Re: Why don't we all just bite the hand that feeds us?

[Guest guest]

Will,

Thank you very much for this post. It is entirely accurate. Most people have no

idea of the toil and expertise that it takes to produce wholesome, health

building milk. We sell real milk and it is very disturbing to see unappreciative

consumers who do not value the effort it takes to produce nutrient dense milk.

Jim

>

> Oh, no, I forgot to warn you, this is a terrible place to whine about raw milk

prices. I have never seen over-priced local raw milk. In my travels across the

country and in communication with other chapter leaders of the WAPF I see

enlightened urban/suburban folks driving hours to get the opportunity to pay up

to $14/gallon of good milk. Even at that, it's a health bargain! A food bargain.

An earth-saving bargain. A cow health bargain. A farmer-saving bargain. That

$10-14/gallon price is about what farmers who make honest milk truly need to

make to stay in business. I see some of our local, raw, organic, seasonal,

farm-bottled dairy farmers trying to survive these cruel times by offering their

precious, delicious and wholesome milk for as low as $6-10/gallon.

>

> With bulk commodity milk prices, even for bulk organic milk, hitting the skids

(again!) there is extreme and justified fear across the spectrum of conventional

dairy farmers. Thousands of strapped, abused and worked-to-the-bone small dairy

farms are going under every year across the country. Industrial Factory Farms

(the champions of both cheap, toxic, allergenic and dangerous milk as well as

" plantation " immigrant labor) engineer their lagoon-waste-moated, 10,000 cow

" dairies " to pick up the slack, and the sleepy-eyed, cell phone-addled

supermarket shoppers don't even notice!

>

> Farmers who make this commercial milk have been squeezed for decades thus

forcing 99% of them to turn to the Dark Side, breeding genetic freaks with 100#

udders (!) and A2 casein, feeding ethanol waste, pushing the cows with " hot "

rations, milking too long, jerking baby calves off their mothers on Day One,

using GMO (cheap) grain, and then drugging the mastitic, metritic and sick,

overworked beasts with antibiotics and other drugs just so they remain strong

enough to drag their bony carcasses into the milking parlor, these days being

worked over (more and more by robotic milkers) two and even three times a day,

and then being forced into doing it year-round! That still wasn't enough so the

back-to-the-wall dairy farmers begged Monsanto to inject their cows with

artificial hormone to extract even more of the cheap, white toxic liquid before

the cow fell over dead in her stall.

>

> Urbanites who don't know anything (or don't want to know anything) about the

daily toll of dead dairy cows being tractor-dragged out of their stall with a

chain around their ankle, want to extend their cheapskate Walmart mentality onto

the few, brave and noble organic, grass-based, sustainable dairy farmers who

struggle daily to keep the farm alive as well as the attempt to maintain a shred

of their pastorial morality and agrarian integrity. Many are now risking

punishment by attempting to go around the industry-protectionistic and idiotic

laws by selling raw dairy products direct to consumers in order to capture a bit

more of the consumer dollar. The same cheapskate, me-me-me mentality that opened

the door in America to a plague of Industrial Food is now trying to destroy what

may be the very best thing about American Farming, the independent farmer who

loves the land, refuses to be cruel to his or her animals and who truly wants to

make food that gives the rest of us health, good cheer and the strength to do

the right thing. So, here's to you, cheap foodists: Ye shall reap what ye have

sown.

>

> Will Winter

> Traditional Foods MN Buying Club

> 302 W 61st St, Minneapolis, 55419

> www.traditionalfoodsmn.com

>

[Guest guest]

I am new to writing but I read this story and I was curious on a few items. My

local Wal-Mart sells milk that is from a large farm in my state, I have seen

this milk in a few states so I know its USDA Inspected. Are these local farms

inspected by the USDA or who?I don't think Wal-Mart produces milk, they buy it

at the best price because of quantity bought. Cows need vaccines, fly control

and such are the family farms getting vet checks and is the milk tested like the

big farms? A lot of farmers self medicate because its cheaper then getting a vet

to come out, who checks all this out when you buy from the small farmer or they

said it was ok. I have nothing against the small farmer I think its great, I

just thought I would throw my two cents in that just because they are small and

family owned doesn't make it better or safer. Just be sure of your sources.

[Guest guest]

,

USDA inspection really guarantees very little. The USDA only visits farms

infrequently. The USDA will not oversee the way that the cows are raised, fed

and handled. The USDA will not ensure that nutrient dense milk is produced. The

best way to guarantee that you are getting clean and nutrient dense milk is to

find a local farmer who you know has the character and integrity to consistently

produce health giving milk even when people are not watching. This is really an

issue of character, not of whether the farm is inspected by some regulatory

agency.

Jim

>

> I am new to writing but I read this story and I was curious on a few items.

My local Wal-Mart sells milk that is from a large farm in my state, I have seen

this milk in a few states so I know its USDA Inspected. Are these local farms

inspected by the USDA or who?I don't think Wal-Mart produces milk, they buy it

at the best price because of quantity bought. Cows need vaccines, fly control

and such are the family farms getting vet checks and is the milk tested like the

big farms? A lot of farmers self medicate because its cheaper then getting a vet

to come out, who checks all this out when you buy from the small farmer or they

said it was ok. I have nothing against the small farmer I think its great, I

just thought I would throw my two cents in that just because they are small and

family owned doesn't make it better or safer. Just be sure of your sources.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I hear your quesiton, but the same logic flows both ways. Just because

they are big and 'inspected' doesn't make it better or safer. Inspections

are infrequent at the factories, small farms that sell raw milk are

inspected weekly by their consumers. Just be sure of your sources. I'd

guess that big farms that rely on confinement as a rule would need to rely

on the use of more medicine.

sean

> just because

> they are small and family owned doesn't make it better or safer. Just be

sure of your sources.

