280702c.htm

September, 1995, USDA’s Food Safety & Inspection Service presented a 600-page document Farm-To-Table – CONTROL of every step in the food chain from production to HOME PREPARATION. Http://haccpalliance.org/sub/news/AAMPReport.pdf

July 1996 Major re-structuring of USDA food policies: Pathogen Reduction/Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) Systems rule. Under the HACCP rule, industry is responsible for assessing potential food safety hazards and systematically preventing and controlling those hazards. FSIS is responsible for verifying that establishments’ HACCP systems are working USDA – THE EVOLUTION OF RISK-BASED INSPECTION (It is YOUR HEALTH they are risking…)

January 1998 USDA – Pathogen Reduction and HACCP Systems…and Beyond

The New Regulatory Approach for Meat and Poultry Safety

1996 The destruction of animals, Disposal procedures and Decontamination operation procedures published

This Manual of procedures for disease eradication by stamping out is based on The destruction of animals, Disposal procedures and Decontamination operation procedures manuals of AUSVETPLAN (second edition, 1996). AUSVETPLAN is a series of technical response plans that describe the Australian approach to an exotic animal disease incursion. The procedures are adapted in this manual to apply to eradication of foci of serious infectious diseases of domestic livestock in any country where they may occur.

MANUAL ON PROCEDURES FOR DISEASE ERADICATION BY STAMPING OUT (FAO 2002)

2008 Efforts of Food inspectors to bring problems with HACCP ignored by USDA management

Apr 17, 2008 Testimony:Mr. Stan Painter, Chairman, National Joint Council of Food Inspection Locals:

December 2004 Union president Stan Painter receive reports from union member that SRM regulations are not uniformly enforced. Painter writes to the Assistant FSIS Administrator for Field Operation about enforcement problem. USDA responses by placed Painter on disciplinary investigation status and contacts the USDA Office of Inspector General about filing criminal charges…..It (the recall of Hallmark/Westland Meat) highlights one of the problems that we have attempted to raise with the agency ever since 1996 when the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) inspection system was put in place. There seems to be too much reliance on an honor system for the industry to police itself. While the USDA investigation is still on going at Hallmark/Westland, a couple of facts have emerged that point to a system that can be gamed by those who want to break the law. It (HACCP) shifted the responsibility for food safety over to the companies .

Stan Painter

December 2004 Freedom of Information Act requests
August 2005 Over 1000 non-compliance reports – weighing some 16 pounds — were turned over

Republicans have up more recent testimony by Stan Painter: (2012)

When the Hallmark/Westland scandal broke in 2008, the agency promised Congress  that  FSIS inspectors would  receive additional  training  to enforce  the provisions  of  the HMSA.  All we received was an on‐line training module that we could access on  the internet  to refresh our responsibilities under  the Act.  There was no  follow‐up  by the agency management to emphasize the importance of enforcing the provisions  of the Act. 

Stan Painter

This is a transcript of the USDA patting Stan Painter and John Munsell on the head before blowing them off: Stan Painter was not invited….”I mean I know the Agency invited Stan Painter (ph.) but unfortunately they didn’t give him his authorization code. So he’s not here. So we have no inspectors here….”

This is the Senate hearing where Stan Painter is ripped to shreds by the USDA – FSIS.

…Question. Is USDA’s investigation of union president Stan Painter retaliatory?

Answer. USDA’s investigation into the validity of allegations that Specified Risk Material (SRM) regulations are not being effectively carried out or properly enforced was conducted solely to ensure the safety of our Nation’s food supply.

Question. Stan Painter, the president of the food inspectors union, set forth a series of concerns about SRM removal in a letter to the agency in early December. I understand that FSIS has responded to the letter by launching a personal investigation of Mr. Painter. In January, for example, FSIS flew Mr. Painter to Washington DC and questioned him for 3 hours, to try to get him to divulge the sources of his information. However, FSIS has a database of non-compliance reports, which should document instances in which inspectors have reported non-compliance with SRM removal. Why has FSIS chosen to investigate Mr. Painter personally instead of addressing the questions and concerns raised by his letter?

Answer. In a December 8, 2004, letter, the chairman of the National Joint Council of Food Inspection Locals made unsubstantiated and non-specific allegations that FSIS is not properly enforcing regulations requiring the removal of Specified Risk Materials (SRMs) from beef products. Because of the serious nature of the allegations contained in Mr. Painter’s Letter, FSIS immediately initiated an inquiry into those allegations which included an informal interview of the union chairman. During that interview, Mr. Painter refused to provide specific information to support the letter’s allegations. That inquiry subsequently resulted in a formal investigation by FSIS to determine the validity of the allegations. As part of that investigation, Mr. Painter was formally interviewed on two occasions in January. The FSIS investigation has been completed and the allegations concerning improper enforcement of SRM regulations were not substantiated..… [Remember the FOIA request resulted in Over 1000 non-compliance reports – weighing some 16 pounds — being turned over…]

SENATE HEARING

Munsell on food safety

I ran across a comment made in another forum that will chill the blood of any farmers or small business people reading this article. It shows the cover-up for large corporations and targeting of Mom & Pop businesses is systemic within the US bureaucracy.

“…worked for the EPA in oil field site inspections. Consistently he [his brother] was tasked with fining, and shutting down mom, and pop outfits, but consistently was ordered to leave the big boys like Exxon Mobil alone..” – Sancho @ ATS

1996 “Freedom to Farm” legislation of 1996. Cargill played a significant role in pressurizing the US government to move away from its farmer support programmes and eventually adopt the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act  otherwise known as Freedom to Farm, or to its critics “Freedom to fail”. — Corporate Watch

1999 Purdue University: Legal and Technological Measures to Prevent Farmers from Saving Seed and Breeding Their Own Plant Varieties.

The latest assault on the right of farmers to save seed is a technology developed by USDA and the seed industry. In March of this year the USDA and Delta & Pine Land Co., a Monsanto subsidiary, proudly announced that they received a patent on a technique that genetically alters seed so that it will not germinate if re-planted the following season.

Hope Shand

April 16, 1999 A veritable who’s who of corporate agribusiness writes a letter to Clinton about WTO meeting in Seattle: They want to establishment a three year goal, and a more effective set of trade rules for the agricultural sector – The Calamity Howler

1999 UK traceback (traceability) program in place, millions of animals are killed in the 2000 outbreak of Foot & Mouth. “depopulation” is used instead of Vaccine due to OIE requirement for returning to Disease free status SEE: http://www.fao.org/AG/AGAINFO/resources/documents/Vets-l-2/5engArt.txt

March 28, 2000 Senate -“Freedom to Farm” becomes “Freedom to Fail” The bill has made sweeping changes in agriculture–it has produced one of the worst economic crises that rural American has ever experienced. Tens of thousands of farm families are in jeopardy of losing their livelihoods and life savings. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r106:S28MR0-0011: (URL is dead)
 “ According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, almost 90 percent of the total income of rancher or farmer households now comes from outside earnings.” — Multinational Monitor

July 2000, USDA officials claimed in court hearing that, “The farmers have no rights. No right to be heard before the court, no right to independent testing, and no right to question the USDA.” –– Linda Faillace: Mad sheep

2001 Issues for the Agricultural Talks and WTO Trade Round:

“The un-scientific so-called “precautionary principle” is unfortunately being successfully and constantly misused as justification to immobilize science and its applications, as well as to confuse the public. ..The so-called principle, which is in fact a concept rather than a principle, is indeed a wonderful tool to avoid delicate political decision. .. the so-called precautionary principle – in reality a concept rather than a scientific principle – should not be used as a tool to stop innovation, even under the guise of a moratorium, which is what has happened in the EU today. There will always be scientific uncertainty in any scientific field and reasonable approaches to risk management must be adopted to manage this uncertainty. Prohibition must only be used as an extreme risk management tool. Abuses of the precaution concept to justify political positions, or to cloak distorting import restriction policies, should equally be avoided and expressively exposed. The European Commission’s recent white paper was helpful in clarifying the limits to be set on the use of the so-called “precautionary principle.” …. The internationalization of the food chain demands that identification, registration, tracking and tracing systems also become internationalized. — Mr Auxenfans

