Wisconsin Dairy Farmers Have Been Duped

For a farmer, getting the news that you no longer have a market for your product is devastating, I know, I got one of those letters a few months ago. It is especially problematic if you are a dairy farmer, since cows need to be milked every day. So, in April, when 75 Wisconsin farmers were notified by their milk buyer, Grassland Dairy Products, that they would no longer have a market, state government officials took notice.

While our government officials appear to be concerned about the well being and economic viability of Wisconsin’s dairy farmers, I wonder if they are really more interested in the viability of the “dairy industry”.

Are they concerned about fair farm prices and the environment or keeping the economic engine rolling? Since the Assembly, Governor Walker and the Wisconsin Department Of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) have done all they can to encourage Wisconsin farmers to produce more milk, never questioning how much milk might be too much, I’m guessing their concern lies with a dairy industry that depends on cheap milk.

In 2003, the Wisconsin Legislature passed Act 235, a bill that limited the ability of local communities to oppose large farms.

In 2011 the Assembly voted to provide dairy farmers tax credits for modernizing or expanding their operations.

In 2012 Governor Walker introduced his “30×20” plan to grow Wisconsin’s milk production to 30 billion pounds annually by 2020, offering grants to dairy producers to help them grow their businesses and, Wisconsin’s dairy industry.

Dairy economist Bob Cropp, professor emeritus at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, thought the initiative was a good idea and it would not lower milk prices, apparently agreeing with the Governor who noted that “ The reality is, that the growth is not fast enough for the opportunities that are before us”.

Wisconsin dairy farmers met the 30 billion pound goal last year, but the predictions of no downside to the increased milk production didn’t work out so well.

As the number of Wisconsin dairy farms has fallen from 14,265 to 9,230 over the past 10 years, those that remain have obviously gotten larger, much larger. The Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) is the preferred model for the future of dairy production in Wisconsin, as CAFO numbers have grown from 50 in 2000 to 252 in 2016.

The support for larger farms and more milk does not end with the Governor and Wisconsin Legislature. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) seems to be very interested in being a partner to large scale farms, not that that is totally wrong, but after the partnering it’s time to ensure environmental protection standards are followed.

As former DNR secretary George Meyer noted, “The standards aren’t really at stake, those are set in law,” but complaints of non-enforcement by the DNR are increasing under the Walker administration. Since Governor Walker was elected in 2011, he and the Republican controlled legislature have co-opted the administrative rule-making process, taking that power, basically, into their own hands.

Even the Wisconsin Attorney General got into the act with his legal opinion stating that the DNR had no authority to consider the cumulative effects of high-capacity wells on the waters of Wisconsin, a gift to the CAFO’s but a real problem for the environment and the citizens of Wisconsin.

Wisconsin is open for business, specifically the CAFO dairy business. By doing all they can to support the growth of dairy CAFO’s, by gutting the DNR’s enforcement capabilities through staff and budget cuts and by appointing a DNR Secretary who says she has “brought customer-friendly private-sector principles to the agency” the Governor and state Legislature have encouraged large dairies to locate and expand in Wisconsin and produce as much milk as they can.

While far too much emphasis has been placed on increasing milk output in Wisconsin and the rest of the nation, solutions to the problem are falling short.

Governor Walker blames Canada for supporting Canadian dairy farmers over US farmers, and not to be outdone in stupidity, the State Assembly’s answer was sending a letter to University of Wisconsin System President Ray Cross, asking him to direct some research funds into exploring alternative uses (beyond consumption) for milk.

They encourage farmers to overproduce, cry their crocodile tears over low prices and lost markets, then, despite the $250 million they cut from the UW budget, they ask for research on alternative uses for milk?

Perhaps producing less milk might be an idea? Supply management, which would promote fair prices for farmers, a stable supply for consumers and possibly some protection for the environment by limiting the growth of CAFO’s ? No,— that would make too much sense and it might cut into industry profits.

Farmers have been duped into producing too much milk. Their profitability is gone and as they are suffering, so is the quality of Wisconsin’s environment.

More articles by:

Jim Goodman is a dairy farmer from Wonewoc, Wisconsin.

March 22, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Italy, Germany and the EU’s Future
David Rosen
The Further Adventures of the President and the Porn Star
Gary Leupp
Trump, the Crown Prince and the Whole Ugly Big Picture
The Hudson Report
Modern-Day Debtors’ Prisons and Debt in Antiquity
Steve Martinot
The Properties of Property
Binoy Kampmark
Facebook, Cambridge Analytica and Surveillance Capitalism
Jeff Berg
Russian to Judgment
Gregory Barrett
POSSESSED! Europe’s American Demon Must Be Exorcised
Robby Sherwin
What Do We Do About Facebook?
Sam Husseini
Trump Spokesperson Commemorates Invading Iraq by Claiming U.S. Doesn’t Dictate to Other Countries; State Dept. Defends Invasion
Rob Okun
Students: Time is Ripe to Add Gender to Gun Debate
Michael Barker
Tory Profiteering in Russia and Putin’s Debt of Gratitude
March 21, 2018
Paul Street
Time is Running Out: Who Will Protect Our Wrecked Democracy from the American Oligarchy?
Mel Goodman
The Great Myth of the So-Called “Adults in the Room”
Chris Floyd
Stumbling Blocks: Tim Kaine and the Bipartisan Abettors of Atrocity
Eric Draitser
The Political Repression of the Radical Left in Crimea
Patrick Cockburn
Erdogan Threatens Wider War Against the Kurds
John Steppling
It is Us
Thomas Knapp
Death Penalty for Drug Dealers? Be Careful What You Wish for, President Trump
Manuel García, Jr.
Why I Am a Leftist (Vietnam War)
Isaac Christiansen
A Left Critique of Russiagate
Howard Gregory
The Unemployment Rate is an Inadequate Reporter of U.S. Economic Health
Ramzy Baroud
Who Wants to Kill Palestinian Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah?
Roy Morrison
Trouble Ahead: The Trump Administration at Home and Abroad
Roger Hayden
Too Many Dead Grizzlies
George Wuerthner
The Lessons of the Battle to Save the Ancient Forests of French Pete
Binoy Kampmark
Fictional Free Trade and Permanent Protectionism: Donald Trump’s Economic Orthodoxy
Rivera Sun
Think Outside the Protest Box
March 20, 2018
Jonathan Cook
US Smooths Israel’s Path to Annexing West Bank
Jeffrey St. Clair
How They Sold the Iraq War
Chris Busby
Cancer, George Monbiot and Nuclear Weapons Test Fallout
Nick Alexandrov
Washington’s Invasion of Iraq at Fifteen
David Mattson
Wyoming Plans to Slaughter Grizzly Bears
Paul Edwards
My Lai and the Bad Apples Scam
Julian Vigo
The Privatization of Water and the Impoverishment of the Global South
Mir Alikhan
Trump and Pompeo on Three Issues: Paris, Iran and North Korea
Seiji Yamada
Preparing For Nuclear War is Useless
Gary Leupp
Brennan, Venality and Turpitude
Martha Rosenberg
Why There’s a Boycott of Ben & Jerry’s on World Water Day, March 22
John Pilger
Skripal Case: a Carefully-Constructed Drama?
March 19, 2018
Henry Heller
The Moment of Trump
John Davis
Pristine Buildings, Tarnished Architect
Uri Avnery
The Fake Enemy
Patrick Cockburn
The Fall of Afrin and the Next Phase of the Syrian War
Nick Pemberton
The Democrats Can’t Save Us