News Sections
Farmer guilty of contempt won't stop raw milk sales
Font-size:
Share
Print
Comments(118)
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Mon. Oct. 20 2008 8:50 PM ET
Despite being found guilty of contempt of court for ignoring an order not to sell raw milk from his farm, an Ontario farmer says he'll continue the illegal sale.
Michael Schmidt asked for the maximum sentence possible after he was found guilty of contempt on Monday, but he said he won't stop his sales.
"Yes, we will continue with what we're doing," he said after the ruling. He and his supporters then gulped down glasses of milk, although it was unclear if the milk was pasteurized or not. Schmidt then compared his effort to sell raw milk to Mahatma Gandhi's fight against British imperialism and Martin Luther King's civil rights struggle.
"When Gandhi picked up the salt, he kept marching, and when Martin Luther started the Montgomery bus strike, he kept going until the law was changed," Schmidt said, according to The Canadian Press.
Selling unpasteurized milk is illegal in Canada and a judge had found that Schmidt circumvented the laws by selling "shares" in his dairy cows to consumers.
In finding him guilty of contempt, the judge called Schmidt's actions "not only illegal, but completely self-defeating." Justice Cary Boswell added that Schmidt has every right to try to make the sale of raw milk legal, but he must do so in a manner that's within the law. The judge also said Monday's ruling had nothing to do with the sale of milk, but instead focused on whether or not Schmidt knew he was defying a court order by continuing the raw milk sales.
Schmidt and his devoted consumers claim raw milk tastes better and say they have never suffered adverse health effects from drinking it.
Health officials say raw milk can carry bacteria such as salmonella, E. coli and Listeria monocytogenes, which carry serious, and sometimes deadly, health consequences.
Schmidt has operated his co-operative organic dairy farm near Owen Sound, Ont., for more than 20 years.
The judge did not sentence Schmidt on Monday and did not indicate when such a decision would be made. The Crown is not asking that Schmidt serve jail time, but Schmidt himself asked the judge to impose "the highest penalty you can find."
Schmidt also faces other legal troubles. He is set to go to trial in 2009 on 20 charges laid by the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Grey-Bruce Health Unit.
In November 2006, Ministry of Natural Resources officials raided Schmidt's farm and seized farming equipment and computers. He was subsequently charged with failure to obey a written order barring him from making and storing raw milk products.
Schmidt lost 50 pounds after embarking on a hunger strike in 2006 to protest the charges.
He ended the protest by bringing a cow to the steps of the Ontario legislature. He drank a glass of milk immediately after milking the cow.
With files from The Canadian Press
User Tools
Related Stories
User Tools
About the tools
Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.
-


Font-size
Print Article
Comments(118)-
Feedback
Share it with your network of friends
Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
I applaud the budget, even though Health Care and education may stay unscathed. Sadly this cannot last and I worry to later this year where cuts will become enviable. If anything, this provides the Wildrose Alliance plenty of ammo when an election is called.


Comments are now closed for this story
V. Joe
said
It's disappointing when laws that primarily protect industry are touted as consumer protection. Pasteurization is great for the dairy industry- it allows them to save money on feed, animal care, and lengthens the shelf life of their products!
Nan
said
Getrude
said
I buy raw milk and it is waaaayy better.
Kris
said
It's supposed to be a free country; there is rising anger at government constantly forcing us to do what's "best" for us.
Robert Brise
said
This isn't a case about the possibility of getting sick from raw milk its a case of the retailers and dairy companies getting scared that they'll be cut out of their government protected profits.
20 to forty years ago just about everyone in rural Canada drank raw milk with no adverse effects, and some still do is the government going to arrest everybody?
Trent
said
CYL
said
BP
said
If they outlawed it what were the statistics of infection or did some bureaucrat make this rule because they only think there is a risk.
As a closing to this the risk of decontamination is through the handling, are things clean etc.
