bigstockphoto_Donotenter_326540.jpgI hesitated momentarily in reporting the suspicions last week of Weston A. Price Foundation attorney Pete Kennedy that the Food and Drug Administration and state regulators monitor the realmilk.org site for the names of dairies selling raw milk. I didn’t want to give away inappropriate information.

Then I realized that even if Pete wasn’t entirely correct, these regulators almost certainly don’t need me to tell them about the site. Better they should know that we know that they know…you get my drift.

 

A few people picked up on the mention of the realmilk.org situation, and suggested that farmers were best off not being listed on the site. “What farmer in their right mind would post themselves as a source of raw milk online?” asked elderberryjam. “My best friend is sheepish about even admitting to me that she buys raw milk, and never gives me a name of the seller. This is my best friend, for godsakes.”

 

The idea of raw milk providers moving underground makes a lot of sense, on one level, at least. If the cops are persecuting you, well, then, you get out of their way. Operate incognito.

 

Unfortunately, the image that pops into my mind is of “the onion cellar” at the chateau in France where my aunt, Inge Joseph, hid out as a teen to escape the Holocaust. As a response to roundups of Jews, the 30 or so teenagers at the chateau built a hidden entryway—a sliding door made to look like a wall of bookshelves–into the chateau’s attic. Whenever French gendarmes approached, someone rang the kitchen bell, and the children scampered into the attic until trouble passed. It worked.

 

Why not do the same thing on farms here—hide the milk and butter, maybe even the cows and farmers as well, until the inspectors move on?

 

But that begs the question: once you go underground, aren’t you not only giving up on the system, but also succumbing to fear and, in a sense, admitting that you are doing something illegal?

 

As a journalist, I seek out transparency, and become suspicious when it’s missing. Conduct your business openly, and legally. If the authorities have a problem with that, challenge them to back off from their assorted forms of harassment. Of course, it’s easy for me to encourage dairy farmers to place themselves out there, and subject themselves to both the stresses and high costs of confronting the ag police.

 

The degree to which raw milk producers should resist is so heavily loaded, it’s creating dissension in California among the most ardent proponents. Aajonus Vonderplatz, the raw foods proponent who has been advocating on behalf of raw milk since the 1970s, argues that Mark McAfee of Organic Pastures Dairy Co. may not be tough enough. In trying to negotiate with the authorities, he says in an email to supporters, Mark “may be burying himself…Health department employees are not his friends and want him to lose his business.”

 

In a lengthy commentary following my previous posting, Mark holds out hope that the regulators will finally see reason, but seems prepared to move beyond discussions, saying “an immediate injunction will be requested to stop AB 1735 in its tracks prior to January 1, 2008.”

 

The choices are daunting. Run and hide? Or stand up and challenge the authorities every step of the way? I’m inclined toward the latter, partly on principal, but partly because the stakes are so very high. If buying milk becomes like buying marijuana, it’s going to be tough for many people to experience raw milk’s benefits.

***

Speaking of farmers willing to resist, Barbara Smith, the New York dairy farmer distributing raw milk via a limited liability company, decided not to partake in an Oct. 23 hearing by the N.Y. Department of Agriculture and Markets on whether 260 pounds of confiscated yogurt and buttermilk should be disposed. She and her lawyer determined it was less costly to sacrifice the product than participate in a lengthy hearing. She continues to make product available to her shareholders. This situation is far from resolved.