South Dakota Raw Milk Producers vs Big Government
State of South Dakota Initiates "Pogrom" Of Economic Genocide Against Small Farm Raw Milk Producers
By Richard Boyden
Small farm raw milk producers are being targeted by the state of South Dakota for criminal prosecution, incarceration, and destruction of their businesses if they do not cease to produce and market raw milk according to the “new rule” proposals being presented for implementation by the Dairy Division of the State of South Dakota. What is shared below is a short overview the oppressive format the state of South Dakota is preparing for small farm raw milk producers.
I decided to write this commentary after the deadline set by the State of South Dakota was past for receiving letters of support for raw milk small farm producers who are being targeted with “rule changes” and “laws” that are formulated to put them out of business. Why? For three reasons.
One. When the "raw milk" hearing was held in Pierre on November 17, there was only a ten day window given to file complaints and 10 days is not enough time for the supporters of raw milk, the small farm producers of, and those who chose to drink raw milk to even begin to get the word out state wide let alone nation wide. Not only that, the timing of the hearing was deliberately set to fall on the Thanksgiving Holiday week so as to make it extremely difficult for support to garnered.
Two. I wanted the rest of America and the world to know exactly what the hidden agenda of the State of South Dakota really is, and what it is proposing to do to raw milk producers and how this will affect those citizens who prefer raw milk over pasteurized.
Three. To expose who is really behind this criminal pogrom and how it affects our constitutional rights as American citizens.
I call this proposed new law targeting raw milk producers a pogrom. If you are familiar with the history of Stalinist Russia, then you will see parallels found in this definition with what the Agricultural Department of the state of South Dakota is proposing to do to small farm producers of raw milk in the name of “health and safety”.
Here is the Wikipedia definition POGROM.
"A pogrom is a form of riot directed against a particular group, whether ethnic, religious, or other, and characterized by killings and destruction of their homes, businesses, and religious centers. The term was originally used to denote extensive violence against Jews – either spontaneous or premeditated – but in English it is also applied to similar incidents against other minority groups."
What South Dakota raw milk producers are being faced with is a premeditated "politically orchestrated controlled riot" in the form of "national socialism” minus overt killings. This incognito form of genocide uses federal federal legislation as a template and was put in place by "fraudulent representatives of the people" who at the federal level, were lobbied by conglomerate pasteurized milk producers and suppliers of ingredients used in the production of pasteurized milk (such as Dean Foods, Monsanto, and Elanco) to buy their votes This allowed for the producers of inferior unhealthy pasteurized milk to monopolize the market and eliminate competition. The end result of the implementation of the new rules proposal or pogrom, will be literal destruction of their businessesof raw milk producers.
Not only that, the historically and scientifically proven health benefits of raw milk as a nutritional source for those choosing to consume raw milk over pasteurized, will also be the victim of this pogrom. If all the toxic, unhealthy, artificial-synthetic growth hormones, and the anti-biotic contaminates (see links below) were included in the definition of whether pasteurized milk was healthy or not, then the milk producers of would and should be “shut down” period. Disease causing ailments resulting from consumption of pasteurized milk and products made from, have been documented to far surpass any record of illness connected to consumption of raw milk or the products of both past or present.
The Dairy Division of the state of South Dakota knows full well (as do large corporate pasteurized milk producers) that raw milk producers are unable to economically abide by the demagogish, ill-legal, and un-constitutional legislation it is promoting. The vast majority of raw milk producers have neither the monies or resources to abide by the pogrom rules being proposed.
So now South Dakota is threatening raw milk producers using the new proposed new rules. Once the "new rules" become "law, the state of South Dakota will be able to have raw milk producers charged with breaking this prejudicial law that has no scientific credibility, criminalized, fined, property confiscated, and thrown in jail. Subsequently, they will lose their homes, their businesses will be destroyed and then they will have the added challange of worrying about how they will be able to feed and take care of their families.
You think not? Then read what happened to a Mennonite Raw Milk farmer in the state of Pennsylvania. Say pogrom and click here. Below are other links documenting the same in other states.
This is same political template and therefore, the premeditated pogrom goal of the State of South Dakota as it "goosesteps" behind the (funded by the pasteurized milk conglomerates) federal legislation which is now being implemented at state level and at the expense and loss of it's own state sovereignty if this attack against raw milk producers is fully implemented as proposed.
