Author: Theresa Sweeney

NMPF Represents Members at Successful NCIMS Conference

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

The National Conference on Interstate Milk Shipments (NCIMS) addressed 72 proposals submitted to revise the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO) and its related documents at a meeting in Indianapolis from April 3-7.

NMPF staff advocated positions of interest for dairy cooperatives and their producer members. Many NMPF members also attended and played key roles in the deliberations of the conference. The 2023 conference featured more than 400 attendees — a record — after taking a four-year hiatus due to the COVID-19 pandemic. NMPF was pleased with many of the outcomes of the proposals and made significant progress in achieving reasonable solutions on many key issues.

The conference once again highlighted the successful collaboration between the U.S. Public Health Service/Food and Drug Administration, state regulators and dairy industry representatives to continue to promote and protect a safe supply of Grade A milk and milk products.  A total of 40 proposals were passed by the delegates either as submitted or as amended. Below are the outcomes of the NMPF-submitted proposals.

  • Proposal 207 was submitted to require a 48-hour notice prior to on-farm inspection. Reasons for this include the risks to human health following the COVID-19 pandemic, the farm’s biosecurity and overall personnel safety. The proposal was amended at the conference and passed through the delegates to be assigned to a standing or ad-hoc committee to review sections 8, 13, and 14 of the PMO. This is an important first step in recognizing the importance of biosecurity measures on dairy farms and will hopefully lead to further discussion of inspection notices.
  • Proposal 301 provided a definition of equivalence for the USPHS/FDA responsibility to determine whether a foreign country’s regulatory program and government oversight of that program has an equivalent effect on the safety of the regulated milk or milk product. The term “equivalence” is important for international trade; unfortunately, the PMO has long lacked a definition. This proposal passed through the delegates as amended to include a plain language definition in line with that of the World Trade Organization. Defining equivalence provides clarity for industry, state and Federal stakeholders about foreign countries’ obligations to participate in the PMO. This proposal reinforces the importance of transparency when analyzing equivalence for foreign countries.
  • Proposal 302 was voted no action as 301 was decided to be the proper pathway for equivalence.

Also to note, Antone Mickelson, NMPF’s NCIMS committee chair, was re-elected to fill the western states industry seat on the NCIMS Executive committee and NCIMS Vice Chair. The next conference will be held in 2025 in Minneapolis.

DMC Margin Decline Slows Significantly in March

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

Following three straight months when the Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) margin dropped by well over $1.00/cwt, the margin dropped again in March, but by just 11 cents from February.

The milk price was down again, for the fifth month in a row, to $21.10/cwt, $0.50/cwt less than the month before, and feed costs were down by almost as much, $0.40/cwt, the first monthly drop on the DMC feed cost since last November. The lower feed costs were driven almost equally by drops in the prices of all three feed components of the formula, when expressed on a milk equivalent basis. The March DMC margin of $6.08/cwt will result in a payment of $3.42/cwt for Tier 1 coverage at the maximum $9.50/cwt level.

Available forecasts currently indicate that the monthly DMC margins are close to bottoming out for the year, at around $6.00/cwt in a month or two, followed by a slow rise that still looking may not exceed $9.50/cwt until the fourth quarter.

Milk-Pricing Modernization: Consensus Can Help Pick Up the Pace

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

The thing about any long journey is, even after you’ve come a long way, you still more steps to take.

But with proper preparation and a clear plan, the rest of your journey may be smoother. That’s our hope now that we’ve submitted to USDA our comprehensive proposal for Federal Milk Marketing Order reform.

Without torturing the metaphor further by saying we have the wind at our backs, I will say that our disciplined approach has had encouraging results. More than 150 meetings over nearly two years, with many of the industry’s best minds, including producers of all sizes and in all regions of the country, as well as the cooperative-led processing community, has generated a strong consensus among producers that portends well for the proposal we’ve presented USDA. The Federal Milk Marketing Order system is, in the end, focused on farmers – and we’ve gained unanimity among our producer-leaders in backing this proposal.

And it’s not just us at NMPF. We deeply appreciate the collaborative spirit and helpful conversations we’ve had with numerous national, state and regional groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation. Many of these groups have their own perspectives specific to their circumstances, and we’ve appreciated the good faith efforts to find consensus. Those conversations have made our proposal stronger as it’s deepened our producer support.

