Raw Milk Safe for Now

The crowds descending on Sacramento had an effect: the legislature has given us a reprieve and rescinded the restrictions on raw milk. Here's the link for the article in the SF Chronicle:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/16/BAEBUFL9G.DTL

The gist of the story is found in these two paragraphs:

Raw milk proponents say the coliform limit is impossible to meet, and that it's unnecessary because most coliform are benign, or even good for human health, and that raw milk already is tested for the kinds that cause illness, including E. coli and listeria.

The department, which has a long history of trying to outlaw raw milk in California, said in a statement that "coliform do not belong in raw milk" and that AB1735 "went through the normal legislative process."

You probably don't need me to say that I agree with the first paragraph and laugh derisively at the second (the "department" is the California Department of Food and Agriculture).

I have to confess to curiosity: why is the CDFA so determined to wipe out raw milk? There is plenty of pastuerized milk sold in the state. It's not as if raw milk is the only thing available or that raw milk proponents want to force everyone to drink it.

They can't even say that people who drink raw milk are costing the state a fortune in health care costs because they're always getting sick or dying. (They did try to pin some illnesses on raw milk once, but their case fell apart. The dairy and all the milk tested clean for e coli and listeria).

Raw milk producers are not even a threat to Big Ag. There are only two raw milk dairies in the state and about 40,000 consumers who buy the stuff. You can't even follow the money in this case.

I don't get it. But I'm glad we got through to them and I'm keeping my fingers crossed. It doesn't sound like the CDFA is going to give up.