Raw milk is milk that hasn’t been pasteurized to kill harmful, and at times deadly, pathogens such as E. coli, Listeria, Salmonella and Campylobacter.
Pulling on one end of the rope in favor of raw milk and raw milk products — as long as strict standards are followed in producing it — is the National Farmers Union, often described as a “populist” organization with a focus on “family-size” farms.
Pulling on the other end of the rope in flat-out opposition to the sale of raw milk and raw milk products is the American Farm Bureau Federation, known for its lobbying powers on the state and federal level. Both claim the distinction of representing the American farmer.
These contrasting views came to light this year in policies adopted by the two organizations during their annual meetings.
Smooth sailing at the NFU convention
During the NFU’s 111th annual convention, held earlier this month in Massachusetts, the delegates endorsed a strong pro-raw milk stance. They also supported the interstate shipment of raw milk, which is one of the items listed under the topic of “Food Safety.”
With an eye on the faltering dairy industry — due in large part to high feed costs and slumping demand — the NFU policy came out in support of raw milk because “it provides a viable market niche for dairies.”
However, because of the risk of cross-contamination with other milk that might contain pathogens, the NFU policy recommends that raw milk be bottled as the product of a single dairy and, wherever possible, at the physical location of that dairy.
The organization also supports policies, practices and standards of responsible raw milk production for dairy farmers who choose to produce raw milk or raw milk products for human consumption. And it calls for equal access to these products for all consumers who choose to consume raw milk.
Mark McAfee, co-owner of Fresno-based Organic Pastures, the largest raw milk producer in the United States, told Food Safety News that there was no reference to raw milk in NFU’s 2012 policy manual. This year, when he was selected to be a delegate from California, he went before the policy committee. The committee agreed to bring the issue before the whole body, where it won strong support.
In proposing the new policies, McAfee was supported by delegates from California, Pennsylvania and the Northeastern States.
“They recognized that raw milk is good for people,” he said. “It’s good for cows and it’s good for farmers.”
But as upbeat as McAfee is about the organization’s new policies on raw milk, he’s disappointed in the states that are suppressing sales of raw milk for human consumption.
“It leaves dairymen in those states up to their own devices to get raw milk to consumers,” he said, pointing out that a lack of strict state standards can pose food safety risks.
According to the FDA, 20 states explicitly prohibit sales of raw milk and 30 states allow it. Among the states that allow it, California, Arizona, Maine, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Utah and Washington have strict standards for the milk’s cleanliness. These standards are equivalent to the national and some international standards for pasteurized milk.
Although the FDA has no power over state laws pertaining to raw milk, it does have the authority to ban interstate sales of raw milk, an action it took in 1987 with an eye on preventing disease outbreaks linked to raw milk.
‘Vigorous’ discussion at the Farm Bureau meeting
In January, during the American Farm Bureau Federation’s annual meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, delegates approved a new policy stating that only pasteurized milk and milk products should be sold for human consumption. According to information from the organization, delegates approved the measure in light of the potential risks to public health posed by the consumption of raw milk.
AFBF president Bob Stallman told Jerry Hagstrom, publisher of Agweek, that delegates had a “vigorous discussion” about this topic.
Dale Moore, director of public policy for the organization, told Food Safety News that raw milk was the “sleeper issue” during the annual meeting.
What triggered concern about this, he said, was a proposed amendment allowing interstate sales of raw milk for human consumption.
“When this came up, there was a lot of surprise,” he said. “The dairy members jumped and said, ‘No, we’re opposed to this.’”
That led the organization to re-emphasize its opposition to raw milk for human consumption.
“We decided we’re going to stay opposed, not neutral, on this,” Moore said, pointing out that this decision was based on the fact that there have been no changes in FDA’s stance on raw milk.
According to FDA’s website on raw milk, a recent study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that the majority of dairy-related disease outbreaks have been linked to raw milk.
Even so, Moore emphasized that the organization’s stance against interstate sales of raw milk applies only to the FDA’s ban.
“We aren’t going to try to change state laws,” Moore said. “We want people at the state level to understand that this is not a policy on what’s happening in their states.”
Hard times in the dairy world
Organic Pastures’ McAfee told Food Safety News that sales of pasteurized milk are in steep decline, which has many dairy farmers across the nation scrambling for ways to stay in business. For some, raw milk offers a better business model.
“If sales of pasteurized milk were really strong, raw milk wouldn’t be as big an issue as it is,” McAfee said. “But a lot of dairy farmers are facing tough times. Some are throwing down the surrender flag and saying they’ll plant almonds or walnuts instead.”
This theory aligns with comments that Michael Marsh, CEO of the Western United Dairymen, shared with a reporter last fall for an article in the San Francisco Chronicle.
“Many dairy farmers are simply giving up and getting out,” he said. “The barns are coming down, the corrals pulled apart, and the ground planted with almonds, walnuts and pistachios.”
The same article also said that farmers are not only losing their farms but also their homes, which in many cases were their grandparents’ and parents’ homes.
In an e-mail to Food Safety News, Marsh said that according to the California Department of Food and Agriculture, California lost 105 dairy farms between 2011 and 2012. He also said that since last October, milk prices have fallen and feed costs still exceed the revenue producers receive.
