Even the most despotic regimes hate to impose martial law and put soldiers into the streets to back up the police in putting down citizen uprisings. Despots worry that, when push comes to shove, and protesting citizens don’t do as they’re told, soldiers may hesitate before firing on their fellow citizens—possibly including friends and relatives–for something as terrible as carrying signs of protest or failing to obey orders to disperse. If that happens, the despots are really in the soup.
Listening to the lawyer-less Mennonite farmer, Mark Nolt, cross-examine Anthony Russo, a Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture microbiologist-turned-undercover-agent, got me thinking about such encounters between citizen soldiers and their subjects. Russo, a lanky bearded fellow who has been with the agency 21 years, had just testified about two occasions when top PDA food safety official Bill Chirdon asked…no, demanded, that Russo accompany him on an “undercover” assignment. The undercover assignment involved going to a farmer’s market near the state capital of Harrisburg and purchasing raw dairy products from Mark Nolt so he could be put on trial.
Russo’s first assignment came July 6, 2007, at a farmer’s market in Carlisle, and went off without a hitch, as Russo purchased a half gallon of milk and a quart of kefir, as Chirdon waited outside the market in a car. Presumably Mark would recognize Chirdon, and possibly endanger the well planned and highly coordinated operation.
“I asked (Mark) about the kefir, and he said there were 13 positive bacteria in it,” recalled Russo. The employee took the items back to the lab and confirmed they were, indeed, raw dairy.
A week later, Chirdon made the same request of Russo. This time, Russo hesitated. “Once again, it was a busy day at work,” recalled Rousseau. “He (Chirdon) asked me to go. He’s my boss, so I said I would go.” Rousseau purchased half a gallon of milk and some buttermilk, and brought them to his boss waiting outside the market.
When the judge asked Mark if he had questions for Russo, Mark inquired about who drove the car and where they parked on each occasion.
Russo answered, obviously uncomfortable about having to confront the victim of his subterfuge, because he then volunteered: “I was nervous about going. I don’t like doing that kind of stuff. I was hoping you weren’t there because I didn’t want to get any samples.”
After the trial, and the guilty verdict by Judge Day, several of the Mennonite women in the audience—easily identifiable by their bonnets and traditional dresses—approached Russo and thanked him for his honesty. He seemed touched, as well he should have been. He’s just a regular guy trying to do his job, avoid trouble, and eventually get a nice pension.
Interestingly, the guy who put Russo up to all this, Bill Chirdon, wasn’t present at the trial. It’s apparently the first time he hasn’t shown up at a court proceeding or a raid that Mark can recall. Maybe Chirdon didn’t want to be called as a witness and have to be cross-examined by Mark. Or maybe he didn’t want to face questions about the questionable seizure of equipment during the most recent raid he led on Mark’s farm. Or maybe he didn’t want to face the battery of television and other reporters who waited outside when the trial ended (see photo above).
Later, back at the Nolt farm in Newville, where the inventory in the store’s cooler is a bit thin, Mary Ann Nolt, still in her black bonnet and purple dress, expressed wonder at what she had seen at the trial. “I was sitting in the court room and there were all these important people there. They have these degrees. They were taking time from their busy day for this. We’re just a tiny speck. Why are we so important? Why are we a threat to them?…I wonder when they go home tonight. Will they feel they did an honest day’s work? Will they feel good about what they did?”
Tony Russo may well have gone home with the same feeling lots of people in that courtroom had. None of us worked very hard, but we all sure needed a shower.
What is the answer to this?
http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/fsb/0804/gallery.forbidden_foods.fsb/2.html
The PDA just issued an interesting press release straight from its Agriculture Secretary Dennis Wolff declaring that sales of raw milk and aged cheese are legal from farms having a valid permit and allowing inspections. Could it be that some higher officials at the PDA are starting to feel some heat from the negative publicity following Mark Nolt’s arrest and trial?
I’m really not sure who is the intended audience for this press release, since certainly farmers and raw milk consumers already know about the permitting process with its limitations and abuses. My guess is that it may be an attempt to quiet nosy questions from reporters and possibly even legislators, if Don is correct and an extensive letter-writing campaign is already in operation.
My advice is to keep up the pressure, and emphasize the fact that a dozen or so of the permitted farms have been subject to recalls due to phantom contamination issues in the past year. What good is a permitting process when it can be capriciously abused by those charged with enforcing it?
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/05-05-2008/0004806685&EDATE=
Basically you take the imagery of ‘jack-booted PDA thugs marching onto Mark Nolt’s farm, tearing him from the arms of his family and throwing him in front of a judge’ and use that to make an end run around the PDA. Hold that picture up to the press and your state’s elected officials, tell them that the PDA is out of control, their so-called permitting process is flawed and capricious and demand that someone in an oversight position reign them in.
