No big surprise, Humboldt County’s Board of Supervisors Tuesday unanimously accepted the report of its Department of Public Health and Environment (described in my previous post) and refused to overturn the county’s ban on raw milk sales.
Even though 2,600 county residents had signed petitions supporting the legal sale of raw milk when the issue originally came up last August, the board chose to listen to its Department of Public Health and Environment and to its substantial conventional dairy industry.
I spoke to Mark McAfee, the owner of Organic Pastures Dairy Co., who had been pushing for a lifting of the sales ban, so his company could expand its California market and sell raw dairy products in the county. He was mainly upset that the county’s Department of Public Health and Environment failed to Acknowledge the reality of raw milk distribution in the rest of California, nor to make any mention of California illnesses from pasteurized milk–for example, an outbreak of illness at a California prison that sickened more than 1,000 inmates in 2006.
But overall, he seemed resigned. For one thing, a couple of the Humboldt County supervisors said they’d be open to re-considering s lifting of the ban if “new information” became available, which he feels leaves the door open to bringing the matter up again sometime soon.
More immediately, he’s had some initial discussions about the possibility of selling milk on a county Indian reservation not far from Eureka, which determines its own governance. That would provide at least one retail site for him to introduce raw dairy products.
It’s not as if raw milk is unavailable in the county. Like in many places around the country that prohibit sales, it’s increasingly available privately, direct from farmers to consumers. As Miguel pointed out in a comment following my Jan. 7 post, “Maybe the people of Humboldt county just want to keep their raw milk local and small scale. Maybe they like the economic benefits that this part of the unofficial economy produces, a lot like marijuana was before it was made legal and taxed.”
I can’t get too enraged, either. I actually think it’s kind of neat that Humboldt County is making its own decisions about food availability. I don’t agree with its decision, and I don’t believe its decisions represent popular will, but the idea of localities making decisions apart from the state or federal government about local food policy seems constructive.
I have to believe that, as the milk issue is raised again, and again, local residents will become more educated about what’s happening, about how a small group of officious and arrogant public health professionals have taken excessive control of decision making that ordinary people should be making for themselves: what foods to serve themselves and their families. When people start raising their voices, county officials will listen more closely.
In other places, local initiatives are moving ahead. The Maine Musketeers I described in a posting last September report they have presented their LocalFood.LocalRules Ordinance to the Selectmen of four 
Pennsylvania residents opposing a federal whisky tax send a tarred and feathered federal tax collector on his way in 1794.Maine coastal towns. The citizens of all four towns will be voting on it at their town meetings this spring. And the Maine Musketeers say they are out on the stump with a growing list of public chit-chats over the next couple of months.
Wyoming is pushing ahead, again, with its Food Freedom Act, which would allow home-based food producers to sell directly to consumers, without licensing and other government oversight. The proposal was defeated last year. A second proposal allows legalization of raw milk via herdshare arrangements, and was also part of last year’s defeated agenda. But this year is another year, with more educated voters, and more educated legislators and a political climate less receptive to regulatory officiousness.
The idea of localities taking back control of food choices and food rights from state or federal regulation makes a lot of sense. I keep having this vision of the old custom of tarring and feathering government officials who made a nuisance of themselves in small towns. Wouldn’t be a bad way to get rid of the federal regulators who will be descending on towns around the country to enforce the new food safety legislation.
?
When I was a little girl in Minnesota, you could not by colored 'oleo' at the store. You could buy white oleo and some odd looking colored pills to mix it up and make it yellow. Yes, big dairy was behind it. I also remember some people would bring it in from another state and resell it privately. It was a huge controversy in it's time.
