Been thinking, in the midst of this East Coast hurricane… and hurrying to post while electricity and modems still working…What are we to make of this seemingly conciliatory gesture by the head of the California Department of Food and Agriculture in meeting with raw milk supporters and suppliers last week to establish a “working group” on herdshares and cowshares?
I was away, out of email and cell phone contact (it’s weird at first, though by the time I returned home, I found I had come to appreciate the quiet, till this hurricane business started)…and now am trying to make sense out of this strange West Coast development.
Is it, as Mark McAfee of Organic Pastures suggests, that California is leading the nation on the nutrient-dense-food liberation front? Or is it something else, something potentially more ominous?
As much as I’d like to feel good about a possible CDFA olive branch offering, especially coming as it does in the aftermath of the Rawesome raid, the cease-and-desist orders against California herdshares, and the federal court action against Amish farmer Dan Allgyer, the fact that it is coming so soon after those events seems a warning sign in and of itself.
Think about it…Is there any reason at all to believe that the federal and state authorities behind these aggressively hostile actions have suddenly changed their stripes and become reasonable and rational people, opening their arms to discussion and compromise? I don’t know about you, but I haven’t seen anything to suggest even a slight shift in attitudes.
So, if there’s no change in fundamental attitudes, why the shift in approach and tone? I can think of three reasons:
* The legislators and regulators have been hearing from a ton of unhappy voters. As McAfee quotes the Agriculture Secretary, “these public servants have recently been threatened and abused by the raw milk crowd.” Poor little babies. When they come with guns and handcuffs and flat-bed trucks to steal food, it’s “enforcement,” but when outraged citizens flood their phone lines and email boxes with complaints, it’s “abuse.”
* The court suit by Michael Hulme challenging the right of citizens to own goats and consume the milk from their goats has the CDFA lawyers nervous. After all, isn’t it entirely possible that a judge might answer affirmatively, that, yes, California residents most definitely have the right to own goats in contractual business arrangements with farms and to drink the milk from their goats?
* Consumers are buying in to private food groups en masse as the last reasonable approach to maintaining their food freedom, and the authorities are ever more fearful that they are losing any hope of control.
What better way to halt any momentum that might be accumulating from the angry voters, a kick-ass court action, and rapidly spreading private locally-based food acquisition groups than to distract everyone with a “working group.” And not just any working group. A working group, as McAfee describes it following my previous post, “to work on the issue of cow shares in CA. Top level legal advisors (from CDFA, I presume) that have looked at the cow share issue have clearly shared with us today, that the entire issue must be analyzed. It could very well be that if a cow share is really a consumer owned co-producer contract…..that CDFA would completely leave them alone.”
Now, I don’t want to single McAfee out for criticism and ridicule here. I have long admired his sincerity and commitment in pushing for food rights. He’s been tireless in his efforts, and I’ve been right there with him at any number of events to back raw dairy producers.
But, as was discussed at some length following my previous post, those of us promoting the same cause can disagree sincerely on particular issues. I, for one, can’t imagine any scenario in which “CDFA would completely leave them alone.” I mean, has there ever been a situation in which regulators have become actively involved in which the final result was to completely leave anyone alone?
No, regulators are in business to regulate. The more they can regulate, the more they justify their existence. It’s been that way from time immemorial, everywhere in the world.
The part of this entire situation I find most troubling is the idea that we need a CDFA working group to define herdshares and cowshares. They are already well defined, and Don Neeper offers crystal clear re-caps of those definitions following my previous post.
No, once the regulators become involved in establishing the rules for these contractual relationships, it’s all over, especially when it comes to raw milk. Let’s not forget, the regulators are essentially committed nearly as one to restricting or eliminating access to raw dairy. In Ohio, where a state judge took the Ohio Department of Agriculture to task and sanctioned herdshares and cowshares in 2006, the regulators are now suddenly reconsidering, re-evaluating, as Don Neeper reports. They don’t like yogurt, or butter, or this, or that. In other words, they want more restrictions.
Some people don’t like it when I say we’re in a war over food rights. We are, and the reason I repeatedly emphasize that point is that the war analogy helps us understand more clearly what’s going on around us. In wars, it’s common practice for the aggressor to offer a potential settlement or compromise after launching a huge military assault, and the enemy has fought back harder than expected. The aggressor hopes to de-rail any momentum, and divide the enemy with an offer that seems tempting to everyone who hates war, which is most of us.
Even if nothing comes of the discussions, the aggressor uses the pause to gather information and intelligence, and to re-group. McAfee indicates CDFA officials were surprised to learn there are likely more than 100 dairies with herdshare/cowshare arrangements in California. Of course they were. They don’t know much of what’s going on in the real world they regulate.
What better way to identify these dairies than to invite them to participate in a working group? Remember, the CDFA hasn’t offered immunity from prosecution, amnesty, or anything else. It hasn’t offered to discontinue going after dairies with additional cease-and-desist letters or prosecution. All it’s offering is its reputation for good heartedness. Yeah, sure.
I’m not saying you don’t communicate with the enemy. But you don’t automatically sanction the enemy’s maneuvers to lure you off the battlefield, and into sham peace discussions. In this case, there must not be any sort of advance agreement to allow CDFA to “define” herdshares and cowshares. Perhaps eventually there is some discussion about testing protocols or similar day-to-day operational and safety matters. In the meantime, there is plenty of precedent under contract law to give these private contractual ownership arrangements a very good shot at being endorsed by a California judge, or perhaps a federal judge on appeal.
Instead of defining herdshares, perhaps the more appropriate subject for discussion is how to dismantle the undercover investigations state and federal regulators have become so fond of using in recent years.
Let’s remember, we are battling as enemies some very shrewd people. Some of them are experienced professional law enforcement professionals, some are lawyers, and some are tough regulators consulting with smart lawyers (as in U.S. Department of Justice lawyers). They are spending much time, and money, probing our weaknesses, exploiting our disagreements or personal animosities.
That’s all not to say we have to be in agreement on everything, as was discussed following my previous post. We just need to counter-attack ever more shrewdly ourselves. We have the ultimate weapon: there are many more of us than them. We can’t forget that fundamental reality.
