WANTED: Women for Real Food Revolution
And community food security
Welcome to Raw Milk Mama, a newsletter about food freedom, our food systems, and how to create local food security in our communities. Sign up here for weekly posts, or keep reading…
If you value this content, please consider a paid subscription.
There’s a legendary ad that many advertisers point to for inspiration. It goes like this:
MEN WANTED for hazardous journey. Low wages, bitter cold, long hours of complete darkness. Safe return doubtful. Honour and recognition in event of success.
As the story goes, arctic explorer, Ernest H. Shackleton, posted the ad in a British paper. Part of the legend is that he got hundreds of responses.
Although there is no real evidence yet found of that ad, today a similar ad should read:
BRAVE MAMAS WANTED for real food revolution. No pay, no glamor, no rest. Long hard work hours. Ridicule, disdain and mischaracterization assured. “Relaxing” lifestyle doubtful. Government investigations and/or lawsuits likely. Food security for your community and the next generation if successful.
It appears that farmers Sarah King and Christine Anderson signed on for the new version.
Gone are the milkmaids of the past.
Today, we have the milk MAMAS.
Mama tough enough they won’t let the predators get their children–or their cows.
Mamas who know the ecosystem enough to see the tidal wave of food insecurity approaching in the coming years and are courageous enough to tell people to run for the higher ground of community food production, even as some ridicule them along the way.
The work we do doesn’t need to be this radical. But it is urgent.
Women Milking cows and feeding their communities are the cornerstone of food security.
Cows mooed in the background as Christine explained the lawsuit to me over the phone. It was a complex conversation because the details are complicated.
For the whole 40 minutes we spoke, I heard the clinking of gates, the sounds of the animals, and the heavier breathing that comes with hard work.
Christine wasn’t slowing down, even to talk to someone about her case.
Unstoppable.
That’s what comes to mind when I think of the women–and sometimes men–who relentlessly strive for food dependability in our communities. It is they who have provided our households and communities with food security generation after generation.
Today, the women who do things like milk cows and goats, make cheese, churn their own butter, grow their own herbs, plant their own gardens, feed our families and communities, are considered fringe.
But why are we considered this way?
This is the question that keeps bugging me.
Because we care more about the soil under our fingernails than having polish on them? Or because we will stand up to those who threaten our food security?
Christine seems so ordinary…
So much like me.
We’re NOT radical. We’re not extremists. We are productive members of our communities, helping and giving where we can, contributing our talents and skills to a common purpose.
For Christine, who grew up milking cows, one of her contributions includes using her expertise to bring the choice of fresh, local milk to her community.
She milks 2-3 cows, serving families in her zip code following all the ODA regs and protocols.
Christine’s expertise extends to knowing how to consistently and safely produce raw milk for her own family and those who don’t have access to land or perhaps don’t have the expertise she has in milking cows.
It’s a win-win.
Or at least it WAS a win-win.
Until the dairy cartels in her area targeted the small and micro dairies–but not for being raw. The new interpretation of an existing rule required that all dairies (small or large, raw or not), get CAFO permits to manage “wastewater.”
From their white paper: “Raw milk dairy operations fall under CAFO regulations because they entail animal confinement and manure handling. They use wastewater management systems to collect, transfer, store, treat, and apply manure, and process wastewater.”1
Of course, interpreting a 3-cow, grassfed dairy as a CAFO is the grand canyon of cognitive deception.
Are the bigger dairy cooperatives so greedy that they would use the Oregon Department of Agriculture to do their dirty work?
It matters not. The Milk Mamas fought back via a lawsuit in conjunction with the renowned Institute for Justice (IJ). (Find the court documents here)
The Institute for Justice explains in their press release…
“The small, sustainable dairies that are suing the state bear almost no resemblance to mass market suppliers. The state allows dairies that milk two or fewer cows or nine or fewer goats or sheep to sell milk without a state license. Sarah’s cows come into the barn to be milked and then rotate between pastures. Manure is either composted for use in her vegetable garden or integrated back into the soil to keep the pasture healthy. Keeping her milking equipment clean requires minimal use of water. Her cows are frequently tested to ensure they are free of disease. She has never been cited for food safety or environmental hazards.
“But in 2023, at the prompting of large dairies, the Oregon Department of Agriculture changed its mind and demanded that small dairies install expensive and complicated drainage and holding systems—supposedly to manage wastewater that they don’t really produce. But the government cannot wrap small dairies in red tape just to please large dairies. That’s why Sarah and other farmers are teaming up with the Institute for Justice to file a federal lawsuit against the agency.”
Clearly, whoever was the shot caller at the dairy cooperative, had the ear of someone at the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA).
So ODA “revised” a rule regulating their Confined Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) farms.
Let’s back up and talk about CAFOs real quick….
What is a CAFO?
It usually stands for “Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation.” In Oregon, they changed “concentrated" to “Confined.” There are clear legal definitions of what a CAFO is, and…. it’s NOT a 3 cow farm.
Christine explains it well in our discussion on the podcast.
You’ve likely seen pictures of CAFOs before. They are the crowded, confined houses where farm animals are kept to be fed, watered and fattened up until slaughter (or while chickens produce eggs).
As I spoke to Sarah King to get her take on the situation, she was watching her cows graze happily out at pasture 15 minutes after getting milked.
“And this,” she says, “is the antithesis to a CAFO.”
Her family works hard to be the best stewards to animals and the earth that they can be.
But, she tells me, when ODA tried to label them as CAFOs, both she and Christine became determined to overturn that new classification.
These two women were clear about what was NOT okay with this program.
“What drives you to do this?” I ask.
Her response is as firm as it is quick.
