Will Herdshares Be “Legalized” in CA? CDFA’s Chief Vet Expresses Optimism About Continuing Negotiations; False Alarm on Brucellosis in MA
Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 07:13PM There are any number of reasons why the negotiations over herdshares taking place in California—between owners of small dairies and the state’s Department of Food and Agriculture-- over the last few months should not work.
Many tiny dairies dispensing raw goat’s or cow’s milk through such operations feel as a matter of principle that they shouldn’t have to negotiate a right that is already theirs—the right to contract with neighbors and friends for milk and other dairy and food products.
Even if they aren’t so principled, many shy away from making their presence known to the CDFA. They figure that no matter what comes out of these discussions—even the least onerous regulatory structure—they’d rather not be on any more government agency lists than are necessary. Assuming the CDFA never gives them trouble, who knows what other authorities the agency may send their way.
Those that are open to negotiation and regulation worry that it’s nearly impossible for the regulators to be fair. So against raw milk are most of the regulators, in this view, there is no way they will negotiate in good faith.
Dr. Annette Whiteford of the California Department of Food and AgricultureDespite all these obstacles, CDFA’s chief veterinarian and director of animal health and food safety services, Annette Whiteford, is optimistic a workable solution can be found to the issue—an issue that only became an issue when the CDFA began issuing cease-and-desist orders last year against small dairies operating herdshares.
“There seems to actually be quite a bit of common ground and I think we will find some compromise solutions,” she explained in an email response to several questions I posed. “Our goal is to have some sort of a tangible result in the near future. We are staying focused on ‘doable’ objectives.”
The small dairies involved in the negotiations are less enthusiastic than the chief veterinarian. Michael Foley, a member of the herdshare negotiating group and a small farm owner worries about the “the onerous facilities requirements that have accumulated in California, while retaining testing and inspection requirements.”
Whiteford acknowledges that the legal status of herdshares in California is a murky issue. “First of all, there is nothing ‘illegal’ about a ‘herdshare.’ In fact, in California, unlike most states, raw milk is legal. We are trying to find out exactly what currently regulated food safety standards cannot be met by very small dairies, some of which are operated as herdshares or under boarding agreements. We are in the process of listening to suggestions from small dairy herd owners, public health officials and other interested parties related to how best to increase access to products from these small farms while ensuring that public health is maintained. “
Prime among the suggestions being offered by small dairies that are part of the working group is that the state exempt from any regulation dairies with some small number of goats or cows—perhaps three or fewer.
Says Foley,: “Our proposals include an exemption from regulation for very small operations -- the ‘family cow’ exemption, paralleling exemptions in a number of states; an exemption for herdshare arrangements, recognizing their purely private character as does current Tennessee law; and reduced requirements for very small commercial dairies…”
Foley worries that without an exemption, tiny dairies will shy away. “A testing requirement would be too expensive for people with just one or two lactating cows to deal with,” he says.
Foley estimates there may be more than 1,000 tiny dairy operations dispensing raw milk in some type of herdshare or private sale arrangements, and that many won’t come out into the open without an exemption. “And that means they won't be able to share knowledge easily, find better ways to do what they're doing, and be responsible to the larger community. California can't police all these folks and shouldn't want to. What they're doing is what rural people have done forever and should be respected, not pushed into the closet.”
In other words, whatever the working group agrees to, if anything, would need to be approved by the legislature via additions to the dairy laws, since herdshares currently aren’t covered. Coming to agreement won’t be a simple matter, though. Foley acknowledges that there are among herdshare operators a significant number that don’t approve even of the “exemption” idea. “I've been in conversation with some farmers who are also law scholars, and they warn that the term ‘exemption’ is dangerous, because it grants jurisdiction to the regulators, along with the (temporary) ‘exemption"’ He feels the Tennessee law “simply recognizes and codifies this lack of jurisdiction” by the state for raw milk availability for personal use.
Another model being explored is that of Idaho, which has new code that exempts small dairies from Grade A dairy requirements for facilities and equipment, but imposes Grade A requirements for the quality of the raw milk, which includes bacteria limits. Cow and goat owners must apply for a permit from the Idaho State Department of Agriculture to sell raw milk to the public.
In their position statement to CDFA, the herdshare operators contend that, “Health risks are nearly non-existent on very small family farms and the number of people with two or three cows/goats is high. To criminalize this group of law abiding citizens would put an incredible burden on the state and local sheriffs, who do not have the resources to enforce unnecessary laws.”