***
I appreciated the discussion following my previous post, about blog protocol and tone. I’m sorry to see long-time commentator Bill Anderson leave, but I understand his rationale. As a number of people pointed out, online communication and debate offers special challenges. It’s an ongoing learning process.
Also, I am very disappointed by Mr. McAfee's responses (or lack thereof) to my questions regarding misleading and inaccurate information regarding his dairy operation that appears on both the Cornucopia and WAPF Real Milk websites. These inaccurate and misleading descriptions of his operation certainly give him a competitive advantage in the California market. If we cannot trust Mr. McAfee to truthfully represent his operation for presumably financial and competitive advantages, then are we to trust him in representing the raw milk movement to the CDFA?? What is his real motivation? How does his participation in these talks benefit him and his position in the California raw milk market? Herd share programs beware!
Food news re. honey:
http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2011/08/honey-laundering/
"if there's no change in fundamental attitudes, why the shift in approach and tone? "
Your photo is very fitting, reminding me of the story of Troy and the Trojan horse; Troy under siege and the Greeks left the great trojan horse and inside they hid. A spy convinced them to move the horse inside the city walls against protests. The Greeks came out at night and conquered the city.
The key is to check down the hall in the other meeting rooms and for consumers and producers to try to get in on the internal and real conversations that are going to decide the fate of any private arrangements regarding private raw milk and milk products in California.
The State people who are directed to attend the meetings on behalf of the State may not even know whats going on in other conversations in the departments, but I can assure you unless significant State Representatives are present or directly represented at these meetings, it will hold no value.
You have to thave one of the bosses in the room who has oversite of the Ag officials or its a severe waste of time.
Been there done that.
Tim Wightman
the first time 'round with the Cease + Desist Order upon our cowshare, in 2008, I jammed-up the (so-called ) health authority by appealing it in the Supreme Court. The REAL MILK kept flowing.
the scumbag lawyer for Fraser Health Authority agreed on paper that he wouldn't take any step in Court 'til the decision came down in Michael Schmidt's case in Ontario = Jan 2010. But he secretly prepared a Petition for a Court order to stop us. And got the injunction in March 2010. The REAL MILK kept on flowing in the face of that chicanery
then in early 2011, after having our agister convicted of contempt of Court for continuing to serve our cowshare, shyster Guy McDannold told the judge in open court that his client was "stepping back" from the issue and wouldn't enforce the law until Mrs Jongerden's constitutional challenge to the regulation, was heard. Her lawyer then had that matter set to be heard in December 2012.
Last week, the same sleazebag = old McDannold = prepared an application for a Warrant to search our farm … the Inspector came 'round for 7 minutes last Friday … with the police presence!
Benjamin Franklin said "parley parley parley" … OK, but don't trust these pricks any farther than you can throw them
meanwhile, the REAL MILK is flowing in British Columbia today
Interesting to be accused of being untrustwothy. I think I will leave that alone. I was very clear that I would check with Cornicopia about purchase of some organic alfalfa and minerals and how that is aligned with the intention of the answer given to a question at Cornicopia.
For your information, it is my best guess that practically none of the OPDC raw milk consumers has ever heard of Cornicopia. That is not to mean that Cornicopia is not doing a great job of suing USDA over fake raw almonds and reporting data about family farms. By the way, Cornucopia does not care about raw milk. They give as much credit to an organic farm that sends milk to be pasteurized using UHT as they do for raw milk. They do not give any credit to food safety at all. All the bluster about Amanda and Cornicopia is ridiculous. It is a battle in Amandas mind. I am her personal whipping boy and that is just the way it is.
I have a personal challenge for Amanda….find something good to say for once.
If she is your Raw Milk Watch Dog, then why has she not addressed Claravale and their issues, or the food safety of other raw milk dairies. She has not addressed the OPDC RAMP program and it's CCP's. This is where the fire of raw milk rests. It is not found in milk pool records or Cornicopia checklists that no consumer has ever heard of and do not have one question about food safety. A raw milk watch dog looks at food safety, conditions, and bacteria counts. Amanda knows little of this and if she knows much…we have seen little. If she is your Raw Milk Watch Dog….I would consider a review of your hiring process.
David, thank you for writing about CDFA and Ag Sec Karen Ross.
She is very proud of helping create and birth the USDA " Get to Know Your Farmer, Get to Know Your Food" initiative. She knows full well that when implemented the USDA GTKYFAYF initiative looks just like Cow Share Contracts. There could be no more intimate connections between a farmer and their co-producer consumers. They know each other for sure!! She knows there is no going back. She said this herself. She said it proudly and clearly. This is a new emerging American market and it is not defined in the Ag Code. Even though we all know that it is defined and protected in the 230 year old writings of the entent of our founding fatehrs and in the intent and words of our over looked constitutional rights.
During discussions, Richard Estes ( counsel for CDFA ) gave us his legal assessment.
There are Grade A dairies selling raw milk to consumers under the cow share program and we know that there is no way those cows are owned by the consumers…they are leveraged by the bank….there are 2 cow operations selling raw milk on a hand shake….there are operations that are clearly consumer-farmer equity relationships and seem to be something covered under right of ownership statutes. These are my words, but they are very near what Richard Estes said.
He then went on to say….if all of these arrangements are cow share programs…then we do not know what a cow share program is and the definition is being exploited as a ruse…and until they are defined we need to enforce the state law on sales of untested unknown raw milk.
I can actually see adn appreciate this rationale. If you are a regulator, and you think there are four little dairies illegally selling raw milk in the entire state and the law says only Grade A Raw Milk that is inspected by CDFA can be sold to consumers…then it is "Lock and Load Time…go get the warrants". That is all they know, that is what the law and Ag code says they are supposed to do. They think they are protecting OPDC, Claravale and the raw milk consumers from unsafe raw milk. In some cases they probably are.
