On August 9 Massachusetts Governor Charles Baker amended a provision in an appropriations bill that would have expanded raw milk access for consumers and better enabled raw milk producers to make a living. Currently only the licensed on-farm sale of raw milk is legal; House Bill 4835 (H.4835) would have allowed licensed raw milk farmers to:

• Deliver raw milk directly to a consumer, off-site from the farm if the raw milk farmer has a direct contractual relationship with the consumer;
• Contract with a third party for the delivery of raw milk off the farm to a consumer;
• Deliver raw milk through a CSA (community-supported agriculture) delivery system;
• Make deliveries to the consumer’s residence or to a pre-established receiving site so long as the site was not in a “retail setting.” Raw milk producers, however, could make deliveries in a retail setting through a CSA delivery system provided that the raw milk met the stipulation that it “shall be kept separate from retail items for sale and shall not be accessible to the public.”
• Sell raw milk from the farmer’s farm stand even if the stand is “not contiguous” to the farmer’s raw milk dairy. Current law requires the farm stand to be on the same property where the raw milk dairy is located.

H.4835 had a labeling requirement for raw milk being sold or delivered to consumers off-farm and the bill gave the state department of agricultural resources and the state Department of Public Health joint responsibility to issue regulations governing the handling, packaging, storage and testing and transportation of raw milk.¹

The amendment Governor Baker sent back to the legislature for consideration as House Bill 4884 (H.4884) mentioned none of the benefits of H.4835 except for the sale of raw milk at a farm stand off-site from the dairy farm.

H.4884 states, in part, that “the commissioner of public health, shall, … adopt and promulgate rules and regulations to reduce the risk of milk-borne illness associated with the consumption of unpasteurized milk that is sold off-site of the farm at which such milk was produced. Such rules and regulations may include, but shall not be limited to, the sanitary and operational standards for the transportation, receiving, handling, storage, processing, packaging, labeling and sale of milk intended for human consumption prior to pasteurization. … Such regulations shall allow the sale of milk intended for human consumption prior to pasteurization at a farm stand owned or operated by the producer of said milk that is not on the site of the farm at which the milk was produced.”

Given the bias of the public health department against raw milk, it’s unlikely that any of the other benefits provided in H.4835 would be included in a regulation. H.4884 also requires raw milk producers selling at an off-site farm stand to obtain an additional license from the Department of Public Health.²

Governor Baker based his authority to amend the raw milk section of H.4835 on a provision in the Massachusetts Constitution that states, in part, “the governor may disapprove or reduce items or parts of items in any bill appropriating money…As to each item disapproved or reduced, he shall transmit to the house in which the bill originated his reason for such disapproval or reduction, and the procedure shall then be the same as in the case of a bill disapproved as a whole.”³

There is nothing in the state constitution that says that the governor can amend a bill, but the way the executive branch of government has gotten out of control these days at both the federal and state levels in exceeding its powers with little resistance from either the legislative or judicial branch, there’s little reason to believe Governor Baker won’t get away with his violation of the Massachusetts Constitution.

Even if H.4884 is lawful, it’s a poor decision from a policy standpoint. The state’s licensed raw milk producers have an excellent track record of safety with few, if any, foodborne illness outbreaks attributed to the consumption of raw milk in Massachusetts. H.4835 was a way to help raw milk producers—at little or no risk to the public-—which is especially important given the current crisis the dairy industry is in today. In 1997 there were three hundred fifty-three dairy farms in Massachusetts; at the end of 2017, there were one hundred thirty-five.⁴

Instead of helping Massachusetts dairy farmers the way he had a chance to, Governor Bake bought into the fear-mongering on the “dangers” of raw milk fed him by his Department of Public Health. The nanny administrative state marches on.

H.4884 has been referred to the House Ways and Means Committee.

1. Massachusetts House Bill H.4835, accessible at https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H4835
2. Massachusetts House Bill H.4884, accessible at https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H4884
3. Massachusetts Constitution, Article LXIII, Section 5.
4. Thomas Farragher, “The demise of a Massachusetts dairy farm”, The Boston Globe, 23 January 2018. Last viewed 9/10/18 at https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/01/23/the-demise-massachusetts-dairy-farm/G0tyAng0VJ9Ovy8nVvjrZK/story.html

This article first appeared in the Fall 2018 issue of Wise Traditions in Food, Farming, and the Healing Arts, the Quarterly Journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation.