[Guest guest]

,

In my previous life, I spent 22 years as a dairy farmer. In that time,

I had a USDA inspecter on this farm twice! The state of MN inspects

dairy farms twice a year. The inspections amount to the condition of

the facilities, the cleanliness, and that anything in the facilities

is stored properly. Their only concern with the cows is if they look

dirty. One of the USDA inspecters that was here admitted that their

inspection has little to do with milk quality.

Terry

> I hear your quesiton, but the same logic flows both ways. Just because

> they are big and 'inspected' doesn't make it better or safer. Inspections

> are infrequent at the factories, small farms that sell raw milk are

> inspected weekly by their consumers. Just be sure of your sources. I'd

> guess that big farms that rely on confinement as a rule would need to rely

> on the use of more medicine.

>

> sean

>

>> just because

>> they are small and family owned doesn't make it better or safer. Just be

> sure of your sources.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

>>I am new to writing but I read this story and I was curious on a few

items. <<

, it's good to write, because when you get answers, other people with

the same questions get answers too. Write more, ask more questions, because

there is a lot out there that the food-consuming citizen needs to know, but

would never even think to ask.

>> Cows need vaccines, fly control and such are the family farms getting vet

>> checks and is the milk tested like the big farms? A lot of farmers self

>> medicate because its cheaper then getting a vet to come out, who checks

>> all this out when you buy from the small farmer or they said it was ok.

>> <<

Here's the first issue that needs addressing... " cows need vaccines. "

Brucellosis vaccines for heifers (young cows) is mandatory. It is law.

Brucellosis can be prevented by certain feeding protocols that have to do

with natural forage. It cannot be prevented with the same things added

artificially to the diet. Factory farms are disease producing cesspools.

They are entirely unnatural, based on unnatural feeding and feedstuffs that

make the cows sick. Vaccines are used to prop up this disease factory

model. Routine vaccination for livestock trickles down into the backyard

producer model because ALL we have to go by is protocols developed over the

last several decades to support factory farming. Our body-knowledge of

raising healthy animals without such artificial inputs is largely gone, and

having to be re-invented by the renegade few. That being said, vaccines are

not intrinsically a bad thing. I vaccinate my animals for tetanus, because

I believe there is a clear and present danger. I used to vaccinate for

" Clostridium Perfringens Type C & D " which is lab-speak for " overeater's

disease. " The fastest growing (hardest pushed) lambs suddenly drop dead.

Do we need to give them a vaccine for that or change our management to allow

them a more natural (slower) growth cycle? The tetanus and the CD-T are

usually bundled together in one vaccine. One has to REALLY SHOP to find the

tetanus alone. I vaccinate my horses for tetanus and West Nile Virus. They

have no particular exposure to disease, except by insect vectors, yet the

vet had them on some whomper stomper vaccines " just in case it shows up in

this area. " You can get eight or nine vaccines bundled up in one syringe.

Be sure to have epinephrine on hand in case of anaphylactic shock, and have

the vet's number handy for when you get an abcess at the injection site.

So...do cows in Cow-Land need vaccines like cows in Cow-Slums? On some

counts, they do by law. It's interesting to note that there are detectable

levels of drugs in our local rivers. I doubt vaccinated cows are to blame,

but it's something to think about.

We're building a root cellar in our new sheep barn. Food storage in a sheep

barn? Why not? My sheep aren't diseased.

It is not the vet's job to ride herd on the milk producer. He's the guy who

has to deal with the train wrecks caused by bad management and unnatural

environments.

>>I have nothing against the small farmer I think its great, I just thought

>>I would throw my two cents in that just because they are small and family

>>owned doesn't make it better or safer. Just be sure of your sources.<<

I couldn't agree more. In the days before control, Oregon dairies were

filthy and tuberculosis was rampant. There were stretches of our main

navigable river that the riverboat pilots would not enter because the

tanneries dumped the offal into the river and the stench and disease were

unbearable. Those days are gone. Sometimes we do need controls to save us

from ourselves. The best thing we can do is know our sources, as you say,

see if we approve of what we see. Ask questions.

I'm on a local food buying list and was prompted to suggest that loyalty to

a producer should be earned. The buy-organizer queried the producer of pork

and beef that she had patronized last year, but was questioning the $1/pound

extra the farm was charging for hanging pork. I told her, " Ask - question

their practices - know them and know what they are doing that makes them

special. " So she did. And the answer she received was mind boggling.

These folks finish their pork on hazelnuts (Oregon is the largest producer

of hazelnuts - " filberts " - in the nation) and they plant chestnut trees to

finish the pork. They grow and mill their own grain. This is staggering,

because most grain comes from 2500 miles east of here. They're involved in

riparian improvement. They hold open farm days. Most folks buy bags of pig

feed for $25.00/50 pounds and feed it to pigs held in a stye. I could do

that if I want to, but I won't. And I can't come close to doing what the

other farm is doing to produce pork. We decided we were going to continue

with our lambs because that's what we're good at, and look for pork that

was " worth it. " We found it. I will not go price shopping for a side of

pork. We will throw in with the group buy.

I think for those of us looking for whole, real food, the best " inspector "

is ourselves. We need to find producers who are so excited and committed to

what they are doing that they can't WAIT to answer questions and share their

excitement with other humans they propose to feed.

Barb

[Guest guest]

My real milk farmers have cows that live to the ripe-old age of 19 or 20 and

not 5 or 6. And when they live to be geriatric stage of life, they aren't

turned into hamburger. They're allowed to live with a high-degree of

thankfulness from my farmers, for all the calves they ever created. And

I'll be darned - my beloved farmers remember the name of every single calf,

in order of birth, and also what became of them. My real milk farmers

" self medicate " with herbs and natural meds, and not the synthetic crap.

