When last I reported on the case of Morningland Dairy–the Missouri cheesemaker with listeria monocytogenes in a few cheese samples, but no illnesses–a judge had sided with the state in arguing that the entire $250,000 of inventory should be destroyed.
Jonas Stoltzfus, a Pennsylvania dairy farmer, read his poem (see below) at the Washington demonstration in support of Amish farmer Dan Allgyer. It wasn’t the judge’s decision that raised eyebrows–after all, judges tend to believe the regulators first and foremost–but rather the judge’s reasoning. Even the state hadn’t alleged disease in any of Morningland’s cows, or unsanitary conditions on the farm…yet the judge concluded some cows had mastitis and that the facilities were “unsanitary”.
The judge’s surprise reasoning now has the parties to the suit wrangling over a possible appeal. Morningland Dairy and its legal representative, the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, are now trying to convince the judge, David Dunlop, to order a new trial or to reverse his original decision. Not an easy task in any event, to convince the judge to go against the regulators, but that he made the wrong decision.
The state of Missouri, not surprisingly, now sees the judge’s decision as eminently reasonable, despite the fact that it introduces information the state never raised as concerns. The state is arguing that FTCLDF can’t introduce an affidavit from the owner of Morningland, Denise Dixon, to buttress its case, or of a state inspector who didn’t find mastitis or unsanitary conditions.
It’s a messy legal situation, with the parties introducing legal briefs to counter the other…and convince the judge. The state at one point accuses Morningland, in introducing Denise Dixon’s affidavit, of an “insidious attempt to re-litigate issues already testified to and resolved at the trial.”
The FTCLDF replies that, “Nothing could be further from the truth. Ms. Dixon at trial did not testify to their procedure for banding cows that produced abnormal milk, for separating that milk, and that 75% of the cows that were culled were not even being milk or housed at the Dixon’s at the time.”
The FTCLDF concludes, “Rather than relying on evidence of mastitis, the State relied on somatic cell ount test results and the Dixon’s culling of the herd to insinuate there was mastitis in the herd at the time Morningland maufactured cheese. However, and as described in Morningland’s motion for new trial and with all due respect to the Court, the Court’s use of these somatic cell test results and subsequent culling constituted a classic case of the fallacious argument known as post hoc ergo propter hoc. A somatic cell count in excess of 750,000 for three non-consecutive months out of sixteen months does not constitute evidence of mastitis. Likewise, culling of a herd for financial reasons also does not constitute evidence of mastitis.
“To further reinforce Denis Dixon’s trial testimony that some animals were culled because her family was ‘financially stricken’ she provided an affidavit. Denise Dixon’s affidavit provides further evidence that, with respect to the Court, the Court’s conclusion that there was mastitis in the herd is an example of post hoc ergo propter hoc.” (Simplified, A occurred, then B occurred, therefore A caused B.)
All this because the judge decided to become what I would term an armchair scientist. It’s difficult to imagine a judge overruling himself, but as we sometimes say in sports, “The game isn’t over till it’s over.”
***
Two additional towns have approved the Food Sovereignty laws developed out of coastal Maine.
What may be the first town outside of Maine to approve such a law is Sandisfield, MA. Brigitte Ruthman, who has been battling with Massachusetts regulators over the legality of her one-cow herdshare, reports that her town earlier this months “adopted a resolution as follows…..’We the people of the town of Sandisfield, Berkshire County, Massachusetts, have the right to produce, process, sell, purchase and consume local foods thus promoting self-reliance, the preservation of family farms and local food traditions.'”
And Deborah Evans, one of the original promoters of the Food Sovereignty idea, says the Maine town of Trenton just approved the ordinance as well, by a 29 to 25 vote.
That makes a total of five towns–four in Maine and one in Massachusetts–to approve the ordinances. I understand others are waiting in the wings.
***
Finally, there’s one other item from the Washington demonstration to support Amish farmer Dan Allgyer last Monday that I wanted to share. It’s a poem by Jonas Stoltzfus, a Pennsylvania farmer and head of the Pennsylvania Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (PICFA) , who arrived late to the demonstration and did his reading after many people had departed. Ii is entitled, “Leave Us Alone”:
We don’t need your license, permission to be,
In the home of the brave and the land of the free.
No permits are needed, it’s easy to see
All we ask of you, is just leave us be.
Our forefathers left Europe many years ago,
And came to America, to plant and to grow.
In Europe persecution is what drove us out,
They hammered us bad with government clout.
They beat us and hung us, some were skinned alive,
And boiled up in oil, like a bunch of French fries.
We were drownded and pounded, to make us submit
To the official religion, how they interpreted it.
But we fled to America, to the land of the free
To put down new roots, and it worked, you can see.
We’re peace-loving people, small farmers most,
But now again seems, like we’re government toast.
It looks like we’re fallin’ on hard times again.
This time seems the leaders, are trying us to skin
By economic pressure, make us change our ways,
Make us comply, to the regulation daze.
For years we’ve sold food to all who would buy,
Do our best to keep it whole, we always would try
So now all we’re asking, in our place in the sun,
Is just for some peace, and just leave us alone.
Just leave us alone, is all that we ask,
Let each of us get on, with what is our task.
We get up each morning, and do our own thing
As we’re working along, sometimes we sing.
We’re producing the food that many folks like,
Most of the stuff does a body real good.
Maybe some of our bakin’ is just a tad sweet,
But the bread that we bake, is a pleasure to eat.
And all that we ask, is just leave us be
Is that just too hard? Something you can’t see?
We’re the small time farmers, in love with our land
And the animals we raise, with a skilled, gentle hand.
We pasture our stock, cows, chickens and pigs,
Sheep, horses and goats, green grass they all dig.
People come to our farms, they line up to buy
The stuff we produce, we can look in the eye
Of each of our customers, friends, neighbors too,
And be sure it’s the best, I’m just tellin’ you.