A lot of work has gone into this effort. We have examined the program in great detail and come up with a plan to modernize and update federal milk marketing orders so they can work better for today’s dairy industry. And it’s also important to note, to everyone involved, how much the elements of our proposal rely on one another to succeed.

Take the make allowance, for example – a key priority of our hearing request. That specific portion of federal orders, which helps cover processing costs, is of intense interest to some, but still needs to be addressed in a way that benefits all. The make allowance is important; it hasn’t seen a meaningful update in 15 years. But handling that issue in isolation would have the effect of reducing milk prices to farmers, a non-starter in a program that’s ultimately supported by a vote from producers.

And the make allowance is far from the only issue the USDA needs to address. That’s why we have the make allowance issue in our proposal, but as one of five provisions on which we’re seeking a hearing. Other necessary updates to milk pricing help economically offset our proposed make allowance adjustment, by bringing pricing formulas up-to-date and minimizing disruption to markets.

One example of a needed update is changes to formulas that are based on the composition of milk itself. Key pricing factors are tied to the protein, solids-not-fat and the other solids content of milk. The factors currently in use date to the late 1990s, before the last major change in the federal order program in 2000. A quarter-century later, the protein content, the solids-not-fat, and the other solids content of milk coming off the farm is higher. We need to adjust those factors, because they have an impact on the price that is reported and then, ultimately, paid to producers. That’s one issue.

Another example is Class I fluid milk pricing. Given the example of the pandemic, which showed how a change in the Class I pricing system we supported in the 2018 Farm Bill ended up placing too much price risk on farmers, we’re calling for a return to the “higher of” approach that priced milk off Class III and Class IV prices. While the pandemic exposed the problems with the new formula, the problems occurred last year as well, demonstrating the need to return to the “higher of.”

We’ve also updated the Class I differentials, a fixed price per hundredweight of milk, in each of the 11 federal orders around the country. The fluid market – the bottles of milk you see in the stores – is a higher-cost market to service, and farmers need a federal order system that more accurately reflects costs and manages risks than what we have today, rather than the environment of 2000, when the current Class I differentials were set. Updating differentials and returning to the higher of are key components of furthering the key purpose of the Federal Milk Marketing Order system – to ensure orderly milk markets nationwide.

Returning to the make allowance: While it’s clear that updates to make allowances are needed, it’s also become clear that a fair, lasting solution is going to require sound, higher quality data, from which we then can build producer consensus.

To move toward that outcome, we’re first proposing an interim increase in the make allowance of cheese, whey, butter and nonfat dry milk. This increase already has support from producers, who unanimously endorsed it at our NMPF annual meeting last October. But to go much  further on adjusting make allowances, we need to address the need for solid data, so we can make changes that reflect current conditions with greater certainty than what is now possible.

For that, we need to go to Congress to get authority for USDA to conduct a mandatory manufacturing cost survey. We are going to pursue that in the farm bill, through a provision from Congress that gives USDA the authority to do a mandatory, auditable survey of plants that are reporting their price information to USDA and get further information from them on their manufacturing costs.

By reporting that every two years to the industry, we then can have a mechanism to more regularly update make allowances going forward. That’s important for a truly modernized system. It’s also critically important to get it right, which is why we’re taking the path we’ve chosen.

Modernization of the Federal Milk Marketing Order system has been due for some time, and the pandemic experience, which exposed disorderliness in the system, underscored just how overdue this effort has been and created the necessary momentum for change. Yes, we’ve been deliberate – but we wanted solutions that had benefits for everyone, and we wanted to make sure that we addressed the concern that Agriculture Secretary Vilsack had stated, well over a year ago, when he said it was important to have consensus within the producer community.

We have achieved that consensus. I’ve been very heartened by the strong degree of support for the proposal that we submitted to USDA on Monday. To keep this momentum going, we now need to prepare to make the best case possible before USDA. And we’ll need to maintain the strong consensus we’ve achieved. That’s important for the best outcome, and it’s important for keeping the pledge we made at the outset to pursue modernization that leaves this industry better positioned to meet today’s – and tomorrow’s – challenges.

The key to a successful journey is to prepare well, anticipate the challenges in advance, go in with a plan, and execute that plan without wasting energy. We’ve been dedicated to those principles so far, and they will continue to guide this process. That’s not just how you reach a destination. It’s how you succeed – and in less time than others may have thought possible.