JP
said
Above poster is correct to say that it is dairy lobby that is most threatened by this...can't have farmer's getting directly paid for their work by an informed consumer now, can we?
carey
said
Lance Chalmers
said
Lance Chalmers
said
korie
said
Mike
said
I for one don't drink raw milk because of the health risks, i'd much rather be safe(r) and drink 2%
If these people want to drink raw milk, health risk and all, or medical benefits and all (didn't do much research), then let them
The Bet
said
Yoyoma
said
rational
said
100 years ago it world fine - we are here arent we
said
If this guy wants to drink and sell whole milk fresh from the cow that should be his business. Who said BIG BROTHER is always right?
Annie
said
J
said
If you have your own cow you are free to drink raw milk. There is no law against that. Schmidt tried to get around the law by selling shares in the cow, thereby giving you ownership and the right to drink the milk.
Gilles
said
JP
said
Our parents and grandparents grew up on raw milk, and I urge you to ask them if there were as many sick kids as there are today. It correlates. ...
AK in Hamilton
said
"
I find that attitude interesting; do you feel, then, that the police would be best put to use hunting down every frat party and back-alley drug user? Or should they track down the people supplying the drugs, in an effort to stem the problem at its source?
Shawn
said
At the same time, rational is right by saying that we as the tax payer will have to pay for any illness incurred by this action.
To make everyone happy, legalize raw milk and change law to make an illness that can be attributed to drinking raw milk (or smoking, etc) a self inflicted injury that becomes the finanical burden of the person who caused it.
Steve
said
Mark in Montreal
said
I say, raw milk if you prove to me the cow is 100% all natural cow.
Vijay
said
I would even make my own yogurt, and some other products that is made from raw milk rather than buy all those over-processed, radiated and empty calories milk products sold in stores - cancer foods, as I call them.
That being said, this is a political decision to protect big corporations who will lose profits from cheese, milk, yogurt, etc.
Granted, the milk from cows today contain steroids and other chemicals. but ask yourself the question, does the pasteurized milk sold in stores NOT contain steroids and other chemicals? Do you think pasteurization removes steroids and other chemicals?
If the products produced by big corporations are so safe then why all the recalls, why Listeriosis (?), why does lettuce sold have E.Coli?
And last but not least, for those scientists who assert the minimum acceptable levls of poisons and radiation in our food, Would you feed those foods to your kids? Probably not!
Frunk
said
Laura M
said
MM
said
Now if you want to risk your life/health by consuming unpasteurized milk then go ahead. But, for the record, people DID die in the past due to food bourne illnesses but the technology wasn't available to isolate the reasons for the deaths back then.
Dennis L. Krahn
said
RT
said
So let's tax a natual substance that has been consumed for thousands of years, and then the gov will be happy, and we can have something healthy. I beleive that some of our health trouble are coming from being too "healthy"! There are "good bugs" out there that protect us, but they are "banned" so are not there to help us fight disease.
Put a warning sign, and let people buy raw milk!
Kathy
said
Its pretty pathetic when we have a justice system that allows criminals to go free and throws an inocent farmer in jail.The stupidity is just frightening.
More than Meats the Pharm eyes.
said
jason
said
Canadian Federal and Ontario Government should provide and encorage the suppliers to supply his milk instead of blocking it. If people can have the option why not. Shouldn't this be part of the real GREEN SHIFT. Lets become greener before
Paul in Ottawa
said
AlSask
said
Connie
said
Number Cruncher
said
Michel (Ottawa)
said
dre
said
ripperjack
said
Robin the Hood
said
Doug
said
This guy has an organic farm, which should mean no steroids or antibiotics.
I can't believe our ministry doesn't have any bigger fish to fry! With all the recent issues such as the Maple Leaf thing and the melamine milk thing from China they still choose to tackle the little guy who is actually introducing wholesome food to the market place!
I shake my head.
Doug BC
said
If the laws surrounding the sale of milk are to be challenged,there is a course of action to follow.And it can be followed to the highest court in the land.
From here,it's hard to see how he is not guilty of "contemp of court".
Government is often held responsible for issues that affect the health of it's citizens.The same burden of proof we apply to things like DDT,or BPA can easily be applied to milk.Just make your case and take it through the proper channels.
But,contempt for those who are appointed to enforce the laws is not the right path to a just solution.