We’re like the King’s food taster, in those days of yore,
who checked out each thing, makin’ absolutely sure,
There was nothing that threatened, the life of the king.
And all that we ask, is to leave us alone
As we grow food to eat, boil the broth from the bone.
We pay our school taxes, then have our own schools
And most of the time, stick close to the rules.
We take stuff to market, veggies, milk, cheese and meat,
And meet with our customers, a firm handshake to greet.
We take care of each other, no public welfare we need,
Just leave us alone, is now what we plead.
We don’t want your handouts, no bailouts we need
Just leave us alone, we now again plead.
But this is America, land of commercialism, land of corporation as person, land where the loudest voices are the biggest business interests. Sometimes those voices are monsters behind smiling masks. Sometimes they are friends bent on doing good, and bringing their friends along for the ride whether those friends want to go or not. Either way, theres not much good to say about what they create.
The refusal of some to here to acknowledge to momentum of ideas in this big-voice culture is surprising to me. Most all of them have complained themselves of being pushed around by the big.
Mark, Luv ya man, but this statement is both wrong and an obfuscation:
RAWMI has been welcomed by all that welcome a brave heathly near world of kids with strong immunity…an FDA that acknowledges and respects high quality raw milk, producers that stand together, with good science behind them.
Those that advocate for the status quo…are in the dark ages and will continue to be treated and tortured on the rack….just like in the dark ages.
First, not all. Second, there are more available than the two choices of status quo vs. the igniting of another bulldozing system, especially one that is designed to placate in part or whole the status quo you warn against.
Please, all who support organizational standards: Watch your language. Tone down your rhetoric. Acknowledge that in this money- and media-driven culture, your ideas can become what you hate.
In case it needs to be said: I do NOT mean to say that searching out practices that seem sensible for your operation is wrong. Quite the opposite. But answers not perfectly aligned with the context of a problem are not comforting, and certainly not uniformly helpful.
Heres an example: We have been having near constant rain where I live since winter broke. Ive noticed that in rainy periods there can be changes in the flavor of our milk seemingly disconnected to the usual suspects (such as relative grass-proteins). Its interesting. (For the record, I corresponded once with miguel about it, and he suggested it may be related to pollutants washed through our farm, which made some sense to me given the state of our air and water and soils.) If I decided to alter my practices in response to these episodes, would it be wise to begin with a policy and procedure manual, or rather consult my experience, observations, like-minded and not-so-like-minded friends, and yes, that P&P manual?
_______________________________________________
And Tim, If cows have been bred to produce more output than a grass-based diet can support, what exactly is the solution? Is it axiomatic that we must therefore apply a hyper-bred dairy feed regimen, or might we do better to revert to pre-commodity era cows? Or is there possibly a third option neither of us has imagined?
A suggestion: Dairy holism, seen beyond the industrialized world, considers grass as hearty, available, symbiotically linked with grazing animals, and naturally healthy for (un-hyper bred) cattle and therefore humans. We can perhaps learn something about health from non-industrialized cultures, but only if we are willing to work outside the rules of industrialized commerce.
_______________________________________________
Now a personal note: I dearly appreciate Mark and Tim and the FTCLDF and all the wonderfully off-center men and women who keep us thinking, and by their efforts urge us and the powers-that-be to challenge what we think we know. (That statement of support is plain and understandable I hope.) I would simply ask that all make a full and heartfelt effort to stand in the shoes of folks like miguel, and Kirsten, and goatmaid, and Ken, and the countless other little guys scattered all over the place, who at times take issue with this or that of their ideas. At least, do not assume lack of concern with families, neighbors, and customers.
look up = see those chemtrails? Beyond argument, climate change is going on, but it isn't a consequence of industry …. weather modification is engineered. Before you sneer, read the bloody patents as to how it's done. There's an awful lot of hard evidence to support some "conspiracy theories"
who's doing it? All I know is that they aren't our friends
I am totally in favor of constructive criticism and input when developing raw milk standards. Miguel and others have certainly given plenty of constructive criticism, and I welcome their viewpoints and input.
However, what we need to get past is this "I'm in it for myself" and "the customer is my inspector" ideology. That is profoundly unhelpful to our cause. We will not have a successful raw milk revolution unless we are preparing to confront legitimate public health and food safety concerns.
Michael Schmidt understands this, and he has been rigorous in his dedication to food safety. That is why Michael won his court case, where dozens have failed before him, and will continue to fail unless food safety issues are addressed.
We can sit here flailing our arms about "rights", and going on and on about conspiracy theories and anti-government rants. But all that will be irrelevant when someone like Mike Hartman causes numerous outbreaks and ruins it for everyone else around him.
I welcome the constructive criticism. I am 100% in favor of transparency and democracy in this process. We will be the anecdote to FDA.
Mike Schmidt and I share much the same philosophy of holistic prevention through the right conditions to assure a very high level of safety for our consumers.
Mike is part of RAWMI and we are proud to have many of the names you would all recognize supporting RAWMI through our Executive Advisory Board.
Bill is right…we will not progress with out some standards.
What I think separates RAWMI from other standards organizations that have attempted to increase safety is this: Each farm has its own risks. Seasonal changes, regulatory politics, wild life, rain, temperatures, humidity, snow, soils, water sources, milkings systems, size of herd, pasture conditions, farmer beliefs, markets, distribution systems, environmental biology….etc….etc. Each farm then by neccessity must have its own RAMP program to manage those risks. So…Dave and others, when a set of conditions is mentioned that somehow seems to be a strange or unusual risk…that is normal and anticipated at RAWMI. If you chose to join RAWMI and earn the seal of excellence, then your set of risks will be managed by your RAWMI assisted RAMP program. Simple as that.
Everyfarm is unique yet every farm can be improved by a careful analysis of their risks and managment of those risks.