To display overt ignorance (or feigning the same) if not outright authoritarion arrogance on the part of the state of South Dakota’s Agriculture dairy program. I want you to read the below quotes from the mouth of the administrator of, Darwin Kurtenbach. Carefully note that what he alleges and how he threatens raw milk producers in South Dakota. He basically threatens them and implies they are already "guilty" of breaking the law which is NOT yet law while not even mentioning any factual evidence to support his position in condemning raw milk producers.
During the Nov. 17th hearing in Pierre, the state of South Dakota chose to evade the subject of scientific documentation about the health risks of raw milk. In other words, Kurtenbach and company are the least concerned about the health and welfare of the citizens of South Dakota while they lie in bed with large pasteurized milk producers.
In his interview, Kurtenbach is “parroting” the standard jargon used by oponents of raw milk to divert attention from the truth about “pasteurized” milk while demonizing raw milk and the producers of with regurgitated political and economic slander that profiles raw milk producers as “law breakers” and producers of unhealthy milk.
What Kurtenbach and South Dakota’s Agriculture administration does not want, is for the citizens of the state to neither have the right to produce a healthier milk then pasteurized for it’s citizens or the citizens to have the source for as well as the “FREEDOM” to chose on their own whether or not they want to drink raw milk.
Kurtenbach said the following:
"all of the rule changes are proposed because of public health concerns.
…basically, humans can carry a lot of diseases.
…there have been some cases of human illness linked to people drinking raw milk.
…about 15 years ago, there were reports of people getting sick from cheese made from raw milk.
…we know it’s going on. Raw milk is very dangerous,
…people raised on farms 50 years ago drank raw milk with little ill effects and got used to exposure to the bacteria.
…It’s a different world now…people want to go back to the old days…it’s not going to happen.
…There are a lot of serious health issues you can get from raw milk.”
So in order to “bypass” the whole issue of raw vs. pasteurized, the State of South Dakota has put in place the standard pogrom being used by and successfully put in place by other states in the United States in the form of the following rules to become law.
Read the State of SD Proposed Law pertaining to the sales of Raw Milk by small independent Raw Milk Producers. Click here to view.
Here is the response of small farm raw milk producers represented by Lila Streff, a raw milk producer who has a small family farm in Custer South Dakota where she raises goats who produce raw milk for human consumption. She and her customers and friends are appalled at what is happening but not totally surprised.
These are the key issues they oppose and why:
1). (12:05:07:15) — Bottling Machine –Hand-Capping is Prohibited. The Proposed Law of an expensive bottling machine poses an economical barrier to the small farmer. There is no scientific proof that this is more sanitary than hand bottling. Washington State has proven this and omitted it in their statute. (It is good to quote this).
I have documented information on the prices of the Bottling Machine: $8,950 ; Bottles : (min purchase) 1 Pallet (1,344) of Quart (square) bottles @ $1,102 per pallet; and 1 Pallet (792) of Half Gallon bottles @ $1,188 per pallet; Caps : (4000 x $51.77 per thous.) = $207.08. Plus shipping and taxes on these.
2). (12:05:07:15) —Barn Construction Requirements. An economical barrier is posed to the small farmer to construct a facility to meet all of their criteria just to sell a small quantity of milk. It is prejudicial to treat all farmers like a big dairy.
3). 12:05:07:17—The Proposed testing for coliform levels of 10 per mil. is too low. It practically comes out of the animal at that level. Other states require between 50 and 750 per mil. (Idaho and Connecticut – 50 per mil. are good examples to quote). SD is making it so low that it can't be passed -therefore we really won't be able to sell the Raw Milk.
4). 12:05:07:20— Proposed Customer List—It is intrusive to the customer’s privacy to have to submit your personal information to a government list. They could call you and harass you! It is none of their business what you consume (what type of milk you drink and where you purchase it). This is a breach of privacy.
5). 12:05:07:22 —TB and Brucellosis Tests — Proposed Law is to do this twice/year. Once/year is adequate. To do the test the animal is injected with a serum. If you test more than once/year, the animal's body will think it has the diseases and throw a FALSE POSITIVE . These tests are expensive, and again an economic barrier to the farmer. They are also unhealthy for the animal.
6) 12:05:07:12 — Permit to sell Raw milk —The issue of freedom to choose would probably pertain to this proposal of having to hold a permit to sell. To get this permit, of course, you have to follow all of the other new proposed laws. However, If we don't have to have a permit, then the other laws do not pertain.