About the Author

[include content_id=663]

The post Massachusetts Governor Amends Bill Provisions Expanding Raw Milk Access appeared first on Real Milk.

On August 9 Governor Charles Baker amended a provision in an appropriations bill that would have expanded raw milk access for consumers and better enabled raw milk producers to make a living. Currently only the licensed on-farm sale of raw milk is legal in Massachusetts; House Bill 4835 (H.4835) would have allowed licensed raw milk farmers to:

• deliver raw milk directly to a consumer, off-site from the farm if the raw milk farmer has a direct contractual relationship with the consumer;
• contract with a third party for the delivery of raw milk off the farm to a consumer;
• deliver raw milk through a CSA (community-supported agriculture) delivery system;
• make deliveries to the consumer’s residence or to a pre-established receiving site so long as the site was not in a “retail setting”. Raw milk producers, however, could make deliveries in a retail setting through a CSA delivery system provided that the raw milk met the stipulation that it “shall be kept separate from retail items for sale and shall not be accessible to the public.”
• sell raw milk from the farmer’s farm stand even if the stand is “not contiguous” to the farmer’s raw milk dairy. Current law requires the farm stand to be on the same property where the raw milk dairy is located.

H.4835 had a labeling requirement for raw milk being sold or delivered to consumers off-farm and the bill gave the state department of agricultural resources and the state department of public health joint responsibility to issue regulations governing the handling, packaging, storage and testing , and transportation of raw milk.¹

The amendment Governor Baker sent back to the legislature for consideration as House Bill 4884 (H.4884) mentioned none of the benefits of H.4835 except for the sale of raw milk at a farm stand off-site from the dairy farm.

The summary to H.4884 reads:

An act, a message from His Excellency the Governor returning with his disapproval of a certain section, and also with recommendations of amendments of certain sections contained in the engrossed Bill promoting climate change adaptation, environmental and natural resource protection, and investment in recreational assets and opportunity [see House, No. 4835]. August 9, 2018.

H.4884 states, in part, that “the commissioner of public health, shall, … adopt and promulgate rules and regulations to reduce the risk of milk-borne illness associated with the consumption of unpasteurized milk that is sold off-site of the farm at which such milk was produced. Such rules and regulations may include, but shall not be limited to, the sanitary and operational standards for the transportation, receiving, handling, storage, processing, packaging, labeling and sale of milk intended for human consumption prior to pasteurization. … Such regulations shall allow the sale of milk intended for human consumption prior to pasteurization at a farm stand owned or operated by the producer of said milk that is not on the site of the farm at which the milk was produced.”

Given the bias of the public health department against raw milk, it’s unlikely that any of the other benefits provided in H.4835 would be included in a regulation. H.4884 also requires raw milk producers selling at an off-site farm stand to obtain an additional license from the department of public health.²

Governor Baker based his authority to amend the raw milk section of H.4835 on a provision in the Massachusetts Constitution that states, in part, “the governor may disapprove or reduce items or parts of items in any bill appropriating money… As to each item disapproved or reduced, he shall transmit to the house in which the bill originated his reason for such disapproval or reduction, and the procedure shall then be the same as in the case of a bill disapproved as a whole.”³

There is nothing in the state constitution that says that the governor can amend the substantive language in a bill, but the way the executive branch of government has gotten out of control these days at both the federal and state levels in exceeding its powers with little resistance from either the legislative or judicial branch, there’s little reason to believe Governor Baker won’t get away with his violation of the Massachusetts Constitution.

Even if H.4884 is lawful, it’s a poor decision from a policy standpoint. The state’s licensed raw milk producers have an excellent track record of safety with few, if any, foodborne illness outbreaks attributed to the consumption of raw milk in Massachusetts. H.4835 was a way to help raw milk producers—at little or no risk to the public—which is especially important given the current crisis the dairy industry is in today. In 1997 there were 353 dairy farms in Massachusetts; at the end of 2017, there were 135.⁴

Instead of helping Massachusetts dairy farmers the way he had a chance to, Governor Baker bought into the fear-mongering on the “dangers” of raw milk fed him by his department of public health. The nanny administrative state marches on.