Raw Milk must break from a history of random success and praying for no one to get sick this year attitudes. This will no longer fly.
Planned success and hard work will usher in health for more Americans and sustainable econmic and social systems for our farmers. Systems that embrace listening directly to consumers and responding with foods that they can eat. Foods that are not allergenic and that can be digested. Foods that are very safe, yet biodiverse and enzyme rich.
People….we have kicked the bee hive with the reimergence of raw milk as a food for America. I will make this statement confidently. Milk production and selling is the oldest and largest food system of modern times. It has shaped and defined America in so many ways.
This hornets nest is struggling and it is suffering. Raw Milk takes the farmer away from the processor and reunites the farmer to his long lost consumer. The processors are pissed off and want to sting someone.
RAWMI is the way forward to unit farmers and their consumers to win this battle. There will be no peace until farmers join with consumers and feed more and more of them and the tipping point is tipped. This is an educational challenge. This is a food safety challenge. Raw Milk can not succeed if we continue to make headlines with sick kids or pathogens found in our products.
I am no chicken little and the raw milk sky is not falling….but the FDA is a chicken little and they do claim that the Raw Milk sky is falling with one drop of raw milk consumed for any reason at any time. So please do not say that I am creating or inventing some kind of panic so RAWMI will have patrons… that is negative spin BS…
RAWMI is all of us united in a unified front to teach and feed America. Whether that be from 2 cows in a cow share program or 300 cows milking into a line.
The only thing RAWMI asks is that you enbrace the common end points:
Low bacteria counts ( yet to be defined )
No pathogens ( to be listed )
Your individual RAMP program with comprehensive risk assessment and managment plan.
If you do not want low bacteria counts and zero pathogens. Then RAWMI is not for you. I am not sure you should be providing raw milk to humans if you do not embrace these basic concepts ( I do tip my hat to Miguel and his arguments as to the relative pathogen argument but this is a side discussion…. we must win politically and pathogens at this time are crucial to making progress ).
Hey….look at the good news….the world did not come to an end!!!
I would say though, that the world as we know it is not doing well however, and if we as Americans do not start feeding our kids better, the human world as we know it will come to a tragic, personal and sickly end.
Mark
Some friendly, and loving, constructive criticism:
Please consider how many times you use the word I in your thoughts and speech. For example, that you support or don't support this or that, and that you welcome constructive criticism, is fine to know, but it is not really all that important here. Ideas are what really matter, because they are what take us actually and fully into considering the needs of others, and out of the in it for myself mentality.
Please consider your characterizations of what is going on around you, and be more respectful. There are, for example, no flailing arms here.
Consider that perhaps some good folks here are not interested in being a part of your raw milk revolution. Perhaps some here would prefer to be part of (yet another) revolution to restore natural rights (and with success thereby enjoy the freedom not only to drink raw milk, but countless others as well). Perhaps the fundamental change we all want may be rooted in good people not placating lawyers and judges and bureaucrats, but simply doing what they know is right and thereby feeling the sting of the lawyers and judges and bureaucrats who misuse their powers. (Just a thought, Bill. Not attempting to douse your flame.)
______________________________________
Nestled as we are, generally among friends and the like-minded here at TCP, it may be difficult sometimes to appreciate the magnitude of power and inertia in our modern medical and biological science. David's quote of Ray Costa in his last post, that we raw milk advocates think pathogens are good for [us], brought that home. Such a baldly over-simplified and under-informed lay-type statement coming from one of our experts may lead us to believe that we are arguing with a bunch of children. The reality is that almost EVERYONE, including almost all of our highly educated classes, and not to mention almost all of our business and government systems, are on the other side of this debate. (One bit of evidence: The direct costs of standard medical care now absorb well over 15% of GDP in America. There is a LOT of homogenized thinking reflected by that number!) If we do not therefore focus on rights, it is likely that Bill's last typo, We will be the anecdote to FDA, will become more real than it already is.
Lastly, for the record, I personally may very well adopt RAWMI on my own farm. I'll figure that out when I see the fine print. In any case, I ask that we all consider the effect of building yet another system, when a whole bunch of peoplemany, many more than those in this era of medical-paradigm worship could counthave already proved that they can do quite well thank you without it.
____________________________________
Mark, regarding this: Raw Milk can not succeed if we continue to make headlines with sick kids or pathogens found in our products.
Many of the headlines, and more important, the police-type actions, are much ado about nothingAllgyer and Morningland, are prime examples. Headlines and fussing and fines and good people badgered and deviled, without sick kids or pathogens. How does that happen? More important, when the inevitable illness occurs while RAWMI is being followed, what then?
Despite the fact that they are voluntary the restrictive in nature of standards of certification are a threat to diversity and tend to marginalize those who dont fit into the box or those who chose to remain outside of the box.
Ive yet to be convinced that public health and food safety concerns are indeed legitimate and if you are using standards as a tool to keep the wolves (regulators) at bay then all I can say is, prepare yourself for disappointment.
Marks statement that, those advocating for the status quo…are in the dark ages and will continue to be treated and tortured on the rack….just like in the dark ages, is little more then a fear mongering tactic that serves no constructive purpose other then attempt to discredit the decision of those who have put a lot of thought into, and made difficult choices with respect to this issue.
During the winter I feed a little whole and/or milled oats to the milking cows for physical conditioning and maintenance of milk production. In doing so would that practice exclude me from your body of certified grass fed milk producers?
Ken Conrad
" Weeds" are an invention of weed killer producers just as "Pathogens" are inventions of medical professionals and the pharmaceutical industry.These terms were invented to increase the sales of their products.
