At approximately 9:00AM this morning (Wednesday, March 9), a local organic farmer was stopped on his delivery route by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture.  His vehicle and all product were confiscated.

Alvin Schlangen of Freeport, MN, offers direct-to-consumer sales of organic eggs, milk, meat and produce.  This morning, Department of Agriculture vehicles surrounded his truck at his first delivery site near Macalester College.  The Department then confiscated his delivery vehicle loaded with fresh organic foods.  The delivery vehicle was towed to 625 Robert Street in Downtown St. Paul.

The Department indicated to Schlangen that they will not be return any of his product.  Nearly 70 families and at least one food co-op are awaiting delivery.  None are likely to receive the goods for which they paid.

As of right now (11:20AM), Schlangen is at 625 Robert Street waiting (hoping) for the release of his vehicle.  Schlangen reports the Department did provide a Warrant.

This is just another one of the Department of Agriculture’s tireless attacks upon anything that falls outside of totalizing corporatist distribution.   Under the banner of  “public health,” the government teams up with private cartels to essentially mandate the consumption of its low-quality to no-quality food products.

More information about Schlangen can be found on at mnorganiceggs.com

Here is another account from: http://nathanmhansen.blogspot.com/

At 9:00 this morning, Alvin Schlangen was boxed in near Macalester College. Two St. Paul squad cars and two Department of Agriculture squad cars boxed in Alvin Schlangen’s van as he stopped to deliver eggs to a co-op in St. Paul. He was not arrested, but his van was impounded with all of its farm-fresh contents. He was not allowed to deliver eggs to the co-op. His van was taken to 625 Robert Street and remains there with its contents. The people from the Department of Agriculture apparently had a warrant.

The Department of Agriculture indicated that they were stealing all of the contents of Alvin’s van. There are 60 families awaiting milk and eggs and other food from Alvin.

Presently at 11:00 a.m. Alvin Schlangen is at the Department of Agriculture Headquarters awaiting word from government officials about what is going to happen to the contents of the truck.

We can see that the Mark Dayton administration is every bit as bad as the Tim Pawlenty administration on the issue of food freedom. Raw milk is legal in Minnesota, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture just doesn’t believe people can cooperatively own cows and have milk that they have paid for delivered by an agent of the farmer. As dark people are bombed overseas to bring them freedom, we live in an intolerable police state at home. I have remarked several times that there is likely much more food freedom in Iran than there is in the United States. Further, real food safety threats like high fructose corn syrup and aspartame are never investigated by the “authorities.”

Call Governor Mark Dayton today and tell him you don’t agree with his police state tactics interfering with food freedom: 651-201-3400.

See a copy of the search warrant here. (pdf)

A dairy farmer challenged British Columbia’s prohibition of the sale and distribution of unpasteurized and unhomogenized milk. Alice Jongerden says her “cowshare” business called Home On The Range has 400 members. But the province’s March 2010 law makes distribution of raw milk punishable by up to 3 years in prison and a $3 million fine.
Jongerden says Home On The Range and its 400 members sold raw milk from 2006 to 2010. “Fresh milk has high nutritional value,” Jongerden says. “Fresh milk contains vitamins, minerals, nutrients, beneficial enzymes, natural immune system boosters, and healthy fats and proteins. Fresh milk also has beneficial health effects that have yet to be fully understood by scientists. Processing milk by pasteurization and homogenization significantly reduces the nutritional value of milk.”
But a court order in March 2010 prohibited her from packaging and distributing “fresh milk” based on the province’s Public Health Act.
After the order was handed down, Jongerden says, she kept distributing the milk, with labels stating that the product was “not for human consumption.”
She was found in contempt of the order, but was not penalized.
If the regulation is struck down, Jongerden intends to resume the cowshare’s operations.
Jongerden adds that fresh milk is available in at least 20 states and nearly all of the European Union. Health risks associated with processed milk include allergies, asthma and lactose intolerance, she says, and “as is the case with processed milk, risks associated with fresh milk can demonstrably be managed with appropriate regulation and provision of information to consumers. An outright prohibition is unnecessary.”
Jongerden wants the Public Health Act Transitional Regulation prohibiting sale of raw milk declared unconstitutional because it “deprives the plaintiff, contrary to the principles of fundamental justice, of the right to security of the person and the right to liberty.”
She is represented by Jason Gratl of Vancouver, B.C.
Raw milk is a contentious subject in the United States as well. Many people consider it more nutritional than pasteurized milk, but one organic dairy farmer in Vermont told Courthouse News that he has stopped selling it, as the cost of defending a single claim of raw milk-originated illness could put him out of business.

Source: Courthouse News

Cynthia Kapple has been drinking raw milk since she was a child, and she’s been selling it now for 10 years.

The milk tastes better than pasteurized milk and is better for you, she said.

One of her customers, Vickie Tucker, also swears by raw milk.

“My daughters won’t drink store-bought milk anymore,” Tucker said. “They don’t like it.”

Kapple and Tucker believe Oregon’s law that caps a farm’s raw cow’s milk production is just plain wrong.

“It’s a raw food,” Kapple said. “This isn’t something with chemicals added to it that might be carcinogenic. (The law) blows me away.”

The two Albany-area residents are among thousands of Oregonians aligning behind legislation that will expand a dairy’s ability to supply customers with raw cow’s milk.

House Bill 2222 is sponsored by a diverse group of lawmakers, including a physician, Sen. Alan Bates, D-Ashland, and several conservative Republicans.

The mainstream Oregon dairy industry opposes HB2222.

“The main issue is there is no way you can guarantee the safety of consumers from raw milk,” said Roger Beyer, a lobbyist for the Oregon Dairy Farmers Association. “And what happens is if anyone gets sick from a milk product, consumers don’t look at it as raw versus pasteurized. It’s milk. And there would be impact to the whole industry from that.”

In addition to concerns over human safety, dairy farmers wonder who is going to pay the costs of licensing raw milk dairies.

The Oregon Department of Agriculture estimates the annual cost of licensing raw milk producers at $10,000 per dairy.

“That’s if you don’t have any screened positives, and life is beautiful,” said Jim Postlewait, food program manager with the department.

Testing for pathogens in raw milk is far more expensive than standard dairy tests, which look for drugs and somatic cell counts.

Oregon dairies currently pay between $135 to $812 a year for state inspections, with larger dairies paying more.

“We want to know who will pay for that (additional) cost,” Beyer said.

Under a small-farm exception to Oregon law, raw cow’s milk producers with three or fewer cows aren’t required to be licensed. Dairies are prohibited from producing raw cow’s milk from more than three cows. Also under Oregon law, dairies are prohibited from advertising their raw cow’s milk and can’t transport if off their farm.

Under proposed amendments to HB2222, raw milk producers with more than three cows, or more than nine goats or nine sheep, must be licensed. Proposed amendments to the bill apparently would limit a dairy’s raw milk production to 10 cows.

Oregon’s current law crimps a raw dairy producer from meeting demand, said Kendra Kimbirauskas of the group Friends of Family Farmers, which is behind HB2222.

“We are hearing from raw milk producers throughout Oregon that they have more consumers than they legally are able to supply milk for under the current exemption,” Kimbirauskas wrote in an e-mail response to Capital Press questions.

The law also restricts a raw milk producer’s ability to buy affordable feed, which drives up production costs, Kapple said.

“We have to buy our grain retail,” Kapple said, “whereas a commercial dairy can buy their feed at wholesale prices.”

As a result, Kapple said, raw milk typically is high-priced, and affordable only to upper-income Oregonians. Kapple, for example, charges $7 for a half-gallon of her raw, organic milk.

While raw milk has advocates, it also has detractors.

Oregon senior epidemiologist Bill Keene said disease outbreaks from consumers drinking raw milk “are a staple” in epidemiology circles.

“People who drink raw milk are at very high risk for getting infections, relative to people who drink pasteurized milk,” he said. “If more people drink raw milk, more people will get sick from raw milk. That’s a truism.”

When asked if he would drink raw milk, he said: “Not knowingly.”

When asked if he would recommend his family drink raw milk, he said: “I would be horrified to hear about it.

“It is such an unnecessary risk when pasteurization is cheap and a highly effective public-health intervention,” Keene said.

To date, 13 states, including Washington and Idaho, allow raw cow’s milk sales in stores and 29 allow raw cow’s milk sales of some sort.

Oregon started restricting raw cow’s milk sales in 1999.

Kapple sells the 6 to 9 gallons of milk that her cow produces each day to 15 customers, who drive to the Midway Farms produce stand and pick up the pre-ordered milk.

Several other local residents have asked if they could buy the milk, but Kapple is unable to supply them.

“They said they haven’t been able to find a local supplier,” Kapple said.

One of the reasons Kapple decided to purchase the cow was because she couldn’t find raw milk for her family.

“I believe very strongly in my family having raw milk,” she said.