Thank you to everyone who has helped bring us this far. It’s time now to move forward.

 

Jim Mulhern

President & CEO, NMPF

 

NMPF Co-op Leader Supports FMMO Modernization, Touts DMC’s Benefits at Senate Hearing

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

Second-generation New York dairy farmer Blake Gendebien championed NMPF’s Federal Milk Marketing Order (FMMO) modernization petition and advocated for a strong dairy safety net at a Senate Agriculture subcommittee hearing held today to review commodity programs in the farm bill.

“We are heartened by the strong support among dairy farmers from coast to coast for this broad proposal,” Gendebien said of NMPF’s FMMO proposal, which the organization submitted to USDA yesterday. “We are hopeful that this comprehensive, thoughtful, measured approach to modernizing the program will be considered as the foundation for a national federal order hearing.”

Gendebien, vice chairman of Agri-Mark, an Andover, MA-based NMPF member cooperative, testified on NMPF’s behalf at the hearing of the Subcommittee on Commodities, Risk Management and Trade, held on Capitol Hill in Washington.

The hearing, titled “Producer Perspectives on the Farm Safety Net,” kicks off Senate consideration of this year’s farm bill reauthorization, due Sept. 30. The measure includes programs important to dairy farmers such as the Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) safety net and supports risk management programs such as Dairy-Revenue Protection (Dairy-RP) and Livestock Gross Margin-Dairy (LGM-Dairy).

DMC, which Gendebien lauded in his testimony, offers effective margin protection for small and mid-sized farms and affordable catastrophic coverage for large farms. Risk management programs including Dairy-LP and LGM-Dairy give all farmers the ability to tailor risk management to their specific needs.

“DMC has provided important security to my family’s farm, given the volatility that persists in dairy markets,” Gendebien said in his testimony. “Since the program was implemented in 2019, we have consistently purchased the maximum available DMC coverage at a margin of $9.50 per hundredweight, knowing that it may not pay out every year, but is intended to serve as a safety net when needed.”

The upcoming farm bill still presents an opportunity for improvements, Gendebien said, highlighted NMPF’s work to vet and review potential improvements to the dairy safety net and risk management programs, including a further update to DMC’s production history calculation.

“Dairy farmers need the opportunity to update their production history to reflect more current on-farm production levels,” Gendebien said. “Other farm safety net programs do not use such an outdated production reference.”

On marketing orders, Gendebien supported NMPF’s plan in this year’s farm-program reauthorization to pursue reinstating the previous “higher of” Class I mover, given the asymmetric risk borne by farmers under the current mover.

“There’s a ceiling on how much better the new mover can perform than the old mover,” Gendebien said in response to a question from Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-NY, who chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee’s Dairy Subcommittee. But because the new mover is capped at 74 cents per hundredweight but has no floor, “it really causes a problem,” he said. “In 2020 and in 2022, the divergence in III and IV cost farmers about $900 million. We’d like to go back to the original “higher of,” which would eliminate those massive losses.”

Gendebien at the hearing also supported increased resources for farmer mental health services. “We need to remove the stigma around mental health,” he said, responding to a question from Gillibrand.

NMPF Submits Milk-Pricing Plan to USDA, Moving FMMO Modernization Forward

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) today submitted to USDA its comprehensive proposal for modernizing the Federal Milk Marketing Order (FMMO) system, the product of two years of examination and more than 150 meetings held to build consensus behind updates to a program that last saw significant changes in 2000.

“Dairy farmers and their cooperatives need a modernized Federal Milk Marketing Order system that works better for producers,” said NMPF President and CEO Jim Mulhern. “By updating the pricing formulas to better reflect the value of the high-quality products made from farmers’ milk, by rebalancing pricing risks that have shifted unfairly onto farmers, and by creating a pathway to better reflect processing costs going forward, we are excited to submit this plan as a path toward a brighter future for dairy.”

