I’ve stressed any number of times the importance I attach to a heavy focus by raw dairies on milk safety. Some raw milk proponents have let me know they think my focus on safety is a diversion from more important political issues. And some raw milk opponents have let me know they think my focus on safety is lip service, that they aren’t convinced I really mean it.
A big part of the problem is that, much as I would like safety to be a straightforward matter of focusing on cleanliness and systematic oversight, it’s not straightforward because it gets wrapped up in the heavy-duty politics that have become part and parcel of the raw dairy struggle. The Scientific American article Joseph Heckman linked to following my previous post does an excellent job of pointing out the vagaries of food safety policy-making.
Still and all, a growing number of farmers are focusing ever more seriously on safety in its own right–for the sake of their customers’ health, to reassure regulators, and to help compete more effectively in the marketplace. One of those farmers who has made safety a major passion is Scott Trautman, owner of a Wisconsin dairy. Here, he relates a brief story many dairy owners should be able to relate to.
by Scott Trautman
Times are tough for Farmer Tom. His conventional dairy business has been hemorrhaging money for the last three years. He decided a couple years ago to make the transition to raw milk, and he’s just about to begin production, with the intention of selling directly to local consumers. His biggest concern all along has been safety. He wants to be sure he produces a completely safe product, and has no surprises in terms of illness.
Scott TrautmanBefore he begins publicizing his new raw milk business, he has an immediate problem to solve:
He’s got a broken piece of equipment and a farmhand to let go.
Business is such that he can only keep one of his two farmhands, and he needs to decide who stays and who goes.
The broken equipment will be costly to repair, delay harvest, and the problem was most probably preventable.
Farmer Tom knows that what each of his farmhands says about the broken equipment will play a big part in his decision as to who stays and helps launch the raw milk business and who goes.
Each farmhand had used the equipment the prior day and it had been put away without noting anything broken.
The first farmhand Farmer Tom speaks with is Dave. “What do you know about this broken equipment situation, Dave?” asks Farmer Tom.
Nearly before Farmer Tom has completed his sentence, Dave breaks in. “You are accusing ME of breaking this equipment? I know how to operate the equipment. If I even used the equipment, it was in perfect condition when I left it, and I won’t be questioned about it.” “In fact”, continues Dave “…you or that other farmhand have it out for me. You know how much better I am, but you’re jealous of me – it wouldn’t surprise me if you broke it just so you could fire me.”
Dave turns and leaves.
Next, Farmer Tom meets with Steve. He listens carefully, and appears thoughtful when Farmer Tom has asked his question. “I know I used the equipment, I know I am responsible for the equipment when I use it. Yesterday, in a rush, I did not check all points as I usually do. I heard some unusual noise, very slight, but thought I’d heard that before and it wasn’t serious, I could finish the day and look into it further the next day. I see now that was a mistake. I believe,” Steve goes on, “I think I know what I would do in a similar situation next time. I’d like to review that with you, but regardless, tell me what you’d like me to do to make it right”.
Farmer Tom thanks him.
Each farmhand is about equal in ability.
With which “farmhand” does Farmer Tom base his new raw milk future? ?
?
Easy choice; I would choose the honest person who also showed the initiative to improve himself and the issue.
Why IS Dave so obnoxious to his boss? What was the employer's tone to Dave? Has he been aggressive previously in unjustly blaming Dave, causing Dave to overreact? Has he in fact preferred the other FH all along, since Dave seems to have picked up on it?
Anyway, why ask such an obvious question? Everyone is going to pick the other fellow and not Dave. Is this an allegory of raw milk vs governmental control… how we should all be nice to the government and bend over backward in sucking up to power? If not, what was the point of this story?
So many unanswered questions. lol
Farm hands are just one part of the much bigger question of the bigger team that is needed prior to building a raw milk food chain.
Practically anyone can produce raw milk if they really pay attention to some basic tenants….the much bigger question is this.
