ODA investigator Ron Cordial
Will Joyce Brown, the vocal dissenting member of Highland Haven Farm’s herd share, finally get her revenge on Ohio farm owner Adam Hershberger?
Possibly, if it is up to an Ohio Department of Agriculture enforcement agent, Ron Cordial, who says ODA prosecution of Hershberger is imminent. Agent Cordial has been interviewing herdshare members in recent days, asserting as a fact that Hershberger is about to be prosecuted for violating the state’s laws on slaughtering and selling meat.
As I described in a recent blog post, Joyce Brown, a self-described “retired veterinarian,” has pursued a vendetta against Hershberger, emailing herdshare members, going to the ODA’s dairy division with food safety complaints, putting up a web site and Facebook page criticizing the herdshare, and reporting him to the ODA’s enforcement division. It is in this last effort where she apparently gained some traction, as Cordial visited Highland Haven farm December 16, and pulled out an email from Brown as evidence of possible violation of the state’s meat laws.
In a telephone call January 26Â with one of Highland Haven’s administrators, Diane Phelps, Cordial said that in his December 16 visit to Highland Haven Farm, Hershberger denied all allegations related to violations of meat laws. Diane Phelps recorded the call, with Cordial’s permission; the recording can be accessed at the end of this post.
When she suggested to Cordial during the call that there may have been some misunderstandings during the December 16 discussion, and asked Cordial to submit his questions to Hershberger via email, Cordial refused, saying: “I’m not going to do that. I tried it on December 16, and he was totally uncooperative. He denied having anything to do with Highand Haven farm or having anything to do with a herdshare,….then he denied butchering or slaughtering animals for other families.”
I asked Hershberger about Cordial’s statement. Hershberger said he inquired with Cordial as to what his regulatory authority was with respect to herdshares. When Cordial couldn’t or wouldn’t provide an explanation, Hershberger declined to answer questions about the size of his herd and other specifics about the farm. “I wouldn’t lie to him,” Hershberger added.
As for meat, Hershberger said Cordial “also accused me of butchering animals and selling the meat to the public. I said that wasn’t true, we’re private.”
When Diane Phelps inquired during the telephone call with Cordial about reports from herdshare members that Cordial has been telling them the state plans to prosecute Hershberger, Cordial said it was true: “We are going to go forward with the prosecution, we are going to charge him with illegal slaughter.”
“Are you allowed to tell people that, that you are prosecuting him?” Phelps pressed Cordial.
“It’s an open thing,” Cordial replied. “People are victims as far as I am concerned when they get tainted meat, or get adulterated meat from a person that is not licensed. They have a right to know that….He also knows that it is illegal to do, and he said he wasn’t doing it.”
Hershberger said he hasn’t had any complaints from herdshare members about tainted meat, or getting sick from the meat. He says one herdshare member complained recently that a particular wrapping on some ground beef wasn’t sealed properly, and Hershberger says he immediately took the meat back and refunded the member’s money.
When it comes to changing one’s story, Cordial seemed to be the one out on a limb when he discussed the particulars of his investigation: “Our investigation is open to the public. They can get a copy of it at any time. So can Mr. Hershberger. I told him that.”
When Phelps said she wanted a copy of the investigation, suddenly the brake lights went on, and there was some quick backtracking. “You can get it from our legal department when it is over with,” Cordial responded. “You will have to go through our legal department. It is still an open investigation.….Once my case is closed and it is filed it will go in the records and they can get a copy of it at any time.”
When Phelps took issue with an assertion Cordial made that Hershberger “stiffed” a local slaughterer, Cordial became agitated. “There is two sides to every story….Mr. Hershberger wouldn’t give me his side, so I guess I’ll have to go with the other side. ….You weren’t there m’am. And I am telling you my side. And you were not there. That’s fine. We will discuss that in court.” With that, Cordial hung up on Phelps.
In the meantime, a Highland Haven herd share member checked with the local slaughterhouse in question, and reported back to Cordial that the slaughterhouse says Hershberger doesn’t owe it any money, and was never “stiffed” by the farmer. In a conversation that herd share member recorded in the last couple days, Cordial backed off his “stiffed” charge.
