|
FDA Agents Invade Amish Farm in PA
Kinzers, PA - At 9:40 a.m. last Thursday, February 4, only a few miles from the scene of the Nickel Mines Amish massacre of 2006, another drama against the Amish began as agents of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) came onto the property of Amish farmer Dan Allgyer, without permission, claiming to be conducting an investigation. Agents Joshua Schafer and Deborah Haney, from the Delaware FDA office, drove past Allgyer's "No Trespassing" signs and up his driveway almost to his barn, where Allgyer happened to be outside. Allgyer approached the car, the agents got out and Allgyer asked them why they were there. They produced a piece of paper, asked Allgyer if he was Dan Allgyer, which Allgyer confirmed, asked him his middle initial and phone number, entered the information on the paper, told Allgyer they were there to do an inspection and started reading the paper to him, saying it gave them jurisdiction to be there.
The agents - Schafer did most of the talking - said they had a right to be there because "you produce food for human consumption." Dan asked why they believed that and they said, "Well, you have cows. You cannot be consuming all the milk you produce." They further stated, "If you get a milk truck in to move all this milk you sell milk to the public, therefore we have jurisdiction."
Dan said, "This is a private farm, I do not sell anything to the public."
As they continued to harass him about doing an inspection, Allgyer said, "You can sit in your car. I will call my lawyer." The agents remained standing.
Allgyer called his attorney who advised him to have the agents call him. When Allgyer told them to call his attorney Schafer replied, "You are the owner and you have to speak for yourself."
They pressed him to talk and Schafer asked, "Are you refusing us an investigation? Allgyer replied, "That's not what I'm saying." They kept repeating, "Are you refusing an investigation?"
Allgyer kept saying, "Call this guy" - meaning his attorney.
Allgyer said they must have asked him six times.
One of them said, "Even if you do not say so, you are still refusing an investigation."
Eventually Schafer said, "If you refuse an investigation will you answer some questions?"
Allgyer said, "I'd rather not."
When the agents continued to push him Dan said, "Is that a question?
Sheepishly, they said. 'Yes."
Allgyer said, "What did I say about questions?'
They replied, "Well we're going to write this up as a refusal to have an investigation and give it to our higher officials."
Dan felt they were threatening him at this point.
After that, they got in their car, drove out the driveway and parked on the neighbor's property watching Allgyer. A visitor, Ivan, who had been on the farm, though not part of the conversation, left in his truck soon after, and the FDA agents proceeded to follow him in their car, even when he stopped at a convenience store to use the facilities. After forty or fifty miles, Ivan called 911 and told the police he was being followed.
The state police - in two cruisers - pulled the agents over. Ivan pulled over as well.
Ivan said the police told him that the agents explained they were FDA agents and they had the right to follow him because they were conducting an investigation on the farm he left. They thought he had product and they wanted samples of the product.
Ivan responded by opening the back of the truck and revealing it was empty. The agents photographed the inside of the empty truck and gave Ivan a paper, claiming they had a right to inspect his truck. He told them they were harassing him. The state trooper said they had a right to follow and pull him over but they were in an unmarked car so Ivan would not have had to pull over.
Continue Reading at:
http://www.nicfa.com/index.html#FDA | |
| Posted 2010-02-24 9:58 PM (#33755) By: nmaureen
|
| | |
How come they're not "invading" Monsanto for the GMOs they're feeding us? | |
| Posted 2010-02-25 3:08 PM (#33791 - in reply to #33755) By: groovsmyth
|
| | | I was under the impression the Amish mostly traded their goods amid their community and Amish people (perhaps sometimes Monnonites) rather than selling outside their community. Does anyone have anymore info on this case? I doubt these agents would ever win a court battle over this infringement. | |
| Posted 2010-03-01 9:18 AM (#33908 - in reply to #33791) By: catstack
|
| | |
In a nutshell, Catherine, it is my understanding that Milk producers in Pennsylvania are not allowed to sell their products on the open market. However, they ARE allowed to sell to members of certain organizations such as C.A.R.E. (Communities' Alliance for Responsible Eco-Farming).
Nevertheless, in recent years, the Amish milk farmers of Pennsylvania have been made to suffer almost every possible disadvantage, including this sort of harassment.
To get fully up to speed on the issue, you might check the library for a book such as this one:
The Raw Milk Revolution: Behind America's Emerging Battle Over Food Rights by David E. Gumpert, Joel F. Salatin http://books.google.com/books?id=w8LmQ4ujsPcC [Limited Preview]
-- -- -- -- --
Beginning in 2006, the agriculture departments of several large states-with backing from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration-launched a major crackdown on small dairies producing raw milk. Replete with undercover agents, sting operations, surprise raids, questionable test-lab results, mysterious illnesses, propaganda blitzes, and grand jury investigations, the crackdown was designed to disrupt the supply of unpasteurized milk to growing legions of consumers demanding healthier and more flavorful food."The Raw Milk Revolution" takes readers behind the scenes of the government's tough and occasionally brutal intimidation tactics, as seen through the eyes of milk producers, government regulators, scientists, prosecutors, and consumers. It is a disturbing story involving marginally legal police tactics and investigation techniques, with young children used as political pawns in a highly charged atmosphere of fear and retribution.Are regulators' claims that raw milk poses a public health threat legitimate? That turns out to be a matter of considerable debate. In assessing the threat, "The Raw Milk Revolution" reveals that the government's campaign, ostensibly designed to protect consumers from pathogens like salmonella, E. coli 0157: H7, and listeria, was based in a number of cases on suspect laboratory findings and illnesses attributed to raw milk that could well have had other causes, including, in some cases, pasteurized milk.David Gumpert dares to ask whether regulators have the public's interest in mind or the economic interests of dairy conglomerates. He assesses how the government's anti-raw-milk campaign fits into a troublesome pattern of expanding government efforts to sanitize the food supply-even in the face of ever-increasing rates of chronic disease like asthma, diabetes, and allergies. "The Raw Milk Revolution" provides an unsettling view of the future, in which nutritionally dense foods may be available largely through underground channels.
-- -- -- -- --
| |
| Posted 2010-03-01 1:44 PM (#33919 - in reply to #33908) By: VALEDICTION
|
| | |
|