Can you sell it?
Can you keep the flavor constant?
Flavor sells… when OPDC did market huge surveys, flavor was most important. Spoiled Americans want delicious food.
Raw milk does not sell itself.
Well….it does to a few very verbal and passionate WAP type people…they are few, passionate and they are loud. But that does not create a market and pay the bills. The farmer will soon realize that he will need to leave the farm and discover and connect to his consumers. Learn to speak to them…learn to teach them. "You never sell raw milk to anyone". "You teach raw milk" and give the first samples for free. If what you are making is true then it will sell. If not, then you have more work to do.
As far as food safety is concerned, I did not see anything in the article focussed on food safety….
What we have found is that a safety plan does far more than provide for safety it provides for standards and a method to reliably control flavor and other elements that can get out of control if not monitored.
Under the PMO and under CAFO conditions, the elements that are critical to raw milk quality are ignorred and irrelevent. The PMO does not consider pathogens in their policies. A solid raw milk food safety plan address all the conditions from earth to tummy. Itwill assure that all of those conditions are known and appreciated monitored. Testing is also something to be done as part of the program to assure that conditions are producing the anticipated good bacteria.
So, Scott….what about safety? What is the plan?
The "farm hand" will have to prove himself each and every day. How does he do his checklists? ( this is sooooo critical, does he take it seriously???? your safety program is only as good as those that do the lists and the actual work ). How does he communicate with the consumers that visit your farm. Who has better social skills. Who can learn faster…who can speak and teach?????
You will need to build a "teaching team" that you can trust. WAP had it dead on when he said…
You Teach… You Teach… You Teach…. as his last dying words on this earth. It is our OPDC marketing and sales program all wrapped up into one instructional system.
This link shows what can happen when a farmer reaches out and teaches people about raw milk….they go nuts when they hear and see the data and the truth. After they taste it….it is a done deal!!
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B-v3ur3dO3m9ODFkN2Q4M2UtZThkMC00YmE0LWEzYTQtNjY5YWIzZDY5NTQ4&hl=en
http://www.befoodsmart.com/blog/raw-milk-gets-a-raw-deal-%e2%80%93-part-2/
That Farm Hand must be teachable and also an instructor for all that visit.
Mark
Also, I'd rather have Dave there when the sting guys show up!
Scott is setting up a fictional situation to create an environment where he can promote his agenda of new safety standards, while at the same time trying to discredit those who feel that rights is more critical than kowtowing to the authorities via safety regs, AND those who won't fall in lockstep with the new regs.
If the FH's were the milk producer…which milk would you drink…..the one who 'knows it all" and won't be questioned….or the conscientious one with a bogus preoccupation with 'review'….sophomoric if you ask me.
One of the simplest way to make white right, is to make black bad….too bad we live a world colored by shades of gray. Feeble effort.
The notion that those who recognize the futility of the capitulation to the authorities via safety regs are all know it alls who won't be questioned, or have guilt complexes or other personality deficiencies is ridiculous. Just as it is to cast those who believe that raw milk acceptance by the authorities will only come through safety regs are all detail oriented, mellow, review freaks. Shallow attempt.
Villifying those who don't lineup behind the new regs is the next logical step. Casting those who won't join the "infatuated with review" crowd as 'dangerous'…or without the clarity or personality to produce safely, is also on the agenda. Divide and conquer.
Us and them.
Dangerous.
I'd reconsider my hiring practices! I agree with Mark, you've got to have a team and shoulder the responsibility for crafting that.
Scott is setting up a fictional situation to create an environment where he can promote his agenda of new safety standards, while at the same time trying to discredit those who feel that rights is more critical than kowtowing to the authorities via safety regs, AND those who won't fall in lockstep with the new regs.
If the FH's were the milk producer…which milk would you drink…..the one who 'knows it all" and won't be questioned….or the conscientious one with a bogus preoccupation with 'review'….sophomoric if you ask me.
