MO Homestead & Raw Milk battle

I agree completely I hate the food laws to since they have gone way past common sense and actually keeping people safe into absurdity!

You know honestly I think that the rules that you can't sell to individuals from your inspected dairy has to be in the top 10 of the craziest food laws! I can guarantee that one came from the dairy industry because you could make a whole lot more selling it wholesale than bulk.

Yes, it is crazy that after it has the governmental stamp of approval that it cannot be sold to individuals, but if you just milk in your backyard, you can. Just illustrates all the more that it is NOT about public safety.
But I have to say that there are many inspected dairys I have visited where I would NOT drink the milk if you paid me. If people could see some of the places where supermarket milk comes from, they would never buy it again.
Just like with anything else, you can get by with an awful lot of filth if you know how to get around the set regulations.
So it all comes down to the individual farmers morals and standards. A responsible farmer will produce a high quality milk.
I have eaten with many dairy farmers and many of them serve milk from their bulk tank at the table. I like to see that. We do the same here.

__________________
Emily Dixon
Ozark Jewels
Nubians & Lamanchas
www.ozarkjewels.net

"Remember, no man is a failure, who has friends" -Clarence

Forerunner, what is this freedom thing you speak off? I've heard rumors of it existing once upon a time.

Everyone knows raw milk is just a gateway dairy product...soon your hooked on real sweetcream butter, unpasteurized cheese...hanging out with renegade consumers on the wrong side of the tracks. Sounds like everyone should switch to sheeps milk ..there seems to be a lot of sheep around here.

Good grief, I think I am going to call my connection right now so I can score a dime bag (showing my age here) of milk for this weekend.

__________________
www.salmonslayer-simplelife.blogspot.com

I'm not an expert, but I have always understood "entrapment" as when a person is actively prompted by the authorities (or their representative) to break the law rather than simply providing an opportunity for it to happen.

For instance, in this case it appears the secret agents ASKED the girls if they had any extra milk for sale. The girls may not have had any intention of selling milk to the general public until they were prompted to do so.

The secret agents should have asked the girls what they were doing and patiently waited to be solicited.

There is a big difference in the two scenarios.

I think the intent of anti-entrapment laws is because there is enough crime for the police to go after without drumming up business on generally law-abiding citizens.

Edited to include link to definition:

http://www.lectlaw.com/def/e024.htm

salmonslayer: A friend used to raise Kathadin sheep. One summer we worked a deal I'd raise four lambs in my fenced in yard and when they sold in the fall we split whatever they sold for. I suspect I heard every sheep/shepherd joke ever created that summer.

My favorite: Two shepherds are talking about driving the flock in for the annual shearing the next day. One commented on how he is so looking forward to it. Asked if it was because of the better food, he said no. Asked if it because he would be able to sleep in a warm, comfortable bed, he said no. Asked if it was because he would see a woman for the first time in six months, he said no. Asked then why? Reply: "Tomorrow I get to see them all naked."

I rather doubt an entrapment defense would work. What they were doing was apparently illegal to start with (selling out of a parking lot). If the milk was prepaid they might have the argument it wasn't a sale (that happened back at the farm when payment was received). All they were doing was delivering it. I wonder what would have happened if they had told the agent no, they would have to preorder.

And I can see the girls predictament. At least one customer or two were no-shows. They likely waited past the allotted time for pick up. Rather than bringing it back home they took the opportunity to sell it.

Wonder what the situation would have been if they hadn't been in a 'parking lot' per se. Perhaps one of their buyers let them use their driveway. Before I-40 was put in Highway 70 was the major east/west road through TN. Between Waverly and McEwen there is an old 'rest area', a place to pull over with a couple of picnic tables under the shade trees. Each year a produce reseller sets up there. Would it be considered a parking lot?

I suspect someone complained and the health department had to then take action. We have a local zoning inspector. I'm told they don't go out looking for violations. If one is reported, then they act.

For about a year I had a bent & dent grocery outlet. Inspector came twice a year. He candidly said he was going to find something wrong (usually dust on merchandise or a can which was dented a bit too much). Otherwise it would look to his supervisor like he wasn't doing a thorough job. I suspect health inspectors are also under some performance review pressure.

I have a nephew who is a county deputy sheriff in Florida. I asked if he had a quota to meet. He said no, but the number, type and results of traffic stops was part of his annual performance review.