After 31 years with Monsanto, Mr. Auxenfans, retired from the Monsanto Corporation at the end of 1999 as the former Chief Operating Officer (COO) of the Agricultural Division, and its Chairman for the Europe-Africa operations. He is a member of the Board of Directors at both the IPC and the IAMA.

INTERNATIONAL FOOD AND AGRIBUSINESS MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION

This is how the USDA and FDA replaced the “precautionary principle” aka “Do No Harm” with “risk-based assessment”

2001 FAO Manual of procedures for disease eradication by stamping out

2001 History of UK 2001 foot & mouth disease

2001 Polish entry into the European Union: EU Chair states intent to remove 1 million Poles from their land (using regulations as a weapon) The Battle to Save the Polish Countryside:

July 26, 2002: Report [ Managing the Invisible Hand – IATP] Finds Fundamental Flaws in WTO’s Agreement on Agriculture: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy report argues that the Agreement on Agriculture fails to account for agri-business’ monopoly over global agricultural trade. https://web.archive.org/web/20021108185105/http://www.socialfunds.com/news/article.cgi/891.html

2002, the National Institute of Animal Agriculture (NIAA) began a major push for NAIS (traceability).

Listen up, America. Apparently, there’s a big, new threat to our national security: Terrorist chickens. Luckily, though, our national government, with the support of agribusiness corporations and high-tech firms, have a plan to tag and track every one of these terrible terrorists…. Holy George Orwell! Forced surveillance of livestock and pets – who came up with this? The National Institute of Animal Agriculture – a lobbying front for the likes of Cargill, Monsanto, Schering-Plough, and other agribusiness giants, as well as for the makers of the billions of electronic tags that Americans will be forced to buy. Since 2002, this tiny group has quietly pushed the Bush ag department to impose this mandatory program on all livestock owners, literally invading our homes and farms, while trampling our privacy and property rights

Jim Hightower

2002 Effect of new Ag policies on farmers in USA and Mexico:

FTAA is essentially an expansion of NAFTA. But NAFTA has proven to be a nightmare for working families and the environment. A look at NAFTA’s legacy shows why these kinds of “free trade” agreements should be opposed. Working families suffer: In the US, more than 765,000 jobs have disappeared as a result of NAFTA. When these laid off workers find new jobs, they earn 23 percent less on average than at their previous employment. In Mexico, manufacturing wages fell 21 percent from 1995 to 1999, and have only started to recover. The percentage of Mexicans living in poverty has also grown since NAFTA went into effect. The environment suffers: In the maquiladora zones along the US-Mexico border, the increased pollution and the improper disposal of chemical wastes have dramatically raised rates of hepatitis and birth defects. NAFTA should be repealed, not expanded.

Global Exchange Org

March 6, 2004 “It is important to note that no animal identification program will prevent an introduction of animal disease, ensure safe food or prevent a recall.” – SCOTT CHARBO, Chief Information Officer at USDA

“Tracking of Cattle Becomes Key Goal,” Houston Chronicle, March 6, 2004, p.1.

“According to APHIS-USDA (2004a), the increasing number of animal disease outbreaks that have been reported around the globe over the past decade, and the single US cow that tested positive for BSE, have greatly intensified public interest in developing a national identification program for the purpose of protecting animal health.