One of the simplest way to make white right, is to make black bad….too bad we live a world colored by shades of gray. Feeble effort.
The notion that those who recognize the futility of the capitulation to the authorities via safety regs are all know it alls who won't be questioned, or have guilt complexes, conspiracy paranoia or other personality deficiencies is ridiculous. Just as it is to cast those who believe that raw milk acceptance by the authorities will only come through safety regs are all detail oriented, mellow, review freaks. Shallow attempt.
Villifying those who don't lineup behind the new regs is the next logical step. Casting those who won't join the "infatuated with review" crowd as 'dangerous'…or without the clarity or personality to produce safely, is also on the agenda. Divide and conquer.
Us and them.
Dangerous.
There is no question that consumer choice is an important value we ought to promote as the basis for raw milk availability. But to disparage any effort at improving food safety as "divisive" is shallow and counter-productive.
I would agree that Scott's parable is rather simplistic. But why attack it? What is wrong with it?
Perhaps the question is why some people are so hostile?
Who says that my concern with new standards equates to a "total disregard for food safety". This is the kind of statement that scares me…and is truly divisive. My view about regs designed to placate the authorities has no bearing on how I milk my cows, how I clean my equipment and teats….or how seriously I take looking into my customers eyes when I sell them a jug. I resent your implication. Your attitude (as stated in your opening sentence) IS the problem.
Organized regs and standards are kind of like organized religion…either you are in, or you are damned to hell. I have little faith in either.
What is wrong with this simple picture is that it is not reality….is a fake situation with a single goal in mind…and that is to create a line…with the good guys on one side…and the bad guys on the other. There has got to be a way to increase milk quality…across the board…without creating 'haves and have nots'..
I reject your attempt at discrediting me through the 'hostility' angle. I'm not angry at all….actually it was kind of funny seeing the lame attempt to promote the stereotypes that Scoot needs to have. Most raw milk farmers are far from stereotypical. Don't confuse my straight forwardness with anger…you would be doing both of us a disservice.
MF- I can say from personal experience that there are a few people who don't take safety seriously. Its true what Andy says — a vast majority of farmers are doing the best job they can, and doing a good job at it. But I do know of at least one provider of raw milk in Wisconsin who I would consider to be very high risk because he does not propertly clean his milk pipeline, and this was the same farm that was responsible for the outbreak that spurred the raw milk crackdown in 2009-2010. His customers have no way of knowing, because they are not experts in dairy sanitation and microbiology (or animal husbandry and farming for that matter).
This is why it would be immensely helpful to have an independent group of people who are knowledgable about these topics to certify farms providing raw milk.
I'm here to tell you that if WE don't create such a certifying body, THEY will — they being the corporate interests who are opposed to raw milk. And they will write the standards in such a way so as to exclude the small and diversified sustainable family farms.
I mean no disrespect towards you. But to expect every raw milk consumer to be an expert in dairy science and dairy farming is ridiculous. We cannot realistically expect the customer to be our certifier. We need to write standards that are as flexible and inclusive as possible, while ensuring the likelihood of an outbreak is minimized.
What WI needs is going to be different than what different regions need.
I am not opposed to having different standards or certifying bodies for different regions, based on that region's needs.
My concern is that if we do nothing, then we are setting ourselves for big problems. The food safety issues are not going away. Our best route to increase consumer access to raw milk is to take those concerns head-on and neutralize them as a weapon to be used against us.
You'd better have your P's & Q's in order when inspector Bill comes knocking on your milkhouse door, or no soup for you!
Mary won the best of show at the American Cheese Society in 1998 and wrote a HACCP plan for making farmstead raw milk cheese:
http://wisconsindairyartisan.org/pdf/HACCP.pdf
I'm curious, Lola. How do you handle it when the OV field rep shows up at your farm? Do you treat him/her to the same snide remarks you serve to people on this blog? Funny how you always show up to comment when you can snark at people, but you never have anything constructive to offer. I've got a suggestion — How about you shut it unless you have something useful to contribute.