I’m starting to see some negative reactions to the Mark Nolt incident in the press but probably not enough to roll back their actions. You really need a ground-swell of negative press, which can only be accomplished by continuing to hammer on the story. CARE, PASA or someone else should write up a press release, send it to the local Associated Press offices and start shopping it around to all the local news outlets.
The men who have worked long and hard to gain complete control over the dairy market and industry stand to lose everything they have gained,much of it in just the last 20 years.They have very close to monopoly control over the dairy products all of you folks can eat.The demand from people looking for better quality food offered small farmers an opportunity to step out of the tightly controlled milk market.
These independent farmers who sell direct to consumers are very much like slaves who have escaped the plantation back in the days of legal slavery.They are a bad example to the rest of the slaves who are being exploited by these men who control the market.Fear of being targeted as Mark Nolt has been is what is keeping many dairy farmers from becoming independent.
These men have put their agents in powerful positions such as the secretary of the Pennsylvania dept of ag in order to search out and punish these runaway slaves and to bring them back to the plantation if possible.Many of the states have industry employes in the agricultural departments.
Once the independent farmers get a taste of a true free market,they would rather die than go back to the plantation.You will see a lot more farmers like Mark Nolt who will stand up to these slave hunters.To go back to life under the thumb of those tyrants would be to lose everything including our self respect.
If we are no longer of use to them then we need to be eliminated.That is the grim reality of how the corporate executives think.They mean business and this will be a very difficult struggle.
My family comes from a long line of Patriots, our door stays open for the underground, in many forms.
I was going to say, no, people don’t really know where their food comes from, Mothership beat me to it. I believe that people envision milk comes from the "happy cows" munching grass in the pastures that they see on TV or in pictures. They don’t see the factory farms, the cows standing/laying in their own excretement, nor the ingredients to the slop they feed the animals. And not to forget the processing of ingredients… the added chemicals, the list goes on and on. Nope they have no clue where the food comes from or anything about it. Do they really care?
I was pretty close to giving up on this blog after reading Milkfarmer earlier, but your sense of defeat below and the very true comment above ("happy cows") inspired a comment (sorry to everyone who hoped a government participant would go away ASAP–getting there)…
From Sylvia (previous post): "Speak out? I do, as I expect other consumers do. As the minority what else can we do? Letters are continuely written, I’ve contributed to…"
IMHO, the only way to find some workable solutions between farmers and regulators is through the grassroots/local effort. The "top down" approach of FDA and states obviously isn’t working very well. However, I am seeing the same top-down appraoch here, especially recent posts. Instead of dialogue, it’s all black and white ("we’re right," anyone who disagrees is wrong, and if they are from the government, they are super wrong. Period).
And, this comment on Milkfarmer’s post: "MMs goal of getting raw milk into as many stomachs as possible is the right one (whether 400 cow dairies is the best way to go about it is debatable)."
Again, IMHO, having a quota/goal to increase raw milk consumption is either: 1) profit driven or 2) a religion. Even though I want to taste Bob H’s feta, I am disturbed that someone out there has a "goal" to put raw milk in my stomach. Sure hope the raw milk movement doesn’t suddenly start coming to my door with flyers and samples to "save my soul."
I’ll continue with my new found opinion to support raw milk product availability at the local level with good, cooperative farmers. But, if a stomach quota appears more important than the safety, I’ll work to test you out of business (especially the producers selling and marketing product in stores and on the internet…across state lines…).
The black and white vision? That can be said for many people; govt and all. People who have a passion in what they believe bring life to the table. Life is full of choices.
What exactly is the grassroots/local effort?
I suppose it depends on how you interpret the context of the quota/goal to increase raw milk consumption statement. Was MM referring to educating the population on raw dairy by making it available to everyone? Or was MM just wanting to increase sales? Religion? I hadnt looked at it that way.
I would like to believe that safety/sanitation is the utmost importance with any product to be consumed. I would also believe that most dairy farmers try their best to maintain sanitary conditions as it is their livelihoods, they dont want to be sued or out of business. (I say most as there are unscrupulous people in all fields). So far MM appears to have done quite well with maintaining sanitary conditions as has Claravale. If their methods are taken and expanded upon then a template could be made for other raw dairies.
What is the difference between the regulations of sanitation at raw dairies and the factory dairies? I am curious.
We are after all, still human,with human connections and loyalties. Don’t forget the honeybee principle. Talk to them. Go to their office. Show them. Teach them.
my 2cents,
-Blair
Have you ever seen a group of factory farm cows exhibit their happiness by putting their tails in the air and dancing around? All of the factory farm cows I have seen are obviously depressed.Does milk from depressed cows produce depression in people?