Now let's change the story just a little. There are 135 of these programs in CA and most of them are equity-contracted consumer co-producer arrangements. They are private…they are documented properly. The consumer owns the animals and can prove it. The last Cow Share they ever heard about was Ecodairy in Del Norte County. This arrangement was the cause of an outbreak with many illnesses and one very serious GB syndrome near death experience with Mary and raw milk campylobacter.
Remember, that cow share was at an organic Grade A dairy with a wonderful and very ethical WAP family ownership and nearly 2000 cows being milked….not an equity deal and all that milk was going to be pasteurized. That milk came from a huge bulk tank.
Can you see the confusion now. CDFA has no mandate to gather a bunch of underground cow share people and figure out what they are??? No mandate what so ever. However, when this group and their consumers and state senators come up onto the CDFA radar screen announce their intentions and wants to meet to administratively discuss and resolve the issue. That is completely different. That is what has happened.
Battles are dynamic and fluid. CDFA has a mandate. Their inspectors are not paid to think too much. They are paid to know the regs and enforce them. That is their job. Government jobs are not like private jobs. They work in tight spaces and under narrow authorities. ( at least that is the way it is supposed to work when they do not get corrupted and Go " SWAT FOOD INC" on us ).
The bottom line is that we have not done our jobs.
We have failed to educate CDFA and we have not met with them to discuss what the hell a Cow Share is and what it is not. The secretaries working group does have several state senators on it. They are participating and listening. We expect CDFA to know all about something that is being kept a private and extremely close secret???? that is an oxymoron.
There are many parts to this battle field. With out the heat of: The Farmagedon Awakening, Rawesome, the desperation of Mike Hulme, the illnesses at Eco Dairy years ago, the FTCLDF lawsuits, the ongoing cease and desist orders, WAP chapters teaching about raw milk etc… with out the rapidly growing raw milk markets and local food movements….the global raw milk battle field dynamics would not produce the CDFA ripeness and interest in meeting at the table and figuering this out.
I have much confidence in this process. But this process takes an effort on all parts of the battlefield to force an effort at the peace table.
This can not be a Trojan Horse. If it is all Hell will break loose. CDFA is trusting in us as much as we are trusting in them. If the Trojan Horse exists…it is on another field of battle.
If this working group dissolves or fails, it will be because of poor communication. '
Then we force new state laws. All is not lost. The process will be highly effective and just evolve to the next level. RAWMI has Strategic Lobby experts on Staff. If this dissolves…it dissolves into our own Briar Patch. Yum Yum…just where we want it.
Let us all letb this process work. That means keep the heat on all parts of the battle as we urge peace at the CDFA Working Group table.
I want to see this work. I am committed to seeing this work.
Trust….why would a guy that owns OPDC, the largest fastest growing raw milk dairy in the world want to see cow shares being recognized and respected????
Trust. We at OPDC are committed to something much greater. A trust in the future of a better, healthier America for our babies and us all….not just OPDC.
Words matter. Use them wisely.
Mark
Why do you dislike the term stakeholder? It is a description of a network of people with similar interests/goals. Clearly, people working together as stakeholders will come up with more positive outcomes than those entrenched in the goal of fighting and war as described in this post.
MW
Here are the exact words in my email to Cornicopia:
"Good Morning Gentlemen,
I want to make sure that our Cornucopia score card for OPDC is 100% accurate.
Place make these adjustments if appropriate:
1. As far as a closed herd is concerned, OPDC does buy certified Organic cows that have been tested for TB and go through a screening assessment by a veterinarian prior to delivery. In my mind, a closed herd means no cows that come from outside sources that are not certified organic. In other words, we do not buy conventional cows and transition them to organic at OPDC. We are closed to conventional cows. We are not closed however to additional organic cows that are tested and meet our requirements. If our definition of closed herd is not appropriate or etcplease make this change. We buy organic cows once in a while to add to our genetics and biodiversity. We are always on the lookout for the best cows and the best breeds for our herd and our consumers. Most of our replacements come from OPDC grown replacements, but on occasion we do buy certified organic cows from local CA dairies that grass pasture feed like we do.
2. We produce the majority of our organic feed. However, OPDC does purchase some additional organic alfalfa, barley and minerals. Please make this adjustment if appropriate.
Our check list data may be a little dated. We just want to make sure that it is 100% accurate.
There is a local CA PhD writer and blogger named Amanda Rose, that has designated herself as the Raw Dairy Watch Dog, she has been singularly critical of OPDC for its Cornucopia score card accuracy. I have nothing to hide and want to assure her and everyone that all of our data is beyond reproach. If OPDC data needs updating please do update based on my representations above. If not and our data is accurate according to your assessment given this new information , please let me know as well.
Thanks for all you do,
Mark McAfee
Founder CEO OPDC
You say, "If this working group dissolves or fails, it will be because of poor communication." But there is a factor you haven't allowed for, and that is the FDA. It likes to portray an image of state independence, but in reality it calls the shots on the dairy front. As well intentioned as the CDFA folks might be (though there's been little evidence of that up till now), the FDA will be pulling the strings behind the scenes, and in the end likely will have veto power over anything the working group comes up with.
Milky Way,
Say again, who are "those entrenched in the goal of fighting and war"? Or, put another way, are those under attack who are fighting back the aggressors?
David
Now Mark has a point about Richard Estes' concerns but it also sounds like Estes is quite capable of understanding what a cow/herd share really is and I have no doubt CDFA will use this to further their goal of the control and elimination of raw milk production.
While I certainly value hearing what Mark has to say I must treat his statements and intentions the same way I would those from CDFA. As we've had illustrated for us time and again, Mark has a history of making false and misleading statements. He has also made known his opinion that producers need to 'join the tent' and 'come into the light' and submit to government regulation. He is himself after all a government licensed producer and as such someone who has confessed he has no right to produce milk outside of government permission. As someone else put it recently, controlled opposition is an apt term. 'Our' government has a long history of using this tactic to great affect.
I am also still waiting for a response about the percentage of grains your cows eat, and if you are going to also contact WAPF to revise your company listing on their website that does not state you also feed grains to your cows? This is very misleading to the consumer, especially in light of the fact that the WAPF Real Milk website makes a big deal over the point that Claravale uses grains in their feed, clearly communicating that their milk is inferior to your "pasture-fed" cows.