Go out in your pasture or lawn and clear away an area of sod.Observe what happens.The first plants to colonize this patch of bare ground will be fast growing plants with big leaves and root systems that spread out to attach the plant firmly to the soil and to stabilize as much soil as possible.This type of plant covers the soil and protects the soil bacteria from the sun ,wind and rain.The plants are of many diverse types and each produces a different root exudate that feeds different types of bacteria.The role of these plants is to preserve the life in the soil and stabilize the soil so that fertility will not be lost. They also set up the conditions such as stable soil and humid conditions that the more slowly growing grasses and legumes need to re establish themselves.They are beginning the process of healing the bare patch of ground.Should we label them "weeds" and run for the weed killer? If we want to accelerate the healing process a better option would be to put some grass and legume seeds on this spot.The "weeds" will help keep these seeds in place and keep them shaded and moist until they can sprout and put down roots.Eventually the grasses and legumes will crowd out the "weeds" and we will have a lawn or pasture again.
The same healing process takes place when a patch of our intestinal flora is destroyed.The microbes that are labeled as "pathogens" are the ones that are able to survive and reproduce in the absence of any infrastructure.They serve as a buffer between the food and our bodies until the normal flora are able to repopulate and rebuild the symbiotic community of bacteria that was destroyed in that spot.Should we try to eliminate these "pathogens" or should we speed up the healing process by seeding with probiotic bacteria. Could the healing process even begin if none of these "pathogens " were present waiting for the proper conditions that favor growth?
A healthy natural system will tend to return to a balanced state if we don't get in the way.Better yet ,if we understand what is going on we can help in that return to a balanced state.
It is a big mistake to underestimate the intelligence of those who seek out raw milk.They are very capable of understanding the real cause of disease and of judging the quality and safety of milk.In fact ,I see raw milk as a way of teaching these people about their health and the natural laws that lead to a life without chronic or life threatening illness.
RAWMI standards do not exist yet. It would be a very presumptious if the RAWMI protocol was developed already and the formation of the directorship approval process was just a formality…. after the fact.
That is why RAWMI is a process. It is first and foremost a process where the best ideas from the best minds we can find are collected and formed into a protocol.
As the founder and as a director of RAWMI, I will try my best to assure that the basic philosophies and the mission does not stray.
When the website is up…all of this will be clearly explained.
The feedback that RAWMI has recieved at TCP has been very very valuable and deeply appreciated. Some of the toughest and most critical minds are right here. I apologize that more has not been completed and ready to post about RAWMI. But….the content needs to be approved prior to posting. This takes time and thought.
The SF Chronicle had a nice OPDC RAW MILK piece today.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2011/05/22/MNVN1JH966.DTL&object=%2Fc%2Fpictures%2F2011%2F05%2F21%2Fmn-milk22_PH4_0503499022.jpg
Miguel….
You do not ever sell raw milk. You teach raw milk.
When people begin to understand that they need biodiversity in their gut for immune system health and general health….they then search for that biodiversity in their food supply. It can easily be found in raw milk. One of the only foods in America with biodiversity in it. Yogurt has 3-5 bacteria types. Rawmilk has hundreds and they are always changing….the rain forest effect. Miguel…. I hear you….
Mark
Who will approve the RAWMI content? Can you explain the process, please?
With input from the Executive Advisory Board, the Directors of RAWMI will approve content and policy. As the director of RAWMI, I will work hard to assure that our mission stays focussed and all energies stay on target.
This is all described in the Bylaws and RAWMI formation documents. All of this will be posted at the RAWMI website when it is done.
This is one of the reaons that I can not speak for RAWMI. RAWMI is not me. It is a group of WE. All I can mention is the mission and culture and philosophy of RAWMI.
So to answer your question…the Directors of RAWMI will aprove RAWMI policy etc.
All very exciting.
Mark
This is for the producer who is attempting to make money on raw milk production. hobby milkers do what you will, your job will keep you from effectively utilizing the following…
Its the third option that needs to be discussed. Its not that we have dairy cows that are bred to exceed what they can get from grass and still maintain body weight and breed back.
A milk cow can get all she needs from grass if the grass has what she needs in proper balance at all times. That is the difficulty of all grass systems. Beef give us a bit of room to work with, dairy cows do not, they need consistancy and given all the variable of the weather and heat humidity and poor soil climate it just makes the job harder.
It is a target to shoot for, more forage in the diet and less inputs from the barn, but we must always be aware of the needs of the cow so she is getting a balanced diet and keeps weight on, breeds back and produces quality milk comfortably.
Third option
I still insist it is much easier to have 6 cows at 60 lbs than 18 cows at 20 lbs per day.
Less pasture, less space, less fence, less hassle, which all goes into less cost of land taxes help feed inventory ect ect ect.
The old line of thought of grape growers that less production is more flavor density has been proven wrong time after time.
Production follows Quality. Shoot for quality milk (or grapes) with balanced soil forage and ration to the cow and she will produce abundant amounts of high quality safe raw milk.
Throw a few tests in there to qualify what we taste and see in our animals and we have a quality safety program.
But to think we have green grass and thats all a cow needs is a very wrong assumption, yes a few hours a month that grass will be just right for a milk cow in her stage of lacation but what do you do for the other 97% of the hours if you are not clipping and accurately predicting the weather rain fall and soil climate and species you have to feed her.
Given our current constraints of land prices taxes the value people put on food, we have to be economically wise about how we produce our product.And until we have a consumer base who will pay 30.00 a gallon to starve down herd to 20lb average, routinely buy more animals for the farmer to replace that which is not breeding back, this senario just seems to close to the CAFO model we all want to avoid.
I do not see a problem with current genetics, meet the needs of the cow and away we go.
just make sure she is clean when she hits your farm, hard telling where sees been.
Tim
You need to get out more and open your mind up to what's possible. Just because you can't produce 100% grass/forage milk doesn't mean it's impossible. We've been doing it for over 11 years. I know many others that are as well. There have been some that had major problems, but that doesn't mean we are all in that group or that it can't be done (kind of like any group of dairy, some succeed, some fail), or that you shouldn't learn what options there are to help those having problems. Starve cows down to 20 pounds, and buy replacements. Seriously????? The lengths someone will go to to discredit something good. You will never learn with a bias like that!
