Wholly Without Merit: No Right to Food Choice
In this follow-up to our last post, “Wisconsin Judge Denies Basic Property Rights and Food Choice,” one of the plaintiffs in the case passionately expresses her dismay at the ruling.
By Gayle Loiselle, Plaintiff
Wisconsin Judge Patrick J. Fiedler impudently ruled that “no, Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice.” This is the latest in a string of astonishing court proceedings focused on the rights of consumers and small businesses to own a dairy cow, enter into a contract agreement with a farmer, and consume unpasteurized milk. In his decision on the plaintiffs’ Clarification Motion, Judge Fiedler called our claim of fundamental rights “underdeveloped” and “wholly without merit,” and went on to say the government has a legitimate interest in regulating the sale and/or distribution and consumption of unpasteurized milk “because it can result in serious illness.”
As a plaintiff in this case I find it “wholly without merit” and completely ludicrous that Judge Fiedler ruled I have no right to own and drink milk from my cow, because I may get sick. Yet I do have the fundamental right to smoke cigarettes, get drunk, carry a gun, and blow my brains out after taking prescription antidepressants. Clearly, this issue is not about protecting the health of consumers. It is rather about control of the production, distribution, and sale of all milk and milk products.
USDA research shows that between 1970 and 2006, the number of farms with dairy cows fell from 648,000 operations in 1970 to 75,000 in 2006 — or 88%. Production is shifting to farms with at least 500 cows, with the most striking changes occurring in dairies with at least 2,000 milk cows. The number of farms in this largest size class more than doubled between 2000 and 2006, as did its shares of cow inventory and total milk production. The majority of these cows each produce 100 pounds of milk per day, they are routinely fed antibiotics and growth hormones, and the horrifying conditions these cows live in are well documented — just Google “factory farms.” These cows are not healthy, and this is not the milk I choose to drink or feed to my family, even after it is pasteurized.
On the other hand, small family farms can and do produce milk that is safe to drink “straight from the cow,” as my kids put it. Raw milk contains beneficial health giving organisms that would be destroyed if pasteurized, and the taste is far superior to that of pasteurized milk. I own and pay board on a cow because it is illegal for me to just buy raw milk from a farm. My cow lives in a herd of about 30, including young stock and a bull, and most days they are out on over 50 acres of pasture. This farm is run on organic and biodynamic principles; it is self-sustaining, environmentally friendly, and able to supply over 200 families with fresh milk, eggs, pork, beef, poultry, and honey. This type of direct farm-to-consumer food supply system makes sense on so many levels: for public health, growing local and rural economies, long-term environmental sustainability, and national food security.
The FDA, USDA, and Wisconsin’s Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) rely on industry compliance with regulations, licensing, and inspections to protect the nation’s food supply. Still, the CDC estimates that each year roughly one in six Americans (or 48 million people) get sick, 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die of foodborne diseases. The most recent failure of the government to protect consumers is tainted cantaloupe, which was shipped to 24 states and has sickened 84 and killed 17 people so far. I trust my local farmer monumentally more than the government to provide healthy, nutrient dense, uncontaminated, real, unmanufactured food. This is my choice to make; the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are very clear on that.
Government agencies and members of the judicial system are increasingly emboldened to rule as they see fit regardless of the law, the Constitution, the will of the people, or common sense. Judge Fiedler’s ruling is a blatant manipulation of the inherent meaning of the Constitution, an abuse of power, and is a threat to the core values of our country, our freedoms, and our very well-being. “We the people” need to stand up and remind our government servants that we live in a free democratic society in which we most definitely do have the fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of our choice!
Wisconsin Judge Denies Basic Property Rights and Food Choice
In a striking setback for property rights and consumer choice, a Wisconsin judge issued an order on September 9 that owners of cows do not have a fundamental right to consume milk from their own cows. The order was issued by Dane County Circuit Court Judge Patrick J. Fiedler in response to a motion to clarify an August 12 ruling denying a motion by the Zinniker Family Farm, Nourished by Nature LLC (NbN), NbN members Robert Karp and Gayle Loiselle, and the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund for a judgment that the boarding agreement was in compliance with Wisconsin law.
Under the agreement between the Zinnikers and NbN, dairy cows owned by NbN as an LLC were boarded at the Zinniker Farm. The cows were owned by the LLC rather than by the Zinnikers, who simply executed a services contract to board, care for, and milk the cows for their owners.
