bigstockphoto_Chicken_548602.jpgOne of the things that stayed with me from my conversations last February in reporting on Doug Kirkpatrick, the Michigan cattle and pig farmer who lost his animals by government decree after an outbreak of bovine tuberculosis, was his description of how the ecology, and economics, of his farm changed after the animals were shipped off.

Even though the government compensated him at market rates for his animals, his expenses to maintain the farm while he waited for clearance to bring in new animals were much higher than he expected, for reasons he never anticipated.

When the cattle were grazing, they acted as natural lawn mowers on his 100 acres of pasture. After the cattle finished their grazing in one area, the chickens would graze further on the shortened grass. Once the cattle were shipped off, the grass just kept growing—so high the chickens couldn’t graze. So Doug had to have the pasture grass cut commercially, which cost money, and energy. And he had to pay more for chicken feed.

I thought of that situation when I read over the last week about an ongoing dispute about raw milk in Utah. It seems 60 people got sick from camphylobacter, and Utah agriculture officials blamed it on one farmer’s raw milk, even though no such bacteria were found in his milk. (They speculate that their test was somehow defective, or it would have shown the bacteria.)

Except the regulators’ speculating didn’t end with their empty-handed tests. They surmised further that the cows came in contact with the bacteria through chickens, which graze along with the cows. So now the agriculture officials are considering rules to segregate cows and chickens.

The farmer, Lars Woolsey, told reporters that he’s not playing along, arguing not only that his cows aren’t responsible for people getting sick, but that the chickens eat larvae of flies, thereby naturally controlling the fly population.

The interplay between animals and grass and fly larvae seems so natural. Basic biology. But in a food and agriculture system where animals are segregated to maximize productivity, I suppose it has come to seem natural to agriculture regulators to solve problems by keeping animals separate.

All of which comes back to the matter of food prices. Trying to produce food in an environment in which so many institutions and forces are working against you makes it nearly impossible to turn out inexpensive food. Gary in his comment on my June 1 posting says he has been butting his head against these forces in trying to start a raw milk dairy. Until he gets going, he’s supporting his raw milk habit by paying $12.50 a gallon for raw milk from Organic Pastures, which has had its share of legal bills to keep the doors open.  

I might add that Gary hasn’t even mentioned expected legal expenses in his litany. I don’t know what they’ll be in his operation, but I don’t have to be a farming expert to tell him they are probably going to be higher than he expects.

***

While I’m on the subject of raw milk, I want to note that Randolph Jonsson, the webmaster of raw-milk-facts.com, has just added an interesting new page on raw milk as a medicine. Most intriguing is the last section, “The Little Known Miracle of Immune Milk.” Jonsson in his research found a patent granted to several scientists back in 1968 based on their demonstrations that cows injected with certain pathogens produce milk that imparts immunity on its drinkers. Sounds a little like a vaccine coming from a cow.

Since patents are only good for twenty years, there may be an opportunity awaiting…