We seldom drop below 40 pounds per cow and have not bought another cow since we started in 1993. Our herd is growing faster than we know what to do with them all. I know many other dairies with the same results.
It takes management just like any form of dairy farming, but someone that travels a lot and wants to be a spokesman for raw milk, quality food, COW DIET, etc. ought to get educated about the possibilities. BTW, I sat in on your presentation in Chicago at the Weston Price Conference about the impossibility of feeding all grass/forage (at the Weston Price Conference!!!!!!!). It was rather sad. I hope in the future they will have someone speak that actually knows how to produce milk without grain.
"Throw a few tests in there to qualify what we taste and see in our animals and we have a quality safety program."
Ask Gary Zimmer about some of those tests, Tim. Like the one Chico State did a few years ago where my milk blew everything else off the chart. It was 5 times, yes, 5 times higher omega 3:6 ratio than the biological or conventional group. Beta Carotene was similar ratio, and mineral levels were the same. I do believe soil fertility is very important, but it was interesting that there was NO difference between the biological farms and conventional farms because of the grain feeding. Very low grain does improve the beneficial fatty acids levels some.
"yes a few hours a month that grass will be just right for a milk cow in her stage of lacation but what do you do for the other 97% of the hours if you are not clipping."
You should try grazing, Tim. I mean really try it. A few hours a month of grass just right???? It's easy to spot a non grazer a mile away. I see them in the organic movement all the time. Why it can't, won't, shouldn't, wouldn't, and couldn't be done. They have no interest in learning, trying, or even listening to those of us doing it. I hope you can find a way to learn.
Grass fed IS the future, Tim, whether you like it or not.
Having spoken a lot recently, and getting rather slammed for it, I wasn't going to say anything more for a while, but I really can't restrain myself at this statement.
Some three years ago I bought a pregnant Jersey from local Jersey dairy, at the tail end of her lactation. She calved three months later, and started producing 6 gallons a day. That's a lot for a Jersey, I gather. I gave her 2-3 lbs of grain (mostly oats, with some corn and sunflower seeds) on two solid flakes of alfalfa during milking and all the pasture she could eat all day and night, plus good minerals and kelp. As the season went on, I dropped the grain as she did not seem to need it, giving her only alfalfa while milking. She settled down to a steady 5 gallons a day. She did not lose weight.
The next year I AI'd her with Jersey semen and the same thing happened… a nice steady 5 gals/day on pasture, plus alfalfa while milking; no grain, no weight loss; a nice little bull calf. The same thing the following year, with a heifer, which I kept. I finally sold the cow because I could no longer bear to see her futilely swishing at the flies with her pitiful stump that the dairy had cut off in the name of efficiency and "cleanliness." Last June I bought a yearling Jersey which I bred to a Dexter last fall; she's due in 6 weeks.
When this heifer calves, I don't plan to grain her either. She hasn't received any grain all year and is fat as a tick on hay and pasture only.
It IS possible to milk well on grass and hay…. Jerseys, anyway. The Kiwis in NZ have been doing it for years, and semen from their cows is available… my extension co-op dairy agent has been really pushing me to try it this year on my younger heifer.
Grassfed genetics is out there. Look into it. In fact, I believe I gave links to the various sites several months ago.
You are coming from a conventional dairy way of thinking.I too have come from the conventional dairy model.The biggest problem I see with feeding grain is that you have to grow grain.Any high quality grain is grown to be fed to the farmer's own livestock.Low quality grain is grown to make money.Every time you plow up a bio diverse pasture and plant a monoculture of grain,you are losing all of the biodiversity in your soil microbes.You are starting over a process that may take as much as 50 years to reach it's full potential.The biodiversity in your milk comes from what the cow is eating.
As for having perfectly balanced soil for milk production there are other methods to do this.If cows have access to shrubs and tree leaves and all kinds of herbs and browse growing on a variety of soil types,they will find what they need.
Not feeding grain and milking once a day does produce less milk,but as milk production falls,fertility increases.When I first switched to once a day milking,I expected the cows to continue to calve every 12 months as usual.I was taken by surprise when many of them calved every 11 months.One even calved 10 1/2 months after her last calving.Most of the cows stay in good condition.The 2nd calf heifers sometimes need a longer dry time before calving so that they can put on some weight.More cows giving less milk has the added benefit of having lots of calves to raise to sell.Rather than continuing to expand the size of the herd,we are helping lots of others to start their own herd.
The monoculture paradigm is dead.Perennial poly cultures are the way to promote soil microbe diversity and to provide the cow with a balanced diet.Forget production per cow.Maximum production of the whole system is what we are after.A farm that is a symbiotic community of organisms will always out produce a monoculture farm.And you will make some money in the process if that is what you really are after.
Milk once per day, keep calves with mom and sell your milk directly to the customer is wonderful, yummy and profitable. Tim, if you need advice on how to do this, please contact me personally and I will let you know how my raw milk producer is able to be successful.
We need 1000's of small local grass based dairies. Artisan cheesemaking will follow this model as it does in certain parts of the world ~ be it milk from goats, sheep, cow etc.
Manure is no problem if a cow is raised on grass . . . .it is firm and pelleted like a horse.
We as a farm are still involved with the fight against those that are against us with regards to food rights . . . . we are just taking a different angle.
All those Senators and Congressmen/Women who voted for or supported S510 are in our crosshairs and we are doing EVERYTHING to put up challengers in the next primary election to take them out . . . . this is how we are fighting this and everyone out there should be doing the same.
Kind regards,
Violet
http://www.kilbyridgefarmmaine.blogspot.com
P.S. Bill Anderson . . . . Please do not respond to this post.