Marshall (2004a) reported that USDA Secretary Ann Veneman announced on April 30, 2004:

(a) USDA will now move forward on a National Animal Identification System (NAIS) using $18.8 million to start the program and with $33 million more in the FY-2005 federal budget,

(b) the frame work will be “technology neutral” but RFID will be the method of choice to get the program going as soon as possible,

(c) the USAIP will be modified to protect producer confidentiality (against inappropriate use of the Freedom Of Information Act—FOIA), and (d) NAIS will initially be voluntary, with premises IDs assigned in Fall 2004 and individual animal IDs used at a later date.  http://www.theisef.com/CMDocs/isef/05Traceability.pdf [Dead URL]

January 30, 2004, Bush signed Homeland Security Presidential Directive-9, “to defend the agriculture and food system against terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies.” USDA’s Jeremy Stump, says, “It’s from farm to fork.” The order covers animals and crops – the entire food supply chain – and includes shared operations with the CIA. — CBS News

January 2005: Guide to good farming practices: This draft guide to good farming practices for animal production food safety was taken from the Report of the Meeting of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission (Paris, 17-28 January 2005) www.oie.int/boutique/extrait/25berlingueri823836_0.pdf?PHPSESSID=64969a28688594daf57a7263f42fb1ce (Dead URL– I have a copy on my computer and it is jaw dropping. Think Max security facility…. With guards and health papers required for visitors.)

2005 Bill: Safe and Secure Food Act (OIE Good Farming Practices as US law)

AUG 2005 Monsanto Pig Patent

June 2006 Global Diversity Treaty: Standard Material Transfer Agreement (SMTA) a standardized contract that will enable much easier access to crop diversity. [ germplasm for patenting] royalty payment (1.1% of sales) is paid only if product is unavailable for further breeding and research. Funds will be devoted to conservation efforts. Translation: Bio-techs Corporations steal seed from third world farmers, patents it and pay money to Bioversity International

December 2006 “In the EU, there is now a list of ‘official’ vegetable varieties. Seed that is not on the list cannot be ‘sold’ to the ‘public’ To keep something on the list costs thousands of pounds each year…Hundreds of thousands of old heirloom varieties (the results of about eleven thousand years of plant breeding by our ancestors) are being lost forever . https://web.archive.org/web/20080601185703/http://www.defra.gov.uk/planth/pvs/pbr/app-procedure.htm
& http://www.realseeds.co.uk/terms.html

Feb 2007 GRAIN press release USA: Seed companies want to ban farm-saved seeds
A new report from GRAIN reveals the new lobbying offensive from the global seed industry to make it a crime for farmers to save seeds for the next year’s planting. See History at: https://web.archive.org/web/20070528091510/http://www.gmfreeireland.org/news/2007/feb.php

Feb 2007: U.S. Department of Agriculture’s “risk-based” inspection plan: Food Safety and Inspection Service will focus more on plants (factories) judged to have a higher risk of contamination. (if there are no complaints or non Compliance reports no inspections made) http://articles.latimes.com/2007/feb/23/business/fi-meat23 (requires fee to view in archives)

Feb 2007 Clones declared save: FDA decides based on “risk assessment” that meat and milk from adult clones and their offspring are as safe to consume as those from standard animals. “There has, of course, been no public debate about whether US citizens, let alone the recipients of US exports, wish to consume such fare, and surveys of US public opinion show a decided lack of appetite for cloned food. But we may not have the choice. The FDA has already concluded labelling should not be required “ — IndyMedia Org

2007 “In 1981, there were 181 FSIS employees per billion pounds of meat and poultry inspected and passed; in FY 2007, FSIS employed fewer than 88 workers per billion pounds “ — House Oversight Committee 2008

April 2007 Monsanto, Cargill and Maseca-ADM sign agreements to establish regional seed banks in the center and south of Mexico. https://web.archive.org/web/20080123221104/http://www.counterpunch.org/ross11212007.html