On drug dealers, the local sheriff spoke before a Crime Stopper's group. He said the primary way they find out who is dealing is through other dealers. They can call them into Crime Stoppers to eliminate the competition. When one is caught, they typically plea deal in return for naming other dealers.

Entrapment?
None of us know what led up to this.
Some folks would like to think that the Health Department stalked them and entraped those girls.
Heck, they were adults, not children. How would the Health Department know they were selling milk in the parking lot? My guess is that they got a call from someone. This wasn't a one time situation, the guys from the Health Department bought milk at least twice. Who knows how long this was going on? Only the family does and they aren't admiting to anything.

Around here, the Health Department issues the septic tank and drain field permits. They look at the soil type, drainage, number of bedrooms, etc. They decide the minimum sizes that my system can be and how far from my water well it must be. There are safety standards.If you were my neighbor, would you support me in building my septic tank near my water well, because I hate to be told what to do?

Should we avoid regulation until my septic contaminates your well? Should we tolerate parking lot milk vendors, until someone gets sick or dies? Should we self-regulate, those that get sick from parking lot milk simply stop buying from them and when enough people get sick they'll go out of business? I think we had that system once. It didn't work so swell.

Seems those that object to health standards are against all sorts of government regulation. These standards and health laws are doing such a good job in protecting our health and providing safe food that we can't imagine what things were like without them. Pointing out the rare situation where those systems fail doesn't change the fact that we have one of the safest food systems in the world.

No one likes regulation. No one likes to be told what to do. But it is simple minded to think we'd be better off in a totally unregulated society. Spend some time in unregulated Haiti or Mexico or Jamaca.

So I think we understand that in order to exist as a society, we must have laws and regulations.
Most states don't allow the sale of raw milk. To bash the Health Department in a state that allows the sale of raw milk is foolish. It might be cheaper to just outlaw the raw milk sales all together. By making their enforcement of the current law a point of critisim, how does that help the homesteading movement?

You have made a pretty big claim several times. You say you know that the govt were the people who didn't show up to claim some pre-ordered milk.

I wonder how you 'know' this to be a fact?

Makes the rest of your arguments less appealing.

We all start out with some beliefs; you seem to think you know something about this that no one has ever said, nor is there any proof of?

A weak argument like yours is often followed with 'prove me wrong', which we all know is just silly - one can't prove a negative. You start with a guess, and ask others to bring proof to the table.

I think you hurt your side of the argument with these tactics.

Just a simple observation, don't mean anything more.

This is one of those 'two sides of the coin' issues for me. I believe in freedoms, but safety is a good thing too. In my state, seat belts in a car are required, but helmets on a motorcycle are optional. That seems all backwards.... Kids under 16 can drive an ATV, but it is illegal for those same kids to drive a UTV with a roll cage. Kinda backwards on some of these 'safety' deals. Comes down to the squeaky wheel. The saftey laws don't always make the most sense, but are a comprimise of accomidating people who squeak the most.

--->Paul

"So I think we understand that in order to exist as a society, we must have laws and regulations.
Most states don't allow the sale of raw milk. To bash the Health Department in a state that allows the sale of raw milk is foolish. It might be cheaper to just outlaw the raw milk sales all together. By making their enforcement of the current law a point of critisim, how does that help the homesteading movement? "

Excellent point. Are they endangering the sale of raw milk statewide?

I disagree with the entrapment. You have to wonder if the only 2 times the girls sold milk like that were to the health inspectors or if that was just common practice if somebody didn't show up. If I was shopping at my local health foods store and saw somebody selling something in the parking lot I would wander over to see what they are selling. If they had milk I might even ask them if I could buy some. I think that would be a fairly frequent occurance in a public parking lot.

So since I find it impossible to believe that those inspectors were the only 2 people ever to have asked if they have milk to sell then here's my question: if they knew it was wrong to sell it that way why did they not have a set response? Something like we aren't allowed to sell it unless you order it from the farm, here's a card with our information and how to order it. We will be back here next week with another delivery. The fact that that was not their response leads me to believe they have been selling a few gallons extra every week to people who come up and ask about it.

i don't know anything from personal experience, but it is the scenario which makes the most sense to me, rambler. proving me wrong would seem to be the thing to do if you feel my argument is weak. do you think it is outside the realm of possibility for the health department, knowing the bechards were delivering raw milk in the parking lot, to set up a crafty sting? the OP has already stated her experience in trying to conduct business legally (her soap) and has commented on the harassment that followed. it is obvious that the health department is doing all they can to dissuade the sale of raw milk products, no matter what the laws are.