Clarifying his original ruling that the plaintiffs did not have a fundamental right to possess, use, and enjoy their property, Judge Fiedler explained clearly that there are no fundamental rights to own and use a dairy cow or dairy herd, to consume the milk from one’s own cows, to board one’s cow at a farm, or to consume the food of one’s choice. In addition, Judge Fielder stated that the private contract between the Zinnikers and NbN falls within the scope of the State’s police power, that the government has the power to regulate the private conduct of growing and consuming food.
Gayle Loiselle, one of the founders and managers of Nourished by Nature LLC, had this to say about Judge Fiedler’s ruling: “As a plaintiff in this case I find it completely ludicrous that Judge Fiedler ruled I have no right to own and drink milk from MY cow, because I may get sick…. Clearly, this issue is not about protecting the health of consumers. It is rather about control of the production, distribution and sale of all milk and milk products.”
Nourished by Nature was developed, with help from the Biodynamic Farming and Gardening Association and with support from a grant by RSF Social Finance, as a new type of consumers’ association designed to purchase and hold agricultural assets in order to support family farmers and protect consumer rights.
The Zinniker Family Farm, the oldest continually operating biodynamic farm in the country, was shut down in the fall of 2009 by the State of Wisconsin for distributing raw milk through a cow-share program that they had run since the mid-1980s. The State’s actions have put the Zinnikers under severe financial strain. As farmer Mark Zinniker explains, “We’re still trying to figure out how to try and make a living and stay at the same scale, which is very difficult. The milk really gave us the ability to stay on the smaller side. For a small farm like this to be able to survive, it has to have that community support, people who value that small-scale production and are willing to pay the real cost of that production.”
The issues of this case have consequences that reach far beyond the Zinniker farm, however. “It’s very obvious, to us anyway, that this is way beyond raw milk,” says Zinniker. “They’re basically ruling on your rights, [or the rights] that you don’t have. And I think that’s very much of a consumer issue.”
The plaintiffs in the case filed an appeal of Judge Fiedler’s decision on September 26.
About the Biodynamic Farming and Gardening Association
The Biodynamic Farming and Gardening Association (BDA) is an association of individuals, groups, and organizations in North America who are committed to the transformation of the whole food system, from farm to table, and who draw inspiration from the spiritual-scientific insights of Rudolf Steiner. Biodynamics is a worldwide movement for the renewal of agriculture based on an understanding of the spiritual forces at work in nature and in human social life. From this understanding, a particular form of organic farming has been developed that continues to grow and evolve around the world.
Contact: Robert Karp, Executive Director, Biodynamic Farming and Gardening Association
(262) 649-9212 * robert.karp@biodynamics.com * www.biodynamics.com
On Biodynamics and Radiation
By Robert Karp
Executive Director, Biodynamic Farming and Gardening Association
The recent tragic events in Japan and news of increasing radiation fallout around the globe have led to a growing interest in past reports from Europe (primarily) of a possible role of the biodynamic preparations in protecting farms and food from radioactivity. Understandably, this is quite a “hot” topic in biodynamic circles, evoking much debate.
I am thrilled to report that recently two members of the Biodynamic Research Working Group (BDRWG), Maria Linder and Barry Lia, have agreed to procure and evaluate all the available research and reports relating to this question and to draft a synopsis that we will make available through our journal and website. The BDRWG will also take up the question, in its next meeting, of whether a new research project in this direction is warranted and if so, how it would be best undertaken. These are small but important steps.
Personally, I think we are dealing with a very delicate matter. On the one hand, I would suggest that there is good reason, from a spiritual scientific perspective, to believe that some biodynamic food, farms, and practices may (and I say MAY) offer a measure of protection from radioactive fallout or at least offer a kind of healing antidote. As such, this is indeed an important time to encourage people to intensify their work with biodynamics. On the other hand, I agree with many members of the BDRWG who believe that we should refrain from making any claims for biodynamic products or practices until we determine if we have a genuine foundation for such claims.
Let me elaborate.
The idea that biodynamics may address radiation derives from the perspective that the biodynamic preparations and methodologies are designed, in general, to stimulate what are called in biodynamics the “etheric formative forces” or “life forces” active in nature. These are forces that stand behind and are active within all biological life — whether in soil, plants, animals, or humans — but which have their source in a realm above that of purely physical matter.
Radiation, on the other hand — again from a spiritual scientific perspective — is active at a level below that of purely physical matter, and as such, could be called a “sub-natural force.” Speaking quite generally, sub-natural forces such as radiation and electricity have a destructive effect on matter. The etheric formative forces, on the other hand, which are stimulated through the biodynamic preparations and methods in general, have an up-building or life-giving effect on matter.