September 2007 Arctic Seed Vault http://www.physorg.com/news90236313.html

2007 farm bill: an analysis: https://web.archive.org/web/20111017023929/http://co.blaine.id.us/vertical/Sites/%7BDDCFF136-A071-4998-93F2-2DDE77274A17%7D/uploads/%7BC08DFE30-212F-441B-BFB0-CDB149283710%7D.PDF

2007 Data mining: State of Massachusetts uses rabies and other information to sign up farmers for Premises ID without permission. — NOFA Mass Org

2007 What is Premises Identification?

A Premises has no protection under the Constitution of the United States while property always has the exclusive rights of the owner tied to it. Property rights are protected by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. The word Premise is a synonym for the word tenement… Websters New World Dictionary 1960 College Edition defines Premises as the part of a deed or lease that states its reason the parties involved and the property in conveyance. Webster then defines conveyance as the transfer of ownership of real property from one person to another. It is quite obvious that the bureaucrats in Washington had a very good reason to use the term premises and never mention PROPERTY…. Page 22 The New User Guide-USDA

The Truth about Premises Identification, Before you sign up did they release this information to you? premises identification number, or PIN, is then assigned to that location associating it with the mailing address. Page 22 The New User Guide It is important to remember that the premises identification number (PIN) is assigned to a geophysical location. If an owner or entity sells his/her farm, the next operators of the premises use the original premises identification number that had been assigned to that location. If the seller buys a new location to build a new operation that never had livestock, he/she would register that location and obtain a new premises identification number. It will carry with the land forever….. That means this PIN must be disclosed when selling the property.

Giselle of Alaska

January 8 2008 ~In the UK Defra has dropped the word ‘farming’ from its title. “Defra and the Treasury’s joint vision document of 2006 presented to the EU argued that supports for farming should be completely abandoned.. farming is a drain on the country’s finances and we are in a “post agricultural era”…“ —Warmwell

May 2008 Bio-tech companies lobby to lift ban against terminator gene http://www.gmfreeireland.org/news/2008/may.php

The terminator gene technology, or genetic use restriction technoligy (GURT0 is the genetic modification of plants to make them produce sterile seeds in second generation…This technology was patented by the US Departmetn of Agriculture and the Seed company, Delta and Pine Land Company … During 2002 Monsanto acquired Delta and Pind Land (DPL)….

https://www.biotecharticles.com/Agriculture-Article/Terminator-Gene-Technology-Types-Advantages-and-Disadvantages-4123.html

According to Vandana Shiva the termanator gene was stolen from India.

May 2008: Creekstone Farms loses appeals for right to test for BSE (Mad cow disease)
http://www.animallaw.info/cases/causfd2007wl1020786.htm

2008: Documents USDA cuts and changes in poultry inspection
https://web.archive.org/web/20080529054505/http://www.organicconsumers.org/irrad/industry.cfm

2008 Who’s who in Corporate take over of food.
https://web.archive.org/web/20080209021546/http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=4185&name=Biotech-Brigade

FAO is supporting harmonization of seed rules and regulations in Africa and Central Asia in order to stimulate the development of a vibrant seed industry…An effective seed regulation harmonization process involves dialogue amongst all relevant stakeholders from both private and public sectors. Seed quality assurance, variety release, plant variety protection, biosafety, plant quarantine and phytosanitary issues are among the major technical areas of a regional harmonized seed system. The key to a successful seed regulation harmonization is a strong political will of the governments involved

FAO

2008: USDA is moving toward supporting fewer labs nationwide, with the remaining labs serving as regional labs and supporting larger geographic areas. The first-point testing program is the “early warning system” for the brucellosis program, enabling detection of infection prior to sale of cattle within the state. With the discontinuation of first-point testing, slaughter testing will become the primary method for brucellosis surveillance. Texas Animal Health Commission

2008: NAFTA and WTO in Mexico:

June 2, 2008 – How to manufacture a global food crisis: The destruction of agriculture in developing countries
Excellent article detailing the destruction of country after country “… by “free market” policies promoted by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and Washington [grain subsidies]….”