“I don’t understand how this scare (over raw milk) has come up,” Kapple said. “I personally have never met anybody who has gotten sick from raw milk.”

Source: KVAL.com

Three Republican state senators are proposing legislation to legalize most sales of raw milk in Minnesota.

The bill would permit direct farm-to-consumer sales of unpasteurized milk, including sales at farmers markets and at private homes. Current law allows sales of the product only at the farm which produced the milk.

Raw milk supporters want state lawmakers to ease restrictions on the product, even though the state health department says consuming unpasteurized milk is a serious health risk.

The proposal comes from Sens. Sean Nienow of Cambridge, Gary Dahms of Redwood Falls and Claire Robling of Jordan, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee.

The legislation comes in the middle of a fight between state regulators and a southern Minnesota farmer over the issue.

The state says raw milk sold illegally by dairy farmer Michael Hartmann has sickened at least 15 people with E. coli, campylobacter and cryptosporidium illnesses.

Hartmann has denied the allegations, but last month a district court judge reviewed the evidence and said he has “no doubt” the state is right.

The state’s investigation of Michael Hartmann has caused an ever-widening debate over the wisdom of drinking the unpasteurized dairy product.

The Hartmann case lead the agriculture department to crackdown on what they say are illegal deliveries and sales of raw milk at Twin Cities drop sites.

State law bans all but occasional sales and only at the farm where the milk is produced With the crackdown, most of those drop-site sales have ended. Raw milk supporter Greg Schmidt of St. Paul says many adherents are now driving several hours to a farm to get unpasteurized milk.

“This is a legal product in the state,” Schmidt said. “But this burden that forces consumers to go to the farm to procure it just doesn’t make any sense on any level.”

Schmidt welcomes the proposed legislation because it would allow raw milk sales at farmers markets as well as homes.

None of the bill’s three co-sponsors could be reached to discuss the legislation. The bill will serve as a forum to debate the merits and risks of drinking raw milk. According to the Centers for Disease Control, nearly 1,700 illnesses and 2 deaths were traced to raw milk over the decade ending in 2008.

There’s a growing debate nationally over whether and how to regulate raw milk, as natural, unprocessed foods grow in popularity. State laws on raw milk vary widely. Wisconsin, which bans sales, last year empaneled a large working group to study the issue. A report is expected next month.

Already lining up against the new Minnesota bill is the Minnesota Milk Producers Association, which represents the state’s conventional dairy farmers, those who pasteurize their milk.

Association Executive Director Bob Lefebvre says any bill allowing easier sales of raw milk is a bad idea.

“That’s a very dangerous thing to do,” he said. “And we shouldn’t go there.”

Lefebvre said if anything, the state should tighten regulation of raw milk even more. He said any farm selling the product should be regularly inspected and tested by the state, something that doesn’t occur now.

Lefebvre and others say study after study has shown that raw milk is a health risk. Supporters though argue they should be allowed to decide for themselves whether to accept those risks and buy the product.

Source: Minnesota Public Radio

Cows eat grass. You wouldn’t think it’s a big deal to state this, but at Iowa State University a highly qualified job applicant who had the temerity to voice this simple biological fact was ejected from consideration for a post leading a sustainable agriculture program, The Chronicle of Higher Education reports:

Among those who study sustainability, saying cows should eat grass is not a controversial statement. But saying so in Iowa—which grows more corn than any other state—is likely to attract attention.

Well, it sure did. Ricardo Salvador is a well-respected sustainable agriculture expert and a former professor at Iowa State—and a natural, many observers thought, to lead the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture as its new director. A finalist for the position, however, he didn’t get the post even when the top candidate turned it down. Apparently, his cow comment came back to haunt him:

The remark that may have sunk Mr. Salvador’s candidacy came 37 minutes into his on-campus presentation. While discussing a research project in New York State, he mentioned meat being “produced in the natural way that meat should be produced, which is on land suitable for grasses and perennial crops.”

If this were a TV game show, a loud buzzer would have gone off and Mr. Salvador would have been escorted from the stage that very moment. Because apparently he was supposed to say that cows should eat corn. Even if that’s not natural or sustainable, it’s simply how things are done in Iowa, a state built on big agriculture:

Corn allows cows to get fatter faster and be ready for slaughter sooner. But there are downsides, including the fact that cows have trouble digesting corn and must be fed antibiotics to prevent them from becoming ill. What’s more, the beef from corn-fed cows tends to have more fat.