H.4884 has been referred to the House Ways and Means Committee.

————
[1] Massachusetts House Bill H.4835, accessible at https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H4835
[2] Massachusetts House Bill H.4884, accessible at https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H4884
[3] Massachusetts Constitution, Article LXIII, Section 5
[4] Thomas Farragher, “The demise of a Massachusetts dairy farm”, The Boston Globe, 23 January 2018. Last viewed 9/10/18 at https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/01/23/the-demise-massachusetts-dairy-farm/G0tyAng0VJ9Ovy8nVvjrZK/story.html

Photo by Navraj Narula, Staff of Daily Free Press, published 9 January 2015

The post Massachusetts Governor Meddles With Raw Milk Bill appeared first on Real Milk.

IOWA House File 2055 (HF 2055) would allow the unregulated sale of raw milk and raw milk products on-farm and through delivery. There is a labeling requirement that there be a statement on the container notifying consumers that the product has not been inspected and is not subject to public health regulations. Bills have also been introduced in the Iowa legislature that would legalize raw pet milk sales (HF 2057) and the distribution of raw milk through herdshares (HF 2056) but HF 2055 is the only raw milk bill the legislature has considered so far. On January 30 a subcommittee of the House Committee on Local Government recommended passage by a 2-1 vote; the bill is now before the full committee. Iowa is one of the remaining states that prohibits any raw milk distribution.

LOUISIANA companion bills, Senate Bill 188 (SB 188) and House Bill 437 (HB 437), have been introduced that would allow the on-farm sale of either cow milk or goat milk of an average of 500 gallons per month. No permit is required but producers are subject to inspection and must comply with milk testing, herd health, and sanitary standards as well as a labeling requirement that there be a warning that the raw milk may contain harmful bacteria. The bills are a reintroduction of Senate Bill 29 (SB 29) that nearly passed in 2016. SB 29 passed out of the Senate and was defeated in the House committee by one vote.

MASSACHUSETTS Senate Bill 442 (S.442) and House Bill 2938 (H.2938) are companion agricultural omnibus bills that include provisions which would officially legalize herdshare agreements and would allow the off-farm delivery of raw milk by licensed dairies. Under the bill, farmers with no more than twelve lactating cows, goats or combination of cows and goats can enter into herdshare agreements with those wanting to obtain raw milk. There must be a written contract that includes a statement that the raw milk is not pasteurized nor subject to inspection by the state Department of Health nor the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources (MDAR). MDAR has power to issue rules on testing but cannot require testing more frequently than once every two months. The bills allow from a licensed raw milk farmer to deliver raw milk to a consumer with whom the farmer has a contractual relationship, including through the farmer’s agent and through a community supported agriculture (CSA) delivery system. The bill gives MDAR power to issue regulations governing delivery; the regulations must allow for non-mechanical refrigeration. The bills have passed out of the Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture and will likely next be assigned to the Senate Ways and Means Committee.

NEW JERSEY Assembly Bill 502 (A502) is the same bill that has been introduced the prior three legislative sessions, A502 allows for the on-farm sale of raw milk and raw milk products by a licensed dairy. Producers must comply with labeling, signage, herd health, and milk testing requirements. The bill also legalizes herdshare agreements and states that no permit is required for the distribution of milk through a herdshare contract. New Jersey is one of the remaining seven states that prohibits any raw milk distribution. A502 has been referred to the Assembly Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee.

TENNESSEE House Bill 2229 (HB 2229) and Senate Bill 2104 (SB 2104) would have allowed the unregulated direct sale from producer to consumers of all foods except meat, on the farm, at farmers markets and other venues. There were labeling and signage requirements but no licensing or inspection under the bills. The bills were both defeated in committee; under current law, the distribution of raw milk and raw milk products is legal through herdshare agreements. Herdshare programs have been thriving in the state.