Pasteurization became necessary, the position statement suggests, because of the industrialization of agriculture, including milk production. “The laws for milk safety were developed in response to the dangers of the swill dairies of old, and those laws continue to be relevant today in protecting consumers from dairy produced in Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). These CAFOs produce a product that can be rife with dangerous bacteria and therefore require strict facility and pasteurization requirements to kill the pathogens within their milk.”
I sense in Whiteford’s response, a desire by CDFA to not take on the huge task of closely regulating so many tiny dairies operating as herdshares, as well as an interest in getting this matter off the CDFA’s table, via new legislation that could address the issue. I hope I’m not being too much an optimist, but I do know that if this matter could be resolved via negotiation between dairy owners and regulators, it could serve as an important precedent. We certainly could use some positive precedents.
***
Mystery solved. The “brucellosis” scare in Massachusetts was a false alarm. The farmer, Robert Kilmer, doesn’t have brucellosis, nor do any of his cows. I had actually heard about preliminary results Tuesday evening that the testing was coming up negative, but wanted to wait for final results before posting anything. Now, Food Safety News is saying it has emails from the Massachusetts Department of Agriculture and the Massachusetts Department of Public Health giving the all clear. Kilmer’s farm is no longer under quarantine, and it can resume raw milk sales.
I suppose Kilmer will need to do more digging about his own physical symptoms.
And maybe he can ask the agencies for an apology. According to an email quoted by Food Safety News, an official of the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources stated: "All in all this has been a trying experience, but the cooperation and willingness to take the steps needed by MDAR, DPH, USDA and most importantly the farmer has helped immensely." I would expect that is the closest Kilmer and other raw dairy farms in Massachusetts are going to get to an apology for blaming the dairy's raw milk for illness. And he'll have to accept the fact that all those incorrect reports will continue coming up every time someone googles under brucellosis in Massachusetts or his farm’s name.
Reader Comments (31)
What a surprise.
"they warn that the term ‘exemption’ is dangerous, because it grants jurisdiction to the regulators, along with the (temporary) ‘exemption"’
It is always dangerous when they play with words.
since law is only remedial, yet the Great State of California is not suffering an epidemic of food poisonings related to raw milk from herdshares, where the evidence of harm which needs to be dealt with?
what's the necessity for govt. officials to be intruding their will on private parties, at all? Did someone go calling on The Big WetNurse for assistance?
The more I work with CA Cow Shares....the more I think that some Cow Shares ( the ones not attending and demanding total secrecy in the name of freedom ) are their own worst enemy. Dr. Ann Whiteford has done more for raw milk by listening and giving access to process...but it is not appreciated by all of those in the Cow Share working group. It has been my experience that Cow Share operators do not seem to understand the political process. They do not understand that this entire process will be culminating in a legislative process which means open hearings and heavy lobbying of all the voting state representatives. That means total engagement. I think that the Cow Shares that are engaging will get what they want....those that do not engage and demand total secrecy....will get little.
This is America....if it is going to be free or get better this requires engagement and that means standing up....not hiding. Attendance is required for progress.
Please attend...please engage. Dr. Ann Whiteford will help you if you help her by attending.
Just Showing up is 95% of luck and success. Patti Chelseth has shown the way....total engagement....total passion....total grass roots engagement. Patti will get what she needs. She is the table. No laws to protect Cow Shares will pass with out engagement.
My question is what warranted this attack on herd shares?
Does the government randomly spin a giant wheel to decide what their next crusade will be?
Which goals did we as herd share farmer fall short on in California?
GOALS OF THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE:
Ensure that only safe and quality food reaches the consumer.
Protect against invasion of exotic pests and diseases.
Promote California agriculture and food products both at home and abroad.
Ensure an equitable and orderly marketplace for California's agricultural products.
Build coalitions supporting the state's agricultural infrastructure to meet evolving industry needs.
I have a natural right to raise my own food and humanely care for my own animals.
I have a natural right to share my abundance with my friends and neighbors.
I do not need government officials or politicians that have never milked a cow telling me how I should milk my cow.
Thanks again Mark McAfee for chiming in again about demanding total secrecy and hiding. The farmers at the working group have already been outed. Some of us need to work behind the curtain and not paint big targets on our backs so we can continue to feed our families.
Have an ounce of compassion for all involved in this process.
From the land of Milk and Honey,
In a strange way I believe you see herdshares as a marketing advantage. But, the super small folks - lets say 2 cows or 5 goats - operate under the "radar." The curious thing is why would CDFA bring them on the radar. They were never a concern. In CA, there is a serious public health concern about these larger "herdshares" with 50 or more animals selling to many dozens members...advertising, and getting into farmers markets (unregulated). This might be a concern and public health threat.