Never could stand the stuff myself, we were a butter family.
http://blog.ideasinfood.com/ideas_in_food/2009/08/the-ogleshield.html
"The cheese itself is made by Montgomery with the milk from Jersey cows. A favorite for milk and cream, it's large fat globules make the milk an unusual choice for cheese."
http://www.thecheeseshed.com/ogle-shield-153-p.asp
"A few years ago jamie Montgomery – maker of the famous cheddar – played host to two young Americans keen to learn about cheesemaking. They experimented with some of his Jersey milk – not generally used for cheddar – using various techniques, and the result of one of their more successful ideas led to Jersey Shield."
As you can see, the Jersey milk is not traditionally preferred for cheddar right in the very origin of cheddar. I know old Wisconsin cheese makers who will tell you the same thing about Jersey milk — not good for cheddar.
I responded and am still waiting for her answer to my question about which raw milk she'd buy for home pasteurizing: http://www.thecompletepatient.com/journal/2011/1/7/the-laws-on-raw-milk-are-vague-for-a-reasonso-they-can-be-us.html?currentPage=3#comments
So I ask again: Lykke, whose milk would you rather buy to take home to pasteurize… mine or the high-speed mega-dairy? And why shouldn't every one be given the choice to buy raw milk, including those who want to take it home to pasteurize?
Nobody likes commercial milk, once they've tasted real milk.
Maybe s/he got horribly ill from listeria one time after eating a raw carrot with a little bit of dirt on it. Maybe that experience taught Lykke to never EVER drink raw milk.
HA! You'll have to excuse my sarcasm.
Yes, these officials are more accountable to the citizenry in that their election depends on local support, but its hard to see this decision as truly local when theyve relied on directives from a top-down public health apparatus over constituent desires. So what if the supervisors did all individually believe Public Health Department statements about relative safety? What business did they have deciding what level of safety is appropriate for each citizen? (One might hope that local officials might have a breakthrough idea about liberty when it comes to plain milk, which is not only a very legal product but one that has been central to health and economies since the dawn of man. But no, the central-control imperative is simply too tempting.)
Citizens may still act privately of course, and should do so, to get the food they want. But our central-control habit makes that option far more difficult to exercise than it ought to be, and thats a shame.
I recently received word of a rehabilitation hospital in Oregon that wants to start a horticulture therapy program inside their rehab unit. Infection control experts there are looking for policies that address the risk of soil-borne organisms. Growing plants—very risky! Better sterilize the soil first. Or better yet, just make it illegal.
Except for one little thing. The FDA gave us much in writing at the BOS meeting and now we know how they operate and how they think.
I stand by my opinion and experience.
The FDA is a criminal organization.
It seems that the FDA can kill 100,000 people and consider themselves the "conquers of the free world of health"…but to make a few ill by raw milk is considered cold blooded ruthless murder ( and never considering the thousands made well ). Yes they make the quantum leap to causing death…when the CDC data does not show any raw milk deaths in 37 years.
I never understood that entire mindset….
Kill a million people and you are a feared and highly respected "conquerer" ( Avandia, VIOXX, Celebrex etc )….but….kill one person and you are a low-life "murderer". I guess it goes with the idea that those that win the war can do what ever they want with the vanquished for what ever crimes they choose or make up.
It is a religion mindset….there is no data that will convince a person that believes something religiously. The data in CA does not matter. Safety programs do not matter. The truth does not matter. Science does not matter ( the FDA says that the PARSIFAL study was not about raw milk but about farm milk that was boiled ). For those that know the PARSIFAL research we know that the Steiner Schools were the basis of this study and know that they drink raw milk. In EU they call it farm milk or fresh milk. The FDA obviously felt very threatened by this and singled it out for scientific execution. The bottom line is this….if you drink raw milk, you will confirm the PARSIFAL study in your life experience and do not need the damn FDA to tell you the results of your own experience.