UTAH Senate Bill 108 (SB 108) has passed through both the Senate and House and are on the desk of Governor Gary Herbet. SB 108 allows the delivery and sale of raw milk through a mechanically refrigerated mobile unit by licensed dairies. Currently only the on-farm sale of raw milk by license holders is legal unless the producer has a majority ownership interest in a retail store (only one of the state’s ten licensed dairies meets this qualification). SB 108 also allows for the unlicensed on-farm sale of up to 120 gallons per month by unlicensed dairies if the producer is in compliance with labeling, recordkeeping, milk testing, and milk cooling requirements. Producers wanting to sell under this exemption must notify the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (UDAF) that they are doing so. UDAF has power under the bill to order a producer to stop selling raw milk if the producer’s dairy is linked to a foodborne illness. The department has the power to levy administrative fines against producers who have been linked to a foodborne illness outbreak.

VIRGINIA Senate Bill 962 (SB 962) and House Bill 825 (HB 825) would have officially legalized and regulated herdshare operations. State policy in Virginia has long been to leave the many herdshare programs existing in the state alone. The original versions of both bills would have criminalized the refusal of either farmers or consumers to turn over copies of their contracts to government agencies. Both bills stated it was illegal for anyone besides the party to the contract to receive raw milk; in other words, giving raw milk to family or guests would have been a crime. Criminal penalties for violations of the bill’s requirements were up to one year in jail and a $2,500 fine; every day the violation continued would be a separate offense. The bills also required that the herdshare contracts contain a clause that shareholders assumed joint liability if the herd or any milk produced by the heard was responsible for any injury or illness. SB 962 was in Senate committee and shortly afterwards was stricken in the House committee.

For further updates on the progress of raw milk legislation, go to the bill tracking page at realmilk.com.

The post STATE RAW MILK BILLS – 2018 UPDATE appeared first on Real Milk.

Currently, Massachusetts state law allows raw milk to be sold to consumers on the farm, but Bill S.419 proposes allowing farmers to deliver raw milk to consumers – a change that would bolster sales.

Other changes that would result from these bills being passed include state standards for humane treatment of livestock, the creation of a farm-friendly plumbing code, the creation of a committee to protect honeybees, and easing the process of opening slaughterhouses.

Read more via Mass Live.

The post Massachusetts Farm Bureau Federation Backs Farm-Friendly Bills for 2015-16 Legislative Session appeared first on Real Milk.

State Representative Smitty Pignatelli of Lenox is sponsoring a bill that would exempt small dairy farms from some of these rules, and he is hopeful that the bill will gain support and move forward in Fall 2015.

Massachusetts Animal Health Director Michael Cahill defends the guidelines that are in place, saying they are for the consumer’s benefit: on-site pickup allows consumers to see the health of the cows for themselves and monthly milk testing protects consumer health.

The Northeast Organic Farming Association (NOFA) Massachusetts published a notice about the bill and is asking people to contact legislators in support of the new, less restrictive laws.

Support the Campaign for Real Milk, join the Weston A. Price Foundation, today!

The post Massachusetts Legislator Wants to Loosen Raw Milk Restrictions appeared first on Real Milk.

By Pete Kennedy, Esq.

The future of Lawton’s Family Farm (Lawton’s), one of the oldest farms in the U.S., was threatened by the town of Foxborough’s Board of Health. Lawton’s is one of about thirty licensed raw milk dairies in the state of Massachusetts; raw milk has a great track record for safety in the state with no cases of foodborne illness linked to raw milk consumption going back to at least the 1990s. Despite this, the Foxborough Board of Health proposed raw milk regulations threatening to put the dairy out of business; under Massachusetts law, towns can impose stricter requirements than state law prescribes on raw milk production and sales or even ban the product outright. The initial regulations proposed by the Board of Health would have in effect amounted to a ban on the sale of raw milk in Foxborough. The regulations contained among other requirements, that:

1. Raw milk dairies test their milk on a weekly basis; no law in the U.S. requires that raw milk dairies test more frequently than once per month.
2. If the dairy fails any test, its sales could be suspended for up to thirty days. The required tests include standard plate count, somatic cell count, and coliform counts.
3. The producer must submit a written plan for the dairy’s standard operating procedures each year for approval by the Board of Health.
4. The dairy would be required to maintain a list of the names, addresses, phone numbers and emails for each customer and make those available to the Board of Health upon request.
5. Obtain product liability insurance with an aggregate of up to three million dollars at a minimum. No state currently requires a raw milk producer to obtain product liability insurance; most insurance companies that do offer raw milk product liability insurance will not provide an aggregate over two million dollars.