C2- stomach quotas are not what I’m talking about, but from someone sympathetic to government I understand how you might want to foster that notion. The piece missing from your post is CHOICE. No one here is talking about forcing raw milk onto anyone. What we all are fighting for is the right for those that want to consume milk raw, have the opportunity to do so. The people who are into the ‘force’ aspect are the goons that are attempting to take raw milk farmers down.
While it’s nice that a single lab tech has been shown a glimmer of the light, the attitude of testing someone out of business reeks. How do you test someone out of business….charge lots of money for each test, do what is possible to get negative results? Please, testing anyone out of business belies the ‘blind eye of science’ and is totally unprofessional. Its agendas like this that we are fighting to overcome. And it is this attitude that fosters a distrust of government and its lackeys. Oh thats right, youll only do it to me because you dont agree with what I do or write.stellar logic, impressive morals.
People can be passionate about something and not let it take control of their lives. People can know the specialness of something and not make it rule their world (ala religion). When you see something thats really good, and has helped change people for the better, that last thing you want to do is hide it, or make it less accessible. Raw milk is a wonder. Just listen to folks like Don. It has altered the quality of lives. There are thousands of stories like his all across the country. Why should we settle for thousands of miracles when we could have millions? (now that attitude, any governmental employee should be able to understand) No, casting raw milk aficionados as cultist or evangelical is just more of the same scare tactics we have come to expect from those spouting the governments party line. Those who must use fear to get their way are truly serving the dark side.
Fear is what Chirdin and this campaign in PA want to promote. The threat and spectre of being shut down, cast into financial ruin, and publicly humiliated is the easiest way for the authorities to maintain control and keep everyone in line. Its a process (fear keeping people in line) that churches and governments have been using for centuries. I contend that continuing to produce raw milk for human consumption, in the face of this campaign and others like it, is a brave and heroic act. Not because there is no fear, but because farmers continue to produce in spite of it.
No c2, until every American has the right to contract with a farmer to produce his/her food, and the farmer can do it without extraneous demands from government, there is still much work to do.
PS Im sorry that your participation here rests on individual posts. Threatening to leave is another childish method that is gaining popularity on internet forums. Reminiscent of the take my ball and go home when we were kids growing up, it is a weak attempt to make others become sympathetic. Stay if you like, or go, but dont try to unload the responsibility for that decision on others.
Loved your post on the ex plantation workers. So ironic when you see all the captains of industry bloviating about the "free market".
There is ample evidence that a diet consisting of processed corn can cause depression in humans. I don’t think it’s a far stretch to imagine an unnatural diet (and the obvious poor environment) can cause depression and illness in cows as well. Then in turn, the resulting high omega-6 to omega-3 ratio in the meat and milk from these animals causes chronic disease, including depression, in humans.
Really, it is a nasty cycle.
After wiping the sand out of my eyes, it seemed clear that a single anybody (even a simple "lab tech") has the potential to ignite positive change. Bob eloquently addressed the second point of that sentence.
We’ll just play on opposite sides of the sandbox for now. Take care.
The drama unfolding over raw milk on opposite sides of the U.S. is fascinating (brought live to us by David Gumpert). I believe this is history in the making. Its the story of opposites: Mark Nolt in the East and Mark McAfee in West. Both are family farms, one small and the other large. One farmer sells to private customers and the other sells to the masses in grocery stores. These two raw milk farmers are the antithesis of each other as are the legal issues being addressed.
The heart of the matter over raw milk is safety. These two farmers are a reflection of all the issues, both good and bad. We have learned so much from them. Thank you David for covering these stories.
What are the "bad" issues that the two farmers are reflecting?
The heart of the matter is safety,whether we are
talking about raw or pasteurized milk.How is the best
way to make milk safe?
http://www.ftcldf.org/aa-10apr2008.htm
Editorial
You Can’t Vaccinate Your Way to Health
Government eradication programs almost always end in
failure (Part 1 of 3)
By: William G. Winter, DVM
Saying government eradication programs virtually never
work runs counter to conventional wisdom. But, as
George Orwell so graphically illustrated in his
landmark book 1984, anything repeated often enough
passes for the truth after awhile. Even bald-faced
lies.
The government agencies’ basic approach to cases of
suspected "contamination" or"contagion" is
block-headed and monolithic. There are some standard
characteristics:
1. Round up, quarantine and isolate the suspects.
Quite often this includes a security band of innocents
who were unlucky enough to be proximate to the
suspects. Bummer.
2. Mark them in some way to make them identifiable,
such as a tattoo, or, nowadays a microchip.
