Raw milk farmer Michael Schmidt talks on video after recent court hearing.

Here is a video from Marianne Else of the Simcoe chapter of the Council of Canadians. Here’s what she says about it: “This is a video with interviews I made today [Dec. 3, 2009] at the Midland Court where charges were dropped for Ina and Keith Wood and the charges against the other 16 people were STAYED.

Earlier stories on Dump Site 41 on the Bovine:

Michael Schmidt’s Eight Days of Personal Resistance

Site 41 Victory — Council votes for moratorium

What if all concerned people did what Michael Schmidt is doing?

Michael Schmidt’s blockade and arrest at Dump Site 41

More Site 41 stories

We may still be wondering about the buck, but we know the yuan stops here. Chinese shop.

Here’s a fascinating story credited to Jon Cook at Reuters and sent our way via Mike Calicrate. It seems people are actually avoiding big-brand stores and the big-brand stores are trying to disguise their identities to still get the business. And just to throw in another twist, we’re including some photos of stores with obvious “knock-off” brands from a mall of such stores in China, where they clearly have no respect for American intellectual properties:

The hidden meaning of the hidden Starbucks logo

Bryant Simon

– Bryant Simon is professor of history and director of American Studies at Temple University. He is the author of “Everything but the Coffee: Learning about America from Starbucks”. The views expressed are his own. –

Last week, Roy Street Coffee and Tea, located at the corners of Roy Street and Broadway in Seattle, opened. This is another one of those stealth Starbucks – Starbucks stores without the Starbucks name over the front door – the coffee giant has been opening in its hometown and in London as of late. Like the other shops of this new vintage, this one is appointed with antique-style furniture, retro lighting, and a distressed looking table top salvaged from an old ship.

Lovin' it, Chinese-style.

The rough-hewed interiors of these not Starbucks Starbucks haven’t really mattered to the journalists and bloggers who have been writing about them. They talk only about the naming patterns in Starbucks’ most recent branding strategy.

To them, the names of the stores represent a brand crisis. Quite rightly, they point out, when a brand hides its own identity, it is in some ways admitting defeat, saying that its name – a central part of any brand – has lost value. When it comes to Starbucks, all of this is true, but the question is why? Why has the Starbucks brand lost so much value that it has to hide from customers and act like a small business? The answer to these questions rests with communities and consumers, what they care about and desire the most these days.

Over the last several years, a quiet but decided shift in buying patterns has taken place. Really, there is something of a velvet revolt or a quiet rejection of brands going on.

Pizza Huh... the new generation? Another creation of Chinese marketing genius.

In the early years of this century, the then mayor of Baltimore Martin O’Malley begged Starbucks to come to his city. He thought these big name stores would lend his de-industrializing hometown a much needed upper-middle-class sheen. Same with the residents of Landsdowne, Pennsylvania. In 2004, the town had several mom and pops diners and coffee shops. One day, though, a team of local residents lined up in three rows of forty in an empty lot where a 7-11 used to be. When the photographer gave them the sign, they turned over the letters. Their message read: “Got Location! Need Starbucks!” Afterwards, the Greater Lansdowne Civic Association sent this “visual petition” to Starbucks headquarters. Landsdowne never got a Starbucks, but Benicia, California and a lot of other towns got plenty of Starbucks.

By 2007, Benicia didn’t want them anymore. When Starbucks tried to open a fifth store in the northern California coastal town some residents balked. “It’s a serious problem,” a former city councilor and owner of an independent coffee house, told the Contra Costa Times (By Danielle Samaniego, “Benicia Looks at Limiting Chain Stores,” Contra Costa Times, Feb. 16, 2007). “People need to wake up to it,” she proclaimed, “When you drive through a town and everything is so homogenized that you can’t tell where you are anymore, that’s a problem.” She had an idea. Limit the number of chains. Ban them even. Encourage, instead, small, one-of-a-kind businesses. Soon her idea gained the support of local officials looking for ways to curtail the opening of more chain stores without violating state and federal laws. When the city council started to debate a ban on all “formula” businesses, a city official told the Contra Costa Times, “it’s about protecting the unique character of the commercial areas of Benicia, and there’s nothing unique about a store that has the same look and style, not just here, but everywhere.” (By Rachel Raskin-Zrihen, “Officials Look at Ways to Prevent Starbucks Overflow,” Contra Costa Times, Feb. 9, 2007)

