bigstockphoto_Smoke_And_Mirrors_1722194.jpgI’m trying to take stock of the Greg Niewendorp affair, and it’s not easy. The situation seems to be unfolding on two levels.

First, there’s Greg. He’s not just outspoken, he’s very outspoken. He is into both the subtleties of the regulations (agonizing over what the term “premises” really means), and the symbolism of his protest (he loves to read a tale of Irish protesters from the mid-1800s who were given death sentences, eventually commuted to life, and shipped off to Australia, where they became major political figures). When he begins talking about his property being under military occupation, well, I’m not sure where to go with that.

Yet I have to admire his bravery, his willingness to stand up to the state on behalf of a cause. It takes some guts to tell the state police to get off your property.

Which brings me to the second level, which is the complexity of the entire affair. The various comments over the last few days are testimony to that—questions about the prevalence of M.bovis, of which cattle are tested, the role of the sheriff, the possible legal options, etc., etc.

I spent some time just trying to assess Steve Bemis’ comments about whole herd testing and NAIS, and I realized how difficult it is to understand the rules and regulations about what is supposedly a simple test. The head of the Michigan Department of Agriculture posted a memo earlier this year that lays out the testing process. It explains that Michigan has three “zones” for testing: A “modified accredited zone” (which includes Greg’s county), a “modified accredited advanced zone”, and a “bovine tuberculosis free zone.”

I won’t bore you with all the details (you may want to read it for yourself), but essentially, in the modified accredited zone, “All cattle herds must complete an annual whole herd bovine tuberculosis test…,” while in the other two zones, “herds will be randomly selected for whole herd testing.”

The National Animal Identification System (NAIS) definitely fits into all of this, since the memo is prefaced with the statement, “Effective March 1, 2007, all cattle must be identified with official RFID electronic identification eartags prior to movement from a premises within Michigan, unless exempted by the director.” RFID eartags is code for NAIS. What I also read into this is that Greg’s herd must be tested, but not necessarily fitted with RFID tags, since he doesn’t move his herd from the premises.

But isn’t that part of the problem here? The regulators bombard farmers with these complex, highly restrictive, and arbitrary, regulations, supposedly based on scientific research and hard data. Yet when we go to examine the data that underlie the regulations, whether for raw milk or M.bovis, we find that our repositories of health information, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and scientific journals, contain incomplete information, or evidence indicating there’s not nearly as much of a problem as the complex and restrictive regulations would suggest. Blue smoke and mirrors, supreme.

I realize that the reason I keep listening to Greg and writing about his lonely odyssey is that he isn’t just challenging the bovine TB test and NAIS, he is really challenging basic notions of health and disease in animals and people—and making lots more sense than the state he is battling.

***

There is a nicely done small-paper article about a rally held last weekend at the farm of Mark Nolt, the Pennsylvania farmer I wrote about a few weeks back, who has defied state authorities by selling raw milk without a permit. It does a good job of communicating the sense of both support and outrage among the farmer’s supporters.