The danger of the truth is so great that the Chronicle couldn’t even get Wendy Wintersteen, the dean of Iowa State’s agriculture school, to go anywhere near it. When asked whether cows evolved to eat grass, she replied, “I don’t have an opinion on that statement.”

Sheesh. Consider, for a moment, the man that the Leopold Center is named for, famed conservationist Aldo Leopold. In 1939, in the essay “A Biotic View of Land,” he wrote:

Each species, including ourselves, is a link in many chains. The deer eats a hundred plants other than oak, and the cow a hundred plants other than corn. Both, then, are links in a hundred chains.

Sorry, Mr. Leopold, but I’m going to cut you off right there before you say anything more inflammatory. Some university officials are not going to be happy about this.

Source: The Chronicle of Higher Education

Tumbling milk prices have enraged European dairy farmers over the past two years, but one Czech farmer has found a creative way to increase profits by bringing his milk directly to customers and, in the process, has created a new business model.

Residents of Plzeň, west Bohemia, have seen something new at farmers’ markets in the past few weeks as dairy farmer Jaromír Boháček has inaugurated an innovative way of selling milk: a milk truck. Boháček, owner of Líšťany Farms, which produces 6,000 liters of milk daily from 236 cows, says low milk prices over the past two years left him in dire straits but have sparked a successful solution.

“We’ve sold milk below cost for the past two years, and of course this has caused us difficulty. We had to come up with a suitable solution for us as well as the customer,” he said. “So we came up with the idea of selling milk from a mobile milk vender.”

Boháček said the mobility of his milk vending machine allows him to sell milk in every district of Plzeň, as well as the suburbs, for 15 Kč (75 U.S. cents) per liter, about the same price as milk in a supermarket. And of course, customers have the chance to buy fresh milk, which has proved a popular novelty. Boháček is considering spreading his route to other villages and cities, depending on demand.

Boháček stopped short of recommending a mobile milk van for every dairy farmer on the market but said dairy farmers need to begin taking their fate into their own hands.

“It’s difficult to recommend anything to other farmers, because every farm has its own specific needs and conditions, so each farmer has to sit down with a calculator and make sure something like this will be profitable. But generally it is a good practice for farmers to sell directly from the farm, and I think it should escalate,” he said.

The mobile milk van is unique in the Czech Republic, but Boháček’s innovation builds on a burgeoning industry of farmer-operated milk dispensers. Milk dispensers are maintained by dairy farmers who are able to deliver raw milk directly to potential customers, cutting out the supermarket middlemen and getting more of a handle on their profits.

Milk dispensers began appearing in the Czech Republic in October 2009, as milk prices hit historic lows of about 6 Kč per pint, leading to 4.5 billion Kč in losses for dairy farmers in the first half of 2009. Industry representatives were unanimous in voicing the need for regulation, but there was no agreement on exactly what form that regulation should take.

“The idea is that, if you put more and more money into the dairy industry, you don’t know if you’ll get it back. But the situation is so bad that we’ve got to do something,” said Barbora Daňková, spokeswoman for Czech milk-processing company Madeta.

The European Union’s solution was to offer a total of 318 million euros in support funds for European dairy farmers in dire need, beginning in December 2009.

But for many Czech dairy farmers, a more fundamental shift in the way they did business was necessary. Milk dispensers offered an immediate solution, both allowing farmers to charge almost twice as much for milk as supermarkets – about 20 Kč per liter – and requiring the customer to provide the bottle, thus advantaging farmers rather than retailers.

Milk dispensers were lauded by the Czech and Moravian Dairy Association, which nevertheless cautioned that more is needed to be done to help support domestic dairy farmers. Milk dispensers are only a viable solution for small dairy farms, according to Dairy Association President Jiří Kopáček.

Nonetheless, “the milk dispensers have improved markedly, and at the moment, there are about 200 in the Czech Republic,” he said.

Many of these dispensers are located at farmers’ markets, such as the one at Prague’s Kubánské náměstí, where excited customers lined up for fresh milk July 10. Toko, the company that supplies most of the milk dispensers, has also begun manufacturing machines offering meat, vegetables, fruit juices and other fresh farm products.

An increase in the popularity of milk dispensers, however, coupled with the growing number of urban farmers’ markets, has given rise to opposition. Tetra Pak, producer of milk cartons for all major Czech milk companies, issued a warning April 26 about the dangers of drinking raw milk from dispensers, saying, “It is important to realize that drinking raw milk, which means untreated milk, is always a risk.”

Jan Veleba, president of the Czech Agrarian Chamber, has called the warnings against raw milk “lies,” saying they unnecessarily disadvantage farmers struggling to make ends meet.