Seems like a sorta dumb exercise creating "exemptions" for 3 cows or less, when the real issue is larger dairies like the one in San Jose claiming they are "small," when in reality they want to sell widely, advertise, etc.
If you think unregulated herdshares are immune to problems, watch Mari's story about a Northern California herdshare (WAPF Chapter Leaders promoted this raw milk):
http://www.realrawmilkfacts.com/real-life-stories
MW
The Globe is the biggest newspaper in the New England region, and is unfairly slanting the majority of public perception about Raw Milk just by manipulating the placement and visibility of these stories despite the reality that one is speculation and the other is fact. Shame. Agenda. Deception. I think I'm going to cancel my subscription and tell them why.
Wonder what the answer is?
In all the years I was going to the various farmers market in Sacramento, there was NO raw milk sellers until OP came in, was it late 2010 or early 2011?
Claravale has @50 head or more and they have NOT had issues with contamination. Nor have they been singled out,yet as OP has. I think part of why OP is under the microscope more is that OP is bigger and Mark vocally promotes raw dairy and the demand for it has been slowly growing. Even though Mark follows cdfa, he is assaulted by them. There is no trust and as long as cdfa continues their BS there never will be.
Control the masses with fear, food and water and drugs.....
Ora Moose, the media does that all the time.
The rule of engagement is simple; tell them to butt out of the herd share process.
If it is indeed America they will acknowledge the American’s citizens right to engage in a private contract absent their overbearing interference.
Cali Farmer
You ask, “Does the government randomly spin a giant wheel to decide what their next crusade will be?”
It almost appears as if they do. I think however with respect to raw milk it is somewhat more conniving then that. They have given themselves or think they have been given the authority to act and do so, without discretion for human rights. At times their actions are irrational and demonstrate malicious intent.
With respect to raw milk and herd shares they have clearly abused their power.
Ken
The type of cheese I make (French soft-ripened styles) actually reach a lower pH (higher acidity) than most conventional commodity styles of cheese, but they only stay at this low pH for a short period of time. As these cheeses ripen, the aerobic cultures on the rind (yeast, mold, bacteria) consume the lactic acid, thus providing an opportunity for potential pathogens to grow. They also break down the milk proteins (which are a natural milk acid), and release alkaline compounds in the process. Although some of these organisms can be inhibitory towards pathogens, this process tends to create a somewhat more hospitable environment to pathogens, when compared to a more conventional variety of cheese. These cheeses are also higher in moisture, which is also a higher risk factor.
A more conventional variety (like cheddar) can be aged for a much longer time, and actually becomes slightly more acidic as it ages. A long aging period causes most organisms to expire -- not just potential pathogens, but also the cheese starter cultures. It is actually the expiration of the starter cultures which contributes to cheese flavor, because as these bacteria lyse (break open) they release intra-cellular enzymes that break down milk proteins and fats into flavor compounds.
All in all, the safest varieties of cheese (regardless of whether they are raw or pasteurized) are hard long-aged varieties. Soft varieties are inherently higher risk, again, regardless of raw or pasteuried. I would argue that for soft varieites, if anything raw is actually a little safer (provided that E. Coli O157:H7 is properly controlled for) because the bio-diversity tends to inhibit listeria monocytogenes, which is normally an environmental contaminant from the cheese making or aging room.
The US government has a history of engaging in police state type actions.
Most recently that would include the internment of European and European Americans, Japanese and Japanese Americans in the early 1940’s.
Most people are familiar with the internment of the Japanese during WWII. How many of you are aware that 52% of the persons who had their property confiscated and were sent to internment camps by the US government were Germans, Italians, Hungarians, Romanians, Bulgarians, Czechs or Poles?
The US government has suppressed that bit of information. Focusing on the Japanese internment makes the internment actions look like a racist issue and obscures the fact that the US as much a police state in the 1940’s as was Germany.
We had an uncle who spent four years in a US internment camp for the crime of being Italian born. He came to US as a toddler. I have acquaintances whose parents emigrated from Germany to Cost Rica in the 1930’s. They were happily minding their own business in Costa Rica until the US government had them rounded up by the military, forcibly brought to the US and then thrown in an internment camp in Texas for the “crime” of entering the US illegally.
You can read more about this period of US history at
www (dot) foitimes (dot) com/internment/history (dot) htm
Fast forward to the 1950’s we have Senator Joe McCarthy and the actions of his House Un-American Committee who ruined the careers and lives of many innocent people. My father was blacklisted because one of the girls he dated in high school in the late 1920’s later went on to become a registered communist. The fact that she wasn’t a communist in high school and that my father had no contact with her for 30 years was irrelevant to our government. From their perspective the association tainted him.