Rudolf Steiner pointed out that, as civilization makes greater and greater use of the sub-natural forces in our technologies, a counterbalance must be struck if human beings and the earth are not to perish. One way this counterbalance can be found is by developing technologies that work with the “etheric formative forces” rather than with the sub-natural forces. This is one of the main reasons why Rudolf Steiner brought biodynamics to the world at the time he did. Again, just as radiation releases an abundance of “death forces,” so are the biodynamic preparations and practices designed to stimulate and quicken an abundance of “life forces.”
Thus, from this point of view, it stands to reason that farms and gardens managed biodynamically MAY under the best of circumstances be better able to assimilate and transmute the effects of radiation, and that food from such farms MAY be able to help us do the same. From this perspective — all research and reports aside — the increased use of biodynamic methods in the wake of the nuclear meltdowns in Japan is indeed something to be encouraged.
On the other hand, if the above spiritual scientific insights are correct, it should be possible to demonstrate these effects, in some measure, through appropriate methods of traditional scientific research. Therefore, I think that making claims along these lines, without the necessary research and evidence to back us up, could easily lead to misunderstandings and weaken the credibility of the biodynamic movement.
I realize that there is a delicate balance to be struck here between a sense of urgency and a sense of sobriety, which we each must navigate out of our own sense of integrity. Hopefully, the work of the BDRWG and others across the world can, in the coming months and years, place all this work on a new and more solid footing.
I’m sure these thoughts won’t quell the debate. Part of the purpose of this blog is to open up a constructive conversation on the matter where different points of view can be heard. If you have thoughts you would like to share or a guest essay, or information on the topic you think would be relevant to the BDRWG, please get in touch with us.
Contact Robert Karp at robert.karp@biodynamics.com. Visit www.biodynamics.com/biodynamic-research for more information the BDRWG.
We are pleased to pass on an invitation initiated by members of the Anthroposophical Society in Canada, which is being circulated to biodynamic associations throughout the world:
Dear Friends,
You are invited to participate in world wide Bio-dynamic 500/501 preparation stirring and spraying activity between the dates of 21-June (Solstice) and 26-June of this year.
This event is in commemoration of the 150th Birthday of Rudolf Steiner who was the originator of Biodynamic Agriculture which is now being done around the world. The preparations he introduced have increasingly been used to help heal the earth since 1924.
If you want more information on the preparations, you can start with this link: www.biodynamics.in/BD500.htm
The basic idea is to have farm, garden, neighbourhood, community, and even back-yard stirrings done at around the same time as a potent world energizer in commemoration of Rudolf Steiner. Also, to bring awareness to the healing now being done to help the earth on a regular basis at many places.
So find some friends to help make it happen or find a stirring in your area and join in!
Contact your local Biodynamic Association to get the preparation or contacts.
You are also invited to translate this message into other languages and to pass the message on using email, Facebook, etc.
For information about obtaining biodynamic preparations in the United States and Canada, visit the Josephine Porter Institute for Applied Biodynamics (JPI) and/or contact your regional biodynamic group.
The Agriculture Course: An Intensive Study of the Origins and Future of Biodynamics at the Pfeiffer Center
A Midwinter Seminar at the Pfeiffer Center, January 14-17, 2011
By Bill Day
For the 2011 midwinter intensive study of the Agriculture lectures at the Pfeiffer Center, the subject was the horn preparations, 500 and 501. As in past years, this weekend gathering featured challenging talks, a eurythmy performance, and convivial meals. New this year were small-group sessions that elicited questions and observations about the horn preps that might never have arisen in a large-group setting; the talking and sitting was leavened with group artistic activities with Deborah Lothrop (charcoal drawing) and Natasha Moss (eurythmy), prep making (grinding silica for 501), and hands-on experiments with water. The overall result was a blend of learning and fellowship that – like the original agriculture course in 1924 – left everyone with many new insights to digest and many new questions to ponder.
The two horn preps are alike (and unique) in that they are made by burying a substance in cow horns. In nearly every other respect, they are not only different from each other, they are polar opposites. The cow dung that becomes 500 is dark, while the ground silica of 501 embodies light; 500 is buried in fall and spends the winter underground, while 501 is buried in spring and dug up in the fall; 500 is typically sprayed in the afternoon, with large drops directed at the soil more than the plants, while 501 is sprayed in the early morning, in a fine mist directed to the plants more than the soil. In their similarities and their differences, 500 and 501 remind us of siblings, tightly bound together yet emphatically distinctive, one from the other.
