It seems like lots of people have lots of bones to pick with Mark McAfee, owner of Organic Pastures Dairy Co.

He’s accused in the discussion following my Sunday posting of changing his story about whether he tests for pathogens, of letting his dairy get too big for safety’s sake, of having a big ego, and even of posting responses on this blog using pseudonyms. Another blog, The Ethicurean, which I respect a great deal, has come up with something else: it questions Organic Pastures’ failure to inform its customers that it was acquiring raw cream from another dairy. “A lack of transparency will erode trust,” it concludes.

I have both criticized and defended Mark previously about his approach to the illnesses that were potentially linked to his milk. I concluded finally that he had essentially had his trial via an intensive investigation that failed to confirm any links.

This latest round of discussion is a little different, though. It’s really addressing Mark’s business and personal ethics.

I think it’s a great discussion to have, since it is a direct outgrowth of the desire by growing numbers of consumers to know their food producers. One of the main reasons to know your producer is to be able to ask questions and make suggestions about his or her farming and business practices. The producer can then decide which suggestions to take seriously and which to discard. The customer can similarly decide whether to continue doing business with the farmer.

Mark has provided his explanation of what happened in this latest complaint by the California agriculture authorities (and maybe even taken on a pseudonym to express some frustration, though I have no way of knowing whether he did, and hope that wasn’t the case). He’s admitted that he erred by not having full pathogen-testing capabilities.

Melissa and Mary McGonigle-Martin have clearly made their decisions not to purchase any more Organic Pastures products, which, as several readers point out, is their right. It is the essence of the American capitalist system. It is also an outgrowth of an impressive amount of transparency on Mark’s part.

Melissa can argue that Mark has changed his story in certain ways or that he looked agitated when he appeared on television, but the important point is that he’s been available to provide his explanation of events. And obviously enough customers have decided to accept his explanations to enable him to continue growing his dairy.

The place where transparency is non-existent is with the taxpayer-supported California Department of Food and Agriculture. We don’t really have a way of knowing whether its test for listeria monocytogenes in Organic Pastures cream was reasonable or, as Steve Bemis suggests, part of a coordinated Food and Drug Administration campaign to sow fear. Farmer and producer alike are just supposed to take the agency’s word, in the form of a brief press release, that it found dangerous pathogens. Period. End of discussion.

So as much as you may not care for Mark’s style or way of saying things, he is upholding his end of the information-communication bargain. It’s the state that isn’t doing its part or, more troubling, deliberately misleading the public.

***

As a followup to the recent discussion about the centrality of soil conditions in animal and human health, there is a new report from the Organic Center suggesting strongly that today’s veggies and grains are lacking in nutrients when compared with old-time veggies. “For instance, looking at 63 spring wheat cultivars grown between 1842 and 2003, researchers at Washington State University found declines in the concentrations for all eight minerals studied, with an 11 percent decline for iron, 16 percent decline for copper, 25 percent decline for zinc, and 50 percent decline for selenium,” the Organic Center stated in a release describing the report. It blames crops designed to maximize quantity over quality.