And my small farmers can't hide behind pasteurization which kills off every

single bacteria - bad OR good in the milk, and hide behind it. I'll take my

chances with my real farmers that I can talk to, meet, even help feed their

calves like I did yesterday, or who let me walk out into the sun-filled

pasture with them just to shoot the breeze. Sounds like you should meet

more real farmers...........

You should post more. It's good to talk these things out..........

Sharon, NH

>

>

> Ight. Cows need vaccines, fly control and such are the family farms getting

> vet checks and is the milk tested like the big farms? A lot of farmers self

> medicate because its cheaper then getting a vet to come out, who checks all

> this out when you buy from the small farmer or they said it was ok. I have

> nothing against the small farmer I think its great, I just thought I would

> throw my two cents in that just because they are small and family owned

> doesn't make it better or safer. Just be sure of your sources.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

This was from a dairy that pasterized. I am not sure but I think it is when

they started double pasteurizing..think of all the meat that has been

recalled in the past few years due to E coli. I will add some links and

these are all moderated by the FDA!!

http://www.foodproductiondaily.com/Quality-Safety/US-dairy-linked-to-listeria-de\

aths

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19092079/

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/02/17/beef.recall/index.html

>

>

> I hear your quesiton, but the same logic flows both ways. Just because

> they are big and 'inspected' doesn't make it better or safer. Inspections

> are infrequent at the factories, small farms that sell raw milk are

> inspected weekly by their consumers. Just be sure of your sources. I'd

> guess that big farms that rely on confinement as a rule would need to rely

> on the use of more medicine.

>

> sean

>

>

> > just because

> > they are small and family owned doesn't make it better or safer. Just be

> sure of your sources.

>

>

>

--

Kathy-jo

c.

ebay store: http://stores.ebay.com/Uptown-rags

[Guest guest]

> I¹m not a farmer, but I bred many healthy litters of Saint Bernard dogs and

> was one of the founders of the national Saint Bernard Rescue Foundation. I

> take issue with ³self medicating². Many vets are wonderful, but I found

> holistic vets to be the best. Instead of using poison to control insects, the

> focus was on building a healthy immune system in the animal to prevent

> disease. One method I use is adding a bit of Springtime garlic to the feed. I

> have not needed a flea/tick collar for my dogs in 37 years. Most of my dogs

> live longer than normal and my vet thinks I am a fantastic nurse. Hope this

> helps.

>

> Kathy

>

> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 1:35 PM, <pdipisa@...

> <mailto:pdipisa%40gmail.com> > wrote:

>

>> >

>> >

>> > Ight. Cows need vaccines, fly control and such are the family farms getting

>> > vet checks and is the milk tested like the big farms? A lot of farmers self

>> > medicate because its cheaper then getting a vet to come out, who checks all

>> > this out when you buy from the small farmer or they said it was ok. I have

>> > nothing against the small farmer I think its great, I just thought I would

>> > throw my two cents in that just because they are small and family owned

>> > doesn't make it better or safer. Just be sure of your sources.

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> >

[Guest guest]

Beautifully written Barb!

[Guest guest]

There are issues of livestock husbandry that consumers are rarely exposed

to, having to do with the over-vaccination and overmedication practices of

corporate animal production. One might hear vague references to these

things, but hey, let's build up the arsenal here. I'm a farmer-foodie so I

see the view from both sides of the fence. There are other farmer-foodies

here. Our foodie-friends need a clearer view of the harsh realities of

animal husbandry. The stuff that isn't just visually gut-wrenching like on

the documentaries, but just the day to day differences and realities between

industrial and pastoral agriculture.

Factory animals are selected for production. Sires (bulls, rams, etc.) are

selected for their ability to produce daughters with production

characteristics that suit the factory model - ever increasing output. The

animals are " production units " so maximum production is desired and

survivability is a non-issue. These sires are then used to inseminate

thousands of cows. For production. Disease and parasite resistance don't

count - we have drugs for those.

In practice, the selection for production-only ignores the matter of

survivability. For instance, it ignores genetic parasite resistance. The

gene pool becomes weaker and weaker in this area, which then requires more

and more chemical wormers. The livestock industry has long been plagued with

parasitism, and more and more poisonous worming products are invented.

While we breed more susceptible livestock, we breed hardier and hardier

parasites. For sheep, there are no new wormers on the horizon, so all sorts

of protocols are invented to try and stave off the breeding of

chemical-resistant parasites. It should be noted here by the non-agrarian

that parasites KILL livestock. This is no small issue. Everything is done

by the industry to keep susceptible livestock from succumbing to parasitism

EXCEPT, using parasite resistance as a selection criterion in breeding

stock. At some point in the near future, this process is going to fail

utterly.

The grazier/pastoralist has his animals directly in contact with the

conditions that make parasitism a concern - eating from the ground. This is

part of the natural cycle. I visited one farm in Illinois that was so

parasite infested that a mobile home chassis had been converted into an

elevated lamb confinement area, where the lambs were raised off the ground.

No amount of chemistry could get his lambs to market off pasture.

The pastoralist then must face this problem head-on. What is in his

arsenal? Chemical wormers are likely to be necessary at some point. No

chemicals? We have herbs. We have mineral combinations that expel worms

rather than kill them outright, which results in no resistance problems.

These minerals were used historically, but were " obsoleted " when chemical

wormers became available in the '50's. I remember when the worming protocol

for horses was to feed a plastic tube up their nostril and down their throat

into the stomach to pour toxic chemicals directly into the animal.

Godhelpya if the tube went into the lungs. In the 20's, they were worming

horses with chloroform, and who cared if a few didn't survive. Chemical

assaults on animals were in full swing by the beginning of the 20th century

and production of " improved breeds of dairy cattle " had already increased to

the point where pastoral farming production levels were beginning to be

inadequate for the ravening appetite of the growing population. In the

present return to pastoral farming, we begin to return parasite resistance

into our breeding program, thereby selecting natural animals that can live

in a natural environment with fewer chemical props. Because domestic

animals must be kept contained to some degree, and in contact with infective

vectors (okay, a euphemism for " their own manure " ) we then include strategy.