In talks that opened and closed the weekend, Pfeiffer Center Director Mac Mead drew a line connecting the earliest stages of Earth evolution to our time. As depicted in Occult Science, the Earth’s evolution is measured in cycles of expansion and contraction, warmth and coolness, light and dark, order and chaos. These cycles manifest today in the rhythms of nature. Human beings are highly emancipated from the rhythms of nature, and the horn preps, if understood and used in the right way, give us an opportunity to bring those rhythms into our service. Mac suggested that we start by understanding the differences between metamorphosis (a movement from one state to that state’s polar opposite) and enhancement (a process of unfolding), two phenomena that exist throughout nature and also throughout the preps.
Malcolm Gardner’s talks on “The Logic of Horn Manure” and “The Logic of Horn Silica” were an attempt to “recover the rationale” underlying Rudolf Steiner’s indications. On their face, the preps do seem bizarre, but Rudolf Steiner did not arrive at them through trial and error, or by guessing, but through a rational penetration of the workings of nature. The rational aspect is not readily apparent because of the discursive nature of Steiner’s lectures, but Malcolm’s talks were on one level a clinic on how to tease out the logic underlying Steiner’s indications. That logic in turn suggests a path toward the “real science” that will emerge when science at last takes hold of unquantifiable forces. Yes, the elements such as carbon, nitrogen and oxygen are at work in nature’s household, but “for Steiner it’s not about the substances, it’s about the forces.” It is through diligent study of the forces at work that we can learn what it is the substances want to do – what processes of metamorphosis and enhancement they seek, for example, when they take up and throw off other substances, or change from solid to liquid to gas.
Forms and forces work hand in glove to make up the world around us. Where Malcolm took us deeply into the realm of forces, Steffen Schneider led us to consider the cow horn, a natural form that Rudolf Steiner put at the heart of the horn preps. What exactly are cow horns, and why do cows have them? What can we learn about horns by studying their form with an open mind, heart and will? How is a horn different from an antler, and how is the cow different from an elk or a deer? What does the form of the horn (which constantly changes over the life of the cow) tell us about its hidden functions as organs and sheaths – its role as an organ of perception, and its role in the cow’s metabolic life? Steffen’s personal explorations of these questions showed how much there is to ponder and learn from even the most mundane objects in nature.
Stirring is central to making and using 500 and 501, but how often do we think about the properties and behavior of water? Jennifer Greene’s workshop on the subject included illuminating hands-on experiments as well as demonstrations that vividly illustrated how water creates sheaths in motion, generating an environment of almost unimaginable complexity every time we stir preps.
Mac Mead opened the weekend with this startling observation: “None of us has scratched the surface of what the preps are all about.” That may not be what we want to hear from our teacher, or even think about ourselves, but the level of humility it expressed created a mood entirely suitable for one’s own ideas and understanding of the horn preps to undergo metamorphosis and enhancement.
Next year’s midwinter weekend intensive at the Pfeiffer Center is scheduled for January 13-16, 2012. Mark your calendar, and watch www.pfeiffercenter.org for news and registration information in the fall.
Bill Day is Development Coordinator at Threefold Educational Center, the Pfeiffer Center’s parent organization. More information about the Pfeiffer Center and its programs can be found at www.pfeiffercenter.org.
Strengthening the Heart of the Food Movement: Biodynamics and the Deregulation of GMO Alfalfa
By Robert Karp
Executive Director, Biodynamic Farming & Gardening Association
The wider food movement, of which I consider the biodynamic movement to be an intimate and integral part, suffered two devastating blows the past month—blows which have evoked much pain and which deserve much reflection.
The first and most obvious blow was the USDA’s decision to deregulate genetically modified alfalfa and several other crops. The second, less obvious but no less important blow, was the widely circulated letter of Ronnie Cummings of the Organic Consumers Association claiming a kind of complicity among large players in the organic industry in these USDA decisions. (An alternative view can be found here.) The first blow was ecological, political and economic. The second blow cut right to the social heart of the food movement.
Is there a helpful light that can be shed on these events from a biodynamic perspective?
A guiding concept within biodynamics is that of the “farm organism.” The idea is to conceive of the farm biologically and “spiritually” as a whole organism rather than mechanistically as a collection of “parts” to be manipulated for purely human ends. The farm organism does have “parts,” so to speak (i.e. woods, crop ground, animals, vegetables, wetlands, pastures, etc.), but these are worked with in a far more holistic, integrated and ethical way than the parts of a machine. And each “part” is also thought of as a whole—that is, as living organisms of integrity unto themselves.