OPDC cows are fed on green pastures all day long and they are also provided additional minerals, organic grains ( right now it is organic barley because organic corn is not available ).Cows get on average about 8 pounds of barley per day. They also get all the dried organic alfalfa they can eat each day. The cows are moved to new lush pastures every day.
We also provide them with shade during the intense heat of the San Joaquin Valley during the summer months.
The idea of me being very missleading and being untrustworthy blows my mind. I would like to sit down with these negative speakers and see if they have the nerve to say these things to my face. EspecialIy when they speak from behind a fake name. I can not think of anyone here or elsewhere that has shared as much about his operations as I have about OPDC.
Those that use these kinds of words are really not educating or building anything.
I know why Bill. A left this forum. Sometimes it seems as if It is a destructive waste of time to participate….I am committed to building and teaching for all of us that want delicious, local, safe raw milk . When commentors are destructive, it teaches others that we are weak, and we want raw milk to only stay on the farm. AND…. That we encourage the FDA to perpetuate the madness of raw milk confusion and oppression.
This is an important forum for conscious discussion. That is why I will not leave it. If I leave it and others leave…we leave it to no-named negative destructive trolls. Kind of like pathogens in raw milk….we need to keep lots of good bacteria present or the place gets really sick.
"Sharon Z,
"Why do you dislike the term stakeholder? It is a description of a network of people with similar interests/goals."
Milky Way, I believe Sharon was alluding to the use of the word "stakeholder" as a legal term.
Here is the legal defintion of "stakeholder" from law.com:
n. a person having in his/her possession (holding) money or property in which he/she has no interest, right or title, awaiting the outcome of a dispute between two or more claimants to the money or property. The stakeholder has a duty to deliver to the owner or owners the money or assets once the right to legal possession is established by judgment or agreement.
http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=2001
Any person who agrees that they are a "stakeholder" in his farm or his property is (ususally unwittingly) agreeing that he has no ownership in it, but rather has conveyed ownership to the government.
I don't comment on here much but I read it basically every day. Look forward to your colorful posts, I'm glad you try to stay positive (amongest the attacks)
————————————————————————————————————————-
I see merit on both sides of pro-raw milk camps. And it's really a skill, s sign of maturiity, to get yous point across without offending people of other views by using inflamatory language.
Not to say I haven't learned anything from those that do use "riling" language…some very intelligent people on both sides… I just think it's immpressive when people take the time to to say things with respect (it's much easy to not!)
One of the reasons I very much admire my fellow Canadian, Michael Schmidt…he uses his words wisely!
Thanks for the good blog, David!
Mark, could you please tell us how many cows on how many acres? Do you get adequate rainfall in your area or do you have to irrigate?
Thanks,
Lola
You state: "Cows get on average about 8 pounds of barley per day."
Are you then going to request WAPF correct the inaccurate statement on the Real Milk website regarding your operation? You also did not answer my question about the statement on Cornucopia that you do not source milk outside your farm when your own website states you do for your butter.
I would very much like to start buying your product again and trust giving it to my family, and I am just asking honest questions that any consumer in California should be asking you. And yes, even though you belittle us consumers who take the time to really check the claims food producers are making, some of us do use sites like Cornucopia, where you currently have the highest rating possible due to inaccurate statements. Your responses to my questions are certainly not motivating me to purchase your product, the only raw milk product currently available to me that I am aware of, unless I travel a great distance to get it from Claravale. We chose your product to begin with based on the information on the Real Milk website, which by your own admission here is not accurate.
And if I did have the happy chance of finding a herd share program near me with milk available, do you really think it would be in my best interest to reveal my identity and where I live to you? David has very accurately pointed out in his last blog post that there are very good reasons to remain anonymous on this blog.
One hundred percent grassfed is ideal but not always easily achievable, though some do manage to do it–usually by those who live in a climate where grass grows phenomenally fast, like in the Midwest, and few of those do it year-round except possibly those who seasonally milk… when the grass grows.
Barley is definitely a better grain than wheat or corn… at least it's not GMO-contaminated the way even organic corn and soybeans are, and has fewer human allergens that transfer to milk.
It's much better to feed a little grain and keep a cow from ketosis and in good shape for rebreeding year after year, than to keep selling sick cows every other year because they're run down by a purist's no-grain attitude, as certain grass-feeding novices have been finding out these last few years.
Perhaps Mark should say, "Minimal grain when necessary" which is what I say (though I also add, "never corn or soy"), when it becomes necessary to feed grain. My customers totally understand that though grain-free is a goal I strive for, the health of a cow/goat takes precedence over killing them, especially where ketosis is concerned.
I have to say these attacks on Mark seem rather nit-picking to me… their purpose must be to distract from something else?
In 2003 this story mentions irrigation lines on Marks farm, I don't recall where I read it, but it was mentioned before that he irrigates and that is why his heard in on pasture year round. In the Sacramento valley, we grew produce in our garden all year.
Lola thanx for clarifying the definition of "stakeholder".
"Organic Pastures, http://www.organicpastures.com. Raw milk from pasture-fed cows is now available in health food stores throughout California. (559) 846-9732 or 877-Raw-Milk .
Claravale Dairy: http://www.claravaledairy.com or (831) 628-3219 for more information. Jersey milk, available raw and pasteurized. According to their website, Claravale feeds their cows a diet of hay, feeds, and pastures, including grain. Reader Comments: A reader notes that she and her grain-sensitive patients cannot tolerate Claravale milk or other milk from cows fed grain."
It is clearly biased and misleading if Organic Pastures is also feeding cows a feed mixture in addition to pasture. If they feel they feed less grains than other operations, and better grains as you articulated, that would be fine.
As to the Cornucopia website, as I already mentioned, OP has inaccurate statements about their operation that causes them to get the highest ratings, above those that might be honest and state their operation as you have. Would this not concern you as a consumer, or bother you as a milk supplier if you knew you were being accurate and other suppliers were not?