Upon official acceptance, USDA will have 30 days to review the plan and decide whether and how to move forward with a federal order hearing to review the plan. Highlights include:

  • Updating dairy product manufacturing allowances (the “make allowance”) contained in the USDA milk price formulas;
  • Discontinuing the use of barrel cheese in the protein component price formula;
  • Returning to the “higher of” Class I mover;
  • Updating milk component factors for protein, other solids and nonfat solids in the Class III and Class IV skim milk price formulas; and
  • Updating the Class I differential price system to reflect changes in the cost of delivering bulk milk to fluid processing plants.

NMPF will pursue two other components of its Federal Order proposal, approved unanimously by the organization’s Board of Directors in March, outside of the federal-order hearing process, as they don’t involve changing federal order regulations. The recommendations, which remain essential parts of NMPF’s modernization plan, are:

  • Extending the current 30-day reporting limit to 45 days on forward priced sales on nonfat dry milk and dry whey to capture more exports sales in the USDA product price reporting, which can be implemented through federal rulemaking; and
  • Developing legislative language for the farm bill to ensure the make allowance is regularly reviewed by directing USDA to conduct mandatory plant-cost studies every two years.

Mulhern urged USDA to grant a hearing on the entire NMPF proposal, noting how the effectiveness of some components are dependent on the inclusion of others. Mulhern also thanked other organizations that have helped NMPF forge necessary producer consensus by sharing views and insights throughout the process, saying that spirit of unity and good-faith discussion will help FMMO modernization move forward more quickly.

“From state and regional dairy associations to the American Farm Bureau Federation, dairy farmers have had many allies and friends throughout this process,” Mulhern said. “As Secretary Vilsack has stated, consensus is necessary to successful modernization. We have that producer consensus, and we look forward to working together toward adoption and implementation of our plan.”

U.S. Trade Representative Highlights Importance of Common Names Protection in Intellectual Property Report

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

The Consortium for Common Food Names (CCFN), U.S. Dairy Export Council (USDEC) and National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) expressed their appreciation today for the U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) prioritization of the protection of common names in this year’s Special 301 Report. The organizations urged USTR to swiftly move forward with more assertive steps to preserve export access for food producers relying on common food and beverage terms.

Published annually, the report outlines global challenges related to intellectual property, which includes continued and escalating efforts from the European Union to abuse and misuse geographical indications (GI) to confiscate generic terms – such as “parmesan” or “bologna” – for its own producers.  This year’s report reflects several of the main areas of concern that CCFN detailed in comments submitted in January, with support from NMPF and USDEC.

“As USTR’s report clearly lays out, the EU’s aggressive common name confiscation campaign presents a significant threat to producers and exporters in the U.S. and elsewhere,” said Jaime Castaneda, executive director of CCFN. “Looking forward, it’s urgent that the Administration use its full suite of tools to protect the market access rights of producers using common food and beverage names.”

Restricting the right of producers to use common names is far more than just a labeling issue – it strips companies of the right to market products using the names that consumers know and love, takes products off shelves, and hurts workers up and down the supply chain.

“For far too long, the EU has abused GIs to erect trade barriers that prevent U.S. dairy from competing on a more level global playing field,” commented Jim Mulhern, president and CEO of NMPF. “The U.S. government has ample opportunities – including through existing bilateral trade engagement forums and upcoming trade negotiations – to fight back. We’ll be urging and supporting those efforts on behalf of American dairy farmers.”

“The U.S. dairy industry relies on exports to succeed, so when foreign government ban or restrict the use of common cheese names, it impacts companies, family farms, workers and the industry at large,” explained Krysta Harden, president and CEO of USDEC. “American-made dairy can compete with any products in the world. We thank USTR for acknowledging what a sizable problem this is for American producers and call on the Administration to stand up to unfair trade barriers so that our industry can go toe to toe with global competitors.”

Co-ops Build Farm Sustainability, Maryland-Virginia’s Reames Says

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

With Earth Day tomorrow placing a spotlight on environmental stewardship, dairy cooperatives are a critical link in ensuring dairy-farmer leadership in meeting ambitious sustainability goals, said Lindsay Reames, executive vice president of sustainability and external relations for Maryland and Virginia Milk Producers Cooperative Association.

“Sustainability does have a number of different meanings, and I think the most important thing that we can do as a dairy co-op is understand what it means on each of our individual farms,” said Reames in a Dairy Defined Podcast released today. “The way we approach sustainability with our member owners is by finding ways where we can add value to their operation and improve the environmental outcomes from their farm.