Boháček seems unconcerned about the controversy, which doesn’t seem to have harmed his brisk milk vending business.

“All we are doing is putting 100 percent milk on the market,” he said. “What you usually see in the markets under the dairy products sign should really be under a chemical products sign.”

Source: The Prague Post

By Karen Keb

A dairy cow provides lots of practical benefits. Perhaps the most notable is that cows eating a grass-based diet can provide great-tasting dairy products that are more nutritious and flavorful than those you can buy in most grocery stores. Raising a family dairy cow is a fun experience, plus it’s a great step toward self-sufficiency and food security. Surplus dairy products from the cow and meat from calves could even bring in extra income for your family. Keeping a homestead dairy cow is a big commitment though, so you’ll want to prepare carefully.

The Daily Dairy Cow Routine

A cow produces milk in order to feed her calf. After the cow has given birth, she must be milked (or her calf allowed to nurse) at least twice daily or the milk will stop flowing. Count on about nine to 10 months of milk production, allowing the cow to rest at least two months before a new calf is born. Your daily routine will consist of feeding, milking twice a day or milking once a day and separating the calf from the cow eight to 12 hours before you milk. (Keep reading for more details.) You will also need to muck out the milking area frequently and move fences for rotational grazing as needed.

Feeding. A dairy cow needs two principal components in her diet to be healthy: roughage and protein. Roughage mainly consists of cellulose and can be supplied by pasture and various forms of hay. Good grass hay and grass pasture can contain sufficient protein for animal maintenance, but for a lactating dairy cow, higher protein feeds such as alfalfa hay, grass-legume pasture or protein supplements will increase milk production. She’ll also need a mineral supplement and salt, and a lactating cow can drink up to 30 gallons of water per day, so you’ll need to provide plenty of fresh water.

In winter when the pasture is sparse, good hay — and possibly additional grain or premixed feed — will be necessary. If you can feed leafy alfalfa hay (2 to 3 pounds per 100 pounds of body weight), this will be all she needs. However, if you want to increase the cow’s milk production, feed a grain supplement in the form of chopped or ground oats, barley, corn or wheat every day, regardless of season.

During the summer, the cow can get all the nutrients and protein she needs from grazing a lush pasture consisting of legumes and grasses. In many regions, a cow and calf will need at least an acre of good pasture. In regions with poor soil or little rain, 10 acres or more may be necessary to support the pair.

Milking. Ideally, milking should be timed at 12-hour intervals. A cow with a full, distended udder is not a happy cow; don’t inflict this on her by milking erratically. With the family cow, you have the option of milking just once a day by letting the calf help you out. Leave the calf with the cow overnight. Separate them in the morning, and by evening, the cow will be ready for milking (this approach lets you avoid early morning milkings if you have an 8-to-5 job). Using this system, the calf may nurse beyond normal weaning periods (about eight weeks for most dairy calves), and you won’t need to mess around with the bottle feeding that would be required if you were milking twice a day and feeding some to the calf.

Dairy breeds can produce up to 8 gallons per day, although 3 gallons is more typical for a family dairy cow on a grass-only diet. The calf only needs about 5 quarts to 2 gallons per day if it has access to good pasture as it grows. You can assume the calf will drink half the cow’s daily production if you keep the two together about 12 hours a day.

Washing the cow’s udder before milking will help relax her. Equipment (and your hands) should be scrupulously clean, too. Several books, websites and online videos explain the process of hand milking a cow.

After you’ve got the milk in a bucket, you will need to quickly strain it to remove debris and cool it to limit bacteria growth. To strain the milk, you can purchase a commercial milk strainer and paper filters, or pour the milk through four layers of dish towels or cheesecloth over a large colander and bowl.

If you prefer to pasteurize milk, do this after straining, but before cooling. The easiest method is to use a home milk-pasteurizer machine. These machines can be purchased for about $300 for a 2-gallon unit. For an easy stovetop method, read How do I pasteurize raw milk at home? 

Breeding and Birth

Soon after giving birth to her first calf, your cow will need to be bred. She will “freshen” (have a calf and start producing milk) about nine and a half months from the date she “settles” (gets pregnant); her second heat after calving is an ideal time to breed her. For the strongest calves, time the birth when spring pastures are lush. You will be milking (and her calf may be nursing) until the last two or three months before the cow gives birth. At that time she’ll need to be “dried up” (stop being milked) to allow her body to prepare for her new calf.

You don’t need to own a bull to breed your cow. Your options include taking your cow to a bull for breeding or artificial insemination (AI). The easiest method will undoubtedly be AI, unless your neighbor just happens to have a suitable bull and you can walk your cow over for a visit. You can hire an AI technician to do the job, or take a course and do it yourself. Another breeding option is to raise or buy a yearling beef-breed bull and have it processed after your cow is bred.

If you intend to raise your calf for beef, breed your cow to a smaller beef-type bull, such as an Angus. Either way, you’ll want to select a bull that roughly matches the size of your cow — anything larger and she may have trouble birthing a large calf. Dairy breeds usually calve easily, but make sure you’re prepared for problems.

If you want homegrown, grass-fed beef, you can raise the calf until it reaches appropriate slaughter weight (typically about 1,200 pounds, but smaller if you prefer) at about 2 years old, and take it to a processor who will butcher and package the beef for you. You can also sell or give away the calf as a bottle baby for a local 4-H project.

Fencing and Facilities

Although you could tether your cow to a stake and move it daily, it’s a bit risky for the cow. She could get tangled in the rope and be injured. If you can keep an eye on her most of the day while she’s tethered, it might be worthwhile so you won’t have to invest in fencing. Usually, building a perimeter fence is the best option.

The best way to keep cattle on grass is with a rotational grazing system. This process involves dividing pastures into small paddocks and controlling the cow’s access to fresh grass, often using an electric fence that you move every few days. Lush grass grows back in the recently grazed pasture while the cow is grazing a fresh section.

For interior fences and paddock dividers, one strand of electrified high-tensile wire works effectively on cattle that are trained to respect electric fences. But if you plan to raise calves in those same paddocks, two or three wires will be more effective.

Dairy cows require modest shelter against cold winds and rain or snow. A simple shelter can be constructed from recycled materials such as old telephone poles, plywood and corrugated metal.

An outbuilding with a concrete floor that can be kept relatively clean and sanitary is ideal for milking. You can halter and tie your cow to a vertical post if she’s gentle, or use a stanchion to restrain her. Especially gentle and experienced cows can be milked standing in the field.

Get Your Dairy Cow

A cow of any good dual-purpose breed (Dexter, Red Poll, Milking Shorthorn, Randall Lineback or others) will produce a good beef calf, provide it with enough milk, and produce more than enough milk for most families’ needs. Veterinarian D. Phillip Sponenberg says, “For home dairy use, a number of the heritage breeds make a lot of sense. They thrive on average pasture and produce plenty of milk for home use, and owners with even a single cow can make real and important contributions to the conservation of these genetic treasures that we may well need for future agricultural needs.” (For more on heritage-breed cows, check out the American Livestock Breeds Conservancy.)

Ask around in your circle of rural friends, the local extension office or farm stores for advice on finding cows for sale in your area. You might find your cow or cow/calf pair at a local dairy farm, or check Craigslist. If you don’t have experience with cattle, try to buy an older cow with a placid nature.

If you have a knowledgeable neighbor or friend, take her or him with you when looking at a cow that’s for sale. Before buying, do a visual inspection and ask lots of questions: How old is she and how many seasons has she been milked? Has she been hand-milked or machine-milked? Do you have proof that the cow is tuberculosis and brucellosis-free? Has she had calving problems? Does she have any health or behavior problems? If possible, milk her yourself or watch her being milked and examine the milk for signs of mastitis: stringy milk, clots or blood.

If you want a particular breed, check the classified ads in rural-lifestyle and farming magazines, or go to that particular breed’s association website and locate a breeder within a reasonable distance.

Annual Budget for Keeping a Family Cow

There are lots of variables in a budget for a family milk cow, but after you own the cow, have summer pasture, install the fence, and have basic equipment, the primary cost on an annual basis will be for feed. Bull rental (or semen), vet bills and supplements are also variable costs. But the one-year estimates below show that keeping a cow can save you money compared to buying milk and meat at retail prices.

You can “stockpile” some of the pasture, saving it for winter grazing, but to maintain health and production, you’ll usually need to supplement the cow’s diet with high-quality hay when grass isn’t growing.

Calves raised for beef are usually slaughtered at about 2 years old when they’re approaching 1,200 pounds. But you can take advantage of summer pasture, and make or buy less hay, if you butcher the calf right before winter, when the calf is about a year and a half old and probably about 700 pounds.