BRAND AVOIDANCE

This wasn’t just about Starbucks. This was about a growing resistance to brands, and their dominance of the landscape, symbolized by Starbucks. With their feet and their purchases, individual consumers are revolting as well. Scholars have started to call this trend, “brand avoidance,” as consumers worried about the larger social and economic impact of brands on society look for other options, even if those options cost a bit more. In growing numbers, buyers are choosing the local over the brand, the farmers market over the supermarket, the Main Street strip over the mall. Same with coffee.

While Starbucks closed down outlets in 2008, citing the New Recession as the cause, independent coffee houses, the Seattle Times noted, brought in new customers and they didn’t cut prices. Over the last few years, in fact, the number of independent coffee houses in the U.S. has jumped past the number of chain store outlets, and now represent 54 percent of the coffee market.

How can we explain these consumer choices and the growth of these smaller business sectors? Consumers, just like the towns they live in, are starting to think that going to the branded store – to Starbucks or Cosi or Chipotle – costs too much. It makes them look too ordinary and too much like everyone else.

This is what those not Starbucks Starbucks stores tacitly acknowledge. By hiding their logos, they speak to the growing appeal of the locally owned small businesses. (Remember the stealth Starbucks stores are individually designed and named after the streets they are on – the places themselves.)

Apparently the experiment isn’t working. A former Starbucks insider said that Seattle’s 15th Ave. Coffee and Tea – the first of the new not Starbucks stores (its website, by the way, is called www.streetlevelcoffee.com) – is doing only a third of the business of the regular green-logoed Starbucks store that used be at that site.

Perhaps consumer really do want something more than branded artifice; they want something genuinely local.

The revolt against sameness may actually be real, too real for a fake Starbucks. And certainly this growing rejection of brands presents an opportunity for entrepreneurs and small business owners to create something authentically local for their customers.

Secret recipe from the south of China?

We’d like to have linked to the original appearance of this news story, but we couldn’t find it on the web. Our source was via email.

The Chinese mall photos can be seen here. But there are so many copies around it’s hard to pin down the original source.

Here’s an excerpt from a brief story on “The Adventures of Francis” blog, which proudly quotes a reader as calling it “Citizen journalism at its worst”. The piece is titled “Raw Milk Undercover“.

Missouri regulators are trying to make raw milk as unattainable as the virtual teats in this glass jar, even going to the trouble of setting up sting operations to bust farmers who supply the demand through clandestine, underground channels. Ain't that America? See note below about photo.

“It is ridiculous that a small farmer can go to jail for selling his product. It is illegal to sell raw milk in many places, just like it is illegal to sell meth. Raw milk is one of the most healthful consumable products around (so long as it’s fresh), but it is extremely hard to get for someone who doesn’t have a cow….”

Francis then refers readers to this story from yesterday on the “Show Me Local Food Coalition” blog:

“Attorney General, Chris Koster has filed suite against a small family farm in Conway, MO for selling raw milk to undercover investigators in a Springfield, MO parking lot. This has sparked a heated debate about the selling and consumption of raw milk. While the consumption of raw milk has steadily increased over the years and is estimated to be over half a million, the laws have not changed and in some states it is still illegal to sell raw milk.

While it is not illegal to sell raw milk in Missouri the law is such that farmers have to have a licensed permit for the State Milk Board or sell the product on farm to consumers with no permit. State Representative Belinda Harris put forth a bill this year that would clarify the state’s position on the sell of raw milk however this bill did not pass. Harris has submitted a new version of the bill this legislative session; this bill would clarify current raw milk policy and would allow the sale of unlicensed raw milk at farmers markets…”

See that story for news source links etc.

Ptcher picture is from this post “Drink the milk, remember the cow” on the Loft 965 blog. That post includes a link to where you can order one for your very own.

The two Ontario members of provincial parliament who have been most vocal in their support for the raw milk cause — seem to be working together to create a highly visible form of protest against a broad sweeping new tax grab being orchestrated by both provincial and federal levels of government.