Then, S510 passed the federal legislature, effectively implementing Codex in the U.S.
In S510 there is a provision allowing the creation of 3rd party certifiers. Neville McNaughton, a cheesemaker and cheesemaking consultant, suggested that the Weston Price Foundation be the 3rd party certifier for raw milk and raw milk products in a Dairy Business Innovation Centers newsletter late last year.
Conveniently, this is the same group thats writing the National Standards.
Is it inconceivable that some among us will be jockeying for positions with this 3rd party certifier, especially those knowledgeable in the book-side of dairy sanitation and milk microbiology, and who are enthusiastic proponents of the National Standards?
One will make more money and have better job security regulating raw milk farmers than being a raw milk farmer, Id wager. How many times have I heard, I used to be an organic farmer but now I work for a certifying agency? I heard that by several MOSA employees, one OCIA employee and one OV employee. Are those advocating the National Standards in it for the farmers, or for themselves?
(I dont sell milk to OV and I never have.)
My standards would rule out the use of a pipeline because of the rough treatment the butterfat gets being pumped through the sock filter.This is sort of a mild form of homogenization.If the farm has a silo,beware of the risks of silage that is fed when it has been exposed to the air for too long.Better yet if the farmer feeds silage look for another farmer. Of course the standards will be technical because we are trying to include a whole lot of methods that were developed with the production of milk intended for pasteurization in mind.If we want to include everyone ,the standards will be a compromise and it will take an expert to know what chemicals and in what concentrations must be used to keep the pipeline clean.I prefer my food to be produced without the risk of chemical contamination.You can't keep the pipeline clean without strong antibacterial chemicals.
Where are the experienced raw milk producers that have a long track record of pathogen free production and lots of happy consumers???, What about the producers that have created and used Food Safety Programs and know their strengths and weaknesses. What about the team of people that will work together rather than one person that will dictate standards.
Yes…it takes a team and "we" to create standards. Standards can not work if they are a dictate from one "know-it-all". That is something that would be…as they say…. "dead on arrival".
All this talk is hallow and a waste of good brain cells.
I am awaiting Tim Wightmans work with anticipation. I am sure it will be met with negativism just like all things national. But I look forward to the outside ideas and how they could perhaps make what I do better.
OPDC sees the greater good in the longer term. In reality world, we have an immune system battle and we have millions of Americans to feed. We must win the respect ( by bone crushing defeat or time and educational and economic erosion I do not know which or how much of which ) of the FDA and the dairy industry. Then we will feed America. Until then we are mostly a bunch of underground raw milk mooooowshiners.
I am with Bill Anderson on this issue. A mature thoughtful set of reasonable standards that are VOLENTARILY adopted by those that embrace them ( because they work well ) and because the consumers trust the "certification" will go far to reduce the celebrated raw milk confusion that the FDA and CAFO PMO BIG AG enjoys right now. They love our dis unity…our confusion. They rejoice in it!!!
Standards bring us together…they do not drive us apart. If they drive us apart….then the cream will rise and the rest will deal with Darwin…. both in economic and Marler forms.
Get some air guys and gals. Reality check.
Mark
NEWS RELEASE: Food Safety Workshop for Fruit and Vegetable Growers
MADISON Fresh fruit and vegetable growers are invited to attend one of the following Buy Local, Buy Wisconsin workshops to learn more about food safety. The Food Safety for Diversified Fruit and Vegetable Growers workshops will be held in April 2011 in Viroqua, Oconomowoc, and Green Bay.
Participants will learn the implications of the new Food and Drug Administrations (FDA) Food Safety Modernization Act for their farms. In addition, presenters will discuss GAP/GHP food safety inspections, tips for handling raw and processed products, and buyer specifications.