one principle that exists in this country is that you have the freedom to do what you want unless otherwise prohibited. you don't need to ask permission first. delivering the milk in the parking lot appears to be legal. it should not have been something to spawn harassment from the health department. if the law seems weak or vague, the health department and/or opponents of raw milk should try to change the law. if the current law was established in 1972, we should realize that times have changed. computers and the internet have shrunken the world and expanded business opportunities. you will find lots of examples of antiquated laws being tested because of new technology. i don't think the spirit of the law was broken. in the past, it would not have been practical to arrange sales allowing delivery to happen elsewhere in such a fashion or on a larger scale. i think it was obvious that the intent was not to openly sell raw milk to the public or else the girls would have had a truckload of milk to sell openly. that is what makes it obvious to me that they were setup via bogus orders and solicitors. no, they should not have sold the milk and that is the failing of the bechard farm. the girls should have been trained better. it seems obvious to me that they would not have done so if not engaged in such a manner by the undercover agents.

my opinion on raw milk in general and safety has been stated in the past. it is ridiculous to me that you can sell it on the farm or deliver it but you cannot sell it openly in public. the intent, to me, seems to be to remove any promotion of raw milk because if it was really not safe to consume, it would be totally illegal to sell it. i don't think there is any difference where you sell it, as long as you handle it properly. if not handled properly, it can be just as bad on the farm as it can in public. the intent is to keep it out of the public's eye. also, if the opponents of raw milk had such support in the past, they would have been able to make it totally illegal...but they didn't and it is still legal. this isn't about public safety, it is about protecting the slim profit margins of large dairies by removing competition. it doesn't take much competition to eat into a small profit margin.

if i eat raw chicken i can die. it is my choice to cook it. if i drink raw milk, i take the chances and no one else is responsible for my safety but me. not much different than smoking or sky diving...or driving for that matter.

__________________
this message has probably been edited to correct typos, spelling errors and to improve grammar...

"All that is gold does not glitter..."

I think your argument is weak. You are supposing......

Folks in the USA have kinda been coddled for 50 years or so. Plastic food in plastic containers,a ll anti-septic warm in the microwave for a few seconds.

Now there is a back to raw movement, and most foljs frankly don't understand the old health worries & safeguards.

Probably not a good idea to have them dicve in heck-bent on going all raw & 'healthy' as a fad to them, without a big education on germs & safety & how dangerous some bugs can be.


There is probably middle ground on the raw milk issue.....

--->Paul

rambler, lol, for goodness sake...people eat meat everyday and understand the risk. there is nothing wrong with requiring labeling i suppose, but there seems to be a big push against labeling as well. i think your argument that people are too stupid to safely consume food is weak.

as far as the topic at hand...there is nothing but speculation by all involved since there are no documents provided the court. there will be no "facts" until the they have been determined by a court of law.

__________________
this message has probably been edited to correct typos, spelling errors and to improve grammar...

"All that is gold does not glitter..."

sounds like the case in mn but read the reason why his license to sell Grade A milk was pulled . and says this about E. coli. "It's all been blown out of proportion."
GIBBON, MINN. -- The organic farmer who produced raw milk linked to illness in four Minnesotans, including a toddler who remained hospitalized Thursday, has for years fought the government's efforts to regulate him.

Michael Hartmann, whose dairy is just outside this town of 800 people, last had a license to sell Grade A milk in 2001. He has kicked inspectors off his property, refused to tell a judge his name in court and asserted he is a "natural man" with a constitutional right to raise and sell food without government interference.

State officials said Thursday that the investigation of his dairy is continuing but said they have little doubt it produced the raw milk containing a deadly strain of E. coli.

"I am concerned that we are going to hear about more cases," said Dr. Kirk Smith, supervisor of state Health Department foodborne disease investigations. It often takes up to two weeks for cases to surface, he added.

While raw milk advocates believe it offers health benefits, experts say it's risky because it hasn't been pasteurized. The heat treatment discovered more than a century ago reduces bacteria, including E. coli O157:H7, which brings on diarrhea and sometimes more serious illness.

Three of the patients in the current outbreak have been released from the hospital, but the toddler developed a potentially deadly complication.

Hartmann declined to talk about the outbreak with a reporter Thursday, other than to say, "It's all been blown out of proportion."