The Board of Health was scheduled to vote on the proposed regulations November 25 at a public hearing but postponed the hearing indefinitely when a crowd of nearly twice the capacity of the meeting venue showed up to oppose the regulations. Shortly after the postponement, the board amended the proposed regulations, taking out some of the more onerous clauses on testing and punishment for failed tests, but the product liability insurance and customer list requirements remain.

The Lawton family has been farming in the area since 1732. Terri Lawton, the principal operator of the farm, was at one time a dairy inspector for the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources. The dairy has had its sales suspended twice for short periods of time for tests above the legal limit but has never been accused of making anyone sick. Whatever the reasons for the proposed regulation, the actions of the Foxborough Board of Health are more evidence of the bias public health officials have against raw milk and their desire to make raw milk sales go away.

The growth in the demand for raw milk, and the growing public acceptance of the product as a food everyone should have the right to consume, makes the public health sector position increasingly a minority view.

[include content_id=663]

The post Lawton’s Family Farm, Massachusetts appeared first on Real Milk.

The Foxborough Board of Health was considering new regulations that would limit the bacteria count of raw milk to a more stringent level than current state regulation, which, as a result, threatened to put one local farm out of business. More than 200 customers, community members and raw milk advocates flooded the public hearing to show their support for the farm and fight against the proposed changes.

Following the 2-1 vote, board member Paul Mullins said, “Sometimes too much government isn’t a good thing…there was nothing seriously egregious that said we needed to further restrict [state regulations].”

“We’re just really grateful that they didn’t put us out of business, which they could have done if the vote had gone the other way,” said Terri Lawton, a former state dairy inspector and owner of Lawton’s Family Farm. “We’re really relieved. We have a very small, very old family farm, and it’s really important to all of us that it continues going.”

Lawton’s Family Farm has been in operation for 281 years and, for the time being, is safe to continue providing community members with fresh, wholesome raw milk.

Read the full article in The Boston Globe here.

The Campaign for Real Milk is a project of the nutrition education non-profit, The Weston A. Price Foundation. Donate to help fund research into the benefits of nutrient dense foods.  http://www.westonaprice.org/lab

The post Raw Milk Victory in Foxborough, MA appeared first on Real Milk.

The public hearing on proposed changes to the regulations allowing the sales of raw milk in Foxborough, MA has been moved to Monday, December 16, 2013 at 7pm at Ahern Middle School auditorium. The proposed changes threaten to put out of business Lawton’s Family Farm, which has been operating for over 300 years and is the only seller of raw milk in Norfolk County.

The Board of Health was forced to postpone the first public hearing on November 25 after a crowd of 140 people, made up mostly of Lawton supporters, exceeded the capacity of the meeting room and brought on safety concerns.

A large crowd is expected at the December 16 public hearing as well. The meeting is expected to start at 7pm, with the public hearing set to start at 7:30pm.

Monday, December 16, 2013
Ahern Middle School Auditorium
111 Mechanic St, Foxborough, MA 02035

More information about the change in venue here.

The Campaign for Real Milk posts blogs of concern to raw milk fans. Get active, get milk! Follow this blog for future news on the raw milk front.

The post Public Interest in Raw Milk Overwhelms Foxborough, MA appeared first on Real Milk.

Lawton’s Family Farm, which milks 24 cows and sells raw milk and cheeses, believes the proposed regulations are unnecessary and could put them out of business – which would be a tragedy, because Lawton’s has been passed down through generations since 1732. Lawton’s is a Massachusetts Century Farm (recognized by the MA Farm Bureau for remaining in the same family for 100 years or more and still being farmed) and a Massachusetts Dairy Farm of Distinction (recognized by the MA Farm Bureau for adding scenic beauty to the state).