Cordial brings plenty of enforcement experience to his current ODA position. According to a bio provided on the web site of an Ohio firearms instruction company where he has been an instructor, Cordial “retired from the Columbus Police Department after 25 years of working Wagon, Vice, Homicide, S.C.A.T., and S.W.A.T.”
There’s nothing there, or anywhere, about him having prosecution experience, however. Perhaps Columbus cops simply tell the local district attorney whom to prosecute, rather than make recommendations, as happens in most of America, including, I am sure, at the ODA.
Wow, how unfortunate. Really is. It really brings forward the importance of having a well established process of dealing with complaints and addressing all issues.
I trust all Herdshares can learn from this
I think what’s really unfortunate is having a well-established process of dealing with complaints that satisfies all customers but one who is Not To Be Satisfied. Most businesses have had a customer like that at one point or another. In all my years of teaching communication skills and problem solving to thousands of business professionals, however, I’ve rarely heard of cases this extreme.
Really? I would to learn more about the process.
Is it referred to in the original agreement?
How would somebody know what the process is that is joining the Herdshare?
It’s unfortunate that in such circumstances the fingers are/is pointed at the person that has spoke with authorities, rather then the action itself.
The action, under such condition, has the distinct potential of becoming known to authorities, so why seek to blame someone for it?
The circumstance that lead to the authorities being notified of issues, could have been managed differently. While I don’t care to put blame back on Herdhberger, especially from the safety of my couch, following the story and actually speaking with Brown leads to consider that risk mitigation , in way of better resolution strategies could have prevented it from getting to this.
Not a popular point of view , I know, yet important for others that may find themselves in similar circumstances
As one who has been at the pointy boot end of regulatory authorities more than once, I am sorry to see such good people put through this wringer. The process is punishment enough, regardless of the outcome. In my estimation, Brown is a narcissist, as vindictive as I’ve ever seen in my scant years on this earth. There is no punishment for a narcissist, all attention is welcome. She is in her glory right now.
Wow, I can see how reading this blog about the subject may infuriate readers toward Brown. Not being able to hear from Brown on the matter makes it more problematic. I have read a few things about Brown here. Not being able to hear from Brown makes such comments more believable.
That said, I don’t see how defaming Brown helps the situation. In fact, it’s more likely to fuel the flames of discontent.
I am surprised that a Mennonite Christian would consent to how this blog has portrayed Brown.
And if not for religious tenents, then as overall strategy. Fuelling conflict simply raises the stakes of loss. And I see only loss here.
Loss to Hershberger, loss to Brown, loss to the credibility of this blog, loss to the credibility of Herdshares, and loss to the Herdshare owners themselves
Agent Ron Cordial, and this is often the case with many enforcement officials, is to side with the plaintiff especially if that plaintif has a veterinary degree and is, as David stated, “unable to let go of (her) anti-raw-milk teachings”. (Emphasis in brackets is mine) Indeed, “teachings” that motivate her self stated objective, “to protect the public health”. In so doing the truth often becomes twisted in order to establish a case against what they perceived to be a non-compliant individual breaking the law. The private contract and the freedom to choose is irrelevant in their eyes and is perceived as an affront to their belief. If I have to choose whom to trust more on this issue, my vote is with Adam Hershberger.
I am a little confused here. This article states that Hershberger denied butchering or slaughtering meat for other families. Later in the article a complaint from a member about the wrapping on meat is cited. So, it seems Hershberger IS selling or providing meat to other families. I thought herdshares were for dairy only. Can anyone here clarify this?
No, the article doesn’t state that Hershberger denied butchering or slaughtering meat for other families. It says that the ODA agent, Cordial, accused him of denying it. Hershberger denied making meat available to the public. For the legalities on herd shares, food clubs, private associations, and other types of private orgazniations, you’ll have to consult with a lawyer.