MPPs Randy Hillier and Bill Murdoch in the legislature. Photo Tanya Talaga, Record News

This is a tax grab that seems to be in danger of facing no serious political opposition, especially now that Michael Ignatieff, the federal opposition leader in Ottawa has just today thrown his party’s official support behind the new tax. This new “harmonized” sales tax is slated to replace the GST and PST and the big news is that it will be applied a much wider range of purchases. We at the Bovine don’t usually comment on wider political issues, but we found it interesting that these two “allies of raw milk” in government have both seen fit to engage in this act of civil disobedience in order to draw public attention to this new tax that seems to be in serious danger of being railroaded and rubber stamped into law without sufficient public input.

Here’s an excerpt from the story, as reported by Maria Babbage, for the Kitchener Waterloo Record:

“TORONTO — An Opposition protest over tax harmonization that’s created chaos in the Ontario legislature ended up derailing the daily question period in the chamber Tuesday.

Speaker Steve Peters announced his unusual move over the ear-splitting din of the Progressive Conservatives, who have staged a sit-in over the government’s refusal to hold provincewide public consultations on the tax change.

Conservative party mavericks Bill Murdoch (Bruce, Grey, Owen Sound) and Randy Hillier (Lanark, Frontenac, Lennox and Addington), who were banished Monday from the chamber, rejoined their caucus colleagues Tuesday after sleeping overnight in an adjoining lobby that contains couches and a bathroom.

Instead of taking their assigned seats in the backbenches, Hiller and Murdoch sat in the two front seats closest to Peters, where they led their colleagues in an unrelenting campaign to drown out debate by shouting and pounding their desks.

The conflict escalated as Peters tried to bring the unruly Tories under control by pausing the proceedings several times and refusing to recognize the votes of party members who weren’t sitting in their own seats.

That only seemed to egg on the Tories, who accused Peters of being “undemocratic” by not counting their votes.

The battle reached a climax when, despite repeated requests to return to their assigned seats during question period, Murdoch and Hillier refused to budge.

That prompted Peters to walk out, scuttling the only hour in the day where opposition parties are allowed to hold the government to account in the legislature.

“I am not prepared to continue with question period while these two members are occupying the front benches,” Peters said.

No resolution seemed to be in sight Tuesday despite several closed-door meetings with representatives from all three parties.

The Tories insist they won’t give up until they get at least one day of public hearings on the harmonized sales tax legislation outside Toronto, while the governing Liberals derided the antics as nothing more than playing for the cameras.

The two Tories can still be removed by force, but Peters said he was loath to take that unprecedented step.

The clearly uncomfortable Speaker said he allowed Murdoch and Hillier to sleep in the adjoining lobby overnight to avoid a repeat of Liberal Alvin Curling’s overnight sit-in in 1995, when the Conservatives were in power.

“I did not want to see issues in the chamber of somebody utilizing a bottle to deal with bodily, human functions,” Peters said.

The disruption isn’t slowing down debate, which means the Tories are wasting time while government legislation aimed at merging the eight per cent provincial sales tax and the five per cent federal GST continues to wind its way through the legislature, said government House leader Monique Smith.

They shot themselves in the foot again by tanking question period, which has alienated the NDP, their only potential allies in the HST battle, she said.

Smith said she tried to break the impasse Monday night with an offer to extend public hearings in Toronto from one day to 2 1/2 days, but the Tories never responded.

“Unfortunately, we have an Opposition that’s intransigent and we have an Opposition leader who’s unable to control at least two of his members,” she said.

“And by the actions in question period today, it might be even more than that.”

Government sources claim the Tories considered the offer, but Murdoch and Hillier — who are both notoriously difficult to control — vetoed it.

Conservative house leader Bob Runciman denied that Hillier and Murdoch have gone rogue.

“We’re very supportive of Bill and Randy and I think that once this thing is dealt with, I think that it’s not going to be a problem,” he said. “They’re not going to present a problem for the Speaker, they’re not going to present a problem for us. We remain fully supportive of what they’re doing.”…”

Read the whole story here on the Record.