The creative work of the farmer thus involves bringing the diverse elements of the farm into such a dynamic relationship that the whole farm takes on the life of a self-sustaining eco-system. In this way, a profoundly healthy environment is created in which soils, plants, animals and human beings can truly thrive. This is the ideal, anyway, to which basically all biodynamic farmers strive along with many organic farmers and others who have come to this approach out of their own life experience.
The idea of human beings splicing together genes from completely different organisms and species and even kingdoms of nature in order to create wholly new organisms is nothing less than a mechanistic, technological perversion of the picture of the true vocation of the farmer presented here, i.e. of the farmer as a social-artistic creator of farm organisms. And thus it is in the proliferation of these kinds of farms and farmers that I would suggest lays the ultimate antidote to genetic engineering.
But we also need to be active politically and economically. While the concept of the farm organism has been gaining more and more recognition outside of biodynamics, it is less well known that this way of looking at the farm can also be applied to political, economic and social realities. In doing so, radical new ways of approaching social change and the transformation of capitalism can be discerned. Community Supported Agriculture, for example, was inspired by Rudolf Steiner’s efforts in this direction. (See, for example, McFadden, Steven, “The History of Community Supported Agriculture Part I Community Farms in the 21st Century: Poised for Another Wave of Growth?”)
In my 2007 essay “Toward an Associative Economy in the Sustainable Food and Farming Movement” (available here), I pointed to many examples of the promising emergence of an associative or “organismic” economy in our midst and suggested a number of ways to strengthen these efforts. And I proposed that the key challenge facing the wider food movement derives from the fact that we have attempted to embed a holistic approach to agriculture into a conventional, toxic economic and political landscape which, by its very nature will tend to erode the values at the foundation of the food movement.
In that essay, I also pointed to the tension between the grassroots, activist, non-profit wing of the food movement and the pragmatic, industry, for-profit wing—and highlighted the need for these two groups to come together to find common ground and develop more synergistic economic practices and political strategies.
The events of the past month suggest to me again that we stand in great need within the food movement of realizing that our core values are based on wholly different way of thinking about nature, social life and the human being than those informing mainstream institutions. If we think we can easily graft the food movement onto the current social and economic forms, without working to transform the whole system, we are, I believe, profoundly mistaken. At the same time, I do not believe we are called upon to withdraw from society and attempt to set up quaint little agricultural islands for foodies.
In this light, I would suggest that what is most deeply needed right now, in the wake of the recent deregulation of GMO alfalfa and other crops, is not to stand back and point fingers, or even simply gear up for bigger and better lawsuits against Monsanto (which is not to say these do not have their place, particularly the lawsuits). Rather, I think these events call us all, idealists and pragmatists, activists and industry leaders, farmers and consumers alike to come together to develop a more comprehensive, holistic and “organismic” vision for our work, and a more seamless, dynamic ecosystem of strategies for accomplishing our goals.
The fact is we need each other and the diverse perspectives, skills and resources we bring to the table. We need to leverage and harmonize the unique capacities and strategies of our for-profits and our non-profits; of our farmer groups, consumer groups and trade groups; our educators, researchers and activists; our foundations, angel investors and philanthropists. Only by coming together in this way and thinking outside the box, can we hope to navigate and transform the treacherous landscape of our current political and economic life, while strengthening, at the same time, the social heart, the social organism, of our movement.
We must find new ways to transform our economy of winners and losers into an economy of producers, distributers and consumers working together with capital providers to meet the needs of all. And we must find new ways to conceive the right role of government in our movement, and so transform our politics of insiders and outsiders, into a true democracy that can embody the will and wisdom of the whole community.
Finally, as biodynamic practitioners, I would suggest that we must join unreservedly in this task. For we too have often attempted to naively embed biodynamics into the existing social, economic and political forms or withdrawn into our agricultural islands. Rather it is time to join forces, in all humility, with our brothers and sisters in the wider food movement and bring our best ideas to the table, so that the pain of the past months can be transformed into new hope, new insights and a new vision for the future.
In a further contribution I plan to deepen these perspectives and share more specifics of what I think some concrete next steps along these lines could look like.
Life continues to evolve on Jonah and Amber’s CSA farm. Late summer sunflowers and heat-loving vegetables hang on for these unusually sunny and warm final September days. The farm workers turn under the potato beds and pull the broccoli plants for composting. The hoop house awaits the transplanting of fall greens. And last but surely not least, Jonah and Amber celebrated their wedding on the farm last month.



This weekend, over 70 young farmers and farming enthusiasts came together for two days of inspiration and connection at Angelic Organics Farm and Learning Center in Caledonia, Illinois. As coordinator of the Biodynamic Association’s 


