I will let you all guess who this person is. We should be supporting him if we truly believe in our right to produce, sell and consume raw milk. Obama is out to lunch on this issue.
Kind regards,
Violet
http://www.kilbyridgefarmmaine.blogspot.com
"Ive yet to be convinced that public health and food safety concerns are indeed legitimate and if you are using standards as a tool to keep the wolves (regulators) at bay then all I can say is, prepare yourself for disappointment."
As an outside observer.. is RAWMI just another marketing strategy and place to put testimonials/anecdotal stories, or is it a real set of guidelines for food safety worthy of consideration by public health scientists?
MW
If I understand Mr. Wightman correctly, he wants to feed his cattle grain to increase his milk production which will in turn increase his bottom line. Mr. Anderson wants to purchase bulk tanks (plural) of this milk with which to make cheese. I say go for it, guys!
I also want the right to sell my customers milk and cheese from my "hobby" farm. I want to be able to claim that my products are 100% grassfed if that is the case, because I think many people looking for "nutrient dense" foods will pay a premium for this product. This is the product I want to consume myself, and I want to be able to distinguish grassfed raw milk from grain fed raw milk. I would not want any "standards" to impinge on my ability to make this distinction.
"The biggest problem I see with feeding grain is that you have to grow grain. Any high quality grain is grown to be fed to the farmer's own livestock. Low quality grain is grown to make money."
I can testify that the quality of grain I bought was usually subpar… it was dirty and dusty and smelled moldy for much of the year; and sometimes infested with weevils towards the end of the year. Plus, not filling their stomachs with grain means there's more room for grass. My animals' health improved once I removed the grain…. no more colds, coughing, no illnesses, no mastitis, and their hooves don't grow as fast or as weak.
As Miguel said, growing grain yourself is a huge waste of potential pasture, and unless organic the chemicals poison the land as well as the animals, plus tilling several times a year destroys and compacts the soil. Not to mention the HUGE waste of fuel all around, a critical expense that's only going to increase.
And whether you grow grain or buy it as I used to, either way you still have the expense of manpower and time and fuel in moving it back and forth from field or feed mill to barn to cows. How much better to spend that time moving milking animals to fresh pastures every couple of days. It's a trade-off that's well worth a little less milk. My life is much easier since stopping grain.
Grassfed… less expense, less time, lots less physical labor, and FAR FAR less fuel. It's the only option that makes sense for raw dairy.
The above article states, The typical response to food contamination outbreaks in the industrialized world, and particularly in the US, is to impose stricter regulations and more so-called "food safety" requirements. But a new report compiled by GRAIN, an international non-profit group devoted to supporting small farmers, explains that most food safety legislation does nothing to make food safer, and instead harms those that are actually producing clean, safe food.
MW
With respect to those involved with RAWMI, I believe their intent is sincere and designed to establishe a set of guidelines for food safety. That being said however considering the bias that exist among public health scientists I doubt very much that they are interested in such guidelines if it means endorsing raw milk consumption in whatever shape it may take.
Kirsten
Your reference to grass fed versus grain fed is a reflection of two extremes.
Grass feeding is a sensible and economical way of acquiring a healthy and tasty raw milk product. This is not to say however that feeding a small amount of grain is anathema to an equally healthy and tasty raw milk product.
I my part of Northern Ontario we have long hard winters and feeding a small amount of grain is deemed wise in order to maintain a healthy breeding herd of lactating cattle, especially if you dont have good weather during the summer to produce quality hay.
Grain is a viable and highly palatable source of feed for lactating livestock when used in balance with other food sources. I can still remember when we use to feed turnip, potato and carrot peelings mix with some oats to the bull and he would just gobble it up.
Ken Conrad
No one wants to be told how to take care of their animals, and each farm is different. I've been known to keep a pocketful of grain on my person to "make friends".
I also don't wish to be extreme, but at some point feeding grain adversely affects the fatty acid profile of the milk. Obviously, there are farmers who are able to feed their animals exclusively on grass. They should have the right to claim that distinction.
The "once-a-day" milk also lends itself to a different cheese making process, and varieities of cheese. Acidification is slower, and the milk coagulates more slowly from rennet (unless it is pre-acidified first) because of the increased alkalinity.
Bill, it's great that you are so protective of milk from a cheesemaker's point of view, but the "Raw Milk Revolution" was started by and for consumers to drink raw for health reasons, and the revolution continues to be for them, not for cheesemakers. The majority of raw milk providers will never sell to cheesemakers unless they coincidentally happen to live near a cheese factory or unless they sell to a processor and thus lose all their profits, much as regular dairymen do now. This is what most are trying to get away from.
And I agree, it may well be much more difficult to convert a CAFO or conventional dairy from grain to grass, though not impossible if one believes it's best. BUT….. many small, diversified, grass-fed farmers like me, Miguel, Kirsten, Ken and others all over the country, not to mention the Amish, could very well supply raw milk drinkers and make a decent living.
Sure, we will never become RICH or be considered "successful," but then again, most of us small farmers approach life from a different angle… we're content living the life we want and providing the best milk we can naturally. We're not interested in supplying half the nation, or even half our state, and we don't care about "success" as defined by corporations or companies.
As well, starting a small grassfed dairy farm with a few animals, selling milk to friends and neighbors, and growing the herd gradually is much more likely to happen across the nation than someone starting a large dairy from scratch or converting a conventional or CAFO dairy to grassfed, as Tim demonstrates via his various attempts to convince others that grass-fed is not workable.
If I didn't have my own milk animals, I would be far more likely to buy from such a small farmer than a larger dairy, and I think many other customers would too. A small grassfed farm is definitely one very viable way to supply a sufficient number of people who want to buy it.