Kurt S. in Barrie
said
James C
said
Lets have the government ban McDonalds. How about ban cigarettes as well. What about alcohol, get rid of it.
TV and video games contribute to obesity so outlaw that as well.
Skiing can be dangerous, make it illegal.
And how about if anyone participates or consumes such that they be denied publicly funded health care. They are on their own.
Sounds pretty ridiculous, eh.
More erosion of personal freedom. Big brother watching over us and lording over us.
Maria Koenen
said
Paul G. Masse
said
Avoiding pasturization is a logical as refusing imunizations and drug injections.
Two diseases are directly transferrable even before symptoms appear in the milking cow: Undulent fever and TB.
From experience I know how dibilitating Undulent Fever (contagious abortion) Bangs disease can be. It is not worth the risk and we should all be glad someone is monitoring to ensure that the population stays healthy.
Leslie
said
Yes, there are many families on dairy farms that daily consume the raw milk they produce. They generally do this without ill effect because they have built up immunities to anything that might be in the milk both from their close contact with the cows and from consuming the raw milk. This still does not prevent them from occassionally becoming ill from consuming the raw milk. The average person in Canada will not have this immunity. When they become ill, trying to back track and definitely proving their illness because they drank raw milk may be very diffiult, thus negating any chance of them assuming responsibility for their own medical risks from this behaviour.
Also, allowing one farmer to sell raw milk opens the door to others who may not follow safe parctices for the producing and handling of milk, resulting in more food-borne illnesses.
Murray McCarthy
said
Juanita
said
Jamie
said
G.J.M. CALGARY AB.
said
james
said
If the government did nothing, I bet there would be 100 posts asking why they did nothing.
Albertan
said
David
said
This is such a case.
Tori
said
Ecoli, is found in Grade A inspected ground beef and recently Harvey's in North Bay. How many times have we been told by the media that ecoli has been found in tomatoes, bean sprouts and green peppers?
Salmonella can be found in raw eggs as well as in any restaurant where someone did not wash their hands appropriately.
Listeria, as we just were informed by Maple Leaf Foods, is everywhere. It is found in soil and water. Our vegetables could be infected with Listeria.
This is a bogus charge. Risks are associated with how the food is handled. These cows are probably handled more carefully than the many cows that are put onto automatic milkers in large dairy farms. Probably why milk has to be pasturized so that the soil on the animals do not kill us.
Another example of how government regulation is not always the right thing to do.
Dr. Jonathan Joyce
said
We, the herded (pardoning pun) populace are indeedly free; that is, we are free to do exactly as we are told. Say a prayer for Mr. Schmidt. He's dealing with those who cannot tell their nose from their toes (which is a nice way of saying what I really mean). Poor guy.
Good on CTV for having the courage to even let us in on the shilly shenanigans our so-called PTB seem so rabidly intent upon pursuing. The world's melting down; perhaps our judiciary might get a reality gripe. That'll happen when the cows keel over. Riiiiiiight!
PrairieDog-prairies
said
Garett
said
However, clearly you have no idea what pasteurization is. Pasteurization is heating ("cooking") the milk to a high temperature in order to kill any present bacteria. The only adverse effects are that lactic bacteria can be beneficial in culinary practices (good luck making sour cream with no lactic bacteria present in the milk). But the health implications are nil. There is no added chemicals or anything. Claiming that children contract influenza and tonsillitis etc. as a result of pasteurized milk is just as absurd as banning the sale of raw milk in a so-called "free" country. If you desperately need a scapegoat then my first suspect would be additives, preservatives and processed foods (though what we really need are studies of long-term exposure. Not knee-jerk reactions). Pasteurization is innocent from a medical point of view.
Graeme
said
Claude
said
milk drinker
said
As a city boy growing up in London,U.K. all the milk we had delivered (giving my age away)had about 3" of cream on the top of the bottle and our mom had us shake it first to mix it up....
Can't get that anymore....is that because of the processing mentioned here?
Miss that stuff...it was really GOOD!
FarmED
said
JP
said
There is certainly a large effect that pasteurization has on raw milk.
