Dairy

101
About Food & Water Watch
Food & Water Watch is a nonprofit consumer organization that works to ensure clean water and safe food. We challenge
the corporate control and abuse of our food and water resources by empowering people to take action and by transforming
the public consciousness about what we eat and drink. Food & Water Watch works with grassroots organizations around
the world to create an economically and environmentally viable future. Through research, public and policymaker educa-
tion, media and lobbying, we advocate policies that guarantee safe, wholesome food produced in a humane and sustainable
manner, and public, rather than private, control of water resources including oceans, rivers and groundwater.

Food & Water Watch

1616 P St. NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
tel: (202) 683-2500
fax: (202) 683-2501
info@fwwatch.org
www.foodandwaterwatch.org

Copyright © October 2008 by Food & Water Watch. All rights reserved. This report can be viewed or downloaded at
www.foodandwaterwatch.org.
 Dairy 101

Introduction............................................................................................................................................................1

Industrial Milk Production: A Beast of a System.......................................................................................................................1

Free Market or a Free Ride?.........................................................................................................................................................2

Beyond the Farm Gate: Processing and Retail Consolidation Squeeze Dairy Farms & Consumers............................................3

The Many Faces of Dean..............................................................................................................................................................3

The Cost of a Carton: Consumers Pay Plenty, Farmers Get Little..................................................................................................3

Blocking Out the Competition........................................................................................................................................4

Organic Milk: A Not-So-Safe Haven for Dairy Producers............................................................................................5

Consumers Lose Out: Paying More and Getting Less..................................................................................................................6

Going the Distance.........................................................................................................................................................6

Pumping Up Production.................................................................................................................................................6

Taking Back Our Dairy Supply....................................................................................................................................................7

Endnotes..........................................................................................................................................................8
Y ou’re not getting what you pay for in the dairy aisle these days. While shoppers
are led to believe that the milk they purchase comes from tranquil pastures, where
farmers watch over happy milk cows grazing on green fields, the reality is not so idyllic.
There are some good options in the dairy case, but consumers need to know what to
look for.

Over the last 20 years, the dairy industry has been trans-
formed at all levels, from the cows that produce its raw
materials to the cooperatives that secure its prices and the
processors that turn milk into finished products for con-
sumers. Massive mega-dairies, whose herds may receive
antibiotics and growth hormones to boost production, ship
milk across the country to be mechanically separated and
resold as everything from ice cream to industrial protein
concentrates. Consumers no longer know where their milk
comes from — or what is actually in many of the dairy
products they consume.
Industrial Milk Production: A Beast
of a System
In recent years, our country’s small- and mid-sized dairy
farms have been disappearing, squeezed out by the consoli-
dation of industrial mega-dairies that now dominate milk
production. The United States is hemorrhaging dairy farms
and farmers: Between 1997 and 2007, an average of 5,000
dairy farms were lost annually, for a total loss of more than
52,000 dairies in just a decade.1

Today’s dairy industry doesn’t work for consumers or
for small- and mid-sized family farmers. These men and
women — the ones who spend their time with herds and in
pastures, who milk their cows twice daily, help them calve
and ensure they receive proper veterinary care — receive
subsistence-level prices or less for their milk and their
labor. At the same time, consumers are paying higher prices
at the grocery store. It seems like everyone is losing, except
for the corporate middlemen and speculators who skim off
all the cream.
Milk production has remained constant, however, because
more and more cows are pushed onto the farms that re-
main. As late as 1998, the majority of milk produced in the
United States came from small farms housing fewer than
200 cows. Only 10 years later, that breakdown has flipped,
and the majority of U.S. milk is produced on large dair-
ies with more than 500 animals each. In fact, more than a
quarter of all milk now comes from industrial dairies with
more than 2,000 cows, nearly 20 times larger than the
national average herd size.2
 Dairy 101

These new mega-dairies, some of which house 10,000 cows

or more, hardly resemble the placid family farms many
consumers imagine or that dairy processors still show
on their packaging. Cows are crowded into high-density
feedlots with no access to grass and milked in round-the-
clock shifts. More than 40 percent of cows in industrial
dairies are injected with an artificial growth hormone called
recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) to increase
their milk yields.3 When their udders become infected and
swollen from the unnatural rate of milk production, they
are treated with the same antibiotics needed (and increas-
ingly unable) to combat human illnesses.