Rotational grazing, inter-species grazing (cow parasites die in sheep and

vice versa), grazing at grass height that is above the parasite's ability to

climb the grass and be re-ingested. The most important weapon in the

grazier's arsenal is his brain. He has to THINK and apply SKILL to both his

breeding program and his management program. He may have to avoid the

Greatest Gaining Sire of All Time in favor of less yield, but more

survivability. Collectively, graziers are re-inventing our factory animals

back to grazing animals that no longer need irrational quantities of

chemicals to sustain them.

Graziers must select their animals for their ability to eat grass. Can you

believe that?? It's true! A cow or a ewe has to have a big BIG belly to be

able to take in enough green grass to sustain her growing calf or lambs.

Animals grown on highly concentrated diets don't necessarily have that

physical capacity for huge quantities of forage. He also needs to

understand the variabilities of the grass, it's seasonal highs and lows of

nutrition, and it's relative ability to deliver adequate nutrition without a

white coat lab technician punching keys on a computer and barfing up a

" scientifically formulated ration " for an animal that lives on concrete or

mud. The ration that is given to factory animals may contain chicken manure

and ground feathers. Any time a cheap source of protein can be found it

will supplant natural sources. " Broiler litter " and feathers are high in

nitrogen and the cow can convert a certain amount of that into protein.

And one of the things that I haven't even addressed, is that the grazier

must do all of this AND improve his land at the same time. So not only is

he an animal husbandman, he is also an earth steward. The " toxic waste " of

the industrial animal becomes a reciprocal nutrient for the soil and grass

that sustained the cow.

The corporate food machine has abdicated skilled animal selection and

management in favor of a production environment where survivability criteria

are not considered. The production is high, but the diet is adulterated,

the genetic resistance to disease is entirely ignored and the production

unit wears out prematurely. The only way to keep this farce going is to

prop it up with chemical inputs.

As small producers of grass eating animals, we have been exposed only to

this production model in the recent past. All of our older " how to " books

are laced with confinement rearing and feeding advice. NRC requirements for

nutrition are based on pushing animals to their maximum performance. I do

not believe there is a written text anywhere that suggests nutrient

requirements for " natural " production. That is why every grazing operation,

every producer of grassfed products is a " seat of the pants " manager. HIS

livestock, HIS pastures, HIS terrain and climate are completely different

from the guy down the road. Most of the folks around here are still in the

tailspin of grain 'em and vaccinate 'em,

graze-the-ground-until-its-bare-then-drown-it-with sewage-sludge, with no

idea how to get out of the loop. They're still sending bulls to " test " on

the unversity model, not the grazing model. They're buying semen out of a

catalog based on those tests, with little thought as to whether the bull

could sire a calf that would survive on grass, or if the bull himself could

survive on grass! The grassfed guy has to go out and find a bull that he

finds thriving in the pasture of another grazier.

In all fairness, factory farms are not the only ones making bad choices in

selection. Some folks fall prey to the " save every weak lamb " emotional

situation, where they go to extraordinary efforts to save a weakling, and

then return it to the genetic pool, thus assuring a declining robustness in

their herd or flock in the name of compassion. Or a dazzling color pattern

of the coat may be the selection criterion. Small producers rarely have the

sheer numbers of animals to select from for rapid improvement, so keeping a

sub-par animal just happens. Few of us can really afford top sires. And we

have to decide what " top sire " means in the context of our own operation

anyway. In most cases, some reliance on chemical inputs will be necessary.

Even organic laws make it a crime to withhold treatment from an animal that

really needs it. It is not " intelligent " use of chemistry, but the

" routine " use of chemistry that is moving us toward sicker animals and

sicker soils. In any case, such decisions make or break the ability of a

herd or flock to withstand the health-challenging elements of its

environment without chemical props.

Grass farming is not all beer and skittles, sometimes some pretty ruthless

decisions need to be made in order to assure that the chemicals stay on the

farm store shelf. For the most part, though, it forces the return to

survivability of our domestic animals, perhaps at the cost of some

" production " traits that in truth, really only serve the corporate machine.

May " grassfed " never be industrialized in the name of highjacking the label.

This only touches on a little of the dirty underbelly of getting that food

onto your plate. The next time you read about cloning, about genetic

manipulation " so the farmer doesn't have to think about it " you can begin to

understand that it is not the cows that are creating pollution, sick milk,

methane, and on and on. It's her captors that have turned her into a

non-viable life form. She is as innocent of nutritional and environmental

sin as the driven snow.

Barb

[Guest guest]

Thanks, It is great that you have found a farmer like that. I did have one

question I know the cows can produce a little more milk but what does he feed

the calves when everyone is drinking the milk? I am not a cow farmer, I have

several friends who are and I raise goats. I get hay from several smaller

farmers who have been doing this all there life. In my state you cant get raw

milk they cant sell it. I have seen signs on several farms offering raw milk but

I think its pasteurized and because you buy it at the farm they are calling it

raw. I remember going to visit my x wife's grand parents they had a farm and

they would cook fresh eggs from the chickens they got that morning, then they

would milk the goats and we would drink that, that was great (coffee tasted

different). They were all self sufficient when it came time for dinner they

would go outside and find a chicken and that's what we had. But they cooked and

used every usable part of the animal. That truly is the best way to live, but we

cant say all technology is wrong. Our life span has increased a lot.

Re: Why don't we all just bite the hand that feeds us?

