The precedent for raw milk in Wisconson is being set

[Guest guest]

I just got a letter from the state of Wisconson Department of

Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection in response to the

petition that we sent:

" ... The case involves the interpretation of a statute that is

enforced by the Department. The Department has not previously

interpreted this statutory section and there is a pending request for

such an interpretation, called a " declatory ruling " ... that will

explain how the Department will interpret this statue for all persons

coming under its authority. "

I'm not a lawyer, but it sounds to me that if the Brunner's lose, all

dairy farmers selling raw milk in Wisconson lose. If Wisconson

rejects raw milk, then it will look bad to the judges if this happens

in other states; the Agricultural Departments could state, " Having

recently reviewed the evidence, Wisconson recently rejected cow share

programs which enabled dairy farms to sell raw milk. "

Below is a post from 'thor610' a week ago (Brunners and the DATPC):

<<Please keep us informed as to what is happening with the lawsuit.

Perhaps a once a week update to this forum would not be unwelcome.

If the DATCP is prepared to drag the lawsuit out until the public

forgets about it, perhaps we ought to be prepared to send a letter or

letters at least once a week until they drop it.

This is a very important lawsuit and the winning of it by you could

open doors in the rest of the states for the rest of us.>>

I agree completely with your suggestion that we write letters weekly.

I've noticed that the Brunner's are far to modest about asking for

help so I also agree with your suggestion that they provide weekly

updates. That will also let us know when to print out and mail the

next next petition

What does everyone else think?