As farms have grown larger, they have also moved west-

ward. The emergence of mega-dairies has contributed to
the decline of local dairy farms in the Southeast, Northeast
and parts of the prairie states.4 Today, California is the
nation’s largest dairy producer, accounting for nearly a
quarter of U.S. milk.5 The state also houses the world’s larg- est dairy processing plant, which turns out more than one
million pounds of cheese per day.6

These days, more milk is Free Market or a Free Ride?

trucked halfway across the Is all this consolidation just the result of natural market
country because the local forces? Not necessarily. While it’s true that a larger share
of big dairies than small turn a profit, there are many
dairy farmer and milk bottler costs associated with dairy production that big operations
don’t pay. If they did, their profit margins could be much
are out of business. All of smaller. Small dairies generate less manure and usually
apply that manure to cropland as a fertilizer. In contrast,
this change was done in the big dairies generate far more manure than they can use as
fertilizer, so they must store it in giant lagoons — or ap-
name of efficiency — and ply it to cropland at excessive rates, where it leaches into
may have made sense when groundwater and runs off into nearby rivers and streams.
Residents are sickened by contaminated water or by the
gasoline was $2.50 a gallon. toxic gases that blow off the manure lagoons. But the cost
of clean-up and medical care is covered by tax dollars or by
But if you have bought milk the residents themselves, not by the dairies that cause the
problem.
any time in the last year, you
Large dairies have also received a major discount on their
know that consumers aren’t feed bills thanks to federal policies that have kept the price
benefiting from the new dairy of feed grains, such as corn, extremely low. Until 2007,
dairies could actually buy feed on the market at a price
landscape. lower than what the grain cost to produce. Small dairies
are much more likely to produce their own feed, while large
dairies — which have no cropland to speak of — buy feed
almost exclusively.7 Research shows that industrial dairies
– Andrew Martin, The New saved a total of $6.5 billion between 1997 and 2005 because
they were able to buy feed at below the cost of production.8
York Times, May 18, 2008