3. Devise a "test" to judge the guilty.
4. Ideally, exterminate (kill) the contaminated
ones as well as those who may have been exposed, or at
the very least, lock the bad guys up and throw away
the key.
5. Activate(and subsidized) industry to find a
"silver bullet" that will cure the horrible plague.
Thousands of examples abound in modern culture. We
are seeing the last of the majestic American Elms
being thrown into the shredders in an attempt to kill
the Dutch Elm Virus. Sure it kills the patient but,
as Big Brother teaches us, that’s the only way to save
the patient. When the last elm on earth is safely
shredded and buried in the landfill, we will at last
have won the war against Dutch Elm Disease. Mission
accomplished!
Around the world, sharpshooters and guardsmen have
declared war on several animal diseases. Using the
blockhead model, a determination is made that the
"Intruder Alert" alarm has gone off. All it takes is
the suspicion of illness in many cases. Immediately,
the process begins and woe to you if you stand in the
way. We are currently seeing the scramble alert
approach wherein we have declared simultaneous war on
bovine TB, brucellosis, chronic wasting, bovine
spongiform encephalapathy, and avian flu to name a
few. No one seems to notice that the number of wars
are increasing. Meanwhile, old diseases such a
malaria, bubonic plague and polio, earlier losers that
were beaten in our previous war campaigns, are now
crawling out of the Mission Accomplished trophy room.
In summary, as the current thinking goes, if only we
had a better, more efficient way to line up these
contaminated ones, then we could create the model for
quicker sorting, marking, judging, and exterminating
these bad apples. Then we could work on the magic
bullets for the rest of us, right? What is truly
happening here?
Part II – a) If this model is so ineffective, why do
we stick to it then? and b) Vaccine manufacturing is a
very, very big business
Part III – Getting out of the box. A truly superior
model of what really works to prevent disease."
Which approach to milk safety makes the most sense
to you?To throw aside all concern for the health of
the cow and sterilize the milk? Or to take care
starting with the soil,the food that the cow eats,the
environment the cow is kept in and the way the milk is
handled until it reaches the consumer so that it as
safe as possible, making no compromises that put
profit ahead of safety?
Factory farms choose the first route to
safety.Grass based dairies choose the second.
I’ll bet my health on the grass based method.
I can only think of four posibilities:
1. the PDA is a really small shop
2. he has a personal vendetta against raw milk
3. his underlings wouldn’t do it
4. he was put there for this purpose and is personally overseeing the operation
Any thoughts?
Bob Hayles
If it were about safety, we would not be permitted to buy raw meat or vegetables. Most of the drugs on the market that the FDA approves wouldn’t be there. Safety is so relative to the issue being discussed, that when compared to other issues of similar nature, calling raw milk a "safety issue," could be contrued as fear mongering. You could die from raw milk, sure. But what are the statistics in comparison to other food items?
Argue fair.
This is not a sandbox, but a discussion. Calling it a "sandbox" belittles those who disagree with one’s point of view. Not everyone here is arguing fair, but most are.
Those kinds of argument ploys such as "wiping the sand out of my eyes," are not, in my opinion "graceful," nor are they necessary. They are just as unfair as the arguments defended against, and just as bad.
Lab techs have access to statistics on pasteurized milk, do they not? You do test pasteurized milk also, don’t you? Please, at bare minimum, do post some of the negative ones for comparison if you are going to argue safety. Like you could say, "Even in the worst case of food poisoning, pasteurized milk has made less people ill than raw milk," and give well-related statistics, not doctored ones. Then the arguments you make will make a little sense, even if it is freedom of choice we are really arguing about.
Perhaps it is because this discussion is perceived as sand throwing that sound "safety" arguments are not even being made to begin with, and the government officials stick only with unjustified laws as their basis of prosecution.
Gwen
What are the laws these two Mennonite farmers being prosecuted for based upon? It is not anything fair. The safety argument can’t even quote reasonable statistics based on scientific data and comparison, and until they do, safety is not the issue in ANY state, even the "legal" ones.
They feel that raw milk can NEVER be safe, and are taking actions to eliminate public access to them… undercover agents to infiltrate buying clubs to keep them safe? How stupid do you think we are?
The words of some on here do not coincide with the general actions taken against raw milk farmers. The scary thing is when they strip the right early in the struggle (like NC) or totally tilt the level of the field (Utah).
With millions of gallons and tens of thousands of customers drinking everyday…if there was a safety problem with raw milk (outside the laboratory), it would be pretty obvious. No, government is taking care of those who take care of government…Big Dairy, using their communistic market controlling techniques has much money to purchase favors.
If we stand around and wait for the government to ‘give’ us the right to drink it raw, we’ll die of excess maturity. Taking the right is a better option, and places government in a position of taking something away (rather than being the ‘grantor’)