Last week, following my July 15 posting, Barney Google addressed a sharp complaint my way about the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

“You keep promoting a legal team that has yet to show a victory in the raw milk battle…They keep promoting these herdshare/cowshare/farmshare programs, but everyone that has come under fire is still under fire or tied up in court…We farmers are in worse shape now than we were before because of the legal advice the FTCLDF is giving. Look at the cease-and-desist orders, look at the warrants and confiscations. In Wisconsin, Ohio and New York it’s all the same. Meadowsweet has been tied up in court for three years…If this is a valid business model, where are the victories?”

Before I provide my response, let me say that Barney Google isn’t alone. Complaints about FTCLDF seem to crop up every so often from various people.

One of latest objectors is Aajonus Vonderplanitz, the raw food advocate who runs a nonprofit organization, Right to Choose Healthy Food. One of the organization’s food distribution sites, Rawesome Foods in Venice, CA, was the site of a multi-agency raid three weeks ago.

Vonderplanitz and his RTCHF push a different “business model” than FTCLDF–a lease-based model. Quite simply, RTCHF leases the land and/or animals of about 40 farms around the country, which provide products, including raw dairy, to many hundreds of RTCHF members.

As I understand it, the lease-based model differs in a number of ways from the herdshare/cowshare model. A lease is akin to rental, while a herdshare/cowshare is akin to ownership, which would seem to be an advantage for the herdshare/cowshare. But leases have a lot more solid legal standing in business than herdshares/cowshares.

Land and buildings, not to mention cars, trucks, and machinery, are commonly leased every day around the country, and have a long history in agriculture, going back to sharecropping, which became common in the days following the U.S. Civil War. Herdshares and cowshares? The main court test in this country has been in Ohio, where a state court upheld the concept in 2006, and the state decided not to appeal the case. I explore the distinctions in my latest article on Grist.

For these reasons, Vonderplanitz is frustrated that the FTCLDF has shied away from the lease concept, especially given that he’s now taking considerable official heat. “I’ve shown Sally Fallon and the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund people the lease agreements,” he says. They’ve declined to embrace the idea and the result, in his view, has been something akin to what Barney Google described.

The lawyers at FTCLDF said they didn’t want to comment publicly about the Vonderplanitz assessment, in the interests of not sowing divisions in the food rights movement. But they have made clear previously that they think the ownership privileges conferred by herdshares and cowshares are preferable to the more limited privileges of leases.  

Since I’m not a lawyer, I can’t say which approach is best. I do find the long history and strong standing of leases in our legal system to be reassuring. RTCHF has been using the lease model for eight years and, as far as I know, its farmers haven’t been legally challenged by authorities. Yes, there have been raids. Aajonus’ Rawesome foods endured one in 2005 in Venice, and no charges resulted from it.

As one farmer has pointed out to me, Wisconsin dairy farmer Vernon Hershberger, who has embraced the lease model, is producing raw dairy products for consumption, while the Zinnickers are dumping their milk and trying to get Wisconsin courts to sign on to the couple’s hershare model, with backing from FTCLDF.

If it’s results you want, then you have to say RTCHF is getting the better results…up to now.

Now, no one can say what might result out of the recent raids of Rawesome Foods and Sharon Palmer’s farm (she has a RTCHF lease). There could be indictments and long court battles, forcing them to fight the feds for years.

Then again, the feds may well confine themselves to harassment, perhaps working with local officials seeking the less risky tack of trying to force RTCHF outlets to obtain health and retail licenses. But even here, a loss could encourage private groups to widely expand their distribution of nutrient-dense foods–something Big Ag would definitely not approve of. And a direct government challenge to the leasing model–for example, challenging RTCHF on the basis of the ban on interstate commerce in raw milk–could be more risky than the feds will tolerate, since they could well lose. Then, the raw milk spigots everywhere would be opened wide.

Now, some individuals in the food rights movement don’t like me doing such public analysis and assessment. But I’ve come to realize that one of the big advantages we have over the government overlords is our transparency. They work in secret, trying to figure out ways to stymie the public will. We are upfront about what we want, and gain ever more supporters.

Moreover, they are cowardly. All you have to do is view the video from Rawesome Foods of the agents entering the premises in Venice three weeks ago, with guns drawn, to get an idea of how pathetic they are. Guns drawn coming into a food outlet? Maybe they worry about getting too many fumes from healthy food. No, they are so distant from their subjects that they are afraid of ordinary unarmed citizens.

I see the division between RTCHF and FTCLDF as healthy. Just as we are entitled to choices in our food, we should also have choices about which legal course to choose and support. I support both RTCHF and FTCLDF, and whomever else comes forward to lend a hand to farmers and consumers in this ever expanding struggle. It’s going to be a long and tough battle, and the enemy has become increasingly aggressive.
?
When I hear the stories, and see the videos like that of the agents at Rawesome Foods, I find myself thinking about Winston Churchill’s eloquent and, ultimately electifying, rallying cries to his countrymen during 1940, following the worst defeats against the Nazis. Do yourself a favor, listen to this recording. If you don’t have time for the whole ten minutes, listen to the last 70 seconds, beginning at the 8-minute-50-second point, where he concludes, “We will fight in France…” Our situation isn’t nearly so desperate…yet.