“So, any investments that we make through our partnerships and through our sustainability programs have to align with that farm’s business model to bring them real value back to their operation. And we found that a number of new technologies, best management practices not only improve the environmental outputs on that operation, but also improve the overall economic wellbeing of the farm, which is a really important component of sustainability.”

The full podcast is here. You can also find the podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify and Google Podcasts. Broadcast outlets may use the MP3 file. Please attribute information to NMPF.

U.S. Dairy Announces New Collaboration to Lead on Climate

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) and the U.S. Dairy Export Council (USDEC) announced today the signing of a set of principles and a new partnership with the National Agricultural Organizations (FARM) from Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile, Bolivia and Colombia to constructively engage governments and international organizations around the world on the issues of livestock, agriculture, climate and trade.

Far too often, global convenings and climate proposals reflect ideologies at the expense of science, ignore progress that the industry has made in reducing emissions, and try to impose one-size-fits-all approaches on an industry they do not fully understand.

In collaboration with the National Agriculture Organizations (FARM), and the Pan-American Dairy Federation (FEPALE), USDEC and NMPF will coordinate and support engagements with government officials and international organizations in promoting policies that encourage sustainable productivity growth while taking into consideration the unique needs of the livestock industry as well as profitability for farmers.

To launch this important strategic collaboration, USDEC, NMPF, FARM and FEPALE co-hosted a seminar on April 19 and 20, 2023, on “The Road to Sustainability in Livestock Production in the Americas,” bringing together influential leaders from across the livestock sectors of the MERCOSUR and South America region. Attendees heard from global experts and discussed ways to reduce the livestock sector’s greenhouse gas emissions while remaining viable for the next generation of farmers.

Both the partnership and meeting are being organized with an eye toward the UN Food Systems Summit Stocktaking Moment and COP28, where the organizations will play a role in shaping the discussion around agriculture’s role in a sustainable future.

Resources Available for California Farms Affected by Flooding

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

After the driest three years on record, California dairy producers are reeling from storms that have displaced families and cattle, damaged farms and feed supplies, and severely impacted crops being grown to feed the state’s 1.7 million dairy cows. California dairy farmers are now bracing for more flooding as temperatures rise and this year’s historic Sierra snowpack thaws.

Federal, state and local officials are working to repair damaged canals, levees and roads while preparing flood barriers and limiting reservoir water levels to leave room for melting snow. However, overflowing water continues to impact the nation’s top-producing dairy region, and farmers’ full losses have yet to be realized.

NMPF is working with affected members, federal agencies and Congress to mobilize meaningful, timely support for California dairy farmers and secure funding and support for critical water infrastructure and storage in the future.

Preparation and Response

The resources below outline how dairies can best prepare for and respond to a flooding emergency. For immediate help, producers should contact local emergency management officials or dial 2-1-1. California dairy farmers are urged to keep in close contact with their county agriculture commissioners when dealing with losses and problems on the farm as they are the best local resource for agriculture-related information and are tasked with collecting data for USDA disaster assistance.

Recovery

USDA is offering technical and financial assistance to help California dairy farmers recover. Affected producers should contact their local USDA Service Center to report losses and learn more about program options available to assist in their recovery from crop, land, infrastructure and livestock losses and damages. Applicable programs include:

  • Emergency Conservation Program: The Emergency Conservation Program (ECP) helps farmers repair damage to farmlands caused by natural disasters and put in place methods for water conservation during severe drought. The ECP does this through funding and technical assistance. (Application deadline: Oct. 13)
  • Emergency Farm Loans: Farm Service Agency emergency loans help producers who suffer qualifying farm related losses directly caused by the disaster in a county declared or designated as a primary disaster or quarantine area. Also, farmers located in counties contiguous to the declared or designated area may qualify for loans. (Application deadline: Within eight months of disaster declaration)
  • Livestock Indemnity Program: The Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP) provides benefits to livestock producers for livestock deaths in excess of normal mortality caused by adverse weather or by attacks by animals reintroduced into the wild by the Federal Government. LIP payments are equal to 75 percent of the average fair market value of the livestock. (Application deadline: File of Loss must be filed within 30 days of event or when loss becomes apparent)
  • Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees and Farm-Raised Fish Program: The Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees and Farm-Raised Fish Program (ELAP) provides financial assistance to eligible producers of livestock for losses due to certain adverse weather events or loss conditions. Assistance can cover loss of grazing land and stored feed losses. (Application deadline: File of Loss must be filed within 30 days of event or when loss becomes apparent)
  • Environmental Quality Incentives Program: While not designed to be an emergency response program the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) can play a vital role in assisting producers recovering from natural disasters. Through EQIP, USDA’s National Resources Conservation Service provides financial assistance to repair and prevent excessive soil erosion caused or impacted by natural disasters.