I urge you to do the research, simply through the net, on the effects of processing of milk. Yes it is true that it (pasteurization) kills bacteria, but I would ask you, what else does it kill? If it kills bacteria, what else, and how else, does it modify what is "good" in the milk? Honestly ask yourself that question and honestly consider that there may be an answer to it, or many answers.
It is quite ride to say I have no idea what pasteurization is...I know exactly what pasteurization is through both growing up on a dairy farm, from sampling and testing raw vs. pasteurized and performing human and animal trials on myself and family and other farm animals. You would be surprised to learn that a calf will die from drinking pasteurized milk. Does this not say something about the question I asked above, if pasteurization is not doing more to modify the milk than "simply kill off the bad bacteria"?
Trust me, the research is out there, in all the well respected medical journals, and in all the experiences of farm folk like myself, the subject of this court trial, our grandparents, etc.
pat
said
canophone
said
Mike in Manitoba
said
Jonathan
said
Canuck in Bellingham WA
said
That said, please note that these health regulations have been a major part of the greatly increased life expectancy of most people.
And yes, living out in the country drinking unpasteurized milk far from the pollution of cities is mostly fine. But all these people who think there is a correlation between unpasteurized milk and immunity are kidding themselves. Its as stupid as the "immunizations cause autism" rant; it has to be someone's fault; I need someone to blame.
NW
said
pp
said
Salmonella and other bacteria can cause life threatening diseases.
But on the other hand being a farm girl I do know that like anything the healthier and more robust you are the less likely you will get sick from these things.
Unfortunately the issues is also the fact that people are NOT used to consuming these products - their bodies have not built up an immunity to such pathogens. It's like drinking well water - I drink my water all the time - we have had people drink our water and get sick - there is nothing wrong with the water when it shows a reading of '9' for choloform but some people are not used to it and get sick.
Of course these are always city people who drink chlorinated water :)
Over all though people should know that pasturizing milk has saved more lives over the years than it has harmed (I cannot find any literature on harm from pasturizing).
And those that say pasturizing ruins milk - not so there is no difference between raw and pasturized milk...
Tim in Calgary
said
It's all well and good to wax philosophic about freedom of choice, but I didn't hear that argument too often during the listeria outbreak last month. After all, those people should have known the dangers, and could have made a different choice.
pp
said
Just to clarify - there is no law against drinking raw milk - only selling it.
If you have your own cows or even goats then go ahead and drink your own milk.
BUT you cannot sell it.
REMEMBER - If you were to sell it and a large population of people, who became sick with e-coli or salmonella, etc, then the general population is footing the bill.
If you alone are drinking the milk then one or two people sick is no drain on the health but dozens now that's costly... That is my hard earned money now going towards caring for these sick people.
And anyways if you are drinking it all the time your system is likely used to it. The worry is those people who are not immune to the pathogens.
JSpratt
said
Its not the raw milk that is the hazard, its the cow manure and other contaminates that get into the milk after it leaves the teat.
This is a severa hazard.
crystal
said
HEATHER
said
Becky
said
unpasteurized milk. So?????????
A Prairie Girl
said
Northern Menace
said
Melissa
said
Big brother needs to mind his own business and stop infringing on peoples right to choose.I agree this is all about money and nothing else.The egg farmers have been trying to push out the organic egg farmers for years.This is no different.
MORE MILK PLEASE
said
rural gal
said
Dave in Surrey
said
Jspratt
said
What?
A vaccine does not suppress the immune system, it actually encourages it!
Please go back and take a biology 101 course!
J M White, Brantford
said
SK
said
Now, away from the farm, I have an intolerance to 'storebought' milk and can't digest it properly.
Can't we make our own decisions without the government regulating everything we do?
Gord Edmonton
said
james
said
mark
said
For those fearing of paying my health bill - you pay them for those who get heart desease as a result of whole industry promoting the fatty foods in huge portions and nothing can be done in this case??? How can you compare those poor people being "invited" by commercials allowed publicly to this situation? If I want to buy the milk and the decision of purchase is fully conscious where the client is being informed and trusts the source than what? Did you stop the Walkerton by seemingly 'perfect regulation" or recent dying from "healthy" industrially produced meat? Who is paying the bills here? I wish the culprits - but this is not the case.