2
 Food & Water Watch
Cheap water provides yet another subsidy to big dairies.
Ironically, states like California, Texas and New Mexico —
where water is hardly an abundant resource — have become
major milk producers. These three states together house
over 2.5 million cows, and since dairies can use over 150
gallons of water per cow each day in their production,9
water resources are being strained.10 California uses water
from the Central Valley, where a state of emergency was
declared in 2008 due to severe drought. In New Mexico and
the Texas panhandle, the stressed Ogallala Aquifer is the
main source of water for dairy feedlots. Most large dairies
in these areas use water to flush manure out of the barns
and into a lagoon for storage11 — a far more water-intensive
method of manure management than small dairies, which
collect manure solids to spread on cropland. A typical
1,000-head dairy in California generates between 50,000
and 75,000 gallons of liquid manure each day.12
Beyond the Farm Gate: Processing
and Retail Consolidation Squeeze
Dairy Farms & Consumers
Not so long ago, most milk was sold by dairy farms to local
milk processors that supplied the dairy case at local grocery
stores. Today, a tiny handful of companies buy the majority
of milk from farms and process it into dairy products and
industrial food ingredients.
The unique qualities of milk and milking make dairy
farmers especially dependent on their buyers. Dairy farm-
ers have to move their milk while it is still fresh, and that
means they must sell to whichever buyer or buyers exist
near them because more milk is produced every day. As the
milk-processing industry has consolidated and specialized,
farmers have fewer and fewer options in their area.
The structure of the dairy market now looks like a giant
hourglass: Milk produced on the 70,000 remaining U.S.
dairy farms is funneled through a handful of powerful
buyers and retailers — who exert tremendous pressure on
farmers to sell their milk cheap — and then sold to millions
of consumers. Dairy Farmers of America (DFA), a market-
ing “cooperative” with ties to big processing companies,
collects and markets over a third of all U.S. milk.13 DFA is
the primary — and in some regions, the exclusive — sup-
plier to Dean Foods,14 which controls around 40 percent
of the nation’s fluid milk supply,15 60 percent of all organic
milk16 and 90 percent of soymilk.17 That means that a dairy
farmer who wants to access that market will most likely
have to go through DFA — and take whatever price he or
she is offered.18
The Many Faces of Dean
You may not see the name Dean in your dairy
case, but that doesn’t mean it’s not there. Dean
or one of its subsidiaries also owns or sells the
following brands:
AltaDena
Berkeley Farms
Borden
Country Fresh
Garelick
Hershey’s (fluid chocolate milk only)
Land O’Lakes (licensing agreement for the brand)
Lehigh Valley
Mayfield Farms
Shenandoah’s Pride
Verifine
Horizon Organic
Organic Cow of Vermont
Silk Soymilk
…and several dozen others.19 Consumers see a
familiar label they may associate with a local or
regional company, but the company behind all the
labels is Dean.
The Cost of a Carton: Consumers Pay
Plenty, Farmers Get Little
The price of milk at the grocery store rose 40 percent
between 1998 and 2007.20 Yet for every dollar that con-
sumers spend on milk, dairy farmers receive only $0.27,
25 percent less than they received in 1998.21 The remaining
share of that high price consumers pay is captured by dairy
and food processing firms.
For the past decade, the price that dairy farmers receive for
their milk has been near or even below the cost of produc-
ing the milk, while the cost of fuel, labor and veterinary
services has continued to rise. Even in 2007, with retail
dairy prices at record highs,22 some dairy farmers in
Pennsylvania were paid $0.15/lb. for milk that cost them
$0.20/lb. to produce. But dairy production — like the pro-
duction of many farm products — is slower to respond to
these price signals than other markets. Dairy farmers have
invested in barns, expensive milking equipment and herds
that must be milked twice daily. During periods of low
3
 Dairy 101
prices, they cannot simply “turn off the cow” until prices
rise again. That leads them to continue to produce even
more when prices are low, sending prices further south
with the increased supply.
Recognizing that this pattern in the market could mean
the death of the U.S. dairy industry, Congress stepped in
during the 1930s to help balance supply and demand and
keep prices stable. It did so by setting a minimum price that
farmers must receive for their milk, which is determined
using a complex series of formulas. The policy was sup-
posed to provide fair income to dairy producers, much like
a minimum wage.23 But beginning in 1981, this approach
was abandoned. Congress lowered milk minimum price
levels, keeping formulas in place but bringing an end to the
“minimum wage” concept of pricing. The price farmers re-
ceive for their milk has declined steadily in real terms since
that point, as the treadmill of overproduction and lower
prices speeds ever faster.24
4
Blocking out the competition
Even worse, the pricing formulas are now vulnerable to
manipulation by large dairy companies like Kraft.25 Here’s
why: The price of cheddar cheese blocks traded on the
Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) is the basis for the
government’s milk price formulas. Because the trades take
place between a very small number of huge dairy compa-
nies, Kraft and others can actually influence the price of
cheese at the CME — and thus the price paid to farmers
for their milk — by holding or selling cheese at strategic
moments. The federal Government Accountability Office
(GAO) recently concluded an investigation of cheese trades
at the CME and found that they were prone to manipula-
tion.26
There are alternative models out there. Some farmer-
owned companies try to offer their members a higher price
than the going market rate and compensate by reducing
overhead costs and/or raising retail prices. But given the
consolidation that’s taking place even in alternative dairy
markets, all farmers are feeling vulnerable. They’re also
all seeing skyrocketing prices for their inputs. Due to bad
weather, the hay needed to feed cows in the winter is scarce
and expensive, and rising fuel costs are tightening the
squeeze even more.
 Food & Water Watch