My best guess is that Adam is having his beef cows/steers slaughtered & packaged at a local licensed butcher, and then is selling the individual cuts to his shareholders. I had researched this issue a number of years ago, and according to the Ohio Revised Code any meat offered for sale requires a retail food license, as well as a license for storing refrigerated food on the premises. Unfortunately the private/public issue is really a moot point – the law is pretty clear on the matter. Private clubs such as Sam\’s or Costco only admit and sell to members, but they are required to obtain the same licenses and inspections as any other public supermarket. There is an exemption for \”cottage food production\”, but the types of cottage foods are specifically listed (mostly baked goods) and meat doesn\’t apply.
So, it may seem unfair and unjust that an individual farmer can be fined or cited for selling pre-packaged cuts of beef prepared at a licensed butcher to his own herd shareholders, but unfortunately this time the ODA has the revised code on its side. If anyone remembers the Manna Storehouse incident in Lorain County, OH from several years back – Jackie Stowers\’ herdshare and cottage business was raided & shut down when an inspector found some of their cuts of beef at Oberlin College\’s dining hall kitchen. (All packaged beef cuts are labeled by the butcher with the farm or farmer\’s name, so it\’s easy to tell where it came from.)
On the other hand, obtaining the required licenses only costs a nominal fee, but it unfortunately opens the farm up to food inspections. Assuming this is Adam\’s first offense, he might just get a \”slap on the wrist\” as long as he promises to jump through the necessary hoops and get his retail food license. The Amish do get Grade A/B dairy licenses for fluid milk sold to processors, so these kinds of retail licenses shouldn\’t be much more of a stretch. And as long as the ODA keeps a hands-off approach to herdshares, then Adam should be able to separate his retail meat storage from his herdshare fluid milk area to keep the inspectors away from his dairy.
(Gahh – why does editing a post always mess it up! 🙂 All those slashes are from the website, not me…)
In Canada if you own the animal there are no laws preventing you from consuming its milk, eggs, or meat. Nor are there laws requiring licensing and inspection when the product is for ones own use. I would assume then that the shareholder rational could equally be applied to meat as it currently is for raw milk. No doubt, regulators would probably take exception with that interpretation as has proven to be the case with many dairy farm shareholder arrangement in both Canada and the US. As much as it grieves us, these are challenges that are going to have to be met head on and dealt with, one by one, until the state is ordered to back off.
or it may be a political stumbling block in the way of some kind of general allowable understanding for herdshares in Canada. Direct meat sales are totally allowed without any required license from a farmer, so long as the meat is processed in a licensed facility. There is some distinction between direct to consumer and to a retailer or restaurant though.
Hi Ken,
The problem with Adam is that his shareholders only hold ownership in the dairy cows, not the cows/steers raised for bulk beef. It’s very, very common in Ohio for farmers to raise beef cows and sell whole, halves, quarters, split halves, etc. to individual people. The buyer pays the farmer directly for the beef, however the cow is slaughtered & processed at a licensed butcher, and the buyer picks up the meat at the butcher – as well as paying the butcher’s fees. (I’ve been buying a half-side myself for over ten years.) If a farmer has a butcher slaughter an animal but takes the meat back to the farm then it is supposed to be for his own personal consumption. That farmer will run into trouble if he then offers those individually packaged cuts for sale, because holding meat in storage and offering it for retail sale requires licenses according to the Ohio Revised Code’s wording.
David has pointed out that Adam could possibly get a favorably ruling from a judge or jury if he tries to fight it. I’m not sure if Adam belongs to the FTLDF or if they would take his case, but he would need money and resources if he decides to try to fight the ODA.
Hi, Don
I think you are right about the Ohio meat regulations. I am in a herdshare here in Ohio (a small one cow operation) so I am very interested in the outcome of all this.
I have gotten sides and whole animals before, and I also get meat by the cut from some farmers at farmers markets. Took a look through my freezer this a.m. at the packaged stuff – all done at licensed butchers with the butcher’s name on it.
Seems like the problem here, based on what I read on Brown’s website is that Hershberger started slaughtering the animals on the farm himself. Seems like there were some unhappy customers, Brown stayed out of it until the farm reps dragged her name into it, and then that is when she filed the complaint with the ODA.