Also, for those of us who live in California and go all summer with no rain and understand the climate issues here, Lola's questions are also pertinent. I look forward to seeing the answers.
Mr. McAfee can do us all a great favor by correcting these inaccuracies and answering our questions rather than attacking the questioner and the questions. It would go a long way to restoring confidence in the product.
Claravale's ad seems unappealing and ambiguous: "Claravale feeds their cows a diet of hay, feeds, and pastures, including grain." What's included in "feeds"? Silage, chopped beets, post-dated bakery products, some other not-grass feed? I strongly recommend that you look up what most dairy cows are fed on a daily basis.
Raising dairy cows is never-ending HARD work. I do believe that Mark takes care to provide the best and healthiest milk around, and so is not being intentionally deceptive. To me it seems maybe he hasn't crossed all his T's or dotted all his I's, rather than assuming that he's dotting his T's and crossing his I's.
It seems nit-picking to me because, much like Amanda, you are constantly and aggressively attacking him far more than seems normal for even a disaffected customer to do. Most unhappy customers simply go elsewhere. It's the American way. 🙂
If you are not happy with Mark's milk, then raise your own cow if you want better milk than his. Otherwise, you strike me as someone who has an ax to grind… and my question is, "Why?"
Yes, my gorge rose at stakeholders also. It was this particular word–stakeholder–and its legal definition that riled up many, many people about NAIS (not to mention that NAIS is incredibly invasive, serves no purpose in tracking sick animals since the CAFO owners get some sort of exemption anyway, and serves and enriches the tag makers and radio trackers, while farmers get shafted with the expenses and extra work).
The "working group" would be very wise to use another word instead of "stakeholders."
That's not Claravale's ad. That is what WAPF writes about them on their website. I went to Claravales website and looked at their FAQ for the first time. Here is what is says (in part):
——-Begin quote from Claravale website————
Are Claravale Farms cows totally pasture fed?
Claravale Farm is a traditionally run dairy and we don't think total pasture feeding of dairy cattle is appropriate for a number of reasons.
Contrary to popular belief, total, year round pasture feeding is not natural for cattle and is not the way in which dairy cattle have historically been managed. More typical is for dairy cattle to get access to some pasture during the natural growing season (winter and spring here) and to be fed mostly hay, grain and other produce during the rest of the year. This is what we do at Claravale. In this way, farmers have historically taken advantage of natural yearly cycles of rainfall and production. Year round pasture feeding of dairy cows requires the artificial creation of year round pastures by intensive irrigation, which requires energy and water, both limited resources in California.
Here are a couple of important facts for people who are not agriculturally inclined:
Hay is dried pasture.
Grain is grass seed.
Taking a cow to milk.
All three of these feeds (hay, grain, pasture) are completely natural and important feeds for dairy cattle. All three are historically important feeds for dairy cattle. All three have been important components of the diets of dairy cattle for the entire history of their existence on this earth. A cow grazing on a naturally cycling pasture (in California, for example) will be eating green pasture for part of the year, but as that pasture matures and dries out the cow will continue to eat it but it will now be called standing hay (= hay). As the pasture matures the grass forms seed heads (= grain) and dries out. When this happens, the nutrition in the leaves and stems decreases and the nutrition in the seeds (= grain) increases. During much of the year, a cow grazing on a naturally cycling pasture will be getting a large percentage of its nutrition from this grain (= grass seeds).
A good quality, high producing dairy cow cannot do well on green pasture alone. Even the best pasture does not contain the nutrition it needs to produce the milk it was bred to produce. (Important note: this is different than for beef cattle that can do just fine on green pasture alone. Beef cattle only put on a few hundred pounds of weight in their lives. Dairy cattle do this as well and produce thousands of gallons of milk every year in addition.) By adding hay and grain to the diet of dairy cattle you are simply feeding them concentrated pasture. By drying pasture into hay the nutrition it contains is concentrated ten fold. Dairy cattle, however, need even more than this. To do well, dairy cattle need the best cuttings of the best hay possible. Hay that tests the highest in nutrition is referred to in the trade as dairy test. It costs a premium and is reserved for dairy cattle.
Even given the best, most nutritious, feed possible, many cows still lose weight during the early stages of lactation. If dairy cattle are not given the nutrition they need they will be severely stressed and will be susceptible to many infectious and metabolic diseases. The cows will suffer as well as milk production and milk quality. For example ketosis and hypocalcemia are both common metabolic diseases in dairy cattle that are caused by inadequate nutrition during lactation. Both of these diseases can kill cows very quickly.
Milk and cream separator.
Cows are very smart about food. They are expert at sniffing out (literally) food that is best for them. Cows do not want a diet of green pasture alone. Given long term free access to pasture, hay and grain they will eat lots and lots of hay and grain.
Historically, no dairy based culture has ever tried to artificially create year round pastures to feed dairy cattle. It makes no sense with respect to cow nutrition, water use, or energy input. Historically, farmers work with the natural cycles, utilizing green pasture when it is available and at its height of nutrition but also harvesting this pasture when it is at its height, concentrating it, and feeding it to the dairy cattle the rest of the year (that is, they make hay and store it in the barn). They also harvest grain and store it to feed to the cattle throughout the year.
This is what we do at Claravale. We utilize naturally cycling pastures during the time of the year that it makes sense (up to seven months out of the year here in Panoche) and also feed the cows high quality organic hay and grain. We are proud of how we care for our cows at Claravale. We are proud of how healthy they are and the quality of the milk they produce. We dont pretend to do something we dont.
In addition, grass fed cows produce milk that has an "off" flavor. The older literature contains many references to the fact that cows which are on pasture produce milk which tastes bad. It is usually recommended in this literature that the cows be taken off of the pasture for a few hours before milking to limit this effect. These days, this is not a factor with most milk producers (including organic milk producers) because the milk is cooked and processed before sale so it doesn't taste good anyway. The effects of the grass on milk taste will be masked by the effects of all the other processes. Every year when our cows do get some pasture we always get complaints about the taste of the milk. At Claravale Farm, taste is an important component of quality so we don't totally grass feed our cows, but rather give them a varied, traditional diet designed to keep them healthy while producing delicious milk.