Lawton’s Family Farm is asking for help from their customers and other concerned citizens who believe in consumer choice:

“Our health agent is very anti-raw milk and vows to get rid of your choice by making these regulations so extreme as to be difficult to maintain and sell. Some of the rules would allow them to collect your names for a ‘recall’ purpose but more importantly the ability for them to stop milk sales for up to a month at a time. Please take the time to send emails…Please be sure to send us copies as we do not trust our agent to pass them along to her board members.”

Email:

Pauline Clifford, town Health Agent: pclifford@town.foxborough.ma.us
Cc: oake_knoll_ayrshires@lawtonsfamilyfarm.com

For those in the Foxborough area, there will be a public hearing on Monday, November 25, 2013. Concerned residents who wish to speak or to lend support with their presence are asked to attend.

Monday, November 25, 2013 7:45pm

Public Safety Building, McGinty Room

8 Chestnut Street Foxboro, MA

The proposed regulations can be read in full here.

The realmilk.com blog is a nutrition education project of the Weston A. Price Foundation. If you have a real milk story to tell, please contact us by email: press (at) westonaprice (dot) org.

The post Massachusetts Family Farm Since 1732 Threatened by New Proposed Regulations on Raw Milk appeared first on Real Milk.

Testimony of Cyndy Gray to the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources

My name is Cyndy Gray. I:

1. Have raised two sons with my husband.
2. Held a Top Secret Security Clearance from the National Security Agency for twenty years.
3. Am a Vietnam Era veteran at the Federal level, but not in Massachusetts.
4. Was awarded a commendation for my involvement in a 1990 history-making drug bust off the New England Coast.
5. Served as the Veterans’ Agent for the Town of Manchester.
6. Am a retired U.S. Coast Guard Radioman Chief with thirteen years active duty and seven years reserve—thirteen active due to a poorly run medical lab issuing false positive HIV testing to seven total Coast Guardsmen in Boston of which I was one.
7. Was the first female in Boston to be initiated as a Coast Guard Chief.
8. And . . . I was raised on raw milk.

I nearly lost a son due to failed surgeries for his chest wall deformity.

In 2002, I attended a conference and was reminded of the importance of whole, unprocessed foods and healing. Fifty people signed up to start a raw milk dairy on ten acres. Not being enough land, the NOFA-Mass Raw Milk Campaign invited me to join in their effort to help small dairies survive. Our goal was to match citizens to the growing numbers of state-permitted raw milk dairies.

There were two state-permitted raw milk dairies at the time. Our private club took turns driving to one that was certified organic. Our club has been working with MDAR since 2003. Our club has been on the New England Chronicle TV show and in three Boston Globe articles. In 2009 NOFA/Mass gave me an award for asserting the rights of farmers to raise, and individuals to consume, health-giving natural foods.

People who were blind, wheelchair bound, developmentally disabled, cancer victims—those suffering from disease known to man only within the last seventy years—and others with no cars, began to contact me to help them access raw milk. Private club members were all proponents of raw milk—an intensive screening process is used to determine this. A quote from MDAR: “The Department allows the current sale of raw milk due to individuals who believe raw milk is not a health threat and that it, indeed, is beneficial.” Who were some of the members?

1. At least four medical doctors.
2. Others in the medical field and nutrition field.
3. Those with doctorate degrees, MBAs, PhDs.
4. At least four attorneys.
5. Those affiliated with MIT, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Boston University, Boston College, University of Massachusetts Medical School.
6. Astrophysicists, engineers, successful inventors, educators, published authors, filmmakers.
7. College students and others from raw-milk-drinking countries around the world.
8. Christian ministers, a Catholic Monastery.
9. The family of a recent Nobel Prize winner.
10. Professional athletes and referees.
11. Computer programmers, financial advisors, and web developers.
12. The Ipswich House of Peace, a non-profit organization.
13. Disabled and chronically ill people.
14. Firemen, state police troopers.

Those are just some examples of the people who care about the survival of our family farms in Massachusetts, and who exercise their free will by choosing to direct their hard earned money to these farms. Thank you, Commissioner for this opportunity. Thank you all for your show of support. My son was nursed back to health by drinking whole, raw milk and is thriving.

The post Cyndy Gray Testimony to MDAR appeared first on Real Milk.