My real milk farmers have cows that live to the ripe-old age of 19 or 20 and

not 5 or 6. And when they live to be geriatric stage of life, they aren't

turned into hamburger. They're allowed to live with a high-degree of

thankfulness from my farmers, for all the calves they ever created. And

I'll be darned - my beloved farmers remember the name of every single calf,

in order of birth, and also what became of them. My real milk farmers

" self medicate " with herbs and natural meds, and not the synthetic crap.

And my small farmers can't hide behind pasteurization which kills off every

single bacteria - bad OR good in the milk, and hide behind it. I'll take my

chances with my real farmers that I can talk to, meet, even help feed their

calves like I did yesterday, or who let me walk out into the sun-filled

pasture with them just to shoot the breeze. Sounds like you should meet

more real farmers...........

You should post more. It's good to talk these things out..........

Sharon, NH

>

>

> Ight. Cows need vaccines, fly control and such are the family farms getting

> vet checks and is the milk tested like the big farms? A lot of farmers self

> medicate because its cheaper then getting a vet to come out, who checks all

> this out when you buy from the small farmer or they said it was ok. I have

> nothing against the small farmer I think its great, I just thought I would

> throw my two cents in that just because they are small and family owned

> doesn't make it better or safer. Just be sure of your sources.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> ----- Original Message -----

>

>

> Thank you very much for this post. It is entirely accurate. Most

> people have no idea of the toil and expertise that it takes to

> produce wholesome, health building milk. We sell real milk and it

> is very disturbing to see unappreciative consumers who do not value

> the effort it takes to produce nutrient dense milk.

While I agree that there are many people who do not understand and value what it

takes to produce nutrient dense food, I also know that living in the real world

with real world economics, I would not survive economically if I spent

$14/gallon for milk or the exhorbitantly high prices that are charged for other

healthy foods. It would not be a matter of being willing to give up luxuries

like a cell phone, cable or internet. It would be a matter of chosing to pay my

mortgage, heat, water, gas to drive to work, etc. or paying those kinds of

prices for the foods I value. I simply can NOT spend that kind of money. I

don't have it.

In order to feed my family real, whole, quality, nutrient-dense foods, I am

forced to find sources that fit my income. I grow and make as much as I am

able, but I simply cannot spend that kind of money for what I can't grow or

make, no matter how high of quality it may be. I happen to love porterhouse

steak. I think it's wonderful. But as much as I appreciate a good porterhouse

steak, I simply don't buy it because I can't afford it. If my only source for

real, whole, nutrient-dense milk charged $14/gallon, I would be forced to live

without milk. Sad, but true.

Terri

--

Be Yourself @ mail.com!

Choose From 200+ Email Addresses

Get a Free Account at www.mail.com

[Guest guest]

Barb,

I can tell you a bit about the milk machine where you live, in the pacific

northwest, as I spent many years a while back in sales administration at Wilcox

Farms in Roy WA. At the time, we were the major milk processor for Walmart,

Costco, Albertsons and Haggen stores in Oregon and Washington. I do not believe

they currently produce milk for Walmart or Albertsons anymore, but I'm not

really sure, as I have not worked there in 3 years. Safeway runs it's own milk

in that part of the country. The large processors collect milk from farmers via

milk tankers that bring the milk to the " farm " , which we called it although

Wilcox has no cows of their own, but does have many houses for caged chickens.

Anyway, the milk is processed large scale in a modern facility at that point and

then bottled and shipped. I was shocked to discover when I worked there, that

one run of milk might have 10 different brand labels, many of which would sit on

the shelf side by side. For example, in Albertsons, there were usually 3

different brand labels with 3 different prices. They were exactly the same

milk.

Wilcox supplier farms were growth hormone free, which is about the only positive

thing I have to say about them. There was no way to test this, though, so it is

just the word of the supplier.

Wilcox decided to start an organic line, but again, they have no cows, so they

used to distribute organic valley, but now they ship up organic milk from

california that is pre-packed with their label on it.

I basically came away from this experience understanding that all large scale

processed milk is pretty much all the same. And I don't drink it anymore!

Emilie

[Guest guest]

>> I did have one question I know the cows can produce a little more milk

>> but what does he feed the calves when everyone is drinking the milk?<<

,

The bull calves are a waste product. Some go to veal, some go to backyard

dairy-beef raisers like me, probably most of them end up as fertilizer.

Many many calves which have not received colostrum are run through the

auction houses. Most die pretty quickly. These days there are powdered

colostrum products that may see a calf through, but nothing like mother's

milk. I don't really know how dairy heifers are treated, but I believe I

have read they receive milk via hand feeding with bottle, bucket or

however, that is not fit for human consumption. This includes milk from

cows that are on the sick list. They are weaned early, and many times,

turned over to a farmer who will " background " them until they are ready to

be bred. Dairy farms don't as a rule waste their time raising calves,

especially male calves.

>>. Our life span has increased a lot.<<

Our life span hasn't really lengthened since at least the 50's. The reason

it appears that it has, is because they save more babies. Imagine 50 babies

die at birth, and 50 people die at one hundred. The average life expectancy

of this population is 50 years.

Barb

[Guest guest]

> ----- Original Message -----

>

>

> >> . Our life span has increased a lot.<<

>

> Our life span hasn't really lengthened since at least the 50's. The reason

> it appears that it has, is because they save more babies. Imagine 50 babies

> die at birth, and 50 people die at one hundred. The average life expectancy

> of this population is 50 years.

Some interesting numbers I looked up. According to the 2008 CIA World Factbook,

the United States ranks 45th (compared to other countries) for life expectancy.

Yes, that's right. The USA has a lower life expectancy than 44 other countries.

Life expectancy is greater in Bosnia, South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore than

it is in the United States of America! Also according to the 2008 CIA World

Factbook, the United States ranks 47th for infant mortality. Forty-six other

countries (including Guam, Cuba and Taiwan) have a lower infant mortality rate

than does the United States. Yet the United States spends far more per person on

" health " care than any other country.

