Raw deal? Farmers fear impact of milk law

CORNWALL — Farmers who have found a modest market for raw milk, including a handful here in the Northwest Corner (among 14 total across the state), are wary of proposed regulation before the Connecticut Legislature.

Nearly all of the producers are small dairy farms, so even the smallest change in the way they operate could have a significant impact on them.

The bill, put forth by the state Department of Agriculture, calls for more testing at dairies and additional labeling to warn consumers of the potential risks. Most significantly, it would ban the sale of raw milk in retail stores.

Department of Agriculture Commissioner Philip Prelli has said the ban was prompted, in part, by contaminated milk that appeared on store shelves last July. Seven people became ill after drinking raw milk contaminated with a strain of E. coli bacteria. All of the milk was produced at Town Farm Dairy in Simsbury.

Prelli has stated the aim of the bill is for raw milk to be sold directly from the farms where it is produced.

Marketing raw milk has always been an issue for producers.

In Cornwall, Hautboy Hill Farm stopped producing it as part of a recent overhaul of the business. Looking to branch out to other, more profitable venues, Buddy and Irene Hurlburt turned to items such as yogurt and soft cheese, which have to be made from pasteurized milk.

Buddy Hurlburt said they once retailed raw milk at 17 stores, but the price of fuel for deliveries made it cost-prohibitive.

At Local Farm (also in Cornwall), Debra Tyler has always sold her raw milk out of the barn. She prefers not to address the political issues. Friend and fellow dairy farmer Chris Hopkins explained that after 15 frustrating years of dealing with it, Tyler has turned her focus to other pursuits.

Hopkins owns and operates Stone Wall Dairy on Route 7 in Cornwall Bridge. He sells milk there, and at 17 retailers. He said the single incident at one dairy has become the excuse the state has long been looking for to get raw milk off the shelves.

“Only three other states in the country issue licenses to raw milk producers. The belief is it’s a time bomb waiting to go off, that the benefits are not worth the risk,� Hopkins said. “The incident in July gave Connecticut the chance to jump all over it. They don’t want any liability.�

While current regulations call for warning labels to be either printed on bottles or to be added to bottles on “hang tags,� Hopkins said the Town Hill dairy bottles were not properly labeled.

The only way to differentiate between the pasteurized and raw milk they produced was different-colored tops. He suggested the problem was really caused by the state and said the Department of Agriculture inspector allowed regulations to be violated.

“The people who bought the contaminated milk wanted raw milk, so presumably there was not an issue that they didn’t know what they were getting. But that doesn’t mean when their kids get sick, they’re not going to sue somebody.�

Is it worth it?

Hopkins’ analysis of the effect of the legislation is that it will not necessarily have a devastating toll on producers. Right now, each production run is tested for antibiotics. The state tests dairies quarterly for pathogens, including E. coli.

For dairies smaller than his, the increased testing and labeling costs, which the state is proposing the farmers pay for entirely, could mean the end of the line. Hopkins estimates his increased cost would be nearly $12,000 annually.

“I can probably absorb that, but I need to have a better reason.�

Is increased testing the answer, and is it more than just a perceived dilemma?

Hopkins said raw milk producers, by necessity and commitment, hold themselves to a higher standard from the start.

“I work toward producing milk that doesn’t have to be cooked. Pasteurizing kills bacteria, but it also alters enzymes and vitamins. I strive for cleanliness from the beginning of the process. I have to because I don’t have the backup of pasteurization. I believe in fixing the problem at the beginning.�

Getting it off the store shelves

Prelli stated in a press release that the aim of the bill is to limit raw milk sales to farms. He did not return a call this week asking for further explanation.

Hopkins said that while he doesn’t agree with the impetus behind it, the effect would likely benefit many farmers.

“If I couldn’t sell in stores anymore, I would develop customer lists and try to get them to form buying groups.�

For instance, he said he sells about 30 gallons a week at a Waterbury health food store, where customers pay $10 per gallon.

“If they formed a co-op, one person could come and pick up milk for everyone each week. I could easily cut a dollar off what they are paying. I could certainly benefit from not having to run around delivering milk. There are always plenty of things I could be getting done at the farm.

“It would also more directly connect people with where their food comes from. It would strengthen that commitment to buying locally produced food. They could also be buying things like the vegetables and honey we produce.�

Setting their own high standards

Hopkins was an originator of an ongoing plan to form a raw milk producers’ association. The plan included proposing their own set of regulations, based on strict “certified� milk regulations put forth in the 1930s. They supported monthly pathogen testing, provided the state paid for it.

Again, finding the time is a factor.

“When the issues are hot, we get into it. When things cool off, we realize we need to catch up on things on the farm. It’s tough to keep it going. I’m not sure I’m still even for an association, but I do think the government is trying for too much control for the wrong reasons.�

During their research, organizers reviewed testimony on similar proposed legislation in 1994, when Prelli testified (he was a state representative for the 63rd District at the time). Hopkins relates it more as a point of humor: “Prelli was saying he didn’t see what the big deal was, and that he had a bottle of Deb Tyler’s milk in his fridge.�

 Hopkins noted that local legislators have expressed concern over putting dairies out of business. Rep. Roberta Willis D-64, said in an official statement that it “makes no sense to punish these private-owned producers who have never been the cause of any outbreak of illness,â€� and that, “We should be working with these producers to expand this market.â€�

“In the end,� Hopkins said sadly, “it looks like the environmental committee will have enough votes against it to sink the whole thing.