In my locale, cheese factories are abundant. There used to be a cheese factory on every crossroads in rural Wisconsin, and cheese makers competed with butter makers for farmers. There were many debates of old (debates which you can find in old Wisconsin dairy texts) about which was better for calves and hogs — skim milk or whey?
Though those days are long done, there are still laws on the books here (not enforced anymore) that forbid feeding sillage 2 hours prior to milking. This was to prevent putrid off-flavors in cheese, before the days of widespread pasteurization. A sensible measure if you ask me. I think it is also sensible to require cheese makers to maintain a clean vat.
Wisconsin in 2011 is not the same as it was 50+ years ago. Wisconsin has gone from 150,000 dairy farms in 1950, to less than 13,000 today. Instead of Fighting Bob LaFollete, we have corporately funded "tea party" demagogues sitting in public office, who nominate Farm Bureau lobbyists as executives of their Dept. of Agriculture.
Things have changed immensely since those days. But one thing has not — It all comes back to "terrior" — we must understand our own locale, and how these local dynamics intersect with the global forces at work.
I do believe that the "Raw Milk Revolution" is big enough to include individual farms such as yours, Goatmaid, and entire cooperatives of farmers interested in producing the highest quality pasture-grazed raw milk possible. I also believe our revolution is big enough to include food safety concerns along side passionate defense of our mother earth and our natural rights as human beings on this planet. I would not pit these concerns against each other.
I too measure success differently than corporate CEOs. I would like to see MORE dairy farms each consecutive year than the previous, not fewer as the trend has been for over 50 years. THAT would be success to me.
But then again, I have a different terrior than you. I'm sure your measure of success will be different. Either way, we ought to share in this raw milk revolution together, not divided against one another.
"Though those days are long done, there are still laws on the books here (not enforced anymore) that forbid feeding sillage 2 hours prior to milking. This was to prevent putrid off-flavors in cheese, before the days of widespread pasteurization. A sensible measure if you ask me."
The "sensible measure" I was referring to, is to forbid feeding silage 2 hours prior to milking, not widespread pasteurization.
What you are doing would be creating a milk composition closer to a farm milking twice a day. If you wean the young, and maintain once-a-day millking, it would become more like the milk I described. I'm not suggesting that once-a-day milk is better or worse, just different. It actually makes for an interesting challenge as a cheese maker…
So before you continue commenting on this product, please take a sip . . . . produce some cheese and then come back with your comments.
Kind regards,
Violet
I never said it was a bad thing, just different. It moves the milk closer to the composition of blood, in order to maintain osmotic balance on both side of the mammary glands — or at least, that is how this increased alkalinity phenomenon was explained to me by a dairy scientist from Ireland, where their entire dairying system is pasture-based. He has a pHd in dairy science. You can argue with him if you want to. Let me know if you'd like his name and phone number.
Why the attacks, Violet?
Because a squirrel monkey is cute – but not when it's in your pajamas.
I have never said, nor believe that one can not go all pasture fed.
But, to make the blanket statement that everyone can with little forethought, or extensive understanding of your current limitations is harmful and can lead to situations that are not pretty or kind.
Farms such as yours and a few others around the country that have authored books are the exception not the rule.
I have had way too many phone calls from farm managers and producers who have been forced into an ideology that is not appropirate for the situation and lives have been altered by emotional content rather than and complete understanding of limitations and the time line to move forward towards a goal rather than implementing one immediately.
The internet is written in ink, and one must be careful about blanket statements.
There is no black and white process that fits all farms or ecologies.
One has to apply the principals of soil and animal health and test to see if it is actually working, not just a statement that it works for me so it must work everywhere.
As a movement we must move towards a forage based diet, because it is cost effective to do so, but only if everything is in place to do so.
Remember gentlemen the time line of decay is slow, and if we are not comparing our progress with simple tests and markers it is simply an emotional response.
I would also add, who says that omega threes and CLA constitues a quality product?
We have just begun to understand what may be a better product, and in my opinion to hang our hats on two portions of a complex system that created it is pretty narrow thinking.
I will also add the tests the UC Davis did on milk with mineral content showed that the dairy farms with a diet of balanced grain/pasture/barn ration to forage quality ratio had the highest mineral content in the study, and slightly lower levels of your beloved omega threes and CLA.
This movement we are involved in is a marathon, and to think in the glacial click of time we have to effect the environment significantly with just one process is to ignore history at our own peril.
Tim Wightman
Thanks for that comment!
As a movement we must move towards a forage based diet, because it is cost effective to do so
VERY true! Notably (and I know you already know this) the cost of non-forage-based animal farming is quite large in pure dollars, but that dollar cost, substantial as it is, is just the tip if the iceberg. The really big costs (hidden only from those who don't care to look) are the externalities associated with artificial farm systems: poor human health, poor environmental health, and economic serfdom for farmers and consumers.
For the record, I have never suggested that a fix can be had with the flip of a switch. My own grass-based farm is a perfect exampleit took about five years to develop sustainable pasture and there's still more to do and learn!and beyond that there is, as you mentioned previously, a serious problem today with farmland availability and pricing (one of the more grievous symptoms of under-prioritizing food and environmental quality). I am acutely aware that our systems, and even our landscapes, have been reformed to fit the industrial, centralized model of food production. It's a catastrophically large problem, but that only means there is no time to waste in throwing our tanks into reverse gear.
The important thing is that we all work assiduously toward the goal of biodiversity and naturalism. Moving our farm practices in that direction (which of course includes moving toward forage-based cattle) MUST be a priority if we are to live healthfully. And therein lies my leeriness with invented systems that might, intentionally or not, grease the status quo production model.
Where did I say that?
I've never said it is easy. In fact, I said it takes management, and that I feel soil fertility is very important.. I caution anyone that calls me wanting to know how I do it. I also said some have had very bad results. I've talked to them, too. You might want to read it again!
There is no doubt grass fed is best, but I have NEVER told anyone to quit feeding grain, or that it takes no forethought.