The consumer should be able to choose for themselves the most sanitary place to purchase upon visiting different farms that offer Raw Milk. This should not be a government controlled issue. This law directly affects the producer and the consumer.
Click here to read what Lila Streff shared in her interview in the Rapid City Journal.
Now to address and point out information the Dairy Division of the Department of Agriculture of the state of South Dakota does NOT want it’s citizens and you who are reading this to know.
The below information contained in the below links direct you to information and articles about raw milk vs. pasteurized, cases of pasteurized milk contamination, raw milk banned in the United States, raw milk producers jailed and property confiscated in the United States complements of the pogroms of the states of Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania as well as in Canada.
You will see without any doubt, this is the path that South Dakota is duplicating. Raw milk producers in Canada are experiencing the same. One in particular who did his homework and has suffered unjustly because he chose not to capitulate to Canada’s agenda that has targeted small farm raw milk producers there.
Raw Milk Myths: Are We Prisoners of Pasteurization?
Real milk or not real milk?
Real Milk and Pasteurized Homogenized Milk Compared
Report in Favor of Raw Milk
Expert Report and Recommendations
Supplemental Report In Favor of Raw Milk
Growth hormone rbST safe and green, claims study
“Milk from cows given the growth hormone recombinant bovine somatropin (rbST) poses no human health threat and is identical to other milk, a review sponsored by hormone producer Elanco has said.”
Outbreak of Listeria monocytogenes Infections Associated with
Pasteurized Milk from a Local Dairy – Massachusetts, 2007
Listeria Blog – 95 percent of sources cited were NOT from raw milk and when raw milk was cited, it was a report citing the “danger of raw milk or products of” rather then actual cases of human sickness from Listeria iin a raw milk product.
Massive Outbreak of Antimicrobial-Resistant Salmonellosis Traced to Pasturized Milk
Two waves of antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella typhimurium infections in
Illinois totaling over 16000 culture-confirmed cases were traced to two brands
of pasteurized 2% milk produced by a single dairy plant. Salmonellosis was
associated with taking antimicrobials before onset of illness.
Two surveys to determine the number of persons who were actually affected yielded estimates of 168791 and 197581 persons, making this the largest outbreak of Salmonellosis ever identified in the United States.
The epidemic strain was easily identified because it had a rare antimicrobial resistance pattern and a highly unusual plasmid profile; study of stored isolates showed it had caused clusters of salmonellosis during the previous ten months that may have been related to the same plant, suggesting that the strain had persisted in the plant and
repeatedly contaminated milk after pasteurization.
PASTEURIZATION: Pulling the Plug on Scientific Fallacies Undergirding Our Industrial Food and Drug Culture
The pharmaceutical industry toasts to your ill health
Is rBGH is safe for cows and humans?
Raw Milk and the Michael Schmidt Case
Sneak Attack? Raw Milk Advocates Fear FDA Could Use Food Safety Bill to Require Pasteurization; Farming's Future
Michigan Department of Agriculture's harassment of Richard Hebron and the seizure of the raw milk products that he was delivering
No More Raw Milk In Ohio
Raw Milk – Attack and Counter Attack
Cracking Down Officials Order Farm To Stop Selling Raw Milk
Wisconsin: A state under seige by its own government
SDDA Proposes Rules to Create Defacto Ban on Raw Milk Sales in South Dakota
Here is the legislative policy adopted by the state of Missouri and passed on behalf of raw milk producers. Maybe the representatives of the legislature of South Dakota might look at this as an American model of fairness for small farm raw milk producers.
Consumers and Farmers Association (MOICFA), a Missouri based organization, waged a strong and successful campaign in favor of Raw Milk through passage of HB 1901. And yes, the Founding Fathers and Bill of Rights are part of their lobbying effort.
Issue: Free sale of raw milk in the state of Missouri
Economically: Allowing free sale of raw milk supports small family farms and the local economy – providing property tax funds that benefit the local community, public schools, county government, sheriff's departments, and emergency services.
Socially: Pick up and delivery of raw milk causes gathering of like-minded individuals with the same approach toward life
Environmentally: Raw milk is responsible, local agriculture that reduces our carbon imprint on our planet.
Safety: Raw milk farmed and consumed by conscientious individuals poses no more of a threat to consumers than does pasteurized milk or raw chicken sold in stores.