Cost of alfalfa hay: $810
Assumes 42.5 lbs. x 200 days; $190 per ton in small, square bales

Value of milk available for human consumption: $3,000 to $5,215
3.5 gal. x 270 days = 945 gal.; bottle-fed calf drinks 200 gallons in about two months before weaning; net 745 gal. at $7/gal., compares to premium, locally produced milk. Even with a more conservative $4/gal., the value of milk would be about $3,000. If you milk only once a day and allow the calf to nurse instead of feeding it with a bottle, the calf will drink more milk daily and can be weaned when it’s 8 or 9 months old. In this situation, you could expect about 470 gal. of milk for human consumption.

Value of grass-fed meat: $1,575
700 lb. calf at 18 months old, producing 350 pounds of meat at $4.50/lb.

Annual value: $3,765 to $5,980

Source: Mother Earth News

Are raw, living foods sourced from safe local producers better for your health and immune systems than processed, genetically modified, pasteurized, homogenized, or irradiated foods?

Do you have a right to decide for yourself, and to choose healthy, raw, nutritious, natural foods from local growers and purveyors?

Take raw milk as an example. Since California established the nation’s most stringent raw milk standards, more and more people are consuming raw dairy products. Many of those people tout what they view as raw milk’s beneficial properties. They claim that raw milk and cultured raw dairy products help to relieve symptoms of allergies, asthma, arthritis, and other digestive issues, including symptoms of celiac disease.

Speaking from my own experience, after switching to raw dairy about six months ago, my hay fever has disappeared, my nose is never stuffed up any more, my stomach loves me, and I have never felt better. Moreover, my nephew suffers from classic milk allergy. If he drinks milk, his mouth swells up and he has to take an antihistamine. Recently, after witnessing the disappearance of my own allergies, and after reading that raw milk is hypoallergenic, we took the plunge and had him drink a glass. mom anxiously waited to see if he would have an allergic reaction. He had none. Nothing. Felt fine. Since then, I’ve been treated like the wise uncle. But enough of my story.

Raw milk is also rich in natural probiotics such as bifidobacteria, which along with prebiotics, have been shown to reduce inflammation and lessen symptoms in people with celiac disease and associated inflammatory conditions.

For example, a team of European researchers recently demonstrated that dietary probiotics and prebiotics can improve quality of life for people with celiac and associated conditions, such as type 1 diabetes and some autoimmune disorders. Their results offer some of the strongest support for the idea that eating foods rich in probiotics and/or prebiotics, such as raw milk, yogurt, and kefir can help a number of patients with celiac disease reduce inflammation and lessen symptoms of celiac disease.

However, the rights of consumers to access foods on their own terms are under assault from powerful agribusiness and food manufacturers through their influence over the FDA. The Farm-to-consumer legal defense fund summarizes the FDA position on consumer food rights as follows:

*Consumers have no absolute right to any raw unprocessed food, unless the FDA says it’s okay

*There’s no right to good health, except as approved by the FDA

*There’s no right for citizens to contract privately for their food

That’s right, according to the FDA, we have no right to contract with a farmer to grow or produce food outside of FDA approval and control. Approval and control that is heavily influenced by major industrial producers.

These and other issues regarding raw milk and other raw foods are the subject of a recentMercola.com interview with Mark A. McAfee, owner of Organic Pastures Dairy. McAfee was instrumental in resisting attempts by big dairy interests to prohibit raw milk, and in pushing lawmakers to establish the nation’s highest raw milk standards here in California. The article talks about the quality and standards for raw milk, and instructs consumers in what to look for when searching out raw dairy products.

A growing number of people who believe that raw, living foods provide health and immune benefits are organizing to fight what many regard as an assault on the commercial viability of these foods and their producers by major food manufacturers.

Many people who currently enjoy access to raw, living, biodynamic foods from local, sustainable growers and purveyors are concerned about what they see as an FDA that is using laws targeted at major manufacturers to obstruct, restrict, and prohibit small farmers and food purveyors, especially of raw, living, natural foods such as dairy, almonds, juices, eggs, etc.

Regarding raw milk, McAfee points out that only six states presently permit the retail sale of raw milk: California, Connecticut, Maine, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Arizona. However, it’s important to realize that each state sets their own standards. California, specifically, has its own special set of standards for raw milk for human consumption, in which farmers must meet or exceed pasteurized milk standards, without pasteurizing.

You can find raw milk retailers in California by using the store locator available at Organic Pastures.  For other areas, check out the Campaign for Real Milk Web site. You can also look here to find out the legal status of raw milk in the U.S. state or country where you live.

Bay Area consumers may buy raw dairy and other probiotic, biodynamic foods at: Rainbow Grocery;Falletti’s; Molly Stone’s; Berkeley Bowl; and The Foodmill in Oakland.