These workshops are made possible by the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) Buy Local, Buy Wisconsin program, which seeks to provide growers the resources needed to be successful in the marketplace and find new business opportunities.
Presenters include: Jill Ball, a DATCP Food Safety Scientist; Larry Hood, the Managing Director of Technical and Business Services, LLC; Steve Ingham, DATCPs Food Safety Division Administrator; and Tim Leege, DATCPs GAP/GHP Program Manager.
Workshop dates, times, and locations are:
? Monday, April 4, 2011, 1:00 5:00 p.m., WesternTechnicalCollege, Viroqua
? Wednesday, April 6, 2011, 12:00 4:00 p.m., Oconomowoc LakeClub, Oconomowoc
? Friday, April 15, 2011, 11:30 a.m. 3:30 p.m., NortheastWisconsinTechnicalCollege, Green Bay
Interested individuals can find a brochure or online registration at datcp.wisconsin.gov, under Business, Buy Local Buy Wisconsin. Cost is $20 per person to attend. For more information, contact Theresa Feiner at theresa.feiner@wisconsin.gov or 608-224-5112.
That is why national standards must address size appropriate issues. Common end points should be the same for all….how we get there can be worlds apart.
Mark
We are also moving toward legislation in 2012 for value-added products, and we can't get that without legislators' and other key participant support, such as Rocky Mountain Farmer's Union and Slow Food Colorado, American Grassfed Association, Transition Colorado, and others – not to mention consumers (email today from a consumer who looked at recent food safety net website with scary videos – : "This is pretty scary. Should immune-compromised people be wary of raw milk? Do producers on your website test their milk regularly") I felt compelled to answer her as honestly as I could….
Last year, an RMAC member dairy was blamed for an outbreak that sickened 30 people and put 2 kids in the hospital. The dairy in question was not following RMAC standards, but since we are an education organization and not a policing organization, we were unable to enforce our standards. The press on this was highly organized and targeted not the dairy, but raw milk in general.
So, one dairy compromised many….Legislators withdrew their support, and RMFU told us we better get our ducks in a row before they asked for our support. One dairy lost many shareholders in collateral damage. It became a public trust issue.
This set us up for an agenda we had not planned on – but we decided to bend and blend – is that wrong? Is it wrong to seek higher standards that our community trusts and respects?
Scott caused an uproar last year with his comments about "hobby dairies". WAPF has implied the little lady down the road with goat milk is safer than pasteurized milk, and has been harshly criticised. Truth in my experience? Those people don't cause illness. It was a commercial Grade A dairy that was selling raw milk "on the side"…
Honestly, we have a lot of "hobby dairies"; people who are just starting out and want pay for feed, or even a slight profit, but are very conscientious about milk safety.. We're trying to share info to both new and old dairies about the potential for contamination, psuedomonas, acid washes, iodine vs H2O2, and learn about best practices. More importantly, we are building a local food supply across Colorado.
This is a new industry, so let's hire the people that keep asking questions. Let's share information and keep teaching. Freedom of choice is still very much alive – but it's also about education, integrity and safety.
Gumpert's blog, especially his readers, have been very informative and I appreciate all your input!
Just for the record, I don't get paid for what I do – I never wanted to be a policeman, and I believe in freedom of choice. But I get emails and phone calls from new producers that are grateful for the education and process we provide, and I think we help people get up to speed quicker than they would alone.
I don't think we know what raw milk standards should be yet. But we ought to investigate; share and educate – 12 million people need to know what to look for!
Just my 2cents,
Blair
Yes, I departed Myanmar before the earthquake…Enjoying the discussion here, when I can get Internet access…it is spotty.
David
Bill, have you ever made lactic acid cheddar using Lactococcus diacetylactis and Streptococcus thermophilus?
http://wacheese.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=80:fresh-cheddar-curd-extended-shelf-life&catid=43:moderate-cook-temp&Itemid=66
A funny note: I got the above link from a goat cheese group discussing how to make faux Velveeta from raw milk.