Mark
http://www.marlerblog.com/legal-cases/humboldt-county-keeps-raw-milk-sales-ban/
What a jerk…
The Dirty Life: On Farming, Food and Love
By Kristin Kimball
Scribner, 2010.
http://www.newenglandvfc.org/pdf_proceedings/2009/EssexGHPM.pdf
http://www.npr.org/2010/11/12/131268939/-the-dirty-life-from-city-girl-to-hog-butcher
http://www.marlerblog.com/legal-cases/raw-milk-wars-in-california—perhaps-humboldt-county-should-just-look-north-to-del-norte-county/
This is what I posted:
Donna Tam of Times-Standard reported today on the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors decision to unanimously maintain the status quo of Humboldt's ban on raw milk sales. According to documents presented by the Department of Health and Human Services, 10 raw dairy outbreaks with 138 illnesses and one pasteurized dairy outbreak with 23 illnesses were reported in 2010 (See, Outbreaks, illnesses and recalls linked to raw (unpasteurized) and pasteurized dairy products, United States, 2010 – through December 18, 2010). Even though raw milk accounts for less than one-half of 1 percent of all fluid milk sales in the United States, it causes two to 10 times as many outbreaks as pasteurized products, the documents said. In essence the Supervisors appear to have felt that the Cons for raw milk outweighed the Pros:
Pros:
* Advocates say raw milk is good for addressing many ailments, including allergies, asthma, eczema, autism, cancer, Crohn's Disease, lactose intolerance, tooth decay and gastrointestinal problems
* Raw milk is rich in nutritional value
Cons:
* Many regulatory agencies say raw milk contains bacteria, parasites and viruses that are usually killed by pasteurization
* There are inadequate studies to support some of the benefits touted by advocates – See also this document from the FDA that was presented to the Board late, RAW MILK MISCONEPTIONS AND THE DANGER OF RAW MILK CONSUMPTION. See meeting video by following this link. The meeting starts 1:55:04 in and goes to 3:26:00. Perhaps the Board also read my blog post of a few days ago at Marler Blog. Perhaps the Board will ban sprouts next?
I was trying to be "fair and balanced" and by mentioning sprouts I was trying to be a bit ironic.
The question before the board was whether to allow state of ca inspected raw milk to be sold in Humboldt not black-market or some others states raw milk or PMO CAFO raw milk to be sold in Humboldt. Instead of answering that question, the staff and the FDA and Dr. Payne at Wiffs saturated the board with every raw milk illness the USA could muster and did not mention CA standards or pasteurizer illnesses or the deaths from pasteurized milk illnesses.
The health department even slammed the OPDC relationship with the local Girls Scouts. The entire hearing turns my stomach. Corrupt and gross to the core. We are exposing the misleading comments and data and asking for additional hearings. This challenge just started to warm up. Ain't seen nothin yet!!!
The Heath officer at Humboldt had the stones to say that there had been a recall each month for raw milk in CA. This was clearly misleading false. There has been exactly one very infamous recall of raw milk in ten years in CA.
The health officer will be brought to answer for misleading the elected officials. No one is getting off Scott free with lies.
Mark
The labels you give him are totally appropriate and earned. When a person has two voices and two tongues. It is clear that he sleeps with the devil. If Marler wants to earn our respect he will need to acknowledge that when carefully produced and tested raw milk can be as safe or safer than most any other food in America. The FDA refuses to even consider this concept. All raw milk regardless of it's origin kills with just one drop
This outrageous concept is a clear measure of the hysterical and political nature of their dogma. It is both tragic and a disgrace of leadership in an American tax supported institution.
Mark
Mark
To be fair please answer the question raised above. Then call your buddies at the FDA and have a little chit chat about ethics.
Mark
My interest is in one thing – I want to make sure that your desire to sell your product does not conflict with the consumers right to have truthful information. We really are not that far apart.
I asked how you'd clean those teats. Inquiring minds want to know. To answer your question, given the choice, I'd home pasteurize milk from my own "family cow," or a neighbors'.