Also see:

Randy Hillier’s private members bill on raw milk

Proposed new private members bill to legalize direct farm sales of raw milk

Four amigos at Queen’s Park

A brief history of raw milk in Ontario

Bill Murdoch also tabled a private members bill to study the question of raw milk, within a few months after the raid on Glencolton Farms in November 2006. However, as that was before the Bovine, we don’t have any stories on that episode in the raw milk drama.

“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”….”

Get the whole story on Black Hills Today

Photo and story from Gordon Watson, our west-coast correspondent:

Dominique milking a cow named "Cream" for BC cowshare folks

“That’s Dominque Schellenberg milking her cow “Cream” last summer. Yes, she is running a little cowshare on her family ranch, the Chezacut. Obviously, they grow them big and beautiful, ‘way out there in the Wild West, near Redstone British Columbia.”

“What would Jesus buy?” is the question from Reverend Billy and his “Church of Life After Shopping”. The Reverend is a full-blown culture jammer if ever there was one. Yeah I know this is a little off topic on a raw milk blog, but it’s just so funny I couldn’t resist. The following is from the Greenhorns “Irresistable Fleet of Bicycles” blog:

"When the going gets tough... the tough get weird" Reverend Billy on his Christmas tour with the "Life after Shopping Gospel Choir" in Union Square... only in America!!!

“We start on Buy Nothing Day, Friday Nov 27, 5 AM – trying to convert the Consumers at the front-door of Macy’s. Then off to the Valley Stream Wal-Mart to remember Jdimytai Damour. The on-the-road part of the tour starts with the Rev in Minneapolis and St. Paul, then Savitri joining him in Los Angeles and Pasadena. They return to the 40 voice gospel singathon at the Christmas Revival at the Brooklyn Lyceum on Saturday December 12th. Then on the 17th, 18th and 19th, the full choir buses up to Albany, Troy and east to Greenfield, Massachusetts.

Details for all events at http://www.revbilly.com/events

And now a holiday message from Reverend Billy Talen:

“Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit. Blessed are the jobless who force us to change the economy. Blessed are the homeless who unlock empty buildings. Blessed are the evicted who resist with their children watching! Blessed are the broke who re-introduce the what-can-I-do-for-no-money? Blessed are the re-cycled gifts and home-made art and swap-o-ramas and farmer’s markets. Blessed is the local Christmas. Local-ujah!

On this tour there is no room in the inn. We are not paid much – but our hosts have a lot to share. We’re forced out into public space, nuzzled by cows and sheep with angels over-head! Out into the commons, out into the new funky Garden of Eden. We’re starting over!”

Our performances in concert halls, as well as our “Retail Interventions” inside super malls and chains stores – are directed by Savitri D. Our choir-master is James Solomon Benn.

Questions? Want to help promote a show? Are you in the death grip of a shopping-urge and need an exorcism right now??? Email michael@revbilly.com…”

Watch the trailer for the movie, below:

There’s certainly a poignant human story behind the recent events described below. As we understand it, when Susan Atherton approached Michael Schmidt about becoming a cow share member in the fall of 2006 she told him she was sick and hoped that the drinking raw milk would help improve her health — a common enough sentiment among those who seek out raw milk. Of course, seeing as how it turns out she became a cow-share member to obtain milk samples for the government, she probably never did get to drink any. So it’s little wonder that Michael was concerned about how she was doing and decided to give her a call.

Government agent/cow share member Susan Atherton/Susan Taylor investigates the barn where the cows are kept at Glencolton Farms during her undercover operations there in the autumn of 2006.

The world is a strange place, or maybe Canada is a strange place.

Hazel Lynn Chief Medical Officer of Health in our region gets a pay raise of $100,000. She now makes $275.000 a year plus expenses. For what?

She never addressed the concern people have about the safety of flu shots. She never looked into the validity of peoples needs to have the right to drink either raw or pasteurized milk. She takes it upon her self to spread allegations which cannot be proven and do not have to be proven. She also has a hard time getting some of the facts straight in respect to the whole raw milk issue.

The only reason I can come up with, why people in power are getting this kind of immoral pay raise is, that they can become the perfect executers of orders without questioning their own morals and ethics. Hazel Lynn is a perfect example why we cannot and should not entrust our well being to public policy makers.

Yesterday I went through the cow share members list for review and stumbled again upon our undercover agent’s number who became a member on behalf of the Government in 2006. Susan Atherton is her real name, Susan Taylor her undercover name.

Remembering her testimony at trial and our encounters prior to trial I decided to call her to see how she was doing. I do remember that she was not doing well and had left the MNR in the meantime.

I picked up the phone and left a friendly message telling her that I just came across her name on the cow share members list and wanted to know how she was doing. I think I wished her well. No bad intentions.

The next day I receive a message at the farm that Brett from the MNR wanted to talk to me. So I phoned and had Brett Campbell, chief investigator and head of the raid on our farm on the line. He seemed very agitated and threatened me right away with police if I continue to phone Susan Atherton.

I told him that she is a cow share member on our list and I simply wanted to ask how she was doing. This happened to be the first time that I phoned her. It is hard to say if he was angry about that, but repeated his threat to call the police. I asked him why he was threatening me. His answer was that it is inappropriate for me to call Susan Atherton (who happened to be a cow share member on behalf of the Government.)

I do not make a distinction, I treat every one with respect, Government or not

After I reflected with my family on the issue I decided to phone Susan Atherton again and left a message that I had received a threatening phone call from Brett not to phone her anymore. As a friend of transparency I told her that I did nor realize how sensitive this issue was and wished her well.

I also phoned our police department and reported that I was verbally threatened by Brett Campbell the MNR investigator who lost his cool over a friendly phone call to one “official” cow share member.

I started to wonder what this is all about. Are they afraid?

The separation of battle lines seemed to be of utmost importance. No humanity, no compassion, no acknowledgement that we are all humans is allowed. It seems to become impossible to go beyond the protocol of the status quo.

I wish my friend Brett Campbell from the MNR a peaceful Christmas.

I also hope and wish that Susan Atherton finds peace in what she is doing. I think she could be a worthwhile friend to have, just from the few encounters I had with her.

Be well Brett I wish you would start drinking raw milk it is good for your nerves.

Merry Christmas.

Michael Schmidt

Here’s what Susan Atherton was going to say at the raw milk trial last January:

Part 1 of Susan Atherton’s “will say”

Part 2

A process of meetings and dialog involving raw milk advocates and regulators, such as Michael Schmidt has long asked for in Ontario, is beginning to yield fruit in Michigan. Here’s part of what David E. Gumpert, of the Complete Patient blog reports about recent exciting developments in that process:

“Did you ever think you’d see this statement endorsed by dairy regulators?

“Milk fresh from the cow is a complete, living, functional food…the full benefits…are only realized when all of these components function as a complex interdependent and balanced process.”

Or how about this:

“Of all the milk constituents, the milk fat globule is the most drastically altered by the combination of pasteurization and homogenization.”

After endless reassurances from scientists and other officials in public health, agriculture, medicine, and government that there’s no difference between pasteurized and unpasteurized milk, we are now being told something entirely different by an organization that includes top dairy regulators and an agriculture university dean (along with a number of raw milk proponents). The organization is the Michigan Fresh Unprocessed Whole Milk Workgroup, which includes among its members the two top dairy officials of the Michigan Department of Agriculture and a dean of the Michigan State University College of Agriculture.

The Michigan Fresh Unprocessed Whole Milk Workgroup, which I described in a previous post, is a committee that grew out of the ashes of the bizarre “string operation” against Michigan farmer Richard Hebron in October 2006. After forcibly confiscating $8,000-plus worth of dairy products the farmer was delivering to members of Ann Arbor’s Family Farms Co-op, Michigan’s Department of Agriculture sought to have Richard indicted on criminal charges. Instead, a county prosecutor refused to go forward with the case, and pushed the department to settle with Richard. As part of the settlement, the department agreed to allow herdshare arrangements. Subsequently, the department’s two top dairy officials, Katherine Fedder, who ordered the investigation and subsequent raid on Richard Hebron; and Susan Esser, agreed to join the Michigan Fresh Unprocessed Whole Milk Workgroup, which is charged with answering the question: Where do we want to be in three to five years on access to fresh unpasteurized whole milk.

The workgroup has moved systematically, some might say tediously, to address ten topics relating to the question of access to raw milk. When it started meeting in early 2007, it expected to get through the topics in 18 months. Now, nearly three years later, it has formally addressed only two of the ten topics.

The statements I quoted from above come from the second topic and was just posted in recent weeks, on the subject of “Benefits and Values.” Part of the challenge facing the workgroup is that each of its eleven members must approve each and every word of each topic discussion. No majority-rules here. That’s the bad news in terms of pace, but it’s also the good news in terms of buy-in and impact. You know that the government and ag people have reviewed and signed off on everything posted….”

Read the whole thing on the Complete Patient blog

This chronology is admittedly not all inclusive as it focuses solely on Glencolton Farms and Michael Schmidt. Other raw milk producers have certainly been operating in the province during these years. However, we unfortunately don’t have sufficient information on their stories to be able to include them properly in this survey:

Out behind the barns at Glencolton Farms. Photo: Andrea Lemieux

1990 Michael Schmidt starts first cow share model in Ontario at Glencolton Farms

1994 Grey Bruce Health unit raids Glencolton Farms

1994 Charges are laid under the Milk Act and the Health Protection and Promotion Act. Under duress Michael Schmidt pleads guilty to protect his family from further threats. He receives a $3,500 fine and a 2 year probation. Schmidt lost 2/3 of his farm and most of his cows.

1995 Michael Schmidt delivers a research proposal to the Provincial Ministry of Health, Provincial Ministry of Agriculture and the Dairy Farmers of Ontario to jointly study on his farm the safety and quality of raw milk and its effect on the consumer. Both Ministries and the Dairy Farmers of Ontario turn proposal down, Schmidt immediately publicly announces at a press conference in Toronto only 6 months after court ruling that raw milk production under his cow share program will resume. However, he would go on a hunger strike IF there would be another raid on his farm.

2006 After almost 12 years of milk production, the MNR ( Ministry of Natural Resources) joint by the Provincial Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Health, the local Health unit, the Ministry of Finance and the Canadian Food inspection Agency raid the farm with 25 armed officers to confiscate dairy products and dairy equipment. Michael Schmidt goes on hunger strike. Michael Schmidt receives a total of 20 charges under the Health Protection and Promotion Act and the Milk Act.

December 2006, Queens Park: Conservative MPP Bill Murdoch introduces Private members bill to study the safety of raw milk in Ontario. Bill is turned down after brief discussion. Michael Schmidt stops hunger strike after 4 weeks as a gesture to encourage a constructive dialogue with the various Ministries. Michael Schmidt starts Constitutional Proceedings regarding his charges.

November 2007 Press Conference, Queens Park on first Anniversary of Raid: Michael Schmidt and cow share owners present information packages for every MPP in Parliament about raw milk regulations around the world, and a proposal regarding how Ontario could implement its own regulations. Not one response.

May 2008 York Regional Health Unit files Contempt of Court Charges.

September 2008 Trial regarding Contempt of Court Charges in Newmarket despite that there has been no ruling on the other charges, as to whether in fact Michael Schmidt broke the law or not.

October 2008 Michael Schmidt is fined $5,000 plus $50,000 costs. He refuses to pay. Still pending.

November 2008 Press Conference Queens Park on Second Anniversary of Raid: Michael Schmidt presents the Premier and the two Ministers responsible for Health and Agriculture another package containing extensive research on Raw Milk with yet another appeal to enter into a constructive dialogue.

January 2009 Six-day trial in Newmarket. Ruling to be announced January 21. 2010 — one year after trial and three years after farm raid. Since then Farm has doubled its herd size to almost 50 cows due to increased demand.

Glencolton Farms provided in the last 3 years over 1 million servings of unpasteurized dairy products to its cow share members without one single reported case of illness.

During the same time period over 20 people died after eating cold cuts contaminated with listeriosis, which came from Government inspected Maple Leaf Foods plants. No charges have been laid and the company continues to produce and sell cold cuts despite repeated recalls and reported illnesses and further deaths.

Elise and Michael Schmidt in the Glencolton Farms orchard. Andrea Lemieux photo.