Oh, we CAN have mineral levels and CLA, omega3, and other goodies God put in the milk of a herbivore on grass that man has no clue exists yet.
"Because a squirrel monkey is cute – but not when it's in your pajamas."
Please explain?
Violet seems to have a bone to pick with me — she is always questioning my cheese maker credentials, because of my age. Its too bad for Violet that she has little or no formal training in dairy science, and probably does not use a pH meter or titrate acidity (I could be wrong about this… but her comments suggest otherwise) and so she prefers to attack me personally rather than intelligently discuss the issue at hand.
FYI — A pH meter is relatively inexpensive. The one I have cost ~$125. Make sure you take care of it well. It is a rather fragile instrument.
When I say that once a day milk has higher alkalinity, what this means (besides the initial pH and TA readings) is that it has more buffering capacity against the acids produced by your starter culture. This because of the more "blood-like" qualities in the milk serum, as well as the higher concentration of whey proteins. Therefore, it lends itself to cheeses with a slower acidification profile. A cheese like cheddar requires a fairly rapid acidification, and would probably not be an ideal choice for this milk. On the other hand, a cheese variety like Taleggio, Mont D'or, or Reblechon would be excellent candidates for this type of milk. I have also had success with lactic-curd types of cheese (fromage blanc), using this type of milk, because they are also a slow acidification rate (though their ultimate acidity is much higher than a Taleggio, Mont D'or, or Reblechon).
The one sticking point here, is that a slow acidification also requires an extra-clean milk source. Any coliforms or other undesirables (listeria, pseudomonas, psychrotrophs/psychrophiles) will have much more opportunity to grow, because of the relatively long time spent at a high pH.
For the record, I have been working with once-a-day milk, as a cheese maker, for over two years, as my preferred source of high quality raw milk for my personal cheese making. David Gumpert has even mentioned some of the cheeses I have produced with this milk — http://www.thecompletepatient.com/journal/2010/4/25/a-tour-of-two-dairies-is-a-difference-between-day-and-night.html
I have also worked with both pasteruzied and raw milk, from cows, goats, sheep, and water buffalo, in numerous commercial settings and some "hobby" home-scale settings outside of my own.
I do not claim to be a farmer, though. I will leave the debates about those issues to the professionals. I am certainly in favor of 100% grass milk, but would not judge against a farmer who feels s/he needs to supplement with some grain.
My comment was only about the changes which take place in milk composition from once a day milking practices, in cows milk. I do have some information about how this affects goats milk, but I don't have it available offhand. The effect is different than cows milk — I will try to find that info and post it here for goatmaid when I get a chance.
The only time I milk only once a day is towards end of lactation when animals are drying up and the volume has decreased to the point of small return for labor. I don't sell that milk–either the chickens or the dogs get that milk, so I don't worry about the levels of whatever's in it. I have made cheese with late lactation goats milk and found I do need calcium chloride to set the curd properly.
I have both cows and goats, despite my name. ; )
Certification is mostly about proving that you do what you say you do to ensure food safety. The most concrete proof is the lab tests. If we are truly following mother nature's way, the proof will be in the pudding — low bacteria counts with zero pathogens.
I do have a response to Miguel's critique of this "zero pathogen" idea, but I will save that for a future thread. In a nutshell — I do believe that bio-diversity is desirable, but not all bacteria are a desirable part of a bio-diverse milk.
I am three credits shy of a degree in Biology but I graduated with a degree in Political Science way back in 91'.
The milk that I use for cheesemaking has a PH range of 6.68 and 6.72 depending on the condition of the pasture and the weather. . . . . Calves are with mom 100% of the the time and the cows are milked once per day. So your PH ranges are off based on my own experience with once a day milking. You see . . . . I do know what I am talking about and take my own cheesemaking very, very seriously. It has always been a wonderful hobby for me and my family . . . . along with my cooking:)
The reason I have a bone to pick with you Bill is because you seem to have all the answers yet you have never "HUSBANDED" ruminants before. The best cheesemakers that I have met are those who milk and raise those animals themselves. After meeting many of those aritisans in Europe . . . . I have a profound respect for what they do and when the time comes . . . . . hope to be like them someday.
Kind regards,
Violet
http://www.kilbyridgefarmmaine.blogspot.com
I just returned from two days in Pasadena giving three presentations on raw milk. Let me report that the moms are on fire with interest and sales are solid and growing. The recent SF Chronicle that show cased Dan Algyer really stirred the coals. People are pissed and are thanking god they live in CA and buying more raw milk than ever.
I introduced RAWMI at two of the presentations. The support was huge. The energy and excitement about this grass roots program has already found it's tipping point at least in LA. It is clear to our consumers that Food Inc I'd for real and dollar voting to bankrupt dead milk is the most powerful took any mom can use. And they are. It is a full on revolt.
The RAWMI grand opening will come very soon. We have four directors and twenty on the executive advisory board.
In honor of David and his great work here at TCP, we are going to give TCP first clack at describing what RAWMI is all about. At the same time the website will go up. And… I am sure that the compliments and critisms will begin.
All the best.
Mark
The system you describe is different than the once-a-day milking I am describing. Because your calves are on the cows all the time (for the entire lactation?) the milk will not have the characteristics of a cow only being milked once a day. The calves are milking her all day long, which is why her milk will be in the more normal pH range.
I very much agree with you that the best cheeses are farmstead. However, in my experience in the United States, the best examples of farmstead cheese have a division of labor between the cheese maker and herdsman/woman. In fact I am friends with the cheese maker at the most decorated cheese in America. It is a farmstead cheese made in Southwestern Wisconsin and has been awarded the best of show at the American Cheese Society three times. There are two families that run the operation — one that handles the animals and one that handles the cheese making. It is a phenomenal cheese, I sold thousands of pounds of it when I was a cheese monger.