Bill A, regarding your comment, I'd wash the carrot with dirt on it. I'm not sure how you were raised, but in my family I was lucky to have the influence of generations of moms and grandmas and great-grandmas and aunts….they all made us kids wash-up after playing with the farm animals (and they kept their kitchens and veggies clean). Note – I grew up a suburb kid, but come from a long family of farmers and spent a lot of time harassing chickens during family reunions and visits (prep for this blog, lol). Perhaps you hold different values than the female elders in my family that taught good hygiene. BTW, the only foodborne illness I'm aware of acquiring personally was due to norovirus – my illness was linked to a foodhandler with feces or vomit on his hands when he prepared the tostada I unfortunately ate.
Mark said "There has been exactly one very infamous recall of raw milk in ten years in CA."
There have been 3 recalls related to your dairy in the last 10 years:
Organic Pastures Raw Milk Recall (E. coli O157:H7)
http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/egov/Press_Releases/Press_Release.asp?PRnum=06-053
Listeria Detected in Organic Pastures Raw Cream
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ArchiveRecalls/2005/ucm112271.htm
Organic Pastures Raw Cream Recall (Campylobacter)
http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/egov/Press_Releases/Press_Release.asp?PRnum=08-061
Read my post, Lykke. I told you how I'd clean those teats. They're actually not that dirty; I've seen way way worse at commercial dairies… take a trip to Horizon Farms some time.
So, Bill Marler, Lykke, et al: Those who don't or can't have a family cow of their own shouldn't be allowed to buy raw milk to pasteurize at home? They should be forced to buy only commercial dairy swill???
If the answer is drink commercial swill or no milk at all, then the only reasonable answer is that you are really working for Big Dairy.
Nobody WANTS commercial milk, once they've had real milk.
But Bill, neither was Holstein the breed traditionally used to make cheddar. If I understand correctly it was Shorthorn before that and English Longhorn before that and some unknown to me landrace prior to that. Is not the Holstein used more because of its volume of milk production than for any exceptional cheese qualities of its milk?
But for most raw milk producers in the US, Holstein is a non-starter for a great many reasons. Jersey is clearly preferred by customers and few are as discerning about cheese as you are. And for the small farm cheese maker who is selling direct and not nationally, very little of their cheese will live long enough to discern the difference with demand as high as it is.
So what breed milk have you used besides Holstein and Jersey? Or can you go through a cheese making apprenticeship without actually making cheese from different types of milk?
Clearly you know a lot about cheese. What breeds other than Holstein and Jersey would you recommend?
You don't have to agree with me about Jerseys. I'm simply telling you what I (and other raw milk cheesemakers with much more experience than myself) have observed about Jersey milk.
I realize that saying these things about Jerseys isn't going to make me popular around here (just like me saying that there may be some value to certain regulation of raw milk). I'm not trying to win a popularity contest. I'm just trying to to add some nuance and thoughtfullness to the conversation. Not everything is as simple, cut and dried as we'd like it to be. Just because Jersey milk tastes delicious as a drinking milk doesn't mean it is ideally suited to cheesemaking.
Speaking of regulation, I can think of a VERY traditional and ancient form of food regulation, which our good friend David Gumpert is probably very familiar with — the laws of Kosher.
After listening to these discussions at length, I've noticed I have gotten a little numb to the how truly crazy this issue is becoming, and then a little sentence like the one above strikes a nerve and brings it back in clarity.
The thing that struck me was the word "supervisors". When we endow our public servants with labels of power like that, is it no wonder that they begin to believe they have this kind of authority over others? I think the Quakers of old understood something very key when they carefully monitored the way they spoke.
(A quick cut and paste for those who are not familiar: Quakers often ignored the social distinctions of the seventeenth century. This translated into several behaviors which offended those of high rank. "Friends" refused to doff their hat to those of higher status. Quakers also addressed high-ranking persons using the familiar forms of "thee" and "thou, instead of the respectful "you".)
This realization that there truly is a round table forum of tyrants deciding what will or won't be on the menu for dinner on someone else's table is frankly so bizarre – that we are even discussing it says so much about us as a society. But we if continue to refer to them as "supervisors", are we in fact asking for it?