I think he isn’t going to have much of a legal leg to stand on with the private buying
Molly, you are incorrect that “Brown stayed out of it…” Brown was writing endless threatening emails to Adam Hershberger since the late summer. I have seen her final email, from Nov. 5, three full pages, in which she gave Adam Hershberger an ultimatum: Take this “final opportunity” to negotiate with me, or I go to the Ohio attorney general (she had previously been put off by the ODA’s dairy division). The reason she was so sensitive to legal aspects of the herdshare agreement, she said, was because her husband works for a big NY bank, in IT. It is such a stretch as to be laughable.
Hershberger had long since concluded that negotiating with her was an endless path, because every time he tried to placate her, she came back with new demands. He finally decided that engaging with her was a useless endeavor. So he didn’t follow up on the letter (which she said, by the way, she considered a public document).
As I said earlier, I’m not going to get into a debate about Brown’s legal concerns, because it goes nowhere. If you’d like to discuss it, take your discussion to her Facebook page or web site.
Sorry, David – I missed where you said you didn’t want to debate the legal issues.
What I meant with my comment was that Brown stayed out of the meat issues til the farm reps dragged her name into it. I am far less interested in why Brown did what she did than I am in how this impacts food-to-table issues, though, to be quite honest.
I really know very little about these issues, but am interested in learning more. I just really like buying directly from farmers at markets. I want the food I feed my family to be healthy and safe, and to have as much of my food budget going to local farmers rather than corporate grocery stores as possible.
Hi Molly,
Well, if Adam really was doing the butchering and processing himself then I’m both impressed that he can do it and astounded that he thought it was a good idea! 🙂 Farmers in Ohio are allowed to kill and process a certain number of chickens themselves on their farms (I think the maximum number is around 1,000 birds) without a license, but handling an animal as big as a cow requires a lot more skill and knowledge. The meat also needs to be hung and aged before being cut, and then should be vacuum sealed, packaged, labeled and usually frozen. (I actually don’t have any personal experience with the process, what I know is just what I’ve picked up from talking to our butchers over a number of years.)
I am a little curious about buying cuts of meat at farmer’s markets. I buy beef in bulk so I’ve never needed to buy at a farmer’s market, but presumably the vendor is selling meat processed and packaged by a licensed butcher? I’m just wondering if the vendor/farmer needs to have a retail license to sell at the market, or does the market itself have some kind of a blanket license that covers all the individual vendors? (I don’t know the legal mechanics for a farmer’s market, and their operation may probably vary by state as well.) If anyone has any knowledge on the matter I’d be interested in learning… 🙂
Hi, Don
Thanks for the answer. I have done both bulk and farmers markets. All the meat I have bought from 4 different farmers at different markets is frozen, labeled with butcher’s name and address, and has a USDA inspected sticker on it. All the meat farmers I have talked to when buying the meat by the cut have said that per regulations the meat can only be sold frozen. I have bought beef, chicken, lamb, duck this way. Bison is available from one farmer, but I haven’t tried that. He sells the same way though – by the cut and frozen. Turkeys we get at the holidays and those are fresh but also processed at a licensed facility, not at the farmer’s farm. Whatever turkey is leftover the farmer sells frozen.
Hearing the same thing from different farmers at different markets made it seem like they must be following the law with what they are doing, and the markets are all very public, so I am guessing they have done whatever they are supposed to in terms of licenses, but I don’t really know. I’d be interested in learning more about this, though!
The problem in Canada appears to be that there is confusion between herdshares and buying clubs, with herdshares acting like buying clubs. This doesn’t work when all commerce is regulated under various laws, particularly laws regulating transactions involving the purchase of foodstuffs. Michael Schmidt was convicted in 2011 of running a Costco-type buying club. Conviction confirmed in 2014 by the Ontario Court of Appeal. Now another legal action has been launched against his farm. Is he still selling – is it still a buying club? Or … is it a true herdshare? What end result of this case should we be expecting? Raw milk consumers across Canada need to know.