Organic Milk: A Not-So-Safe Haven for

Dairy Producers
Over the years, the organic movement in the United States
has built support for food produced in ways that ensured
the health of the land, the animals, the farm family and the
consumers drinking the milk. For several years, the popu-
Allowing… a handful of
larity of milk certified as meeting U.S. Department of Agri- factory farms to breach
culture (USDA) organic standards grew rapidly and organic
producers were receiving great prices. But increasingly, not the standards in order to
even the organic label is a safe haven from the price pres-
sures that conventional dairy farmers experience. bring more organic milk
Organic’s small presence in the market once protected it to market… is unfair both
from the cutthroat consolidation found elsewhere in the in-
dustry. That’s changed: With consumer demand for organic
to consumers and to all the
products growing by leaps and bounds, big business now farmers who uphold the
has its eye trained on the sector. Dean’s acquisition of Hori-
zon, AltaDena and Organic Cow of Vermont,27 the licensing standards to the highest level.
of Stonyfield Farm’s fluid milk brand to H.P. Hood28 and
the growth of organic store brands in large grocery chains
like Safeway, Wal-Mart, Target and Trader Joe’s — all of
which are supplied by Aurora Organic Dairy29 — have lim- – Steve Pechacek, president
ited marketing options for organic producers.30
of the Midwest Organic
Intent on increasing production to meet the demand for Dairy Producers Association
organic milk, some of the large brands have cut a major
corner by limiting or eliminating the amount of time their (MODPA)34
herds spend outside on grass (or in USDA-speak, the cows’
“access to pasture”). Both Horizon Organic and Aurora have
been sued over their failure to comply with the standards
at their large industrial-style dairy farms.31 While these
companies clearly need to stop abusing a loophole in the
organic standards, the real root of the problem is the USDA. Although the department found Aurora responsible for 14
separate violations of federal standards for organic dairy
production,32 USDA chose not to de-certify or even fine the
Change in Total Dairy Operations and Large Dairies dairy. Instead, it entered into a consent agreement with
150 in the United States, 1997-2007 Aurora, which promised to make changes to its practices.33
Indexed change in number of dairies (2000=100)

When large organic dairies exploit lax USDA enforcement,

Total dairy operations the integrity of the organic label is weakened and smaller
500+ head operations organic dairies and consumers lose out.
120
Organic growers are now seeing record-high prices for feed,
fuel and land. Just like conventional dairy producers, the
price they receive for their milk doesn’t always cover their
costs. With all the time and money they’ve invested in their
90 operations, though, they have little choice but to take a pay
cut to balance the books and hope to ride out the low prices.
If things don’t turn around for them soon, some may be
forced to close down.

60 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007

Source: USDA/NASS Agricultural Statistics Database

5
 Dairy 101
Consumers Lose Out: Paying More
and Getting Less
Going the distance
The higher prices we’re seeing in the grocery store have
nothing to do with product quality. They have a lot to do
with the domination of the dairy market by a few giant
global companies. Helped along by cheap oil, and driven by
a desire to find the cheapest milk supplies possible, com-
panies like Kraft and Nestlé have built supply chains that
stretch across the country and across the world.35 These
supply chains have replaced many of the local and regional
ones that used to exist in the United States. Now that gas
prices are skyrocketing, transporting milk long distances
is becoming untenable—but until local and regional infra-
structure is rebuilt, the cost of trucking dairy products from
California to consumers as far away as the east coast will be
added directly on to your grocery bill.
To cut costs further, dairy processing companies like Kraft
have begun to import something called Milk Protein Con-
centrate (MPC), a dried dairy byproduct produced in India,
China, New Zealand and other countries.36 MPCs don’t
have to come from cows’ milk; in fact, they often come from
water buffalo, yak and sheep. Although the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) has never approved MPCs as a food
ingredient,37 U.S. companies have been integrating them
into food products anyway, using them in place of pow-
6
dered milk sourced from U.S. producers. Next time you’re
at the grocery store, check the ingredient list on a package
of Kraft Singles for some evidence.38 The FDA’s blind eye to
MPCs in our food has exposed consumers to a product that
the agency has not determined is safe to eat, undercutting
U.S. dairy producers in the process.
Pumping up production
The “get big or get out” mentality has also driven the use
of rBGH, an artificial growth hormone, in milk production.
RBGH isn’t good for cows or humans. Cows injected with
the hormone have higher rates of mastitis, an udder infec-
tion that must be treated with antibiotics.40 In turn, use of
antibiotics in industrial dairies contributes to the growth of
antibiotic-resistant bacteria, putting humans at risk.41 The
Infectious Disease Society of America recently declared an
epidemic of antibiotic-resistant infections.42
When rBGH is injected into cows, it increases their pro-
duction of another growth hormone called IGF-1. IGF-1
is resistant to pasteurization; the European Commission
found that consumption of milk from rBGH-treated cows
increases daily intake of IGF-1 by humans.43 IGF-1 has been
linked to breast and prostate cancer.44 While less than 10
percent of small dairies use rBGH, 42 percent of industrial
dairies do.45
 Food & Water Watch

