A few weeks ago, with lots of fanfare, the head of Wisconsin’s Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) announced a “working group” on raw milk, “to decide whether raw milk sales should be allowed in Wisconsin, and if so, under what conditions.”
It sounded like peace was nearly at hand. Farmers who had been organizing themselves and encouraging consumers to protest with their legislators as well as with DATCP, over the agency’s assault on people like Max Kane and Scott Trautman, let up, assuming they were about to enter a quiet period before the working group made its recommendations.
But like a nation at war that announces a peace initiative, and then seeks to inflict as many casualties on its adversaries as possible to maximize its negotiating position later, DATCP has intensified its war on Wisconsin raw milk producers.
As one example, it has filed a “Summary Special Order” against Dan Siegmann, one of the leaders of the effort to change Wisconsin’s dairy laws. The order describes the investigation of his dairy, and concludes that Siegmann sold raw milk unlawfully, and must discontinue the sales.
In an email to supporters of the Wisconsin raw milk protest, Dan Siegmann said a few days ago: “They have been aware of the possibility of raw milk being available from our farm because we worked with them many years ago to provide it according to their terms. The terms since then have been revoked and the state law stands as written back in 1957 and 1958. We received a summary special order from Steven C. Ingham, the administrator of the division of food safety at DATCP. We have been officially notified and ordered to cease all raw milk distribution. If they discover any distribution of raw milk
from our farm, they have threatened to revoke the retail food establishment license we have for Back to the Best Country Store. If this happened it would be shut down.”
DATCP has also filed requests for detailed information with three other farmers to determine whether or not they have been selling raw milk. These are often prelude to the summary special order Dan Siegmann received.
DATCP’s spokesperson, Donna Gilson, adamantly denies there is any connection between the announcement of the working group three weeks ago and the seeming step-up in enforcement activities against raw dairies. “We don’t have the authority to declare a moratorium. If people think that’s what the working group is about, they’re mistaken.”
Certainly a number of Wisconsin advocates of raw milk have made that assumption. They had cautioned protesters to remain quiet, mainly to allow for legislation that would legalize some on-farm sales to work through legislative hearings, which haven’t yet been held.
Now, a number are advocating a reversal. Dan Siegmann, for instance, in his email, is encouraging supporters to phone DATCP officials like Ingham as well as their legislators to protest the state’s crackdown.
Others are in the process of trying to determine the best ways to challenge DATCP. the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund is in the midst of its own determination of how to handle the additional cases being cranked out by DATCP.
One thing is clear: in such an intensive battle with a determined enemy like DATCP,:you can’t ever let up the pressure. Any letup is interpreted as weakness, a lack of resolve. DATCP only understands two considerations: pressure and fear of more pressure.
***
Speaking of regulators in relentless pursuit of raw dairy producers, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration continues to apply the heat to Mark McAfee of Organic Pastures Dairy Co. As part of its settlement of a civil suit against the dairy, it wants not only to conduct regular inspections of the dairy, but it wants to charge Organic Pastures for the privilege. All this according to a detailed report in Food Safety News that is well worth reading. Thanks to Don Neeper for the original link.
I think that the new information that is opened up to me, through David or through the commenters, is one reason why I like this forum as much as I do. I even value and appreciate the alternative (relative to the mainstream here on this site) views posted by lykke, cp, and others. I think that their statements many times bring out much more information than would otherwise had been discussed if we all just said amen to David’s blogs.
I think it was someone here that led me to another site called Meet The Farmer TV. It is a show that is based out of Virginia which has made their segments available online for free. I really like watching their interviews with small farmers from many different backgrounds. Not all of it do I necessarily agree with – for example they showcased a "farmer" who was making wiskey and as a side note they showed how the mash produced was given to another local farm to feed their dairy cows… Hmmm, OK. Most of their segments are very informative and full of useful information however.
From that website is a very good discussion about food safety by a man named Steve Warshawer. He is involved as a Food Safety Coordinator in the National Good Food Network. Here is a link to his comments in video form:
http://meetthefarmer.tv/shows/54
Maybe I am the last person on this blog to discover some of these sources of information, but I thought that I would share it nonetheless.
Regarding this latest blog, I think that the more the governmental agencies try to squash the small farmer, the more they are going to unintentionally create a backlash from the average consumer. The more attention they give to us, albeit negative and harmful attention, the more people find out about this issue. I think if people really do their research the right choices are fairly obvious – especially given the fact that most of the nation already doesn’t trust what the government tells us out of hand, at least not as much as we once did.