That is one of the most ridiculous ideas ever, to suggest Michael Schmidt was “running a Costco-type buying club.” Most basically, members of the public can go to Costco and plop down $25 and shop. Members of the public can’t just pay a few dollars and shop at Michael Schmidt’s farm (can’t even find the place). Regulators and judges, and a few gullible readers of this blog, like to buy into that Costco idea, but ordinary people know different–as juries ruled in Wisconsin and Minnesota (for Vernon Hershberger and Alvin Schlangen).
Yes, just like Costco, ordinary members of the public could pay money and join this Ontario cowshare. There were no special membership requirements, such as being a Veteran or belonging to a certain political party. An interest in obtaining raw milk and paying the membership fee appears to be the requirement.
Unless you are saying that The Honourable Justice Peter Tetley is an utter idiot as well, when he concluded in R. v. Schmidt, 2011 ONCJ 482
“51] … No formal contract of purchase and sale was executed by either vendor or purchaser. No corporate structure was created allowing the interested consumer to receive an actual share certificate as an equity owner in the corporation that included the herd as one of its assets. It appears that legal title to the cows remained with the Respondent as the owner of Glencolton Farm. Although the trial record serves to confirm that the Respondent viewed the dairy herd as being owned by the various cow-share certificate holders, in reality, the cow-share arrangement approximates membership in a “big box” store that requires a fee to be paid in order to gain access to the products located therein. There is no evidence the cow-share holders were involved in the purchase of the cows in the herd, their subsequent sale or replacement, or that they had any say in the management of the herd or the distribution of the resultant milk product….”
This sounds like it operated like a buying club, not a cowshare.
This is Ontario, not Wisconsin or Minnesota.
Yes, I am saying the judges, both in Canada and the U.S., are idiots, or more accurately, are completely biased against the farmers. The judges in the MN and WI cases agreed with the prosecution analogy on Costco. But the juries of ordinary people in WI and MN saw through the ruse, and acquitted. There is simply no comparison between the shopping experiences of the two. Costco is public. Michael Schmidt (and other farmers with private arrangements with their members) are private.
To you and others here who have difficulty with the distinction between public food and private food, I suggest you read my book, “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Food Rights”. I document the cases, the investigations, and the decisions that have come down to distinguish between these two fundamentally different types of food distribution.
In Ohio, for example, a number of farmers sacrificed much income and energy, and risked significant jail time, to establish the private arrangements now formally recognized by the state (herdshares). People like Gary Oakes and Carol Schmitmeyer. It’s when some individuals, like Joyce Brown, go crying to public officials to somehow “fix” their private arrangements that they threaten the integrity of the arrangements.
the judges of Her Majesty’s Courts are many things : sometimes, “venal” yes, but “stupid”, no. Their judgments often come off as “idiotic” as a judge cleaves strictly to the status quo, flying in the face of common sense TO SUIT SOME POLITICAL IMPERATIVE. Or = does the exact opposite = rules to advance the agenda of the New World Order … utterly contrary to centuries of common law, not to mention, the Law of God as set out in the Bible which is an essential piece of furniture in every British Courtroom
In his Reasons in the Schmidt case, Mister Justice Tetley drew a roadmap advising all-concerned how a herdshare CAN operate legitimately. Bear in mind that the set of facts on which that case was predicated, was a sting operation in which the govt. of Ontario entrapped him. Michael Schmidt was tricked into selling an undercover official a pound of cheese, by lying to him that she was a member, when she was not. Especially worth knowing is : that lady – after taking the stand to give evidence – came up to him to apologize. Show us another instance where that happened!!
In our situation in Feb 2010, I made the mistake of assuming that, since Michael Schmidt had been acquitted a week earlier, his win applied to our Home on the Range cowshare in BC. I was derelict by not entering evidence to substantiate that our dairy was a jointly-owned herd, whose members hired someone to look after our private property. All it would have taken – then, and still today – would have been 2 lists : an up-to-date “snapshot” of who were the private persons owning a fraction of the asset ie. the herd, along with a “snapshot” describing that private property which we = the ad hoc syndicate = did own.