Out of those 12 million people you refer to how many hold to the belief that exposure is their best option in order to achieve good health? I know that there are many out there that do, and that they view some of the proposed voluntary or enforced standards as counterproductive and an impediment to their attempt to achieve good health.
I think that most of us would agree (more or less) that this issue has little to do with food safety and more to do with controlling access to raw milk for fiscal reasons. That being said those who are hell-bent on abolishing the sale of raw milk will find a way to manipulate and make life difficult for raw milk consumers and producers alike, despite the implementation of self regulatory standards.
Establishing standards for education purposes is good providing they allow for flexibility in methodology. It would be a mistake however to assume that such a process would allay the powers that be and their attempt to eliminate raw milk sales.
Lola
With all the chemicals that have been regulated into the fruit and vegetable industry does the FDA and DATCP plan on providing HAZMAT suites and hazardous material pamphlets to producers and their employees, (and with respect to pick your own operations) consumers as well. In the interest of food safety I think that they should.
Ken Conrad
Your comments are excellent. What RMAC is doing is the good work needed for progress. I think what you will find is that….all is warm and fuzzy and freedom-bent with loose raw milk guidelines and loose voluntary educational standards….until someone gets sick. Then all hell breaks loose and freedom goes to hell, warm and fuzzy becomes freezing cold and unfriendly and the media starts to hate on raw milk . That is the nature of our culture and our litigation and blame oriented system.
The thrivers and survivors of the golden age of our new national raw milk renaissance will be those that adopt standards and have third party inspections and RAMP programs and other serious CYA programs. Insurance companies will simply demand it, your farm family will need it.
For the life of me…I simply do not understand what everyone fears about simple national standards and solid proven systems that work. That is smart….that is being a huge bunch of smart producers that are trusted. That is exactly what builds consumer confidence.
Mark
Or we can be like Dave.
I can be like Dave. Let's even say – 50% of the time.
But then – like Steve – the rest of the time.
What's telling to me, isn't that folks can be like Dave – we all – love to bitch. It's just some never get beyond the bitching and onto the hard work. So deny there's even any work to be done. Okee-dokee. Let me know how that works for ya.
As an entrepreneur, as someone that considers himself pretty darn happy in life, I cannot stay in this place everyone here seems to live in. I'm not sure where I'd find the time. But yes, I'm odd that way. I'm passionate about what I do. And the point continues to be, shape it up, no 'outbreaks', no 'distractions', the cleaner the circuit there is, the more voltage we will carry, the faster we'll get there.
Mark asked a question. Thank you for that.
Answer for all time: Not all I can. I can do more.
I have had a half dozen inspections of an informal nature from people that know more about all this than I do. When they come to my farm, I tell them, I want an inspection. Look for problems. Look hard. Tell me what you find. Then I follow up with them – what I heard, what I do about it.
I've gotten excellent suggestions, and my operation is the better for them.
The last thing I – or my ego – or anyone's ego – needs – is – gosh, this is all just so flippin perfect. Don't change a thing you perfect little creation you.
I, like everyone else, is too close to their operation to be as objective as we should be. For whatever massive ego it's necessary to think I have, recognizing I have have one myself and insisting on situations that counteract that, well, what does that mean.
I am the chief safety officer at this farm. Something happens, there is no, you didn't do something, no, it's on me. It is MY milkhouse, you keep MY milkhouse clean and uncluttered. You do not come into my milkhouse with manure.
The goal is to come as close to running the milk handling like a dairy plant. That is the understood entity by food safety people. A 'milk house' is quite another standard. No, can't get all the way to a dairy plant, but as time goes on, pretty damn close. Separation of harvest and storage/processing/dispensing
I test usually bi-weekly. At this time, due to the less than stellar (muddy) conditions, I'm testing weekly. If I have an elevated level I would test daily possibly. Concerns? Test more often.