Healthy: Raw milk supports preventative healthcare, reducing the burden on the state by contributing to reduced allergies, obesity, asthma, stomach ailments, etc.
Dietary: Raw milk is the only ingredient suitable for certain dishes, nutritional drinks, and delectable treats.
Scientifically: Raw milk is full of nutrients, and has immune and health-promoting effects that are destroyed during pasteurization. Babies do not thrive well on pasteurized milk.
Constitutionally: Raw milk gives the people a reason to peaceably assemble, which is protected by the 1st Amendment.
The 14th Amendment, Section 1 states, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
I would like everyone to send both letters and emails to the principles representing the State of South Dakota in both the legislature and in the Dairy and Agricultural divisions. I am asking you to do this knowing the 10 day deadline is passed so that they have the choice of either dismissing your support for the raw milk producers or allowing for further support to be taken into consideration. I call this a moral and ethical “litmus test” for the them personally as well as for the government representatives of the people of the state of South Dakota.
Otherwise, as it already has been surmised that by intentionally setting a 10 day window DURING THE HOLIDAYS and limit for raw milk producers to gather support against the proposed rules, the State of South Dakota’s Agricultural Department knew full well that they would be able to justify making the rule changes a proposed “law” because of the limited response given the 10 day window and this was a part of a greater premeditated plan intended to accomplish one thing, to destroy the pasteurized dairy conglomerates competition and thus the businesses of raw milk producers while “we the people” are secondary victims of a un-constitutional attack on us that deprives us of our freedom to chose for ourselves that which is healthy for us or not.
It should be noted that raw milk producers were warned that this planning schedule would intentionally be set by elements in the Dairy division around the holidays. The families of raw milk producers, supporters and consumers of, had to scramble to get everyone to send their letters by Tuesday the 17th that week to get them there by Friday the 27th because of the Thanksgiving holiday in between.
So what does the Dairy Division of State of South Dakota do in their benevolent spirit of understanding and respect during the Holy Days Season? They schedule the next hearing before the Rules Review committee first on Dec.15 but they later move it to Dec. 21, the Monday before Christmas!
This is not only disrespectful but EVIL and yet tax dollars of the citizens of South Dakota pay the wages of such insensitive individuals who have no conscience or do they care about the affect this will have on the families and children of small farm milk producers in South Dakota. I call it premeditated HATE on their part!
Also, the State of South Dakota has a 75 day window to the new rules proposal passed and if that fails, they get to resubmit it and it won't be addressed again until April. They are in a rush. Rumors are when the next hearing debate takes place with 6 people on the Rules Review, the State of South Dakota already has stacked the deck with a vice chair who is an RN who spoke out animatedly against raw milk on a local radio channel.
This “new rules” proposal of the state of South Dakota exposes their pogrom agenda. I believe it is to allow for the 4th Reich of the Rich food conglomerates and their authoritarian socialist mandates which are endorsed and pimped by the FDA through the Dairy Division of the State of South Dakota, to continue to give them more control over our food, health, and freedoms as a state, nation, and people. Some folks call this the New World Order. I call it pure evil authored and inspired direct from the throne of hell itself and which the State of South Dakota appears to be a willing partner of.
State of South Dakota Dairy Division Contact Information:
Keven Fridley, Division Director of Agricultural Services for Dairy: Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Darwin Kurtenbach. Administrator for the South Dakota State Department of Agriculture dairy program – 523 East Capitol, Foss Building. Pierre, SD 57501-3182. . .His email address: Darwin.Kurtenbach@state.sd.us
William Even. Secretary of Agriculture for the State of South Dakota
Email address: AGMAIL@state.sd.us
Written correspondence can be sent to:
South Dakota Department of Agriculture
Division of Agriculture Services
Dairy & Egg Office
523 E. Capitol Ave.
Pierre, SD 57501
Here is contact information for Lila Streff:
Streff Ridge Farm and Goat Dairy
12376 Beaver Den Dr
Custer, SD 57730
For those of you who do in fact send a communication to the above representatives of the State of South Dakota, I would ask of you two things. Be respectful and let Lila and myself know if in fact you do respond. Thank you.
Founder and President of Operation Morning Star – a 501 c3 not for profit charity, Writer and Investigative Journalist, Counselor/Minister in the area of Suicide among Native American Youth, Radio Talk Show Host, Former Marine, and former instructor at Haskell Indian Nations University,