Ummmm.....maybe we should spend less on " health " (or rather " sick " ) care and

more on real, healthy, whole food???????

As a side note. I always find it amusing when I read something stating the life

expectancy for time periods such as the bronze age. When I first started

looking into life expectancy, I asked myself, how do they know? There are no

written records of that time period. The only things that I could find about

how they estimated it was that they used wear on teeth and calcium density in

bones.

Ummmm.....did anyone stop to think that what they are using as standards are the

wear to teeth and calcium density of people living today - people who are

significantly nutritionally compromised by manufactured foods. We have a

plethora of degenerative diseases such as osteoporosis. Who's to say that the

calcium density of a person who is 50 today wouldn't be the calcium density of

someone who was 80 but living 1,000 years ago and ate real, whole food that was

vitamin and mineral rich? Life expectancies predating written history are all

just guesses, and I personally don't think they are very good guesses.

While I can't find any statistics, I personally believe that people who were 50

years old living 500 years ago were healthier than people who are 50 years old

today. We are so incredibly overfed and under nourished in this " modern " ,

" developed " and supposedly " advanced " country.

Terri

--

Be Yourself @ mail.com!

Choose From 200+ Email Addresses

Get a Free Account at www.mail.com

[Guest guest]

>>As a side note. I always find it amusing when I read something stating the

>>life expectancy for time periods such as the bronze age. When I first

>>started looking into life expectancy, I asked myself, how do they know?

>>There are no written records of that time period. The only things that I

>>could find about how they estimated it was that they used wear on teeth

>>and calcium density in bones.<<

Terri,

I just started reading a hot-off-the-press book about the hysteria behind

global warming. The first part of the book lays out the historical cycles

of global warming and cooling, and how they affected migrations,

extinctions, populations, pandemics, the rise and fall of seas, and the

retreat and advance of deserts, forests and grasslands. The bad times were

the cooling cycles. Certain " ages " such as the early Bronze age were times

of global cooling, which produced widespread famine, deforestation, and

disease, which is probably evident in the historical register of archaeology

and geology, and the various other methods of teasing out the past. There

may have been whole food at times, but after you've had a look at the first

chapter of this book, you can see that there were times when there just

plain wasn't enough of it. 500 years ago the world was in the grips of " The

Little Ice Age " which began in 1280 ended in 1850, and " Times of feast

suddenly changed to times of famine. "

Only sharing because it is of intense interest, and relates quite

specifically to traditional diets. Not messing with your post.

Expect the best, prepare for the worst. Good read. " Heaven and Earth,

global warming the missing science " by Ian Plimer, school of earth and

environmental sciences, university of Adelaide, Australia.

Barb

[Guest guest]

Thanks Emilie!

Safeway dairy products stink! ) They are taking all my favorite brands

off their shelves and replacing them with the Big Red Ess, their own brand.

The first to go was Tillamook Swiss cheese. Now rows and rows of Lucerne

white and orange rubber. Blah!

Barb

Re: Why don't we all just bite the hand that feeds us?

Barb,

I can tell you a bit about the milk machine where you live, in the pacific

northwest, as I spent many years a while back in sales administration at

Wilcox Farms in Roy WA. At the time, we were the major milk processor for

Walmart, Costco, Albertsons and Haggen stores in Oregon and Washington. I do

not believe they currently produce milk for Walmart or Albertsons anymore,

but I'm not really sure, as I have not worked there in 3 years. Safeway runs

it's own milk in that part of the country. The large processors collect milk

from farmers via milk tankers that bring the milk to the " farm " , which we

called it although Wilcox has no cows of their own, but does have many

houses for caged chickens. Anyway, the milk is processed large scale in a

modern facility at that point and then bottled and shipped. I was shocked to

discover when I worked there, that one run of milk might have 10 different

brand labels, many of which would sit on the shelf side by side. For

example, in Albertsons, there were usually 3 different brand labels with 3

different prices. They were exactly the same milk.

Emilie

[Guest guest]

> While I agree that there are many people who do not understand and value what

it takes to produce nutrient dense food, I also know that living in the real

world with real world economics, I would not survive economically if I spent

$14/gallon for milk or the exhorbitantly high prices that are charged for other

healthy foods. It would not be a matter of being willing to give up luxuries

like a cell phone, cable or internet. It would be a matter of chosing to pay my

mortgage, heat, water, gas to drive to work, etc. or paying those kinds of

prices for the foods I value. I simply can NOT spend that kind of money. I

don't have it.>

Thank you!! The comment about unappreciative customers really bothered me. I

know there are people out there who don't understand, but then there are those

of us who do understand, but still cannot afford to pay high prices. My food

budget is what I get in food stamps each month, and if I run out early, I can't

just pull extra money out of my rear to buy a wonderfully nutrient dense, but

high priced food item. If I do, I can't pay my rent.

I really wish there was some way to find a middle ground... Some way for the

wonderful farmer to get paid what he or she deserves, and yet still be

affordable enough for those of us who simply cannot pay so much.

Roxanne

[Guest guest]

" I really wish there was some way to find a middle ground... Some way for the

wonderful farmer to get paid what he or she deserves, and yet still be

affordable enough for those of us who simply cannot pay so much. "

Well, I believe buying direct from the farmer accomplishes this to some extent.

Kathy

[Guest guest]

" I really wish there was some way to find a middle ground... Some way for the

wonderful farmer to get paid what he or she deserves, and yet still be

affordable enough for those of us who simply cannot pay so much. "

Well, I believe buying direct from the farmer accomplishes this to some extent.

Kathy

[Guest guest]

Hi Kathy,

I think undeniably it does help. And I sympathize with the people who still

can not manage to afford it. Some people are living in small homes in not

so great areas, buying clothing second hand and doing things as cheap as

possible, and still can not afford it. A while back ago, I had a vision for

a food shelf, for nutrient dense food, but it kind of dissolved as the food

group dissolved. :-(

The whole topic is such a good reminder of good stewardship with our

finances. I used to think I was being a great steward when I got food super

cheap. And while there is nothing wrong with taking advantage of sales, we

need to make sure we are spending our money in a responsible manner. I

would rather pay a fair price then take advantage of someone and feel good

all the way back to the bank. I now realize that is NOT good stewardship.

And in many of the foods we might buy, is buying this or that supporting a

corporation getting rich while the food producers, locally or

internationally, are forced into poverty because of unfair wages? To me,

that is not good stewardship. But what do people who agree but truly do not

have an extra dime do? It is quite a conundrum.

I think moms does a good job in keeping pricing fair, but still some can not

manage to pay for it because otherwise they will not have a home. I wonder

if there is something we can do as a group?

Carol

****************************************************************************

*****************

" I really wish there was some way to find a middle ground... Some way for

the wonderful farmer to get paid what he or she deserves, and yet still be

affordable enough for those of us who simply cannot pay so much. "

Well, I believe buying direct from the farmer accomplishes this to some

extent.

Kathy

[Guest guest]

>>I think moms does a good job in keeping pricing fair, but still some can

>>not

manage to pay for it because otherwise they will not have a home. I wonder

if there is something we can do as a group?

Carol<<

This subject really bugs me because I think it reflects so many fundamental

fractures in the industrialized world. Entire populations disappeared from

historical settlements in England when industrialization began translocating

nutrition to the cities and away from local foodsheds. The soil fertility

was stripped so quickly, that indigenous populations could not survive, even

if they were willing to adopt a pre-industrialization lifestyle. While the

human condition has always been boom or bust, the centralization of

populations and commerce I believe, has bled off our ability to access those

real foods that we so crave, in a natural flow between agriculture and

commerce, grower and consumer (who used to be one and the same). The few

feed the many. How can we change that without a complete reversal in our

culture?

I got an eye opener the other day on a list related to this one. Prime farm

land in parts of Missouri sells for around $1500-2000/acre. This rockpile

we live on in Oregon goes for $29,000/acre on the tax rolls. We pay taxes

on that $29,000/acre. We import virtually everything to make agriculture

" work " on this poor hill ground. Grain comes from the midwest. Fertilizer

comes from who-knows-where. Some of the minerals we put on the soil come

from China. Some come from British Columbia. Alfalfa comes from at least

300 miles away, watered with wickedly expensive, finite underground fossil

irrigation water.

And worst of all, what young, passionate Starbucks manager has a chance in

perdition of entering an agrarian life in this region, at those land costs,

and those bleak startup investments? How are we to sustain the local

foodshed if our youth have no inheritance to the land?

Grassfed? The only way to grow animals here was to embrace one model or the

other...buy imported foodstuffs such as grain, or buy imported minerals for

the ground so it could sustain animals without grain (grassfed does not just

happen as a result of deciding not to feed grain anymore. Few lands are

" rich " enough to naturally sustain the entire lifecycle of grazing animals.

Even nature provided migration as the first " grassfed " system.) We chose

the latter because it is the only intelligent choice as far as we could see,

but we still created an " artificial " environment - a rich grassland island

surrounded by a nutrient poor, natural forest, at considerable expense that

we'll likely not ever recover.

Now, I'm not going to relate the following as a " woe is me " whine, nobody

has to defend their financial situation, it's just a way of my conveying to

bewildered, non-agrarian traditional-foodies with no information source but

Pollan and gut-wrenching documentaries, why we are in such a

strapped situation at the lowest level of production - the small farm real

food producer.

Property taxes on the land alone on ten acres of previously non-produtive

rocky hill country with buildings in our county cost roughly $3000,/year,

the cost of two acres of prime farmland in Missouri. In order to make the

production of grassfed lamb possible, we've invested roughly $4000/year for

the last two years in imported minerals (imported meaning anything over 500

miles away) which covered seven acres, and in itself is unsustainable. This

expense will not be repeated at the same levels as initial soil building,

but will continue at a maintenance level. Our land is capable of producing

about 16 lambs per year. While we've eliminated our grain purchases, we

still have to buy a certain quantity of alfalfa grown 150-250 miles away at

about $300/ton. We'll use about a ton in a year. We grow our own hay, but

we pay the neighbor about $700-900/year to bale it, depending on how much we

harvest, typically 11-13 tons. We do not sell the hay, we feed it all to

our own animals. We have to buy bedding for the barn. We have to build and

repair barns. We maintain fences and buy necessary equipment. Basically,

if I sold lamb for $50/pound I will be losing money. I believe that few

really small producers like myself actually charge sufficient to cover the

costs of their actual business model. They're probably just basing their

prices on what everybody else in the area is getting and turning a blind eye

to what it's really costing them to do " business. " Around here, a lot of

people raise a few animals just to get the farm deferral property tax break

offered by the state, with little effort to produce the densely nutritious

food that " local " seems to have come to represent.

Not everybody is faced with the same kind of start-up costs as we are, but I

propose that those of us in urban areas are looking at the same dilemma in

the outlying foodsheds everywhere in the nation. Land is expensive.

Transportation is expensive. Taxes are expensive. Labor is expensive.

Where I do not have expenses, like workman's comp, someone else does.

And then I believe that a lot of this good food is produced - or at least

presented as " special " - as a market share grab. I just read an article

about organic milk losing its market share to prevarications of the truth

(industrial farms simply buying organic inputs, etc.) and I see " price

fixing " at the local farmer's market. I think that on so many levels, we're

being lied to, but at the same time, I think the local farmer like me, who's

raising food for their own table, with a few extra lambs to sell, isn't

covering costs, even with extra high prices. I see so many of the noble

concepts of agriculture that we so desperately want to take ownership in,

being hijacked and misrepresented by everybody from the " greenies " to the

environmentalists to the animal activists to the greedy, simply to serve

some agenda. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. If we don't know what

questions to ask, we'll never really know the truth.