My quality testing at this time consists of:
SPC 1:100 dilution
Coliform 1:10 dilution
alternating PI or LPC
SCC/Butterfat/protein/other solids
MUN
Quarterly I DHIA test; I will do a Milk ELISA Johnes test then as well. Anything suspect, sorry honey, but goodbye. Now.
My SPC's have been usually between 600-1000, high of 3000. Under 5000 is considered to be "high quality milk"
MUN I check, being 100% grassfed, for energy, potential health issues if I don't keep that in a good place (16-20).
We review safety monthly. As in, basic review of safety policy; expectations; any general trends/concerns. Especially the "what are my biggest concerns about contamination".
We grade filters every day. My relief milkers are currently kicking my wife & I's asses, they are averaging A- consistently (an A is "was this filter even used?), me & the wife, well, B. Slackers. I grade hard. A C grade gets a review and a talking to. Two in a row is Scott starting to express concern.
We have an excellent prep routine. I am intrigued by some that don't use teat dips or wash at all; that's not our reality at present. Our excellent udder health shows what we're doing is working, as does our numbers & filters. We run at 160-220,000 SCC usually.
We have a Mas-Detek conductivity mastitis detector used every day, and on every cow at least twice a week. We milk once a day, pay closer attention.
I have now installed a remote datalogging system that monitors my bulk tank temp, my hot water heater temp, my wash water temp, and PH when we get that probe figured out. Checks on proper cleaning & storage.
My vet 'inspects' me on my request every 6 months.
My dairy repair/supply guy – I now have an excellent one, vs. the morons most of them are – very dangerous that – he's out quarterly, and has taught me a lot about what I can do here to inspect my system. (you best know all you can about your pipeline and associated system, these dairy support people ALL believe your milk will be Pasteurized and act like it)
Our herd health is excellent. Has been for years. When there has been any issues, they aren't unexplained issues, and yes, they come down to management failures, not random acts of God, or "that's going around" bullshit. If there is illness, it is my fault, work back from there.
Cleanliness? Very good. Sanitation upgrades, more in the works. I want anyone to show up any day – and see exactly the same thing. A clean, well organized, PROFESSIONAL looking operation from top to bottom.
We have not ever had 'off tastes' in our milk.
Our shelf life is consistently greater than 14 days.
Our milk ROCKS, and anyone that can see, taste, touch or smell will know the quality.
Written safety plan? In the works. Frustrating, but will be soon that I put a wrap on that.
It's very important to me. In my head, not good enough.
Eager to learn more – including from the 'opposition' – perhaps especially from those with opinions other than mine. I have never found it useful as an entrepreneur or to get anywhere or solve any problem to listen to people that a) believe exactly as I do, or b) tell me what I want to hear.
Scott
Excellent work!!!
Do not labor over the written food safety plan part of this. You have already done the hard part by identifying the things you want to measure. Now just write it all down in a simple and progressive fashion. Write it as if it was your daily check list to verify your planned effort. Becuase that is exactly what you have….a planned effort.
I would add things like a simple environmental check off to assure that water is clean, mud is controlled, fences are working, cows are dry, feed is good and not wet or contaminated, the milk barn is cleaned ( however you want that to be done ). When you are done you will have your food safety plan. It is your plan….based on your assessment of your challenges and your conditions.
Your plan will have easily met the national standards of low bacteria counts and zero pathogens.
Congrats!! Good Job Scott. This is a matter of simply putting down on paper a checklist showing your standards and your efforts. The beauty of a plan is that it assures consistency. You may do this one day…but does it get done every day.
Your plan needs to be a living soft copy and as you learn more…simplify it. Make it simplier, not harder. Find out what really matters and let the rest become part of GOOD Management Practices. The most essential elements become either SSOP's or CCPs.