Lately, I’m getting information … only third-hand … about what’s happening with the next iteration of that dairy, after ‘Our Cows’ folded. What I hear, is = The newbies are coping with a steep learning curve and the REAL MILK is flowing. My guess is : Fraser Health Authority is leaving them alone, because the herd’s owners share the work, and also, that they go out to the farm to pick up their own property.
Don, I’m not sure exactly what Adam does with his meat. But the same argument was advanced in Wisconsin in the Vernon Hershberger case regarding his meat and other food–that all he needed was a low-cost retail license, and that his food club was no different than a Costco or Sam’s Club, which had to be licensed–and the jury decided against the state. Vernon continues to sell all his food, including milk, as a private food club. However, it did take him resisting, until the state brought criminal charges, for him to get in front of a jury, which saw the law his way.
I am a bit confused on the private public thing in this case. It would seem to me that so long as anyone from the public can simply by a membership of some kind, whether it be a share or membership, that the actual claim of private is quite limited. It would seem that it may be deemed exclusive but not necessarily private. Particularly, as they market to the public the availability of herdshares.
If they are being treated the same as a costco, then clearly its not being identified as private. correct me if you thing I got this wrong as I have been pondering it all day
Yes, that really is the heart of the question. Herdshares don’t really fall into the public/private arena because they result from ownership – shareholders invest and hold perpetual ownership in physical animal stock. However, members don’t “own” any portion of retail buying clubs/stores and usually must pay an annual membership fee to maintain their status. The question of whether small non-commercial buying clubs are subject to the same licenses and restrictions as retail members-only stores (eg. Sam’s Club, Costco, etc.) is decided at the state level, and could potentially have a different answer in Wisconsin than it does in Ohio.
It would seem that the underlying quality that truly defines ownership, from mere equity, is responsibilty. In this way it would relate to public private in that private ownership implies private responsibility.
If the Herdshare owner is not responsible, who is? The state. ? For determining the Herdshares are a valid means of accessing raw milk as a private expression of ownership? Or the agister? Who in fact solely makes all decisions about the herd?
Hi David – you’re right, and if Adam is cited, decides to fight the injunction and gets his case heard in front of the right judge then he might be exonerated. But as you pointed out, it took a lot of time, money and concerted effort to win Vernon Hershberger’s case, and Adam might not have the same resources. I can’t remember the details, but as I mentioned before I seem to recall a judge in Ohio ruling in a similar case about ten years ago, saying that a private buying club wasn’t any different from a members-only retail store. I could be completely wrong, but if not then there may already be a ruling in the books.
So what is the story here? its not clear. Cause I thought that the problem is that he was slaughtering and processing the animals on the farm, and then selling the meat to the herdshare owners under the new contract, where liability was removed and unclear. please clarify
Well, nobody is really certain, but since a butcher was involved with the original report I\’m just offering my theory on what Adam might be doing. On-site slaughtering and preparation is a specialized complex process, and I really doubt that Adam is doing that himself. He would also be in much deeper trouble with government officials if that were the case… 🙂
I am also confused on another point. David, you open the article questioning whether Joyce Brown will get her revenge on Adam Hershberger. When I look back at your original blog post on this, you are suggesting that her actions were motivated by her being either an undercover agent or that she couldn’t let go of her vet school teachings. What are you now basing your statement of revenge on?
I never said I knew what motivated her. I said in the original blog post she seemed especially upset that the herd share’s administrator left her position. Given Brown’s intense effort to go after Hershberger on any and all possible excuses (dairy, herd share contract, meat, etc.), I can only assume the motive boils down to revenge.
Actually, from my discussion with her, the issue was not about the kid admin. at all. The primary issue is the sudden change of the Herdshare contract. and more importantly the new contract completely dropped the protections for herdshare owners from any issues of liability. The farm seemed to have changed the contract to eliminate the original herdsharing model to one that looks closer to costco, actually. where in the past, there was a monthly agisterial fee and a ratio of the dairy proceeds depending on the amount of herdshares that were owned. It was then changed, without due notice (as listing in the actual contract of 60days) to a new contract where… ” Each member will only need to own 1 herd-share, which will allow them to order any amount of raw dairy they want”.