If one does not see the BIG PICTURE we will not understand the smaller battle in our fight for our UN-A-LIEN-ABLE right to CHOOSE raw dairy.
One very important point revealed in the video is the truely UNACCOUNTABILITY of the corporations for their crimes. Yes the corporation pay staggering amounts of money in fines for their law breaking but who pays in the end really? It is we the consumer as we purchase their widgets the fines and their legal fees are just a part of doing bisiness but the price tag leaves out the tay payers cost of the justice system prosecution.
The politians will not change the system for the good. BUT we can vote with our feet and with our dollars to hopefully bring about a peaceful positive change by starving the BEAST as a recent wise commenter stated.
We followed his advise last week we capped off the truth ministry sewer pipe leading into our home. The Cable TV has been cancled and we dont even miss it. JOIN US?
http://thebovine.wordpress.com/2010/02/02/b-c-judge-reserves-decision-on-raw-milk-case/#more-14273
Speaking of mindsets, it seems that Steven C. Ingham, who sent the letter to Dan Siegmann, appears to be from the sterilize the world camp of deth and disease. He built an academic career on studying pathogens, using a biohazard research lab at the University of Wisconsin to test food.
Thank goodness for the Internet. I was able to enjoy the documentary the Corporation when it was shown in theaters. I wondered at the time how people outside big cities, like Chicago, where documentaries only tend to be shown, could access resources like this. For this at least, the times have really changed.
We dont have the authority to declare a moratorium. If people think thats what the working group is about, theyre mistaken.
but they DO have the authority. it’s called agency discretion. an agency has the discretion to decide which laws it feels are most worthy of enforcement, and which laws are not worthy.
in this case, datcp has exercised its discretion to issue the cease and desist order and to issue the several "requests for information" which, by the way, violate the fifth amendment against self-incrimination. instead of these actions, datcp could have inspected the pasteurized guys for cleanliness, contamination, filth, etc. for compliance with the pasteurized milk ordinance etc. but no, they chose to further harass raw milk producers. typical of these fda pawns.
yes, things are heating up in wisconsin. pictures at 11.
So….we must all become quite comfortable with stress and heat and make some serious enroads to change the laws and stand against the machine.
We all forget….Mike Schmidt stood against the machine for 20 hard (very hard ) years before he prevailed.
The price of admission to the raw milk freedom table is more for those areas that let Pastuerized Milk take 100% charge. In those places that stood hard against the killing machine the course is far shorter and easier.
Thank you Alta Dena and Steuves (in CA ) for fighting for the years before my time. It was because of your efforts that CA stands ahead in the fight for freedom in the raw milk effort.
The level of corruption when it comes to milk is unimaginable. I have said this before and I will say it again. Lesson #1… Read "the Art of War" before endeavoring to provide raw milk to people. Deception, media policy alliances with big ag and regulators and the FDA and being ambushed when least expected….those are the things that await us all. Expect it…prepare for it.
I know… just as Mike Schmidt knows.
Change the laws…that is the only way forward. People….go see your legislature and change the laws. Jam their offices and tell your stories. Show them the science!!!
By the way….I think Bill likes me….he did a great piece on his food safety network about OPDC. It was fair and well written.
Lesson #1…Decemption is the Art of War. Do not ever get comfy….stay extremely close to your consumers and change the stupid laws. If you ever think Bill likes you….you have been decieved.
I just got my micro cam video camera that Mike spoke of…it works great. No bigger than a pack of of gum.
It should really make everyone behave quite nicely. If not… then what great news it will make.
Mark
http://www.uwex.edu/news/2009/10/drinking-raw-milk-a-source-of-illness-in-state-families
David
http://www.alternet.org/food/145503/why_has_the_fda_allowed_a_drug_marked_%27not_safe_for_use_in_humans%27_to_be_fed_to_livestock_right_before_slaughter
I wonder how the good folks at the Dead Milk Society and the GMO Franken Seed Foundation justify adding this to Americas chemical diner table. Do they that rule over us hate us or are they just protecting us from our foolish desires for real food. Something is very very WRONG!!!
Since it is specifically warned against for folks with cardiovascular disease, and since I have had three heart attacks, it should be a slam dunk for him to make me rich.
Oh…I forgot…that would mean he would have to sue those folks who he relies on for "evidence" against raw milk and other BAAAAAD foods.
Oh well ****sigh****
And those statistics show many more illness causing issues, yet the govt ignore that. Why?
Money.