Taking Back Our Dairy Supply

The industrial dairy industry doesn’t serve consumers or
dairy producers. To fix this mess, we need a comprehensive
overhaul: New rules to level the playing field for family
dairies, protect consumers and reestablish regional milk
systems.
Consumers need to
Recommendations: understand what it means to
1. End anti-competitive behavior in the dairy mar-
ket, including price manipulation at the Chicago Mercan-
them as they lose their good,
tile Exchange and the control of dairy marketing, process- dedicated U.S. farmers as
ing and distribution networks by a few companies. The
Senate Judiciary Committee must hold hearings examining corporations substitute our
the scope of DFA’s stranglehold on the dairy industry, and
Congress should support the efforts of the Commodity quality milk with adulterated
Futures Trading Commission to investigate price-fixing by
DFA.46 Congress should also instruct the Department of
dairy byproducts, such as
Justice to follow through on its two-year investigation of
anti-trust violations by DFA and Dean; the investigation
milk protein concentrates
was completed, but findings have been withheld from the and ultrafiltered milk, which
public and no charges have been brought.47
are often imported from
2. Don’t leave dairy farmers out in the cold: Pro-
vide them with a fair wage. When milk prices are low, abroad. How many more
companies like Kraft and Dean save money on their major
input. For dairy farmers, though, low prices can mean the
tainted food products from
end of the family business. Tell Congress to develop a new
milk pricing formula that is based on the cost of produc-
China will it take before we
tion plus a fair return for family dairy farmers. There is a realize our nation’s food
role for government in the dairy market, but it shouldn’t be
to subsidize large dairy processors at the expense of farm supply is threatened if we
families.
don’t preserve our dedicated
3. Hold industrial dairies accountable. Congress and
government agencies must establish strong pollution laws,
farmers who provide us with
water-use permits and pollution reporting requirements for
factory dairies and other large livestock operations. They
a local, fresh quality product?
should be regulated as industrial polluters, not family-scale
farms. Federal and state governments should stop exempt-
ing large livestock operations from existing or proposed –LoriJayne Grahn,
environmental laws.
Minnesota dairy farmer
4. Reestablish healthy local dairy production sys-
tems. The government has a responsibility to provide and
and member of the National
protect a safe, healthy and affordable U.S. food supply.
Instead of tacitly endorsing an influx of cheap foreign dairy
Family Farm Coalition39
imports, federal and state governments should help rebuild
local and regional dairy production systems. Ask Congress
to increase funding for regional value chains and food sys-
tem infrastructure such as small-scale processing facilities.