Hartmann Dairy, run by Hartmann and his wife, Diane, has long operated as an organic farm, and in the early 1990s sold pasteurized organic milk to grocers and several Twin Cities co-ops under the Minnesota Organic Milk or "M.O.M.s" brand.
Randy and Kathy Ahlbrecht run a nearby dairy farm and have known the Hartmanns for decades. She described Michael Hartmann as a generous, church-going man who is always fighting the government. "He tells my husband that you don't have to pay your taxes," she said. "He's got this big book he walks around with that's all about how to get around your government." She said she doesn't share his views.

In 1993, Hartmann refused to let animal health officials test his swine for pseudo rabies and was fined $450. Court papers say the Hartmanns sold uninspected meat as early as 1998. And in 2001, the dairy's license to sell Grade A milk was revoked after state inspectors discovered unsanitary conditions, including chickens roaming and defecating in the milking parlor, according to the state Agriculture Department.

Yet the Hartmanns still operate a creamery. State officials say it is illegal for the Hartmanns to sell raw milk away from the farm. But customers say they pay the dairy directly for the raw milk, which is dropped off at a customer's home for pickup by other buyers.
Sibley County feedlot officer Greg DeVries said he witnessed Michael Hartmann's anti-government views first-hand in 2000, when he tried to inspect the farm.

"He said, 'You can't do it. You have to show me why you are out here.' He basically got angry with me and I left," DeVries said. County officials later got a court order to inspect the farm, and sheriff's deputies came along with inspectors, who found no feedlot violations.

That incident provoked one of Hartmann's many legal challenges against the government, in which he declared himself a "natural man" and "an heir of the Organic laws of the Land and Nation." He has been fined and jailed for zoning and building permit violations. He unsuccessfully sued a bank in 2007 when it attached an IRS levy of $463,443 to an account under the name M.O.M.'s Dairy Trust.

Hartmann said in a court filing that many of the disputes are based on the "erroneous assumption" that because he owns land in the county, "the government has unlimited authority to interfere with my quiet and peaceful enjoyment of the land and the fruits of my labor."

Hartmann said he does his utmost to maintain his independence, self-reliance and individual responsibility. "Yet I am regularly and personally attacked for my choices," he wrote.

I'm all for independence , but this is the part that turns my tummy
""after state inspectors discovered unsanitary conditions, including chickens roaming and defecating in the milking parlor ""

"""""" i think your argument that people are too stupid to safely consume food is weak. """"
I think its the ones that don't keep every thing clean when they process the goods , that are the STUPID ones ..
and the reason why there are so many government regs for food

that article, published in it's entirety it seems, has nothing at all to do with sales violations or the bechard's case. it does a fine job of suggesting that those who support raw milk are apparently nut jobs...so nice job muddying the water.

__________________
this message has probably been edited to correct typos, spelling errors and to improve grammar...

"All that is gold does not glitter..."

how do you come up with that? dairy farmers al over the country are only getting about $1.20 per gallon, and they are making a living.

__________________
http://lownfamilymaplesyrup.com/ max@lownfamilymaplesyrup.com
Professional Tool. 1220 Woodmere Ave,Traverse City, MI. 49686. 231-941-8003. http://professionaltool.com/

Those that don't keep everything clean are the stupid ones, but they aren't always the ones that get sick and die from infected or spoiled food.
While regulations and inspections can't stop every tainted product, it seems to be doing a fairly good job most of the time.

If you could see or smell infecious diseases or bacteria, we might be able to fend for ourselves, but that isn't true. When I need to do a culture on every item on my plate at a local cafe', just so I don't get sick, it would set back our standards of living at least a hundred years.

If you don't like the laws, educate yourself about the reasons behind those laws. If they are really silly or stupid rules, work to get them changed. It happens all the time. But to support a law breaker just because you hate our government is pointless.

Too bad, Ozark Jewels, even tho it's been years since we've had our own cows, I can still remember making Cottage Cheese from a big dishpan, then haning it to drain in a dish towel, over the clothes line!! Guess that wouldnt be proper anymore would it?
I, for one, think the Govt. is "protecting" us to death--but then, I'm from a generation that didnt have to warn consumers to "remove Baby from Stroller before folding"!!

__________________
In Life, We Weep at the thought of Death'
Who Knows, Perhaps in Death,
We Weep at the though of Life.