But the main issue is the liability, where it is unknown whether the owners of the cows will in any way be held liable if some sues or if the state executes fines and such. Particularly as the such measure were in the previous contract, it suggests that now this liability is unclear.
Yes, I agree from my read of her website and Facebook page. It seems there are some very real issues here that she had concerns about and spoke out about:
Sanitation, liability, repercussions for all herdshares in Ohio if Hershberger’s actions cause a problem that th ODA has to step in.
New laws and regulations always seem to follow in the wake of events which get the public’s attention – so whether there was a massive disease outbreak, or one high risk individual got sick during that sanitation break, it could lead to a public outcry and the public demanding regulations.
I went out to her website and Facebook page – it seems to me, under the circumstances, her actions don’t appear all that extreme. From what I am reading, it seems like there were some pretty valid reasons for her actions. On her ODA page on her website she talks about her original reason for contacting the ODA – and it makes sense. From that page, it seems like her main motivation is to get people to realize that Hershbergers’ actions could have repercussions for the entire state.
On her home page, she has a summary of the actions she took, which also clarify a lot regarding why she took the actions she did, including that she recommended for the former administrator to leave her position to avoid liability/prosecution for Hershberger’s actions. I just don’t see a motive for revenge here.
David – can you post links, physical addresses and phone numbers for these “authorities”? I think every last one of us should ask for a copy of this so called “open investigation.” Let these idiots know that we are watching – IN DROVES.
Even if we can’t get records – blasting them in this way shows that there are people across the country willing to stand by their friends, their values and against this sort of bigoted tyranny.
We stopped this same sort of crap with a coop in IL a few years ago – she emailed her list and provided copies of documents to us, and we went after IDPA and her legislator… To the point where they were so inundated they not only stopped their legal action, but begged us not to do it again. The non-perishable property taken was returned. I do not know if she was reimbursed for the rest. Of course we mentioned that so long as they played fair, we would not overwhelm their email server, phone/fax lines and messaging equipment…
Have not had to take those actions again as yet and its been more than 5 years.
Sue, I meant to respond to you sooner. I have held off on putting the information you requested together, since it’s possible something can be negotiated here among the parties. Of course, there is nothing to keep people from contacting the ODA to register their opinions; there is contact information at its web site.
article in the recent issue of the Epoch Times : headlined “The next food fad is coming : Feed your biome” … = a handy explanation of the food processor giants orienting demselves to consumer demand ||||| by Andrea Hayley
… this signals we’re at the stage where the previously-disruptive movement is received as ” self-evident”
Here are some words of wisdom that appear to have been lost in the annals of history. Sir William Blackstone, whose legal commentaries became the basis of university legal education in England and North America stated,
“So great moreover is the regard of the law for private property, that it will not authorize the least violation of it; no, not even for the general good of the whole community. …Besides the public good is in nothing more essentially interested, than in the protection of every individual’s private rights…”
Blackstone Commentaries, 2:138-9
This is a breath of fresh air.
https://blackburnnews.com/midwestern-ontario/midwestern-ontario-news/2016/02/04/bruce-grey-owen-sound-mp-talks-raw-milk/
“Raw milk crusader Michael Schmidt has a supporter in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound MP Larry Miller.
Miller and MPP Bill Walker toured Schmidt’s Durham area farm yesterday at Schmidt’s invitation. Miller says he found the operation as clean and safe as he’s seen anywhere.
He says the Ministry of Natural Resources should have better things to do than continually bother Schmidt.
Miller says Schmidt has been honest and open all along with about he’s doing.\”
Yes, many thanks for all the work being done in other provinces to advance the discourse with officials and bearocratic. It has opened doors and lends some hope there
Agreed, Theothersideofthestory. For anyone interested in one of these other provinces, read the latest BCHA newsletter – http://bcherdshare.org/bcha-newsletter-issue-2-oct-2015 . There is hope.