How Does Claravale Farm Differ From Organic Pastures In Cow Feeding?
There continues to be a lot of confusion and misinformation about what we at Claravale Farm feed our cows and what Organic Pastures feeds their cows. Here are the facts:
What Organic Pastures feeds their cows (according to Mark McAfee):
Hay
Grain
Pasture
What Claravale Farm feeds their cows (according to Ron Garthwaite):
Hay
Grain
Pasture
That is, there is no difference in the types of feed that Claravale Farm and Organic Pastures feed their cows.
———-End quote from Claravale website————-
I have never bought Claravale's milk, and I have no connection with them whatsoever. In fact, my wife and I were at a market recently where we saw Claravale's milk products being sold. Since all I knew about Claravale's product was from the WAPF website quoted in the previous comment, I whispered to my wife as we walked by "They're raw, but they are grain-fed" and we did not even consider buying it (I wish I had taken the time to visit their website and read their FAQ!)
I have never been to Claravale's farm, nor to Organic Pasture's. But based on what I can read and research on the Internet, it would seem Claravale's representation of their product is more up-front than Organic Pasture's. They are not afraid to admit they use grains, and they know that they will possibly suffer from the "grass-fed only" crowd by being honest about it. And based on what they felt they had to write on their FAQ comparing their farm to Organic Pastures, I am pretty sure they have to deal with this question quite often, more than likely because of the way WAPF presents the two farms on their website.
As to your comment: "Most unhappy customers simply go elsewhere. It's the American way. :-)"
I guess I am un-American then for being concerned about truthful and accurate statements regarding the food I am purchasing. Not that we have many choices when it comes to raw milk anyway. Shame on me for being a concerned consumer.
http://beef.unl.edu/byprodfeeds/manual_02_03.shtml
http://www.ansci.umn.edu/dairy/dairyupdates/du126.htm
http://www.ingredients101.com/brsgrnd.htm
It appears that the definition of grains cattle eat "naturally" needs to be determined. Do cows naturally eat corn? Do they eat soybeans? Canola? etc….. Grass seed? What kind of grass seed? Without knowing what kind of grains either feeds their cows, an informed choice cannot be made.
I couldn't tell any difference from Claravale milk or OP milk. Mark has or had mostly holsteins and I think Claravale has or had mostly jerseys. I would have expected better tasting milk from the jerseys, perhaps it is what they feed them? My friend with a cow share-her jersey milk tastes like melting ice cream. Natural sweet milk. Claravale milk tasted nothing like my friends jersey milk. Claravale, OP and Strauss (pasteurised not homognized) all tastes the same to me.
I've been by OP, several years ago, while visiting patients. I saw cows on pasture. Nothing like some of the surrounding confined factory dairies.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing that background/perspective on sensitivities related to terminology.
MW
We flood irrigate, using ag wells from April to November to keep our pastures growing lush and green.
We rotationally and intensively pasture feed to get the most from our own feed…then we feed more to suppliment and keep the cow body condition full and good.
I stand behind Claravale 100%. They are the oldest surviving Raw Milk Brand in the USA. There food safety history is impecable…..no pathogens found since 1927.They stand with me when we fight to keep CA Raw Milk available to all that consume it. They are 100% Jersey when OPDC is a mixed breed herd with about 50% Jersey, 30% crosses and the rest a mix of Holstein, Normands, Ayershires, Dutch Belteds, and other mixed breeds.
Ron ( Claravale ) believes in traditional conventional methods and sometimes I think he is smart to not hassle with the USDA organic certs. Claravale is not certified organic but uses many of the same natural practices that we use. They do not pasture, except for seasonally when they have some natural grasses that grow with the winter rains.
All I can say is we need more raw dairies in CA and not fewer.
Be damn glad that Claravale is here for us.
Last thing….OPDC is not missleading anyone by saying that cows are on pastures all of the time. Our pasture feeders are located in the pastures and that is where they get their added feed. We also have a shaded area that we use to feed the cows during intense heat to protect them from stress.
The pastures aer lush and green and the cows feed on them all of the time.
Earth Google OPDC and or Claravale and see for yourself.
OPDC is at 7221 So. Jameson Fresno CA …EARTH GOOGLE DOES NOT LIE.
Mark
Mark
Again, could you tell us how many cows on how many acres?
Thanks.
MW
"Earth Google OPDC and or Claravale and see for yourself.
"OPDC is at 7221 So. Jameson Fresno CA …EARTH GOOGLE DOES NOT LIE."
So, can I then assume Mark (or OPDC) owns the agricultural land contiguous to 7221 S. Jameson?
The reason I ask is because the Fresno County property tax records (sorry, everybody, property tax records are public information) show that 7221 S. Jameson is valued at *only* $862,053, which seems awfully low for 600-800 acres of agricultural land plus a bottling plant in high-priced California.
Are the cows on the fields contiguous to 7221 S. Jameson or are they somewhere else?
Wow…impressive investigational skills. I have a hard time figuering out the Tax Assessors Values and I am the land owner.
There are 405 acres at the OPDC address. Sometimes Earth Google shows the address a little down the street with some of our neighbors conventional almonds. Just look a little arround the Earth Google address and you will find us. There is an additional 160 acres located about a mile away that we raise additional organic crops on. That makes about 565 acres, all organic.
We have 350 milk cows on 405 acres of pastures. We are actually long on pasture and it tends to grow faster than we can feed it. Our soils are very fertile and with the San Joaquin Valley heat and the irrigation…we have plenty of pasture feed. If you add in the dry cows and non milking herd we have about 540 cows and bulls…total.
I made a 5 minute speech in front of Karen Ross ( CA AG Sec ) yesterday at a local Fresno CDFA Farm Bill listing session. The room was packed and their were 15 or so speakers.
