Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Milk Processors Clout Versus the Voice of Dairy Farmers

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
nosmokes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 04:33 PM
Original message
Milk Processors Clout Versus the Voice of Dairy Farmers
i'm a bit puzzled and chagrinned that organic valley signed onto this letter. it seems that doing the right thing gets harder and harder every damn day even when the demand for it grows. it doesn't make any sense on any scale.fuck.-joe
--###--

original-cornucopia

Milk Processors Clout Versus the Voice of Dairy Farmers

Late last year we learned that the nation’s largest organic dairy processors (Organic Valley, Horizon, Stonyfield, Aurora and Humboldt) collaborated on drafting a secret letter to the USDA Secretary proposing their own “fix” to the controversy regarding factory-farms and whether their cattle are allowed to graze in compliance with the federal organic standards.

We’ve just obtained a copy of this letter and feel that dairy producers have a right to see and review it very carefully. Click on this link to read the letter.

It sounds good, its goals are laudable, but it depends on interpretation which is the weakness that some have criticized as the Achilles heel of the current standards.

Do you trust the corporations, that own and operate the massive factory-farms that have been gaming the system for years, to collaborate in good faith with certifiers such as Quality Assurance International? QAI is the corporate-friendly certifier that has been giving their blessing to the majority of all organic CAFOs. And do you trust the USDA to enforce another standard open to “interpretation” when it has looked the other way on this issue since they were given the responsibility by Congress to create a fair and level playing field?

Since the two largest factory-farm operators signed onto this letter, how much teeth do you think they believe it will have in real-world applications?
~snip~
.
.
.
complete article including link to the letter in PDF here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. humans have NO NEED for cows' milk. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-21-07 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
2. It doesn't matter.
To get cows to produce milk, you have to impregnate them. Then you have to take the calves away so you can take the milk their mothers make for them. The calves are slaughtered immediately as "bob veal" used primarily in pet and baby foods, raised in horrific confinement for veal or occasionally raised to full size for meat (though other breeds are preferred and this isn't real common.) Then the dairy cow is impregnated again, using a device known in the industry as a "rape rack" and the cycle continues, until milk production wanes after four or five years of continual pregnancy, mastitis (That's a breast infection- dairy cows bred to produce so much milk are very prone to them. Any mother who ever had it will tell you mastitis hurts more than you can believe, and unlike those poor cows we get hot compresses and pain meds for it.) and constant lactation far beyond the natural level needed to meet the nutritional needs of a single calf. At this point the cow is slaughtered, usually ground up for burgers because their poor health and the frequency of tumors in their flesh.

That has nothing to do with large or small scale dairies, pasture or barns, that's just what you have to do to make money off of another animal's ability to feed it's young.

There is no humane way to steal the mammary secretions of another animal, nor any reason to do so when cow's milk is the most common dietary allergen in human beings and promotes obesity, cancer and diabetes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nosmokes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
3. cows can an important part of a family farm, and dairy provides
protein. there's no need for the barnaric treatment you describe any more, as more and more organic dairymen are allowing their herd to go dry at regular intervals and if coordinated w/ other farmers and their herds it generally doesn't affect the supply too much. as for the veal issue, i'm not opposed to veal as long as the calf hasn't been kept crated in the dark and fed a liquid only diet. *natural* veal, for lack of a better term is fine with me. it may ot be everyone's cuppa tea, and i doubt that personally i will ever feel the need to eat any, butphilosophically i'm fine with the concept and the practice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC