Milk Story Archives - West Virginia Public Broadcasting

Dairy Dilemma: Food Shelters Awash In Surplus Milk They Can’t Afford To Store

Cyndi Kirkhart has some 26 thousand square feet of warehouse space at the Facing Hunger Food Bank in Huntington, West Virginia, where she is executive director. That sounds like a lot of space. But very little of it is cooler space.

“This is the only cooler we have,” Kirkhart said, stepping into a walk-in cooler the size of a large closet filled with half-gallon containers of milk. “This is Kentucky milk, and this is West Virginia.”

She said her operation has been receiving about 8 thousand of these containers, about a truck load, every couple of weeks since November. She expects to continue receiving the products from the federal government through March.

“What I can’t get in the cooler, I’m loading onto trucks,” she said, where she uses the diesel engines to run refrigeration units overnight.

Donations from the federal government are normal. But those products are usually non-perishable items with a long shelf life. With milk, they have about two weeks before it sours.

“We never have received what we refer to as ‘fluid milk,’ fresh milk,” she said.

Across the country, milk is flooding into food banks like this one as the federal government buys surplus milk from dairy farmers in order to help mitigate lost sales due to trade disputes and over production. Free milk for food banks sounds nice. But as economists say, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. And food banks are finding that this “free” milk is a mixed blessing as storing and distributing perishable items drives up their administrative costs.

Milky Weigh

“Whose responsibility is it to get rid of this milk?”Joshua Lohnes asked.

Lohnes is a Ph.D. candidate and co-founder/Food Policy Director of West Virginia University’s Food Justice Lab. He’s been researching the relationship between industrial food operations, the federal government, and emergency food providers like Facing Hunger.

The dairy industry is already producing a lot of surplus milk. The U.S. Department of Agriculture reports milk production has increased by 13 percent over the last decade, while overall milk consumption has only increased 5 percent in that time. Lohnes explains that recent trade disputes made the situation worse.

Milk is wrapped, then loaded and distributed to smaller food banks throughout West Virginia, eastern Kentucky, and southeastern Ohio.

“Across the Midwest there’s all of this waste and excess that isn’t being shipped because of retaliatory tariffs,” he said. “The Trump Administration released $12 billion to bail out those farmers, $1.2 billion was put toward purchasing commodities and distributing as hunger relief.”

Since the federal purchases started in August the government has bought more than $50 million worth of milk and shipped it to food banks. But the food doesn’t come with any help to offset extra administrative costs.

“They haven’t been given any money to distribute that milk,” Lohnes said. “It costs the food banks $2 a mile to distribute this ‘free food’ across this vast rural landscape.”

Lohnes said food aid groups are talking with state legislators and the Department of Agriculture about ways to absorb the surplus milk.

“To try to figure out, you know, how to not have all of this surplus, pretty much tank their operation,” he said.

Food Mismatch

In a recent article in the journal Environment and Planning, Lohnes argues that government policies have effectively put food banks in a position to serve needs of industrial food operations. He says those policies ultimately do little to address core issues that lead to food insecurity.

“Food banks across the country are now recovering 4.5 billion pounds of food every year both from government sources and from corporate sources,” he said. That use of surplus or waste food is called “food recovery.” But while that “recovered” food has been flowing into food banks, measures of food insecurity have varied widely. “Sometimes they’re up, sometimes they’re down,” he said. “So food recovery doesn’t actually correlate at all to reducing hunger.”

The food bank warehouse is best suited for non-perishable items.

He said surplus commodities have always been used to try to balance out food waste and hunger. “But it became the responsibility of civil society to figure out how to do that,” he said. “The burden of redistributing government commodities was laid on the shoulders of civil society.”

In the journal article Lohnes points out that food banks provide tax relief for food corporations and offer a “vent” for dealing with corporate food waste. But it’s not the corporations paying to operate the food banks. “They are primarily funded by community-based organizations who are themselves stretched thin by economic crises within their own locales,” he writes.

“Whatever it takes.”

In Huntington, Kirkhart said her organization doesn’t have to accept the milk donations. But she knows 285,000 people throughout West Virginia, eastern Kentucky, and southeastern Ohio face food insecurity. It goes against every value of these very mission-driven people to decline food donations because of logistical difficulties.

Cyndi Kirkhart and a crew member delivering food

“We have to do some juggling sometimes,” she said, but her team will “do whatever it takes.”

Food banks like hers do get some reimbursements from the federal government for administrative costs, but they don’t match the increases in overhead expenses created by perishable donations. To complicate matters further, the federal government shutdown delayed those reimbursements.

“We have been advised that administrative funding from January forward is not available,” she said.

Despite those difficulties Kirkhart is confident her team and community will find a way to keep providing a much needed service.

“We’re gonna keep on keeping on,” she said. “I know that we have a lot of love throughout our service area, and people will help us through. Because that’s what Appalachians do.”

Drowning In Milk: Dairy Farmers Look For Lifelines In Flooded Market

LaRue County, Kentucky, dairy farmer Gary Rock sits in his milking parlor, overlooking what is left of his 95 cow operation.

“Three hundred years of history is something that a lot of people in our country cannot even talk about,” Rock said.

That’s how long the farm has been in his family. While the land has turned out tobacco, soybeans and other crops over the years, since 1980 dairy has nourished the family in and out of tragedy.

“In 2013, we had an F2 tornado that totally destroyed all the facilities here except the one we are sitting in, which is the milk parlor itself,” Rock said. If that had been lost, he said, he would not have rebuilt.

Despite losing his legs, Rock manages the centuries-old family farm.

“I told myself, I’m not going to force this to happen. If a brick wall occurs, I’m going to end it.”

Instead, things moved forward with help from his community.

“Before the tornado, we had a freestyle barn. It was low, it was not well-ventilated. After the tornado, we put in a pack barn which eliminated 90 percent of the health problems I had with cattle.”

Rock said the changes ended up helping his operation significantly. But within weeks of the farm’s return to production another tragedy hit. Rock lost his legs in a tractor accident. Still, the dairy provided, and this time with more than an income.

“It enabled me to find life again in a profession that I already knew,” he said. “So, that was a driving force for me.”

Now, the farm looks to weather its greatest storm yet: a disastrous drop in revenue.

“To give you an illustration, the same farm on the same number of cows is selling a $170,000 less of product in value,” Rock explained. “So, try to comprehend having to cut your pay scale in half and see what you’ve got to do to survive.”

This isn’t a Rock family problem, this is a dairy industry problem. Prices have plummeted in a market flooded with supply from foreign producers and larger operations squeezing out small farmers. The crisis has dairy farmers rethinking the U.S. market system and looking to other countries as models for a solution.

In the Ohio Valley the effects have come swiftly. In February, more than a hundred producers across Kentucky, Ohio and five other states learned that Dean Foods, a major buyer, would cancel contracts. Another processor, Prairie Farms, will close its fluid milk processing plant in west Kentucky in June.

“It looks to me that this will be the last month-and-a-half of milking that I’ll do,” Rock said. “This is the brick wall I never faced.”

Facing Bankruptcy

The National Family Farm Coalition says the average price of milk is around 30 percent below the cost of production. Things are so bad that dairy producers that do have contracts report that co-ops are attaching suicide prevention information with their checks.

Farm Aid Communication Director Jennifer Fahy said the tough times remind her of the 1980 farm crisis, when as many as 2,100 farms would close in a week.

Rock’s herd is among the small farms squeezed by the dairy crisis.

“We are hearing from farmers who are being referred by organizations that are usually referrals for us,” she said. “Over the years since the farm crisis the network of support for farmers has been just chipped away.”

Fahy explained that they’ve seen net farm income take a 50 percent drop and dairy is getting hit the hardest.

“Sometimes the best-case scenario is helping a farmer to navigate declaring bankruptcy and getting out before it’s even worse, unfortunately,” Fahy said.

The U.S. open market system is pushing milk production to larger farms. In 1987 half of all dairy cows were on farms with 80 or fewer cows, similar in size to Gary Rock’s operation. By 2012, that midpoint herd size was 900 cows.

Blame Canada!

International trade issues are magnifying problems for the small farms left. International Dairy Foods Association President Michael Dykes blames Canada for violating trade laws.

Dykes claimed that some of Canada’s products are being “dumped” at unfair prices due to Canada’s system of price controls, known as “Class 7,” implemented last year.

Dykes said this all stems from an increased demand in butter. Instead of importing to meet their additional butter needs, Canada raised the milk quotas that Canadian farmers can produce.

“They increased it almost 6 percent, whereas the U.S. is increasing at about one-and-a-half percent per year,” he said.

As Canada upped its quota for domestically-produced milk to make more butter, it was left with an excess supply of other products, such as skim milk powders, for which there was lower demand.

“Now you have the Canadians coming in, they are selling skim milk powders on the ground in Mexico at three-cents-a-pound cheaper than we can from the U.S. to Mexico,” Dykes said.

Dykes said the Canadian policy lowers prices on milk ingredients like skim milk powders and encourages substitution of domestic Canadian dairy in place of products they might import from the U.S.

“So we are in a situation where we have more milk right now than we have demand and that also says trade becomes extremely important,” Dykes said.

He wants Canada to open its market to more U.S. dairy. He’d like to see NAFTA renegotiated or for the U.S. to rejoin the Trans Pacific Partnership. That agreement allowed a small percentage of U.S. imports into Canada before President Trump decided to end it.

In April, 68 members of Congress sent a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Ambassador Robert Lighthizer regarding NAFTA negotiations. The members of Congress urged an end to Canada’s pricing program and dairy tariffs, which impose a duty of nearly 300 percent.

Be Like Canada?

But the view from Canada is different. Dairy Farms of Ontario CEO Graham Lloyd said Canada’s pricing schemes are targeted at the domestic market.

“The fear or concerns that the U.S. seem to have with Class 7 is that we are going to be competitive in the world market,” Lloyd said. “But what needs to be understood is we actually don’t issue milk production for export purposes.”

Beyond just defending the Canadian system, Lloyd recommends that the U.S. should give it a try.

“From a Canadian perspective there is also a lot of sympathy for U.S. farmers,” he said. Lloyd said Canadian farmers once had the same struggles U.S. dairy farmers face now, before the country moved to its quota-based system.

“Farmers didn’t know where their markets were, they were having direct deals with processors,” he said. “Milk was getting dumped, there were no production controls and farmers were going bankrupt because they had no certainty of any market.”

Lloyd said that was all fixed by a supply management system based on three tiers: production control, pricing, and import control. Now, prices are constant and stable allowing processors greater predictability, albeit at lower margins.

“That allows for greater planning for them and that’s where you can maintain higher returns,” Lloyd said.

A tornado spared only this milking parlor on Rock’s farm.

The idea has appeal among some farm advocates in the U.S. who argue that emulating the Canadians holds more promise that blaming them.

“Dismantling a system that is working in Canada so that they are more available to soak up our excess product … would not fix what is wrong here,” said Patty Lovera, policy director for the left-leaning advocacy group Food & Water Watch, which has worked to protect smaller farms.

Food & Water Watch warns that the small to midsize operations are being “squeezed out by the consolidation of industrial mega-dairies that now dominate milk production.”

Lovera cautioned against a “race to the bottom” result if the U.S. simply insists that Canada eliminate its own price and production controls.

“It would take other farmers who are doing well down to where farmers are here,” she said. “Which is what we get a lot of in our trade negotiations.”

In April, the same month that some lawmakers were urging a “get tough” approach to trade talks with Canada, a group of small farm advocates sent a letter of their ownto Congressional leaders and Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue. In it, the National Family Farm Coalition, along with more than 50 family farm, labor and consumer organizations urged immediate action on the dairy crisis by adopting a system like Canada’s.

The groups said the best changes could come by implementing proposals suggested in the Federal Milk Marketing Improvement Act of 2011, introduced by Pennsylvania Democratic Senator Bob Casey.

Wisconsin organic dairy farmer Jim Goodman heads the National Family Farm Coalition. He said a supply management system has worked for Canada for more than 50 years and it will work in the U.S.

“Because the government doesn’t run it,” Goodman said. “They don’t have to be worried about providing subsidies for producers when prices get low because of all we’re supplied because that doesn’t happen.”

Size Matters

University of Wisconsin Director of Dairy Policy Analysis Mark Stephenson argues that there are lots of farmers who benefit from the current U.S. dairy system.

“We’ve had a number of people that, I think, would say the industry has done very well,” he said. “The evidence of that is that we’re producing more milk than ever before. We’re selling it at very reasonable prices to consumers both domestically and abroad.”

Those who tend to say the industry is doing well typically have much larger farms. At one time, Stephenson said, the U.S. had 6 million dairy farms. Today, there are fewer than 40,000.

“We’ve had a lot of discussion about how big should farms be, what right do they have to become a certain size,” Stephenson said.

“I’ve also heard a number of times that ‘bigger is better,’ and I don’t believe that at all,” he said. “What I think we see is that better is better. And if you are a better cow manager and a better people manager and a better financial manager, then you have better financial outcomes.”

According to the USDA cost is a driving force behind structural change. The largest farms earn substantially higher net returns and they have strong incentives to expand.

Slim Choices

National Family Farm Coalition advocates argue that Congress has a duty to protect family farms, and they point to law that states the “clear Congressional support for the continued existence of family farmers, including dairy operations.”

Back in LaRue County, Gary Rock said he likes Canada’s system but he doesn’t know if the rest of America would feel the same.

“You have to realize that our choices are very slim at this point,” he said, adding that the outcome would have effects far beyond farms like his. “What small dairymen are facing, it’s what we once knew as rural America,” Rock said, “trying to survive in an industry that is continually telling you, you have to become larger to survive.”

Raw Milk is Debated on the House Floor

Senate Bill 30 permits a shared animal ownership agreement to consume raw milk. Currently in the state, it is illegal to purchase or sell raw milk. And just like when it was debated in the Senate, some members of the House also questioned the health effects of drinking raw milk, while others maintained it allows for personal freedom.

Senate Bill 30 would allow two parties to have a written agreement saying they would share ownership of a milk producing animal and that milk would be used for consumption. The bill would also require the Department of Agriculture to be aware of the agreement, and the seller would have to meet state standards from a licensed veterinarian. If an illness would occur after consuming raw milk, those persons in the agreement would have to report the illness to their local health department.

Debate erupted on the House floor as health risks and freedoms were discussed.

Delegate Nancy Guthrie of Kanawha County opposed the bill because she worried it would reintroduce diseases like polio and others.

“When I look at this bill,” Guthrie said, “and I realize that we could’ve taken one more preventative measure by just saying to the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services, while we recognize that agriculture is in a growing industry in our state, we need to be very careful about maybe reintroducing E.coli, maybe reintroducing polio, maybe reintroducing some of the diseases that have been associated with non-pasteurized milk over the years. Let them have joint custody on writing the rules.”

Delegate Jim Morgan of Cabell County says he used to own a dairy farm and questioned the cleanliness of those parties selling raw milk.

“That was a difficult job keeping that sterilized, clean, and the Kanwaha, Charleston Health Department examined our farm every two weeks. I just don’t understand why somebody who maybe thinks that a nice cow giving milk is going to be better than buying it pasteurized off the shelf,” said Morgan, “If you have seen farming conditions other than the ones under the, subject to health department rules, and I understand they’re some rules in this. I feel that it’s a step backwards in public health, and that for those conditions to be met is going to be very difficult, and when you go to the farm to visit your cows, be sure to look at their utter and be sure it’s clean.”

Delegate Lynne Arvon of Raleigh County supported the bill and argued it would not require retailers to sell raw milk, only two consenting parties with an animal that produced milk.

“I think people need to remember, this bill is not about selling raw milk. This is about people owning their own cows, their own goats and using the milk from those cows and goats,” Arvon noted, “I think they have the right to use those animals as they choose. We talk about freedom; that is freedom. We’re not selling it to anyone else, although personally I think they should be able to do that. If people want to buy raw milk, they should be able to buy raw milk. And I’ll use the example I spoke about in Health committee. Alcohol. How many deaths can we relate to alcohol? I can’t even count. How about to raw milk? I know one in twenty-five years. So are we gonna ban alcohol? I think not.”

Delegate Kelli Sobonya of Cabell County also supported the bill and says there are more deaths related to foodborne illnesses than from raw milk.

“There are ten million people in America that consume raw milk. Ten million people,” Sobonya said, “We haven’t heard a big problem that people are out there dying, but yet there are millions and millions of foodborne illnesses in America, due to cantaloupe, three-hundred people were hospitalized for candied apples. We haven’t outlawed candied apples for the consumption of children. Seven people died in 2015 from candied apples, and three-hundred were sickened.”

Delegate Matthew Rohrbach of Cabell County says he will support the bill, but only because he thinks it’s an attempt to regulate something that has the potential to be harmful.

“I think we have to be realistic that raw milk is being sold, and we’re not regulating it,” Rohrbach noted, “I think this bill is an attempt to regulate a cottage industry that is going on, and if it does get some oversight over the herds, begrudgingly I can support this bill, but I’m gonna rise to tell the members that we’re gonna have some tough debates this week about some issues of public health, and the people of this state depend on a hundred people sitting here to make decisions for their health and well-being, and I urge you not to go backward.”

Senate Bill 30 passed 81 to 19.

W.Va. Senate Passes Bill Allowing Consumption of Raw Milk

West Virginia senators have narrowly approved a bill letting people drink raw milk through animal herd sharing agreements.

On Friday, the Senate voted 18-16 to approve the measure. Sen. Tom Takubo, a doctor, was the lone dissenting Republican vote. Sen. Bob Williams was the only Democrat voting in favor.

The bill wouldn’t allow retail sales of raw milk.

Instead, it would require filling out a contract of ownership for milk-producing animals. The person consuming the raw milk would have to sign a form acknowledging health risks.

Federal officials have warned of health risks when children, the elderly and pregnant women consume raw milk.

The bill next moves to the House of Delegates for consideration.