There is too many efforts to make "idiot proof" environment without leaving the freedom of common sense.
So for now - time to get back from my pets to get what they do not deserve... which is raw milk.
Jasper
said
In case you are not aware, farmers cannot sell milk unless they own "quota". This is a protectionist measure that limits the amount of milk production and milk producers in the country.
I grew up on a farm and had to drink raw milk as a kid. You couldn't pay me to drink it now. Yuk.
maggie c
said
There must be antibodies? in the milk, same as mothers milk that help babies.
I didn't breast feed as my son is adopted, he is now in his 40's, very healthy.
Thank you for reading this.
Marilyn Idle, LLB, Wellness Consultant
said
No matter which poisons we eat or breath in or get hurt by... they key is... do we have a well body that can return to health quickly.
Perspective and common sense must be applied to each decision we make, -not more and more controlling and imprisioning state laws.
bl
said
Irene Roche
said
we, all, know this is not a 'safety' issue.
Ryan in AB
said
Reece
said
bluegenesask
said
We drank hundreds of gallons over the years and we are all still alive.
Mary Susan
said
Murray from Northern Ontario
said
Michael
said
Tara
said
Beancounter
said
GET A LIFE!
Mitch in St. John's
said
As for this particular case, the government's role should not be to prevent the selling of raw milk. Rather, if there is a perceived danger, some kind of "independent study" should be done and that should stand as the example for consumers. Therefore people can still make their own choices and cannot claim ignorance. Of course that will never happen, for so many Canadians seem to prefer being ruled.
Nancy
said
I drink fortified soy milk or almond milk and I take calcium supplements. That is all my body needs.
Vern
said
Glorianne & Michael Bjerland
said
Small Sask. Farmers
Tony, Chilliwack BC
said
I have no allergies Its rare I ever get sick my amune system is great your body needs bacteria and other bugs so it can build an immune system
lauraine moody
said
I hope he goes all the way.We should be able to drink raw milk.I have many sensitivities and allergies that disappear whenever I can find raw milk,which is hard to find because of all our laws that keeps pharmaceutical in a roaring business.
SICK OF ALL THE NONSENSE
said
Mark Embree
said
sam
said
Gregory
said
I would bet you work for the milk marketing board. Raw milk is fine and the kids that died you are talking about was the result of poor sanitizing methods at the processing plant. There is no problem with the milk coming directly from a cow. It is the additional processing and length of storage that requires the pasteurization.
regards
Tim
said
Know what? Why not allow the sale of raw milk? after people sign a waiver that if they contract any affect from the raw milk they will have to pay all medical costs and would be exempt from free medicare treatment. I'm betting that would turn them off.
That's the silliest thing I ever heard. Should everyone now have to sign a waiver that if they get sick from deli meat, E. coli on lettuce or from restaurant food they will pay their own medical bills which is to say nothing of the effects of alcahol and tobacco? Pasteurization has only to do with the killing of bacteria that may be in the milk. We have better handling practices than 50 years ago. With this understanding and verification of proper production procedures raw milk will not pose more of a threat to society than any thing else.
Mo
said
Perhaps the whole point is that the law should be changed. Maybe, maybe not. It's up for debate. I don't mind it though, perhaps a study may be warranted on this topic.
Bill from Cochrane
said
Jim L.-ottawa
said
I was born in Italy and I remember my childhood very well.
My grandmother would make every morning fresh ricotta cheese and serum for breakfast.
People drank raw milk (cow and goat) all the time with no side effects.
Raw Milk, along with hot peppers, garlic and onions were part of our daily food items.
people were very healthy.
I feel this man is a hero for a lot of us.
he fights for was he believes in and for what is healthy.
if I could buy fresh milk I would buy it and drink it without hesitation.
If I could make a donation to help him for his court cost, I would.
keep fighting, never give up. NEVER.
GOOD LUCK. GOD BLESS.