You have just authored your own Food Safety Plan….most of all, it is yours and it is your plan for consistent success and quality. You will need it because you live it. It will never collect dust on a shelf.
Mark
I don't understand what this means:
"As an entrepreneur, as someone that considers himself pretty darn happy in life, I cannot stay in this place everyone here seems to live in."
Your mind gets worn into that groove. It's easy. Really it is. Nothing is my fault, the whole world in a 360 degree is pickin on poor little me. Or, you start from a position of "it's all on me", and work backwards. Nope, it isn't all your fault, but your mind in that place is going to find you can solve a lot more problems than those that have a persecution complex.
That was me – up until about 26. Whatever it was – maybe flunking college – twice – it was interrupting my party schedule, and of course flunking out was not my fault, it was stupid professors, stupid boring classes, roommates, you name it, anything and everything but me.
At the point I decided to change how I thought – HOW I thought – and WHAT I put my mind to thinking about, that I could do, the world became my oyster.
Those that will pick Dave – okay – there you go – good for you – I bet the earmarks of that are all over your lives. Nothing is your fault. It's the black helicopters, it's FDA, it's the neighbor, it's the schools it's everything but what it really is.
It's easy to be that person. It involves doing – doing – doing – nothing. No self examination. No concern about others. Just you and surrounding yourself with people that have the same damn pity party going on. Get in a circle and pat each other's back.
OR, you look at things from the perspective of: What can I do about it. If the answer is nothing, move on. If you consistently find nothing you can do, then you aint thinkin' right. Lack of creativity, lack of practice, lack of interest, lack of good example, a non-supportive group, whatever, you aint thinkin' right. Look at your own words, over time: how many ideas are there in them, and how much criticism of others are there? Is there a balance – or is it a whole lot of criticism.
I know what works for me. Doing. Taking responsibility. Spending my time in places and around people that are also doing. That have higher standards than I do, in order that I raise myself up, rather than be intimidated; or – Dave would submerse himself in those less than him in order to make himself feel better about what little he is.
Mark has it exactly right. Michael Schmidt, David, RCALF, Rural Vermont – you guys all rock. Taking us places, not just tearing others with ideas down. Not making excuses for themselves.
This will take extraordinary people for an extraordinary job. Simply bashing and saying how out of your control everything is is not a path to solutions. Change your mind.
Above is a topic I think we can all agree on–our food supply in the US. The video is 18 minutes long. I highly recommend reading Robyn OBriens book titled Unhealthy Truth.
Excellent talk, unfortunately she has merely scratched the surface.
Due to the pervasive nature of GMOs an organic label is no guarantee of its absence. The regulatory framework in place endorses GMO use and has given companies such as Monsanto and Dow AgroSciences a license to pollute.
The ability of farmers to produce a truly organic product and to maintain an independent sustainable system of agriculture is being threatened by the surreptitious introduction of GMOs into the environment.
http://www.mindfully.org/GE/Strohman-Safe-Food.htm
Scott
As I see it both employees aught to be fired and a new one hired.
Ken Conrad
Then I learned that people with egg allergies usually can eat eggs produced without soy or corn. GMOs have infested even organic feed through wind pollination. Unfortunately, nearly all animal feed, even organic, contains about 90% corn, 9% soy, and 1% minerals and other missing elements such as lysine, etc. Hog, cattle, chicken, horse, goat… doesn't matter what species, most feed contains just two grains: Corn and soy. This is why grass/hay-fed food and milk are so important…. they avoid grains altogether. That's when I switched to non-grain-based food production.
Because of these revelations through the years, I believe very strongly in raising my own food, buying as little as possible and selling the excess production; many of us here have the same strong beliefs. That's why we're all so very passionate about raw milk. We are all convinced that our raw milk is miles away healthier than the pasteurized milk in stores, even the organic stuff.
I venture to say that many, if not most of us are not producing raw milk for the money… we're producing it because we strongly believe it's the very best milk available.