7
 Dairy 101
5. Protect consumers’ right to an artificial hor-
mone-free dairy supply. Pressured by Monsanto, the
manufacturer of rBGH, state legislatures and agriculture
departments across the country have considered bills to
prohibit farmers from advertising their milk as rBGH-free
— and some have already passed such laws or regulations.
That’s a violation of consumers’ right to know. You can fight
back by buying rBGH-free milk, asking your grocer and
school cafeteria to stock it, and contacting your legislators
if a bill has come up in your state. Stay tuned to the Food &
Water Watch website for updates on this issue.
6. Protect the integrity of organic milk standards.
The USDA has turned a blind eye to violations of the or-
ganic standards by big dairy companies. Consumers should
demand that USDA finish up revisions to the organic
standards that close the loophole about access to pasture
and strongly enforce the organic standards for dairy. Stay
tuned to the Food & Water Watch website for updates on
this issue.
7. Protect the integrity of milk. Demand that FDA
stop companies from adding MPCs to their products and
that the agency not change the definition of milk, yogurt or
ice cream to allow for the inclusion of MPCs. Consumers
should check the label of all dairy products and refuse to
buy products with MPCs added.
8
Endnotes:
1
USDA/NASS (2008). Agricultural Statistics Database. Accessed
August 5, 2008. Available at www.nass.usda.gov/QuickStats/.
2
Ibid.
3
“USDA/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
(2007). Part I: Reference of Dairy Cattle Health and Management
Practices in the United States,” p. 79.
4
USDA/NASS (2008). Agricultural Statistics Database. Accessed
August 14, 2008. Available at www.nass.usda.gov/QuickStats/.
5
USDA/NASS (2008). Agricultural Statistics Database. Accessed
August 13, 2008. Available at www.nass.usda.gov/QuickStats/.
6
Bowman, C. (2005). “Cheese Maker, State Settle.” Sacramento
Bee, October 26, p. A1.
7
Short, Sara (2004). Characteristics and Production Costs of U.S.
Dairy Operations. Statistical Bulletin No. 974-6. USDA/ERS.
8
Starmer, E., and T.A. Wise (2007). “Feeding at the Trough:
Industrial Livestock Firms Saved $35 Billion from Low Feed
Prices.” GDAE Policy Brief No. 07-03, December. Medford,
MA: Global Development and Environment Institute of Tufts
University.
9
Weida, W. J. (2000). “A Citizen’s Guide to the Regional
Economic and Environmental Effects of Large Concentrated Dairy
Operations.” Department of Economics, Colorado College, and the
Global Resource Center for the Environment (GRACE), New York,
NY.
10
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service (2008). Quick
Stats database. Accessed August 6, 2008. Available at www.nass.
usda.gov/Data_and_Statistics/Quick_Stats/index.asp#top
11
Meyer, D.M., I. Garnett, and J.C. Guthrie (1997). A Survey of
Dairy Manure Management Practices in California. J Dairy Sci
80:1841-1845.
12
Harter, T., M. C. Mathews, and R.D. Meyer (2001). Effects of
Dairy Manure Nutrient Management on Shallow Groundwater
Nitrate: A Case Study. Presentation at the ASAE Annual
International Meeting, Sacramento, CA, July 30-August 1.
13
Hendrickson, M., W.D. Heffernan, et al. (2001). Consolidation
in Food Retailing and Dairy: Implications for Farmers and
Consumers in a Global Food System. Columbia, MO: National
Farmers Union.
14
Dean Foods Co. (2002). 10-Q SEC Filing, Item 2. Accessed
September 1, 2008. Available at http://sec.edgar-online.com/20
02/08/14/0000950134-02-010148/Section7.asp. See also Dairy
Field Magazine (2003). D-Brief, Issue 1. Accessed September 2,
2008. Available at www.idfa.org/dbrief/dbrief010903.html.
15
Cheng, A. (2007). “Dean Foods Cuts 2007 Forecast on Milk
Price.” MarketWatch, June 12. Available at www.market-
watch.com/news/story/dean-foods-cuts-profit-forecast/story.
aspx?guid={8898B56A-DC16-4A3E-930F-13E2F5C979B1}
16
Scott, C. (2006). “Organic Milk Goes Corporate.” Mother
Jones, April 26. Available at www.motherjones.com/news/up-
date/2006/04/organic_milk.html
 Food & Water Watch
17
Silverstein, B. (2007). “Silk Soymilk: Smoooth.” Brandchannel.
com, Brand Features: Profile. December 31. Accessed August
19, 2008. Accessible at www.brandcameo.net/features_profile.
asp?pr_id=367.
18
Martin, A. (2008). “Yes, it’s a Cooperative. But for Whom?” The
New York Times, May 18.
19
Dean Foods Co. (2002). 10-Q SEC Filing, Item 2. Accessed
September 1, 2008. Available at sec.edgar-online.com/2002/0
8/14/0000950134-02-010148/Section7.asp. See also Oligopoly
Watch (2003). Oligopoly Brief: Dean Foods. Accessed August 15,
2008. Available at www.oligopolywatch.com/2003/10/08.html.
20
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2008). Consumer Price Index, Milk.
Accessed August 7, 2008. Available at www.bls.gov/cpi/#data.
