"Generally speaking consumers believe we are putting out a wholesome product," Campbell said.

Midwest Ag Journal
Doug Rich
May 25, 2007

Excerpt…

"I am not an activist," says Carrol Campbell, a dairy farmer from Winfield, Kan.

That is until recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST)-free milk began appearing in dairy cases. Since then Campbell has been talking to industry leaders, legislators, his dairy cooperative, Dairy Farmers of America (DFA), and the Kansas Dairy Association about his concerns.

"I feel we have a responsibility to do something about this issue," Campbell said. "If someone asked me to come up with a list of the threats to our business, I could come up with a long one that would include environmental issues, cost of production and $4 corn. But by far and without question rbST-free milk would lead my list."

Campbell has three major concerns associated with the rbST controversy. They are consumer confidence, compensation, and the right to manage his business the best way he can.

"We (the dairy industry) have an unparalleled consumer confidence in our product," Campbell said. "Generally speaking consumers believe we are putting out a wholesome product. I view the advent of rbST-free milk as a step backwards."

Campbell believes that when a consumer goes to their grocery store and sees conventional milk alongside milk labeled rbST-free and milk labeled organic that implies the other milk is not good for your health.

"My country-boy logic says if we have that implication we will sell less milk, not more," Campbell said. "Consumers will go down the isle and buy juice. We have a labeling issue here."

There is a compensation issue associated with rbST free milk, according to Campbell. Processing milk all costs about the same whether it is labeled rbST free or not. Typically, Campbell has found that grocers charge $1 more for rbST-free milk and $2 more for organic milk. On a per hundred weight basis that is an extra $11.63 for rbST-free milk and $23 extra for organic milk. While some organic producers are seeing higher returns for their product, rbST-producers have not seen an adequate premium.

Campbell said he was offered a 50 cent premium by his cooperative if he would sign an affidavit stating that he was not using rbST. He figures it would take a premium of $1.75 to tempt him to stop using rbST in his herd.

"We get a 10 percent increase in production across the herd with bST and 50 cents is not enough of a premium to get us to stop using it," Campbell said.

The third concern for Campbell is his ability to manage his dairy and the precedence that rbST-free milk sets for the dairy industry.

"Mention hormones and people think steroids and body builders," Campbell said. "bST is hormone, a protein that cows produce naturally. When you ingest milk it is digested just like any other protein and there is no evidence that it can do any harm."

"Prostaglandin is a hormone used in reproductive protocols in modern dairy operations," Campbell said. "It is a miracle drug and a staple of the dairy industry. It could be the next thing to go."

"We need to nip this thing in the bud before they gradually eat away at us and dismantle how we manage modern dairy farms today," Campbell said.….

Full article at Midwest Ag Journal.