On Thursday, March 5, Utah H.B. 104, which would amend the Utah Dairy Act to decriminalize cow-share programs, made another step forward in becoming law. The bill decisively passed the Utah House by a vote of 61-11-3, and has now moved to the Senate for debate.
The Utah Code defines a cow-share as:
“A program in which a person acquires an undivided interest in a milk producing hoofed mammal through an agreement with a producer that includes:
(a) a bill of sale for an interest in the mammal;
(b) a boarding arrangement under which the person boards the mammal with the producer for the care and milking of the mammal; and
(c) an agreement under which the person receives raw milk for personal consumption.”
The only exception to the rule is if the “milk or milk products are consumed by the owner of the farm or members of such owner’s immediate family.”
In short, under current law it is illegal for two parties to jointly own a milk-producing mammal and split the milk between them, or to contract out the boarding, care, and milking of an animal to a third party. H.B. 104 would reverse the strictest aspects of the law and allow cow-shares with “no more than two cows, 10 goats, and 10 sheep per farm in the program.”
Among the strongest supporters of the bill are owners and supporters of community supported agriculture (CSA). CSAs are run by farmers who sell shares of their harvest to community members. Bolstered by the local food movement, CSAs have grown in popularity as a way for communities to access fresh, local, and reasonably priced agricultural products. Many Utah CSAs would like to see the bill pass as it would open another opportunity for community supported agriculture.
Red Acre Farm CSA, owned by Symbria and Lynn Patterson, played a key role in introducing and supporting H.B. 104. Red Acre Farm is located in the Cedar Valley of Southern Utah. The farm produces meat, eggs, honey, and over 300 varieties of vegetables. These products are distributed among shareholders in the farm and sold at local farmer’s markets.
The Independent spoke with Symbria Patterson and her daughter Sara Patterson about the bill.
Symbria is happy with how quickly the bill has received support. “Usually bills do not make it out [of committee] the first year, and so the fact that we have come this far is really kind of amazing.”
“It’s really a people initiative,” Sara said. “It’s come down to just the fact that we’re losing the right to eat what we want or to drink our own animals milk. It’s kind of crazy that they [those who jointly own milk animals] can’t even drink their own cow’s products because they own it with someone else. We’re saying it’s really a property rights issue. You’re taking away my property when you take away my right to own a cow and share the milk with another owner.”
The Patterson’s have worked closely with the sponser of H.B. 104, Representative Marc Roberts (R-Santaquin), to push the bill forward.
In an interview with Roberts he too said the bill is a property rights issue: “What this bill does is basically say that if you own a cow and pay for it… you are entitled to all the property rights that come along with that, including consuming the raw milk.”
H.B. 104 has received opposition from the Dairy Producers of Utah. When asked about the dairy industry’s opposition, Representative Roberts said, “They [the dairy industry] are afraid that there will be a raw milk outbreak and people will get sick and that will hit the news and affect their ability to sell milk, brand damage.”
Raw milk does pose a safety risk according to both the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The FDA has warned, “Raw milk can harbor dangerous microorganisms that can pose serious health risks.”
The CDC has reported, “Unpasteurized milk is 150 times more likely to cause food-borne illness and results in 13 times more hospitalizations than illnesses involving pasteurized dairy products.” Representative Scott Sandall (R-Tremonton) addressed these concerns during the bill’s debate in the House.
Speaking about the agricultural groups opposed to the bill, Representative Sandall said, “Either industry wise we have set regulations upon ourselves, or society tends to set regulations upon ourselves, because they want to know that their food is safe.
“Now we have a group of people who enjoy farmers markets, who enjoy wanting to produce some of their own food, they want to know the people who produce their food. And as an agricultural community we want to embrace that.
“But we also want to let them know that there are a number of regulations that we’ve learned from over the years, that we know how food safety should work. And we don’t want to turn the ship really quickly and do something that will upset that balance.”
The Independent attempted to contact Representative Sandall for comment, but was unable to do so. The bill must still pass the Senate and be signed by Governor Herbert before becoming law.
Source: The In