Back on January 19th, 2014, FoodFreedomUSA.org broke this story wide open thanks to Luca Zanna and his Sunday radio show Love, Guns, and Freedom. Since then this story has gone viral in the Patriot community and has been picked up by the 'foodies' too. Below is the latest from Natural News. FFUSA.org has poised some very straight forward questions to the local Missaukee County Sheriff, check back Monday for the latest update on the situation in Michigan and the reply from the Sheriff.
If this is still unbelievable to you, READ THIS:
(NaturalNews) A Michigan farmer says he could be facing an armed raid by government agents soon, following a lengthy disagreement with state Department of Natural Resources officials over his refusal to obey an order to kill his feral pigs.
Mark Baker, owner of Baker's Green Acres, told Natural News in an interview that he was informed recently by a former business associate that local state and federal agriculture officials have been forbidden from contacting him because he is potentially dangerous.
In particular, he said, one USDA field agent whom the associate identified as Tom Gallagher, allegedly labeled Baker, a disabled U.S. Air Force veteran, as a "gun-wielding lunatic" and said agency supervisors have made it clear that only "armed DNR [Department of Natural Resources] agents" are allowed to visit Baker's property.
"[H]e stated vehemently that he and any other MDARD [Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development] employee[s] were expressly forbidden from visiting or in any way contacting Mark Baker or Baker's Green Acres," Baker said in a letter to the Missaukee County Sheriff's Department, informing law enforcement officials of the incident. "This was an order that 'came down from the top.' He also stated that only 'armed DNR agents' would visit our farm and that [I] was portrayed as a 'gun-wielding lunatic.'"
"I consider this to be a threat to me and my family," Baker, who retired from the Air Force, wrote.
Heavy fines and and a longstanding dispute
Baker's troubles with state and federal officials began in 2012 when the Michigan Department of Natural Resources issued new guidance on what constitutes feral - wild - pigs. A December 2011 "Declaratory Ruling" issued by the MDNR listed nine traits which redefined Baker's pigs - and thousands of others across the state that were being raised by other farmers - as "invasive species," which, as such, must be destroyed.
But Baker says he and other family farmers in the state have been raising the same species of pigs for decades; they believe that the Declaratory Ruling, which was issued following a petition by the Michigan Animal Farmers Association, was arbitrary and made in deference to the conventional pork industry as a way to destroy competition.
Baker has thus far defied the order, drawing a $700,000 fine and, apparently, the ire of agriculture officials. He says he is scheduled to take the issue to court in March, where he is confident that he will be vindicated.
In the meantime, however, he believes that Gallagher's comments are an indication that the "threat level is increasing," and he says he fears that a further escalation of tensions - already thick in the area - is taking place, albeit needlessly.
"I spoke to (Missaukee County Sheriff James) Bosscher a couple of summers ago when all of this started," Baker told Natural News. "He wasn't interested."
"He can diffuse all of this," Baker continued, "but he refuses to do so."
No word from the sheriff's department
Baker said his recent letter to the sheriff's department was accompanied by a formal police report.
"While there is no specific time frame, the fact that the only contact I would have from the state government would be at the business end of a loaded weapon held by someone who's been led to believe I'm out to hurt him/her (that's what 'gun wielding lunatics' do) is disconcerting," the letter said. "I have never expressed sentiments of bodily harm towards any government agent. The government, however, has a track record of painting a picture of a suspect and then acting on their suppositions with no regard for the facts. Often they disregard local law enforcement, who may have a true knowledge of a 'suspect' in their pursuit of their goal. This is disturbing and I take it very seriously."
I am requesting written assurance that myself and my family are safe from an unannounced, SWAT team style raid. We have no intention of engaging the DNR on such a physical threat level. ... We have chosen a civil route to resolve this conflict and are seeking written assurance that they have confirmed an equally civil approach to you. I am also requesting written confirmation or denial of the no contact orders.
Thus far, he says, he has received no such assurances - no word at all, in fact - from the sheriff's department.
Nevertheless, he's looking forward to settling the matter - in court - and soon. "They've just about put me out of business," he says.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/043727_family_farm_armed_raid_Michigan.html#ixzz2rzELpsV3
Government Gone Rampant - Action Alert:
Boone, North Carolina: For decades, Eustace Conway has lived an independent, sustainable life, building shelter for himself on his land, growing his own food, setting up outhouse facilities, composting, and allowing others to learn these methods first-hand so that we may once again have a populous versed in the healthy manner of primitive survival skills.