It really BUGS me that I've got some excess lambs this fall that are really

too small to sell, but represent the kind of extravagant quality that we've

come to judge all our other food by. I don't want to sell it. If one of

you that dearly wished for the food were here, I would give you a lamb. If

you wanted to help me in the barn on Saturdays, help me put up hay, spread

manure or weed my garden, fair trade. If you were too busy making ends

meet, labor trade would not be a concern. As it is, there are plenty of

organizations trying to help families in flux, and we're going to try to

find someone who can benefit from our excess.

The system is busted, and I don't think it's fixable. But these are the

kinds of things that I believe need to be transparent between the farmer and

the consumer. The consumer may not want the farmer's whole sob story, but

if the farmer is transparent enough and the consumer needs to know WHY the

pork is $1/pound more than the neighbor down the road, then I don't think

this kind of dialog is inappropriate. The days of red barns and silos and

cows daintily prancing along a pristine stream with a little girl in

pigtails and a dress, holding a bunch of flowers (as depicted on the Organic

Valley milk carton) are a myth and a complete fabrication. Marketing and

feel-good have to be replaced by real awareness. THEN we can start

figuring out how to get this kind of food into the tummies of the children.

Barb

[Guest guest]

> And worst of all, what young, passionate Starbucks manager has a chance in

> perdition of entering an agrarian life in this region, at those land costs,

> and those bleak startup investments?  How are we to sustain the local

> foodshed if our youth have no inheritance to the land?

As a young person who wants nothing more than to have a farm to raise

her own food and family on, and to be able to provide good, wholesome

stuff and education to the public, I certainly hear you on this. It

seems nearly impossible to get back to the land without either being

really lucky and coming into some land/money by way of a relative, or

by being smart/lucky enough to have selected a lucrative career path

when first starting out on your own. I long for the old days when we

could just go out and stake a claim!

- Tipper

[Guest guest]

Tipper,

If nothing else, THIS is the major fracture in communication - not the

tabloid press yelling the sky is falling and giving us no options to prop it

up!!

The agricultural community is aging. We need to invest our energy in paving

the path for the next generation. The farm publications keep preaching to

the choir, griping about commdity pricing and laughing at " alternative

agriculture " , while the popular press and the documentary makers keep

freaking us out and leaving us with no hope for the future! The glossy

magazines have some good stuff and some elitist stuff for well-off

recreationalists. Few, FEW of us are born to the tradition, with the body

knowledge of how to do this right, and if we WERE born to the tradition,

chances are we inherited some very bad practices from our post WWII parents.

And there are some nuts and bolts publications like Stockman Grassfarmer

that are not only fiscally shrewd, but also aimed directly at re-inventing

agriculture for the better. It takes old energy that has already cleared

away many of the obstacles, and new energy to build on that success and

continually innovate. We all need to both create food, and understand the

creation of food, neither as a collapsing edifice of decadent production

models, or a rose-colored view of perennially verdant pastures and

frolicking lambs. Food is life and death stuff. You have really got to

WANT it to fix what's broken about it!

We are not given definitions of what " depleted soils " means - but the phrase

is routinely delivered as either a sensationally grim concept, or a way to

sell mineral supplements. What if people knew what " depleted soil " really

meant? That it's not all man made, that not all lands we expect to yank a

food crop out of are suited for food production, and that not all depleted

soil is irreversible? The popular press is not telling the consumer that,

optimism doesn't sell newspapers, and they will double back on yesterday's

headline if there's a new crisis to report in the food system.

Friend of mine says " sometimes a man's paycheck depends on his not knowing

why he is doing what he does for a living. " Or something like that.

The farming press is just as bad, but there are authors out there that need

to be read by people like you who want to grab that brass ring. Look at the

book list at www.stockmangrassfarmer.com or Acres USA and check out " No Risk

Ranching. " I have not read the book, but I know it is about obtaining

leased lands - sometimes free - as a means of entering food production.

If you want to farm, you need to know that you can't just buy the first

thing that you fall in love with, like we did. " Grassfed " didn't even exist

as a word when we bought here 30 years ago. We had to live a lifetime

before we could pay off the mortgage, finish spending all our time earning a

living, and dabble in this growing obsession of real food production. But

you need to go where you can find out how to begin without risking it all,

or not even having an opportunity to take risk. You need to get grounded in

the new agriculture, and not be bogged down in what " used to be. " The

concept of pristine, perfect agriculture is a myth. Only since the 40's

and 50's has the science been available to remineralize the depleted soil,

and the research came to an abrupt end when plants began being hybridized to

live in starvation conditions, to the great benefit of production and

chemical sales.

Start out with a book like " The Biological Farmer " by Zimmer. Look at

the books on risk-free ranching offered by Stockman Grassfarmer.

Above all, never let anyone tell you your dream is unattainable. It may not

end up being what you envision today, but the blessing of advancing maturity

is that you can look behind you and see how your fortunes have carried you

to a place you never could have imagined in your youth.

Blessings,

Barb

> And worst of all, what young, passionate Starbucks manager has a chance in

> perdition of entering an agrarian life in this region, at those land

> costs,

> and those bleak startup investments? How are we to sustain the local

> foodshed if our youth have no inheritance to the land?

As a young person who wants nothing more than to have a farm to raise

her own food and family on, and to be able to provide good, wholesome

stuff and education to the public, I certainly hear you on this. It

seems nearly impossible to get back to the land without either being

really lucky and coming into some land/money by way of a relative, or

by being smart/lucky enough to have selected a lucrative career path

when first starting out on your own. I long for the old days when we

could just go out and stake a claim!

- Tipper