My message was this:
We hear lots of talk about USDA food programs and eating better in America. We also know that the dairy industry is suffering desparately. We know that you worked tirelessly to create and promote the USDA "Get to Know Your Farmer, Get to Know Your Food" Initiative…..but…. FDA policies are at 100% odds with the USDA programs and health initiatives. While the USDA programs say that eating better and eating good food will help us be healthier…the FDA criminalizes any medical and healing claims on food.
This is a structural confusion in our government. It must be corrected if we intend to stop this medically induced health bankrupcy of our country.
I asked her to carry this message.
People need to be able to hear farmers be able to share testimonials about healing foods and make medical claims on foods…if we intend for people to reconnect food and health…and if we intend to elevate the value of food and associate it with health, medical care and prevention. We all know damn well that health does not come from more lapband surguries, cheaper diabetic needles, more drugs or more visits to the doctor. Health comes from personal responsibility and eating whole unprocssed foods, …that you got from "A Farmer You Got to Know" and excercise.
I quoted Hippocrates ( 400BC ) and thanked her for carrying this message.
Karen loved it…
I know….I know….it is a wet dream. But even wet dreams can come true.
I was just seed planting. As I left the meeting I was followed by at least six people that wanted my card and wanted to talk about raw milk and whole foods.
….they need to be educated. If we do not reach out they will never get this message. We need more engagement not less. Who knows…Karen my call me to testify someday.
Plant those seeds…teach teach teach!!
Mark
I got an email back from Cornucopia today, they are looking into the details of the score card issues you brought up.
Lola,
The land has been in the family since the 1960s. There has been no recent sale. That is why the tax base is so low. Another thing that really helps the assessed value stay low is the fact that nearly all of our milk barn and creamery facilities are either mobile or on wheels and considered temperary. No land taxes on mobile equipment.
I was invited to Porterville Junior College this morning for one of our Share The Secret of Raw Milk presentations. The professor drank raw milk straight from the family CAFO bulk tank….so does all four of her very healthy kids. She wanted me to teach the entire class about raw milk.
Last night I spent an hour with the president of the National Farmers Union. He is a local dairyman…..he had ugly stories to tell. The more I get to know my neighbor dairymen….the more we are like each other….it is the processors they hate. They actually have deep respect for raw milk. They all drink it!!!!
I haven't kept up with your Cornucopia issues. I just think that if your herd is not closed, you shouldn't say it is. If you outsource, you shouldn't say you don't.
As to all of this acreage discussion, if this is going to be of any benefit, it needs clarity. Don't you have two almond groves and an air strip on those acres, Mark? Part of that 400 acres (the north part) is your own almonds, right? Then the neighbor to the north has almonds too. The remaining acres include your offices, service buildings, creamery, pads for the mobile barn, pool, home, supplements, hay, roads, etc. I think people are asking about the acres that the cows actually graze on. I assume they are interested in the milk herd, not the heifers, calves, and dry cows.
Amanda
This special label protocol has never been used. Amanda can confirm this from Milk Pool records.
OPDC has made the policy decision to not buy milk to make any manufactured products. That decision was based mostly on feedback from this forum. When you see OP products….it is 100% from OP.
Mark
——————————
2. Where do you get the extra milk used for your raw butter?
In order to provide enough raw, organic, grass fed butter to supply the California raw butter market, OPDC has partnered with a select group of organic dairymen to meet demand. If you see a Source Sticker on a container of OPDC raw butter, you know this raw butter was churned at OPDC from raw milk purchased from another trusted California organic dairyman. This raw milk comes from a dairy that does grass feed their cows, but it may not be year round like OPDC. If you do not see a Source Sticker on the raw butter container, you know the raw butter came directly from OPDC cows.
3. Why go to the trouble of outsourcing raw milk for butter, and applying Source Stickers?
We made the decision to outsource because we became concerned for the desperate cries from the consumers wanting their raw butter! Some of these cries came from consumers expressing serious medical issues addressed by the use of raw butter. Its not a huge market, but its a loyal one. We believe it is better to meet their needs than to ignore them because we didnt have enough of our own milk. In keeping with our values of maintaining customer trust, we apply the Source Stickers so you will know the true origins of your beloved raw butter.
4. How do you know the butter is safe?
Raw butter products are made of low moisture fat and are thus not subject to the same regulatory testing standards as Class 1 and Class 2 products. The state does not pathogen-test or check for coliform levels in Class 4. Beneficial fatty acids and other elements in Raw Butter prevent the growth of pathogens. Raw butter is inherently very safe.
I DO know that you CAN have amazing carrying capacities (more than double set-stock grazing) with holistic-planned grazing…
I can attest to Claravales stance on the grain issue. In our beginner ignorance, we killed a cow to Ketosis…totally shut her rumen down – she kept eating and her gut grew massive but her body got skinnier and skinnier. We where sure that dairy quality alfalfa was the best thing for her, after all GRASS-FED IS BEST right?? When we got the Vet out a few days before she died, he told us we we "starved" her! I did NOT want to believe him. But as we researched a little more and visited with some of the grass gurus out there, we learned we WERE in the the wrong…ouch!!
Until we can manage out pastured to have highly mineralized, sweet grass (plant sugars) we NEED to feed some grain if we want our modern Jerseys to maintain a body condition to be able to breed back. Not to much though, as over 6-8 lbs a day will change drop the pH of the animals to much (Maybe others have different numbers??)
So we do feed about 3lbs of oats at milking times now and the cows are definitely doing bettter.
Kudos to those who have put in the time and wisdom to get their brix levels high enough to do grass-only!! For sure, the grassbased genetics helps (virtually no selection in Saskatchewan)
So for now, giving the cows some supplemental energy in the form of "annual oat grass seeds" is the most humane and healthy thing we can do for them. We will work away at improving our pastures…and maybe, just maybe…the heifers we raise will be able to flourish on a grass-diet…
Our 405 acres ( OPDC pastures ) is located on Jameson Ave and lays to the west.
Our 160 acres of organic almonds are located 1.5 miles to the east on Westlawn Av.
They are not connected properties. My runway is next to my house on the 405 acres.