People who want to learn more about the campaign for raw milk access may read about it at RealMilk.com, or OrganicPastures.com:

Consumers may learn more about supporting farm to consumer foods, including raw milk by accessing the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

Source: Examiner.com

A judge is moving to the appellate level a case brought against a Wisconsin man by government officials demanding he provide names of friends who may buy or sell raw milk.

The threat against raw-milk activist Max Kane had been the possibility of being ruled in contempt of court for his refusal to provide the information to authorities, according to a report from an advocacy organization.

The dispute over the sale of raw milk by farmers directly to consumers has erupted in several locations in recent months in the United States and Canada. Proponents argue raw milk is healthier, and since it usually is a direct producer-to-consumer transaction the government has no interest in those deals.

Governments argue they do.

Now, according to a report from the Weston A. Price Foundation, which advocates for raw-milk farmers and consumers, Judge Michael Rosenborough denied a motion by the state of Wisconsin to compel Kane to reveal the names of farmers and consumers he believes could be producing or purchasing raw milk.

The report said Kane has lived since December under a court order to deliver the names to the state’s Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection. A month ago, Kane, helped by attorney Elizabeth Rich, requested a stay of the order in the Vernon County Court in Viroqua, Wis., to take the case to appeal.

The judge now has agreed.

Already, on four occasions, state attorneys have tried to extract the names from Kane. The issue is that while “incidental” sales of milk from farmers to consumers are legal in Wisconsin, the agency has decided that an “incidental” sale is one time, making any customer and farmer who agreed to a second transaction in violation of the law.

Kane’s appeal currently is pending.

The Weston A. Price Foundation, which is among the nonprofits that educate consumers about more natural food-production methods, said demand for such products is growing.

“Raw milk … is a supremely healthy food that should be available to those who want it,” said Sally Fallon Morell, president of the foundation.

WND reported earlier when U.S. Food and Drug Administration agents demanded to inspect a Pennsylvania farm described by its owner as private, arguing, “You have cows. You produce food for human consumption.”

The confrontation developed at a farm near Kinzers, Pa., belonging to Amish farmer Dan Allgyer.

According to a report from the National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association, agents Joshua Schafer and Deborah Haney drove past a “No Trespassing” sign and informed Allgyer they were there to inspect his farm.

Allgyer confirmed his was a private farm.

Weeks earlier there was a court victory in Canada in which Michael Schmidt was found not guilty of accusations he sold raw milk to members of a cow-sharing consortium.

According to natural-foods blogger Kimberly Hartke, the judge “found that Michael had done his due diligence, developed a proper contract, and that everyone was informed. The judge went on to say that Michael met a need for the people.”

And in a previous U.S. case, Mennonite farmer Mark Nolt of Maryland had his farm raided by SWAT-type agents. He was fined more than $4,000 and had his equipment confiscated for providing raw – or unpasteurized – milk to participants in his program.

Source: WND

Dairy farming is key factor in history of European nutrition, study argues, with Roman empire a net loss

The Romans, as Monty Python famously acknowledged, have done many things for us. Contrary to popular wisdom, however, improving our diet was not one of them.

A study of the remains of almost 20,000 people dating from the 8th century BC to the 18th century AD has found that the Roman empire reduced our level of nutrition, which increased again in the “dark ages”.

That is because the key factor in determining average height over the centuries – an indicator of nutritional status and wellbeing – has been an increase in milk consumption due to improved farming. Higher population densities and the need to feed the army during Roman times may have worked against this.

The “anthropometric” approach pursued by Nikola Koepke of Oxford University, which combines biology and archaeology, suggests longer bone length is indicative of improved diet. Koepke’s study, presented at the Economic History Society’s 2010 annual conference, also challenges assumptions about the effect of the industrial revolution. Urbanisation did not improve wellbeing, she argues, at least as measured by height.

Rather, Koepke says, the key factor in determining average height growth over the past 2,500 years has been the increased consumption of milk as a result of the spread of, and improvements in, farming. She found that overall European living conditions improved slightly in the past 2,500 years even in the centuries prior to the industrial revolution.

Her study is based on data compiled from analysing the skeletal remains of more than 18,500 individuals of both genders from all social classes, from 484 European archaeological dig sites. “Higher milk consumption as indicated by cattle share had a positive impact on mean height,” Koepke writes. “Correspondingly, this determinant is the key factor in causing significant European regional differences in mean height.”

Source: Guardian UK