Small Farmers And The Doha Round: Lessons From Mexico’s NAFTA Experience

Alongside this, as hoped for by designers of NAFTA, has been ‘modernisation’ – a sharp decline in the share of agriculture and allied sectors in the workforce. From nearly 27% in 1991 it declined to slightly less than 15% in 2006, losing more than 2 million jobs[18]. Again small and marginal farmers and agricultural labour bore the brunt, as evidenced by very sharp decline in the number of rural households. According to a study by Jose Romero and Alicia Puyana carried out for the federal government of Mexico, between 1992 and 2002, the number of agricultural households fell an astounding 75% – from 2.3 million to 575, 000[19]. There has been a significant increase in migration out of rural areas as livelihoods are lost and farms have been abandoned.

Exports vs. Food Security in Mexico

Ejidos are a system of community-owned lands which, in some cases, have been owned “in trust” by communities for centuries. Ejido lands were protected from sale as a result of the 1910 Mexican Revolution. However, a significant amount of ejido land passed into private hands during the 1980s and 1990s due to extreme credit pressures and changes to the Mexican Constitution. These constitutional changes allow, for the first time since the Revolution, the sale of ejido land to private owners. The changes were a crucial concession by Mexico to ensure the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993.

2008: The draft guide to good farming practices from International Standards Organization.
Sources: http://www.oie.int/eng/publicat/rt/2502/review25-2BR/25-berlingueri823-836.pdf (Removed from archives)

2008: Good farming practices lead to transition to sustaniable Agriculture Slide prsentation to FAO
Source: http://www.fao.org/prods/PP6401/GoodFarming/tsld001.htm (Removed from archives)

2009 The Largest Wave of Suicides in History

Farmer suicides in India: Now the full toll—surely among the largest sustained waves of suicides in human history—is becoming apparent. And as Sainath emphasizes, these numbers still underestimate the disaster, since women farmers are excluded from the official statistics… It is important that the figure of 150,000 farm suicides is a bottom line estimate…. As Professor Nagaraj puts it: “There is likely to be a serious underestimation of suicides…what has driven the huge increase in farm suicides, particularly in the Big Four or ’Suicide SEZ’ States? “Overall,” says Professor Nagaraj, “there exists since the mid-90s, an acute agrarian crisis. That’s across the country. In the Big Four and some other states, specific factors compound the problem…. Cultivation costs have shot up in these high input zones, with some inputs seeing cost hikes of several hundred per cent… Meanwhile, prices have crashed, as in the case of cotton, due to massive U.S.-EU subsidies to their growers. All due to price rigging with the tightening grip of large corporations over the trade in agricultural commodities.”

Counter Punch

2013 –  Biologist Pushpa Bhargava spoke of terminator seeds being sold to farmers in India.

While the debate rages as to whether certain seeds contain a ‘terminator gene’ or more likely some other trait that at least diminishes seed virility, the outcome of global policies that have benefited big agribusiness, as well as seed patenting and seed monopoly (and the swallowing the seed companies’ pesticides!) has been the widespread termination of farmers’ lives in India. With reports of collapsed cotton yields throughout the state of Maharashtra in India , ‘cutting edge’ biotechnology is proving to be terminal on many levels.

Global Research

2017 — International Standards Organization AGRICULTURAL STANDARDS:

We are an independent, non-governmental organization.
We are a global network of national standards bodies with one member per country.
Our job is to make International Standards.

We are coordinated by a Central Secretariat in Geneva, Switzerland…

ISO standards for agriculture cover all aspects of farming, from irrigation and global positioning systems (GPS) to agricultural machinery, animal welfare and sustainable farm management. They help to promote effective farming methods while ensuring that everything in the supply chain – from farm to fork [Where have I read that before…]– meets adequate levels of safety and quality…. Who benefits from ISO standards for agriculture? INDUSTRY, consumers, regulators…..

ISO