Since starting OPDC 11 years ago, I have made a life out of enjoying uninvited, unscheduled, rectal proctoscopy….with ever changing practitioners….The problem is that I can not choose my doctor or the visit time….everybody government agency and no-name butt-head wants a turn at my ass. Guess they like it…and I am very happily married and not even gay.
It all comes with trying to be transparent and trying my best to serve our consumers and answer all questions. Something rare in the world today. Try getting this kind of information from Organic Valley….good luck!
How does WAPF make a big deal about Claradale feeding grains… because OP's and Claradale's ads follow each other? WAPF does not write or edit those raw milk ads. Raw milk providers send their own ads to WAPF, which posts them exactly as given, where the ads remain unchanged until the provider gives new changes or asks to have them removed. And this I know because I used to advertise there myself. Claradale's ad was written by Claradale themselves.
"….there is no difference in the types of feed that Claravale Farm and Organic Pastures feed their cows."
Except OP is organic and so does not feed GMOs… a bigger danger by far, as far as I am concerned.
I'm not sure what Lola's obsession is about Mark's pastures anyway. I'm pretty sure that she would become offended if someone were to start doing invasive research on her and ask those repetitive questions day after day. I know I would, especially when the person isn't a customer or even a potential customer.
And like Mark says, he's far more transparent than any other dairy producer, raw or not. Organic Valley and other mega-dairies won't even let you on the property.
For the record, I have been to both Organic Pastures and Claravale dairies. In both cases I spent two days and one night and had full access to all operations. Let me begin by saying that we are lucky to have two families of such integrity providing us with commercially available raw milk in California. While it may be difficult to find two men who are more different I have tremendous respect for both Mark Mcafee (and wife Blaine and family) and Ron Garthwaite (and wife Collette and family). They are both clearly rooted in strong values and if you do a little investigation on the internet you can learn more (I certainly don't need to speak for either of them). Organic Pastures is pasture based with supplemental stored forages (hay, alfalfa, etc.) fed free choice in pasture with an additional supplement of 8#'s of barley per day (per Mark). Claravale, while not certified Organic, feeds Organic alfalfa and grass hay and supplements Organic grain in the parlor at milking (I would estimate 5-10#). OP is a very ambitious and scaling pasture based system and Claravale is a very traditional, modest dry lot system with seasonal grazing. Both have merits and in my opinion both are valid. I'd also like to add that they both make great milk that I can legally buy at my local market in Fairfax, CA. I wish every state in the country had that opportunity.
Aaron Lucich http://www.WeAreWhatWeEat.org
There is nothing better than drinking milk straight from a bulk tank. I have experienced fresh milk from countless dairies across the country over the last six years. I also spent the better part of a year as the interim farm manager at Traders Point Creamery in Indiana, a 100% Grassfed Organic dairy and farmstead creamery. While I am acutely aware of how little I know and how humble I should be, I do consider myself a bit more knowledgeable than the average consumer. One of my main contributions at Traders Point was to initiate a transition from a mostly Hay-Fed dairy to an actual grazing system. Anyone who cares to understand the nuances of feed terminology in the ruminant meat and dairy sector can do so with a bit of time (start here: http://www.stockmangrassfarmer.net/ and here http://www.eatwild.com ). Understand that Grassfed is still an ethical claim as we don't have an actual legal "Standard" per se (and I'm not entirely sure we want one). I have spent a good deal of time in the grass farming community and, in spirit, grass fed means ruminants are eating their ancestral diet of forages: grasses, forbs and legumes, both standing and harvested (hay). In doing so there are times when they will indeed be eating grass that has "headed out" and will consume the seeds (which is still technically grass) and times when the ration of stored feed (hay) increases based on seasonality and grass farming experience. In my opinion the spirit of the term "Grassfed" does not include harvested grain that has been separated from the actual plant and concentrated for its feed value. I have heard producers claim that corn is a grass, which is true, and though grazing young corn (and other annual cereals) is technically acceptable as forage the harvesting and storage of corn and other "grains" as feed for ruminants is not. That said, at the end of the day we should only be concerned with the integrity of the farmer, the health of their animals and land and the nutritional quality of the food. With ruminants the only way to know for sure is to test the milk or meat and check the constituents. Fatty acid profile and CLA's are a good indicator of feed source. While sourcing milk at Traders Point I had farmer X claim that he only feeds a "little grain" in the parlor produce a fatty acid profile of .14: .02 (?6:?3 g/110g) while our on farm milk was .07: .11 (sorry to geek out on y'all). I should mention that Organic Valley's bulk milk came in at .07: .04 which is quite impressive for the size of their pool. 100% grassfed is possible but it is an entirely new game. Folks like Cheyenne and Katy Christianson, members of Organic Valley's CROPP, have made the case even in the tundra of Northern Wisconsin (with Holsteins to boot). The last I saw his milk had a fatty acid profile of .67 ?6: 1 ?3 with very high CLA's. Notwithstanding the Christiansons, most of the grassfed dairies I know have some seasonal limitation and a low rolling herd average compared to systems that supplement with "some" grain. While the dependence on grain is understandable from an economic perspective we all know the production of that grain is far from economically or ecologically sustainable long term. On the good news side Dr Cindy Daley at CSU Chico has shown that a reduction from 10# to 5# of grain per day shows a net economic gain to the farmer, which is a very encouraging win, win, win, win (farmer, cow, consumer, ecosystem). Unfortunately the entire notion of dairy has been forever broken by our abysmal industrial economy and agribusiness. I know first hand that all good farmers have challenges scaling in this ridiculous paradigm and Organic Valley, Organic Pastures and Claravale are all good guys working hard against big odds to forge a survivable food system. We certainly have our work cut out for us in our PARTNERSHIP as farmers and eaters in this transition to a sane and healthy civilization. I sincerely hope we can avoid collapsing in the process.
Respectfully, Aaron Lucich http://www.WeAreWhatWeEat.org
1.) The FDA is a criminal rogue organization that is not authorized by the Constitution.
2.) What ever I decide to put into my body is a God given inalienable right and not under the purvue of any government, for any reason. End of story.