Why else would the government allow the sale of botulism (Botox, anyone?), an EXTREMELY dangerous poison, so dangerous that the Dept of Homeland Security considers it a threat for terrorists to possibly use, for us to use to make our lips puffy and sexy, for God’s sake? My girlfriend says I am sexy without its (Botox’s) help, thank goodness…else I might be forced to used government approved injectable poison.
But I can’t drink a glass of milk as God designed it.
Are we waking up yet?
Like many, I believe it is a choice what you eat. The govt has no business dictating or impeding what I or anyone else chooses to consume.
The govt does not require labeling the toxins in the processes foods, Nor does it require the companies to do so. It is not disclosed to the consumer what consuming/injecting, etc these toxins may do to your body/environment short term and long term. By not warning/disclosing these hazards the govt entities show whose bed they are sleeping and that their true goal is not looking out for the consumer.
On the radio the other day (NPR I think) they were talking about the increase in Gynecomastia (man-boobs). If the side effects of some of the most common drugs handed out like candy over the last, @ 20 or so yrs, were looked at and disclosed to the patients, they may have a reason for the vast increase in man-boobs. Anti-ulcer/acid-reflux drugs are a biggy. How many are consuming these drugs? Many are OTC now….
Pushed by big pharm and the medical community, instead of finding the cause of GI issues and changing that cause, they hand out pills to cover the illness. If they stop taking the pills, will their boobs return to normal? Wonder if that has been studied?
For a woman to have a breast reduction, they have to have a medical reason for the insurance companies to approve it, otherwise it is considered cosmetic, will it be considered cosmetic for the males?
"DATCP’s action reminds me of how they handled so-called "stray voltage."
"Instead of addressing the problem, they created an ad hoc committee to study
it. Farmers thought they might get something accomplished and initially
attended meetings. Now no one attends because the committee simply redefined
the problem out of existence without doing anything. Naturally, the
committee still meets and sucks up resources. No one pays any attention to
it, but the state can cite it as having taken action.
"Formation of a committee lets everyone off the hook.
"Politicians don’t have to act because the problem is being studied. The
committee is stacked so nothing will change, although they allow some
representation of opposing views. Participation by university "experts"
provides the imprimatur of scientific objectivity.
"Proponents who press their case will eventually become angry (allowing
officials to portray them as irrational) or discouraged. The committee will
always define its mission as protecting public safety and portray opponents
of current policy as somehow being against public safety, no matter what
information is presented to the contrary. The media play sporadic attention
but go away if the subject becomes more complex than a curious conflict
between two opposing views.
"I hope I’m wrong, but I wouldn’t bet on it. When a government agency creates
a committee, it’s a good sign nothing will be done."
"Instead of addressing the problem, they created an ad hoc committee to study it."
I wouldn’t rule out that the committee might do some good. But, anyone in the system would admit the government doesn’t like making hard decisions on controversial issues.
HMMM The dairy "industry" takes offense at the exposure of their vile factory farm practices by a "biased person" with a [biased?] camera. Perhaps we need to create an ad hoc committee to study the biased films and submit a report and conduct high level hearings and tell the American public their dead germ ladened white sterile factory nectare from sick cows is the only milk that is safe for their children and their elderly parents.
The era of "industry" lies is coming to an end and there are many "outbreaks" of TRUTH in America today on many very important subjects. The fog of deception is being blown away.
PS Globalwarmers in my area take note get out your snow shovels 24 inches of snow expected! UGH I have already shoveled snow 4 times this winter. NOT NORMAL
Global warming is the old term. They call it climate change now because people started noticing the data wasn’t fitting their theories, as you point out.
Thats an odd statement given Americas countless and growing rules governing legal behaviors.
Really the issue is how government defines controversial. A controversial issue to government is one in which effective opposition might be raised against their decisions. Weak opposition, right or wrong, means no controversy. No powerful interests in opposition? Easy!
Hard decisions therefore are those that come against powerful interests. Alas, in America, the Constitution is no longer a powerful interest. Powerful now generally means rich, and effective generally means expensive, so controversy is (generally) reserved for corporate interests. In the absence of a powerful counter-force, government dances merrily along, blithely and continuously trampling over individual rights.
For government to insist that responsibility be taken for externalities such as stray voltage is unlikely. Instead responses tend to take the form of generalized I feel your pain speechmaking and the above-mentioned meandering committees. While courts may be designed as the great leveler, and are indeed citizens last gasp of hope, courtrooms are also, like legislators and agencies, far more accessible to moneyed interests than average citizens.
Notable exceptions prove the rule, including one court decision involving stray voltage that amazingly rested on common law. See page three of this document:
http://www.boardmanlawfirm.com/muni_newsletter/muniAug03.pdf