After a preliminary visit from the local Planning & Inspections department, several independent local government agencies together performed a raid on Mr. Conway's property, and now the Watauga County Health Department has ordered a cease & desist on Mr. Conway's educational activities, and the Planning & Inspections Department has cited many "violations" on the property, as well as ordered that Eustace Conway bring his structures up to code, or demolish the structures on his own property. Some of the code citations include using unmarked lumber for his constructions (structures are made from cut-down trees without grading system indicators), and requirements for permits, plumbing, and wiring for any structure. Some of the structures cited requiring permits, wiring, and/or plumbing installation include a "roofed-over platform," a doghouse (shown in video), and a tree house (shown in video).
Clearly, that which is law in today's society radically contradicts Mr. Conway's entire way of living. The situation illustrates the fact that a central-planning society is incompatible with individual freedom, personal choice, self-sufficiency, and individuality, concepts upon which this country was founded.
As of right now, Mr. Conway says that he is still in shock & trying to figure out how to proceed. The director of the Watauga County Planning & Inspections says that it is his hope that Mr. Conway will comply with P&I's demands, though he is not prepared to say what measures will be taken if this is not done, as they will have to consult with the county attorneys in order to determine how to proceed. There are many agencies (including state-level) who have reviewed Conway's circumstances, and are attempting to take corrective measures, such as special exemptions within the code; however, stumbling blocks are continually met when one entity or department's attempt at code correction counters another departments' code requirements. Attempts at amending code also take some length of time. Mr. Conway's life remains in limbo.
To volunteer to help Mr. Conway with legal advice, donations, or other services, contact Turtle Island Preserve or Nate Cox of WhoIsNateCox.com, or keep up with the conversation & updates on Conway's situation through the facebook page public communication medium:https://www.facebook.com/eustace.conw...
Interviews and video by Nicole Revels of Spread Liberty News.
Slow Grown in Virginia
By: Bernadette Barber
Kim and I attended a very disappointing public hearing yesterday at the Subcommittee for Agriculture of the Virginia House of Delegates. The movement for food freedom lost a battle yesterday in a classic example of regular people versus lobbyists. We are not discouraged from the fight; far from, it we are animated even more. But disappointed, yes, because after what we saw, I am convinced that in the ‘land of the free’, despite all the lip service, we actually fear freedom.
The subcommittee was examining two bills dealing with what farms (mainly small ones) can do without government interference. HB 268 is a continuation of a fight started in last year’s legislative session, and seeks to limit the power of local governments to restrict ancillary on-farm activities like the sale of true local crafts and value added products, and agri-tourism. HB 135 is a bill to allow small farms to produce and sell food to end consumers without government interference. Rather than re-craft what I’ve said so much already in the last few days, for the sake of explaining our position, here’s the message we sent t o the members of the subcommittee:
I am writing to urge you to vote yes today to forward HB 135, Home-produced or farm-produced products, also known as the Virginia Food Freedom Bill, which removes restrictions on direct farm-to-consumer sales. Specifically, HB 135 would remove restrictions on the sale of foods that are processed in the home or on a farm of 10 or fewer people and sold directly to the end consumer as long as the product is labeled with the producer's name and address, product ingredients, and a disclosure statement indicating that the product is not inspected by Virginia's food safety laws or regulations.
This is not a question of food safety, as some might frame it. The regulations currently in place were written to address dangers common to large scale production and processing, done far from, and out of view, of the end consumers. This bill would not change that. What it will do is allow what never should have changed- allowing those who want to be responsible for their own food supply to seek out producers and products without the government inserting itself in a private economic choice between consenting adults. It will allow greater economic freedom for producers, and it will positively affect the tax revenues of the state and local governments, as those producers who already must collect sales tax, would still do so, but on more product lines. It may even allow some cottage-level producers to grow into small farm status.
This bill, and your vote, is a question of personal freedom and support for small businesses. Virginia was built by small farmers and tradesmen who had the freedom to unleash their creativity, and market their products to their neighbors and peers, who took responsibility for their own discerning purchases. Americans should never have abdicated their responsibility for ensuring a healthy and safe food supply for their family to the government. This bill will allow those Virginians who want to take that responsibility back to seek out the healthy foods they want from the producers of their choice. In this extended period of tough economic times, it would also allow many families to earn a little extra income, and would allow small family farms to open some additional income streams. I challenge Virginia legislators to do more than pay lip service to increasing economic opportunity and freedom of choice for Virginians.
The biggest emphasis there is FREEDOM. Freedom should ALWAYS be the primary consideration over economic and all others.
Well, actually, they didn’t even pay lip service. In the hearing, supporters of HB 135, including Joel Salatin and a representative of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, gave passionate testimony that HB 135 would give small farms greater ability to make ends meet, and help consumers have REAL choices, but most important, that this was an issue of FREEDOM first and foremost. One young farmer gave a particularly rousing testimony that hinged on the issue of freedom first. An interesting and illuminating point in the pro testimony came when a delegate asked the FTCLDF rep how many members of her group file a Schedule C, which I can only presume from his tenor and attitude was an attempt to determine if the fund represents legitimate farmers or a bunch of rednecks who already ignore government. Apparently he doesn't realize that farms file Schedule F on their income tax. Ah, what are details to a legislator, though?
Then the opponents had their say, and a line of pasties in dark suits got up to name the many trade groups they represented, and proceeded to wave the public safety bogeyman with horror stories of plague and pestilence from unregulated milk and meats. The state Meat Inspection Service had its say as well. The delegates duly noted the concerns of agribusiness and unanimously voted to table the bill quicker than you can say "Freedom is dead". The whole vote smacked transparently of a foregone conclusion.
The bill dealing with zoning came up next, and this bill did pass on to the full committee, only because during a lengthy working group over the last year, big agribusiness and small farm supporters actually came to a rare agreement (in my opinion, possible only because agritourism does not directly compete with the bottom line of big food processors). The disheartening part was the line of opponents representing county and local government groups, and even a lobby group composed of neighbors of wineries who want to ensure that activities on their neighbors’ wine businesses do not disturb their peace. (You just couldn’t make this stuff up!) The opponents testimony raised some outwardly valid concerns, but every argument emanated from a presupposition that the citizen must have the approval of the government to do, well, anything, because if a government does not deem the issue to require a specific permit, it is still implied that the government has examined the general activity and deemed that it will allow such activity with silent consent. Well, I just don’t see it that way. Neither did the good folks who wrote our Constitution, and the many more citizens who approved it.
And so readers, the spirit of ’76 is dead. Americans now fear freedom. And I want to know why. Why do state regulators and legislators fear my freedom to sell what I make, to others who have the freedom to choose? If I go to a state inspected restaurant, and become ill from tainted food, whom do I sue? Is the state inspection service, or the restaurant lobby, or the legislators who create the regulatory arms, in any danger of my litigation? Nope, the overworked restaurant owner who has had to deal with all these regulations and inspections, and still somehow failed, he gets to deal with my ire, too.
Why do agribusiness trade guilds fear freedom? They will tell you that it is because they want to protect agriculture from black eyes and bad raps. Hogwash! Thanks to our design, we will always need to eat. The worst tainted food scares have never caused more than a momentary blip in sales of the particular product that caused the problem. Americans have very short memories, and agribusiness takes advantage of it. They don’t fear lost sales due to food borne illness. When was the last time a big processor was truly held accountable for tainted food anyway? What they fear is the fact that when these outbreaks occur in their products, more people start to seek safer food from local sources, and they don’t want you to have more freedom to do so.
Legislators and lobbyists will do what they do, as predictably as the sun rising and setting. But my biggest question is, why do regular Americans fear freedom? If a regular consumer fears the consequences of procuring food from an uninspected farmer, well, there is the one place you do have some freedom- then don’t buy it there. If you do, and get sick, the producer is still the one holding the legal liability. And the local producer has a much greater incentive to produce clean, safe food, because unlike the big guys, he won’t get off with a lecture thanks to a squadron of lawyers and a big war chest. Thus we have a system that prohibits buying a steak or a glass of milk from a neighbor you know, while bringing you irradiated meat and chemically grown produce, dead milk, and foods that aren’t even made from what’s pictured on the label, all in the name of protecting us from dangers that, for the lion’s share, are only present in the large scale production models. Apparently, Americans fear the freedom of a farmer to sell products, which we are free to not buy, so much that we support a system that has failed to give us freedom from tainted food, and refuses to give us freedom to choose the foods we want.
So why do Americans thump their chests on the fourth of July and talk about the freest nation on earth while accepting a government that is so far into our personal choices? Why did our parents and grandparents ask for this system in the first place? Why do we allow this to continue? How does a country that rescued the world from Hitler, et al, get weak kneed about personal freedom because of personal safety? How do a people that fought to set civil rights straight for all races, accept stifling of individual enterprise and choice in favor of big centralized corporations and government bureaucracies? This is a freedom issue. Even those who don’t care a whit about what kind of food they put in their body should be offended at this kind of strangling regulation of individual freedom. If anyone reading is offended because I’ve insinuated that we are not free, we’ll I’m saying it outright, and I hope you’ll see through the smoke and mirrors soon. For those who already do, this is not a diatribe of discouragement, this is a call to get angry, get involved, and force a change!
By Aaron Dykes on January 21, 2014
The firm grasp of tyranny squeezing the vestiges of independence…Extended interview with Truthstream Media.com’s Aaron Dykes and Melissa Melton on The Media Speaks.com, with hosts Sam Di Gangi, Kyle Phillips and DLake. Recorded January 18, 2014.
Aaron & Melissa discuss the fight for GMO labeling, efforts towards food freedom, exposing the dangerous chemicals & food additives used in your groceries, decentralizing political power, the TSA stranglehold, the Bilderberg Elite, the political “fix” in Washington, and building real solutions, etc.
Visit Truth Stream Media
It was an honor to 'ride shotgun' with Luca on his radio show Love, Guns, and Freedom.
Freedom and Food. The danger of GMO, Fluoride, Hormones in food, BPA, High Corn Fructose, Vaccines. Aspartame and much more...
Great guests, Renzo Celani on Skype from Oslo Norway (check the photo you can see his face in the computer), Kristen Harper from Havasu in the Studio with me, and Andrew Mastrocola from Wisconsin. 2 hours packed with information about Freedom and Food, Chemtrails, how to defend our bodies from the chemical, biological attacks of our daily lives.
MATTAWAN, MI -- A Mattawan family's farm may be safe, but changes under consideration by the Michigan Agriculture Commission could strip future small farmers of protection under Michigan's Right to Farm act, according to an "action alert" sent Jan. 7 by the Michigan Small Farm Council. The group's mission "is to protect and extend the rights of urban, suburban, and rural small-scale farming operations throughout the state," according to its website.Those rights are threatened by proposed changes to Michigan's Generally Acceptable Agricultural Practices (GAAMPs) currently under review by "first bring(ing) operations as small as a single animal under the control of the Site Selection GAAMPs," the alert warns, "and then using (a new category) to exclude those operations from Right to Farm protection in residential areas."
Kelly VanderKley and her husband, David Hunter, sought Right to Farm protection for their Antwerp Township hobby farm last year when neighbors complained about their animals and manure on the 4.8 acre of land. The farm underwent strict scrutiny by the state inspector to assure practices were in compliance with all applicable environmental requirements, VanderKley said, and were judged to be in compliance with current standards.
The Michigan Right to Farm Act provides nuisance protection for farms and farm operations which are in conformance with GAAMPs. Right to Farm was originally designed to protect commercial agriculture operations from being pushed out by changes in local zoning or land uses that conflict with common agriculture practices. GAAMPs are reviewed annually by scientific committees of various experts, revised and updated as necessary, according to a recent news release from the Michigan Department of Agriculture announcing this year's deadline for public comment is Wednesday, Jan. 22.
The proposed revisions worrying the Michigan Small Farm Council are tweaks to the GAAMPs for Site Selection and Odor Control for Livestock Production Facilities.
The Site Selection GAAMPs have never applied to most small farmers, the council alert explained, because "Livestock Production Facilities" have been defined as having 50 animal units or more, far greater than the number of animals held by most small farms in Michigan.
"In the proposed changes, MDARD defines a new term, Livestock Facility, as one with any number of animals - including a single animal," a step, the alert warns, that "for the first time brings small farm operations under the control of the Site Selection GAAMPs. And then in a second step, MDARD creates a new class of sites - Category 4 sites - that are not ever acceptable sites for Livestock Facilities."
Category 4 sites are defined as those exclusively zoned for residential use.
Those changes could be the kiss of death for enterprises such as backyard chicken flocks, or small acreage hobby farms such as VanderKley's that keep a few animals on suburban acreage, said Michigan Small Farm Council member Randy Buchler, of Shady Grove Farm in the Upper Peninsula community of Gwinn.
"It would exclude a whole bunch of people who are seeking Right to Farm protection... and strip the small farmers of their right to be protected by a state law."
A circuit court judge ruled in Buchler's favor when he cited Right to Farm to protect his own farm's existence on residential property in Marquette County, the largest county in the state, he said.
"What they are trying to do is to take away Right to Farm protection from people trying to be self sufficient but not able to do agriculture on any level according their local zoning.
Threatened with excessive force by the Michigan DNR.
Mark Baker, of Baker's Green Acres has been threatened with excessive force by the Michigan DNR. We know veterans have been listed as domestic terrorists, and now they are setting the Baker's up for an armed siege. Please listen to Mark's message and share it with everyone you know. It has been reported all across the country about the recent militarization of DNR agencies in almost every state. Do not let them go after a military veteran and harm his family, by spreading this video to everyone you can.
How to defend your body and spirit against the chemical, biological and spiritual attacks of global government!
From: Gianluca Zanna host of Love, Guns, and Freedom
Link for Live Show 1pm Central
Support Food Freedom
Help End the War on Family Farms