June 2006
NEWS
Ohio’s Source for Ag Information
Biofuels bill . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
CROPS
Hay broker . . . . . . . . . . .15
LIVESTOCK
Grazing dairy economics .26
Raw milk debate centers on public health versus personal freedom
BY KYLE SHARP
If you read the word “raw” backward it becomes “war,” and that’s
exactly what is currently being waged
in Ohio over whether or not consumers
should be able to legally buy raw milk
in the state. The battleground is the
Ohio Statehouse in Columbus, where
throughout the month of May testimony was heard, both for and against
legalizing the sale of raw milk, during
a series of standing-room-only hearings
for Ohio House Bill 534.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Arlene
Setzer, a Vandalia Republican, would
legalize the sale of raw milk — milk
straight from the cow, before it is pasteurized to remove bacteria. Ohio has prohibited such sales since 1997. Farmers licensed
to sell raw milk before 1965 were allowed
to continue, however the last farm to hold
one of those licenses, Young’s Dairy in
Yellow Springs, voluntarily gave it up in
2003 after an outbreak of salmonella sickened several people.
The Young’s case shows the height
of contention between the two sides of
the issue. Raw milk opponents cite that
case and other isolated outbreaks when
it warns about the dangers of raw milk.
While proponents of non-pasteurized
milk claim the bacteria strain that sickened people at Young’s originated elsewhere in the state and officials could
not positively attribute the problem to
raw milk.
And the opposing sides were quite
evident at a HB 534 hearing on May 17
before the House Agriculture and
Natural Resources Committee, when
testimony from both camps was heard.
The sale and consumption of raw
milk is not a constitutional issue, it is
an issue of food safety, said Tom
Fleming, an Allen County dairy producer and president of Ohio Dairy
Producers. He believes the process in
place to monitor the safety and quality
of milk, developed over many years,
should not be compromised because
of the inherent increased risk to
consumers and dairy farmers.
“We who have invested our lives, our
blood and our tears into producing a
safe, healthy product are unwilling to
take that risk,” Fleming said. “It only
takes one outbreak to have a large, negative impact on the entire industry.”
To support his position, Fleming read
a long list of organizations who also recommend no one consume unpasteurized
milk, including the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration, the Ohio
Department of Agriculture’s Dairy
Division, the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, and the Center for
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
Pathogens can get into raw milk and
cause serious illness, particularly to at-risk
populations such as children and the elderly, said Mark Case, director of environmental health for the combined Health District
of Montgomery County in Dayton, during
his opponent testimony.
“Parents may make a decision about
raw milk for their kids without knowing
the potential ramifications of that
decision,” Case said.
There is no nutritional difference
between pasteurized milk and raw milk,
and allowing the sale of raw milk would
be counterproductive to the protection of
public health, he said.
However, a number of raw milk proponents believe otherwise and provided emotionally charged testimony to support their
cause. Linda Ligman’s voice raised and fist
pounded on the podium as she proclaimed
people should have the right to buy raw
materials for their food if they so choose.
“The right to life is meaningless without
the right to choose what to eat to sustain
it,” Ligman said.
She buys only raw food products for
her family, including raw milk, and
Paul and Carol Schmitmeyers’ Darke County dairy farm is part of a raging debate in Ohio over whether raw milk should
be legal for consumers to purchase. Selling raw milk is currently illegal in the state, but about 5% of the Schmitmeyers’
milk is distributed prior to pasteurization directly from the farm to herd-share owners. These “owners” pay a weekly
boarding fee to the Schmitmeyers in exchange for partial ownership of the herd, making it legal for them to obtain a
portion of the raw milk produced.
claimed the switch to all-natural products
prevented her son from going blind, cured
her daughter’s migraine headaches and
solved heart ailments her husband
was experiencing.
Other personal testimony from raw
milk consumers at hearings on May 10 and
May 17 said raw milk helps with ailments
such as Lyme disease, asthma, chronic
fatigue, diabetes, arthritis, lactose intolerance and more. Pasteurization was said to
destabilize milk, kill both helpful and
harmful bacteria, and reduce vitamin and
nutrient value.
But ultimately, the proponent argument
boiled down to a right to choose.
“We’re not asking for legislation that
makes every man, woman and child consume raw milk,” said a Holmes County
raw milk consumer. “We’re asking to be
left alone and make our own decision
about what we eat and drink.”
The passionate testimony on both sides
of the fence left many on the Agriculture
and Natural Resources Committee searching for compromise.
“People are going to get their raw milk
from somewhere, and I’d prefer they get it
from a clean dairy farm in Ohio,” said Rep.
John Domenick, D-Smithfield, the committee’s ranking minority member. “We have
to find some compromise so we can all go
home happy.”
The debate begins
Rep. Arlene Setzer, R-Vandalia, had
HB 534 drafted after raw milk consumers
in her district asked for a legal way to
buy raw milk, said Zach Woodruff,
Setzer’s senior legislative aide.
“It’s our opinion that this bill really
opens up the floor for debate on the
issue,” Woodruff said.
continued on page 25