I bring all this up to illustrate that the overbearing actions of the FDA and various state ag departments is keeping with our history. Forewarned is forearmed. Plan accordingly.
I can easily understand why a number of herd shares prefer to stay off the radar. Staying off the radar does NOT mean that they are producing contaminated milk.
Milky Way – Mari Tardiff’s Guillain-Barre Sydrome (GBS) is not the result of drinking raw milk. It is the result of improper treatment of a Campylobacter infection with antibiotics. Although she may have gotten the Campylobacter from the milk, the GBS is a separate issue. Many physicians, including those in the US, feel that antibiotics should not be given in cases of Campylobacter due to the high rate of complications from treating this type of infection with antibiotics.
BRAVO! I agree so much. The repression you speak about is built into our constitution -- which was not designed to be a guarentee of individual rights (that was the Bill of Rights, folks, not the Constitution itself) -- is a direct product of its original design. The constitution was written by and for rich, privileged, white males, in order to create a strong central government that could uphold mercantile, banking, and commercial interests.
What, aren't you familiar with Alexander Hamilton and the Federalist Party? Or with Shay's rebellion (a FARMER rebellion that spurred the early American financial elites to gather the constitutional convention)?
I continue to fail to understand the Constitutional rationale for raw milk, when it so clearly gives the Federal Government the power to regulate interstate commerce (that was part of the design, folks).
For those interested in even more recent histories of US government repression of dissent, I strongly encourage a look at the FBI's COINTELPRO program:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
Or the recent book and blog "Green is the New Red":
http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/
This raw milk repression is just the tip of the iceberg, folks.
As for working in the system...I'm going to play devil's advocate here. If the system of repression goes as far back as has been stated (and I can see it), how can you work within that system for change, as you suggest Bill? Will there not always be a system designed to take you down in your efforts since they are not playing into the hands of those with power?
Interesting. I read that Campylobacter is treated with antibiotics on Wikipedia although treatment with antibiotics is "controversial". So when someone like Mari gets sick, Who is responsible for paying her bills? Certainly she is not at fault for choosing to buy such a life giving product that is promoted by so many in the raw milk movement as harmless.
So, is it her dairyman? The doctor that prescribed her the antibiotics? Some combination of both?
People get sick from drinking raw milk. I'm tired of hearing that cases like Mari's or Chris's got so bad because they were given antibiotics. Fine, there are cases where the docs and hospitals screwed up. But where did the original pathogen come from? What about the kids who had great treatment and still have to take medicine to keep their kidneys functioning or might one day have to have a kidney transplant? Who is responsible for paying for THAT surgery?
Also most supporters go on and on here about gut health as a possible factor in why some are sickened more than others. Be careful when you are marketing raw milk to the general public then. Along that line of logic, since most people do not eat properly or culture their guts with
beneficial bacteria, then most people are a ticking time bomb for illness as an out come of drinking infected milk. Natasha Campbell-McBride and Chris Kresser, two raw milk supporting naturopaths, clearly say that people and children with gut dysbiosis should NOT consume any dairy until their guts are not leaky anymore and they have a healthy immune system as evidenced by a healthy GUT. How do you make this clear to the raw milk consumers without scaring them?
"How do you make this clear to the raw milk consumers without scaring them? "
I can only speak for myself. I believe that everyone should be told facts and what the potential adverse reactions are and what they should do to correct whatever deficiency they have if possible. If you don't have all the facts then you cannot make an informed choice. This also includes medications, environmental, etc. No one ever told me to avoid lunch meat when I was pregnant.
People need to be taught about not only their own gut health, but their over-all health and the foods they consume. It needs to be a cumulative teaching to be effective.
Please explain to us how you know the intimate details of Mari Tardiff’s illness. Are you friends with her? Or are you just speculating that antibiotics were given to her?
Mary
Why don’t you watch this webinar and tell me where you got the idea that Mari was given antibiotics. I am very pissed off that you would disrespect this amazing woman. Put yourself in Mari’s position. Can you even imagine what it must be like for her that complete strangers are discussing her illness and spreading false rumors? Do you have no shame?
http://stopfoodborneillness.org/content/webinars-and-podcasts
Click on Raw Milk; Raw Deal. Mari’s is the second story.
EDs are natorious for pumping antibiotics into someone when they don't know what else to do.