21
USDA/ERS (2008). Price Spreads from Farm to Consumer:
At-Home Foods by Price Group (Dairy). Accessed August 7, 2008.
Available at www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FarmToConsumer/pric-
espreads.htm.
22
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2008), op. cit.
23
Blayney, D.P. and M.A. Normile (2004). Economic Effects of
U.S. Dairy Policy and Alternative Approaches to Milk Pricing. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Report to Congress, July.
24
USDA/ERS (1982-2003). Dairy Yearbook.
25
Grant, J. (2006) “CME in Cheese Price Fix Investigation.”
Financial Times, August 17. Available at http://us.ft.com/ft-
gateway/superpage.ft?news_id=fto081720061727374434. See
also: Mueller, W.F., B. W. Marion, M. H. Sial, and F.E. Geithman
(1996). Cheese Pricing: A Study of the National Cheese Exchange.
Prepared for the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and
Consumer Protection. Food System Research Group, Department
of Agricultural Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
26
US GAO (2007). Spot Cheese Market: Market Oversight has
Increased, but Concerns Remain about Potential Manipulation.
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office
27
Burros, M. (2006). “Survey Ranks ‘Organic-ness’ at Dairies.”
The New York Times, March 22. Available at www.nytimes.
com/2006/03/22/dining/22milk.html.
28
Phillips, D. (2005). Hood’s Dairy Nation. Dairy Foods, January
10. Available at www.dairyfoods.com/CDA/Archives/6a0047062e
0a7010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0____.
29
Cornucopia Institute (2007). Enforcement Hammer Falls on
Nation’s Largest Organic Factory Dairy. Press release, August 31.
30
Hendrickson, M., W.D. Heffernan, P. Howard and J. Heffernan
(2001). Consolidation in Food Retailing and Dairy: Implications
for Farmers and Consumers in a Global Food System. National
Farmers Union.
9
 Dairy 101
31
Cornucopia Institute (2008). America’s Largest Corporate Dairy
Processor Muscles Its Way into Organics. See also Cornucopia
Institute (2007). Lawsuit Announced Against Nation’s Biggest
Organic Dairy.
32
Bradley, M. (2007). Notice of Proposed Revocation. Letter to
Marc Peperzak, CEO, Aurora Organic Dairy, April 16.
33
USDA (2007). Aurora Organic Dairy Signs Consent Agreement
with USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service. News Release no.
0228.07.
34
NODPA (2006). Family Farmers Say No to Factory Farms in
Organic Dairy. Press release, April 14.
35
Ruff, J., Kraft Foods (2004). Re: Prior Notice of Imported
Food. Letter to the FDA, July 8. See also FoodProcessing.com
(2008). “Ingredients from Where?” Accessed September 3,
2008. Available at www.foodprocessing.com/articles/2008/037.
html?page=print.
36
Krebs, A. (2001). “Kraft ‘Cheese’: Adulterated Food?” The
Agribusiness Examiner, No. i115, May 7.
37
Bunting, J. (2005). Testimony Regarding Proposals Seeking
to Amend the Class I Fluid Milk Product Definition. Federal
Register, Vol. 70 No. 69, p. 19012-19015.
38
Blayney, D., M. Gehlhar, C. H. Bolling, K. Jones, S. Langley,
M. Normile, and A. Somwaru (2006). U.S. Dairy at a Global
Crossroads. Economic Research Report No. 28. Washington, DC:
USDA/Economic Research Service, p. 8.
39
National Family Farm Coalition (2008). U.S. Dairy Farmers
Host Teleconference Outlining Crisis in Dairy Industry. Press
Release, March 3.
10
40
Doohoo I. et al. (1998). “Report of the Canadian Veterinary
Medical Association Expert Panel on rBST”. Health Canada,
November.
41
Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production (2008).
Putting Meat on the Table. Washington, DC: Pew Commission.
42
Spellberg B, Guidos R, Gilbert D, Bradley J, Boucher HW,
Scheld WM, Bartlett JG, Edwards Jr. J, America IDSo (2008).
The Epidemic of Antibiotic-Resistant Infections: A Call to Action
for the Medical Community from the Infectious Disease Society of
America. Clin Infect Dis 46.Curr Opin Microbiol 4: 493-9.
43
European Commission (1999). “Report on Public Health Aspects
of the Use of Bovine Somatotrophin.” In Food Safety — From
Farm to Fork.
44
Yu, H., and T. Rohan (2000). Review: Role of the Insulin-like
Growth Factor Family in Cancer Development and Progression.
Journal of the National Cancer Institute 92:1472-89.
45
USDA/APHIS (2007), op. cit.
46
American Agriculture Movement, American Corn Growers
Association, et al. (2008). Letter to Senator Patrick Leahy, Chair,
Senate Judiciary Committee. June 26.
47
Ibid. See also NFFC (2008). Family Farm and Consumer Groups
Urge Senate Judiciary to Investigate Dairy Farmers of America
(DFA). Press Release, July 6.
 Food & Water Watch

Notes

11
Food & Water Watch
1616 P St. NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
tel: (202) 683-2500
fax: (202) 683-2501
info@fwwatch.org
www.foodandwaterwatch.org