She is here for integrity.
And that segues nicely into the next part of our conversation…
Emotional response movement vs. small farm movement
Multiple people sent me articles and videos about how the state of Oregon was trying to shut down small farms. These alarming pieces of content did not speak to Christine or Sarah. They did not get into the nuances of the case.
“Is Oregon going after raw dairies?” was the burning question on my mind. Were they “targeting” small farms for being shut down?
No one was shut down, Sarah tells me.
But what about sensationalism?
Could the social media articles and videos on their case be click bait? Have sensationalists with an agenda intentionally mixed tiny drops of truth in with a gallon of exaggeration? If so, this would do a disservice to those actually on the ground working hard to create the needed change and reform.
While Sarah and Christine have approached this issue methodically, citing real facts, and have been engaged with the legal process the entire time, it appears that other entities have profited tremendously from pure sensationalism.
Yet, the quiet contributions of women feeding their communities seem largely ignored by people who use shock and manipulation for profit. Are some even fomenting for war? A physical war, psychological war or simply a war of words, I cannot say. Sensationalism circumvents the actual facts and puts profits in the pockets of those subverting the immeasurably good work of women feeding their communities.
Using emotionally triggering rhetoric to distract and raise ad revenue or “legal” funds is the antithesis of building and growing real food. It gives specific “influencers” an audience regardless of whether they have any credibility or the ability to make change.
One has to look no further than the ongoing fundraising over the Amos Miller case in Pennsylvania to fully grasp the horrific impact on small farmers and consumers this type of profiting mechanism creates.
If we are going to make changes to create a secure food system, we have to address the facts.
Is the government trying to starve everyone by destroying our small farms?
Or is it more likely that a few extremists wish for any excuse to start an online mob?
Your outrage matters! But it matters most when it’s not misplaced and used against you.
Yes, it IS an injustice against America’s small farmers when a state department of Agriculture changes the interpretation of existing rules specifically at the behest of the large scale dairy industry.
But the facts matter. Nuance matters. The stories of the people involved matter.
The fact that the plaintiffs in this case are all women who are milking cows or goats in order to feed their immediate local communities is imperative.
The fact that never once were these farms shut down is key. This is NOT, as some sensationalists lied, “the government shutting down small farms.” They didn’t get shut down. And facts still matter.
Because of Institute for Justice’s lawsuit, ODA backed down on their reinterpretation of the CAFO rule.
“Effective immediately …. ODA withdraws its policy that the act of milking an animal in a barn, or the washing of equipment used in milking an animal, triggers a CAFO permit coverage requirement. Many small farm operators involved in livestock production could have been required to obtain a CAFO permit under the withdrawn policy, but it is no longer necessary in most cases.”2
ODA stopped short of saying they don’t have the authority to enforce this. Thus, Sarah and Christine tell me, the lawsuit will proceed.
"Bridge walkers"
As Sarah and Christine see it, changing applicable laws is what America is all about.
We have that power in this country and they plan to use it.
Raw Milk Mama's are bridge builders and bridge walkers. Meeting in the middle and finding solutions is the keystone to food security!
Their lawsuit focuses primarily on the 14th amendment.
In other words, as one reporter states,
“The IJ’s attorneys argue the state is intervening on behalf of the larger dairies at the expense of the smaller ones.
“The government cannot crush small producers because its industry pals ask them to,” Senior Attorney Ari Bargil said. “Economic protectionism is flatly unconstitutional and our lawsuit will continue on until the courts acknowledge precisely that.”3
This is the perfect example of using our laws and policies to protect the freedoms of the smallest producers when approached with a wise strategy.
This whole situation–from the first misinterpretation of the CAFO permit to the lawsuit and to the sensationalist and inaccurate reports on the case–beg the question:
What is our common ground?
For Sarah, Christine, and me the answer is simple and obvious:
Spend your dollars at the farms that are feeding you who are IN or near your zip code right now. Engage with your community. Have face to face interactions and exchanges. Learn to produce some of your own food. Get involved with local politics and laws.
As Americans, we have the opportunity and are encouraged to be involved in our governance structure.
It is up to us to use our agencies to shape our communities in a way that will inspire food security. In a way that our children will want to be a part of food security for the future.
Access to hyper local, small scale dairies will, inevitably, be a vital ingredient in present and future food security just as it has been for millennia of human civilization.
And, as is historically significant, women are primarily (not exclusively) responsible for food security in their households and communities.
Without women’s vital contributions in this arena, could we even have food security?
Hyper local micro dairies such as Christine’s and Sarah’s are the epitome of true food security.
Not farmers selling all over the country. Not your mail order meat. And certainly not your sensationalist youtubers earning dough for the clicks that misrepresent the women doing the work.
People are people. There is no “government” separate from “us,” there is only us, as we learn to grow and produce our own food once again living off the common ground that we all call America, but living in and for our communities because we are part of them.
Welcome to America. A land flowing with raw milk and honey if we’ll let it, and home of the brave real food revolutionaries.
For the full discussion on the podcast, listen below or Apple podcasts.
I am called to share in-depth investigative articles with salacious details about my experiences in the “food freedom” movement–the good, the bad, and the ugly. If you appreciate these articles and want to see more of this work, please consider a paid subscription, or if that is out of reach, please share this Substack with others. This work helps to support my family.
I am grateful for all the recent paid subscriptions to help with the above mission. Your messages and notes are encouraging and uplifting. Thank you.
Some have asked about making a one-time gift. Yes, you can contribute here. My family thanks you for investing in my writing.
For more content, follow my daily emails here and the Nourishing Liberty Podcast.
Great read particularly after watching the documentary Wilding last night.I think that might be right up your street.