Marlars web site states the family paid " nurses" $10.? Per hour. As a lawyer he should know it is illegal to call someone a " nurse" who is not a licensed nurse. If they were getting ten something an hour they were either NOT nurses or they were nurses who were so lacking in skills they couldn't get a job. I don't know of any " nurse" in the state of Ca who would accept such insulting wages.
http://www.marlerblog.com/uploads/file/ARTICLE%20-%20Investigation%20of%201st%20case%20of%20GBS%20from%20Raw%20Milk%20(Tardiff).pdf
According to that she DID receive antibiotics.
I am not disrespecting Mari nor downplaying her suffering when I point out that there are two separate health dynamics at play in her case. The campylobacter infection is one. The GBS is a second. The causes, while related, are different.
As Sylvia has already pointed out, if Mari does not want her case discussed in public, then she should not allow her case to be used as marketing material for her lawyer.
Modern medicine has achieved many milestones in acute and trauma care and it also trips on its own arrogance which makes it blind in many areas.
The over use and misuse of antibiotics is one of those blind spots. The side effects of antibiotics are too often downplayed or ignored. It is doubtful that the AMA will open its eyes on this topic and consider alternatives until most pathogens have developed resistance to these drugs.
Kristen, I would contend that the Wikipedia can be a good source of leads for information but that all of its entries should be further researched.
Norbert Cobabus of the German National Library has cautioned:
“Let me therefore emphasize that you have to be very careful when reading not only Wikipedia but also many other information sources on the Internet. This is because they can reflect the interests of certain prevailing interest groups in the areas of economics, politics and others. In this respect, in addition to the many ‘ordinary people’ reading Wikipedia, it is unfortunate that more and more students – on the advice of their teachers – are accessing it, as well as other questionable sources on the Internet, without checking the data they find there. Even in many university seminars, it seems that Wikipedia is becoming more and more fashionable. In today’s increasingly digital world, this is unfortunately a trend that – including the associated increasing superficiality – is promoted by many sides, especially the media, but also by politicians when it comes to the furthering of their interests.”
www (dot) wiki-rath (dot) org/wikipedia_reflection_cobabus (dot) html
To answer your question about who is responsible for paying the bills is a case like Mari’s, I would contend that there is joint responsibility here.
The dairy with the contaminated milk would be responsible for the cost of treatment of a campylobacter infection only, not the cost of the GBS.
When various members of my family had contracted campylobacter in the US, they were kept hydrated and if needed given something for pain while the infection ran its course, usually about a week. When one of us had campylobacter outside the US, we were kept hydrated and were usually given an ayurvedic or chinese herbal formula while the infection ran its course, usually three to four days. No physician ever considered any type of antibiotic as appropriate treatment for campylobacter.
The cost of the GBS bills are the responsibility of the hospital and medical system (including the pharma company) that supports the type of treatment that causes GBS.
To give you an analogy, if you ran into someone and caused a broken leg, you would be responsible for the cost of the medical bills to fix the broken leg. If the patient with the broken leg contracted a MRSA infection while in the hospital for the leg repair, the responsibility for the cost of treating the MRSA infection would be the responsibility of the hospital, not you. You may have put the person in the hospital, but you did not cause the MRSA infection.
I’ve never said that people can’t get sick from raw milk. I have not claimed that raw milk is a magic elixir nor have I recommended it for people intestinal illnesses. As much as I appreciate Weston Price’s book, I am not a member of WAPF and have had less than positive experiences with that organization.
If there is a pathogen in food, its source needs to be discovered and dealt with.
I don’t think anyone is arguing against that. When someone becomes ill with a food pathogen, it is important that all possible avenues of contamination are tested rather than assuming that the milk is the source and stopping the investigation once raw milk is mentioned.
People can get sick from any type of contaminated food. Raw milk isn’t inherently dangerous just because it is raw. The number of illnesses proven to be caused by raw milk produced for direct consumption is still lower than for many other foods. I do not see any justification for the farm raids or cease and desist orders when there has been no illness and no complaint from any of the consenting participants.
Pasteurized milk isn’t inherently safe just because it is pasteurized. Sterilizing the food supply will bring health to no one. The standard conventional milk sold at my local supermarket if supposed to be “safe”. If I drink much more than a sip of it, my throat swells up and my lungs fill with fluid. How safe is that?
The raw milk that I buy has a warning on the labelIt is my responsibility to note the warning and weigh the risks associated with my choice. I am the only one who has the right to make that choice for me. . I have never had an adverse reaction to this milk. When I drink it, I feel nourished. My family has been buying raw milk from the same farm for decades. If we ever did get sick from this farm’s milk, I would not be crucifying my dairy farmer. I would have a conversation with my farmer to determine how the milk got contaminated and learn what steps had been taken to correct the situation.