Click here to navigate USDA’s Disaster Assistance Discovery Tool. The discovery tool walks producers through five questions to help them identify personalized results of what USDA disaster assistance programs may meet their needs.

Additional federal relief is available in counties that have been declared major disaster areas. Assistance can include grants for temporary housing and home repairs, low-cost loans to cover uninsured property losses, and other programs to help individuals and business owners recover from the effects of the disaster. Visit FEMA.org for more information.

Contact Us

Please contact Theresa Sweeney-Murphy at tsweeney@nmpf.org with any questions and for more information.

Need Peanut “Butter”? Got “Milk” of Magnesia? We’re Fine with That

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

Of all the misinformation the plant-based sector has aimed at dairy over the decades, one of the most aggravating has been the idea that because dairy farmers want nut-juice manufacturers to stop pretending their products are equal to theirs, they must somehow also oppose terms like peanut butter, Cream of Wheat, and other common products that have dairy-associated words in them.

They do this to both to obscure our real point – that their mimicking of dairy’s properties and use of dairy terms to sell nutritionally inferior imitations creates a real public health issue – and to try to make our arguments seem silly. But the problem is, that’s never been our position – it’s just another “plant”-ed lie. We’ve even specifically rebutted the point, in the Citizen Petition we sent FDA in 2019. So once more, with feeling, here’s the difference between our position on terms like “peanut butter” vs. plant-based dairy alternatives.

It all comes down to:

21 U.S. Code § 343 – Misbranded food

Plant-based fake-dairy products are misbranded. According to FDA regulations, a food shall be deemed to be misbranded … “If it purports to be or is represented as a food for which a definition and standard of identity has been prescribed by regulations.”

The italicized part is the important part. (That’s why we italicized it.) The main principle behind the concept of misbranding is “don’t pretend to be something you’re not,” and that’s the difference between plant-based imitators and common foods that have long used dairy terms without pretending to be in the same food category.

Cream of Wheat is a wholesome breakfast food, but no one’s urging you to pour it in your coffee. Coconut-milk-in-a-carton is problematic (we’ll explain why), but coconut-milk-in-a-can isn’t being sold as a beverage.

Nut butters are spreads, but they don’t substitute for butter in baking — and if you decide to slather body butter on your toast because you thought it’s dairy flavored with … then you’re just an awful human being, and you deserve to vomit. By the same token, Milk of Magnesia isn’t pushing to worm its way into the federal school lunch program, even if the occasional school lunch may make some students wish that were so.

The common thread is that none of these items are trying to masquerade as dairy products. They aren’t promoting marketplace confusion, and they aren’t implying nutrient content they don’t provide.

Contrast that with the plant-based imposters. They’re sold in gallon jugs, cartons and tubs. Even though most don’t require refrigeration because they’re not fresh, they try to fool consumers by paying grocery stores to put their products in the dairy case. They add artificial colorings to make them look like the dairy products they mimic, and they market themselves as being able to do whatever true dairy milk, butter, cheese, or yogurt can do – with the implication that if they can do the same things, they must be equivalent, which in nutrition, they clearly are not.

That’s misleading, as consumer research shows. That’s misbranding, as the FDA defines the term. And that’s what we oppose, as we continue our fight for labeling transparency.

This charade’s been going on for decades. As then-WhiteWave CEO Steven Demos said in 2001 of how soy beverage came to be a dairy imitator: “We also had to figure out how to get this product category to market. Dairy milk is a staple food that we consider a fundamental part of the scenery in a supermarket. Why not position fresh soymilk to be as close as possible?”

That attitude is all about market position – but not market integrity. But integrity has never been the plant-based sector’s strong suit. We’re hoping that our campaign to add comments to FDA’s draft guidance on plant-based beverage labeling will encourage the agency to start enforcing its own rules, just as we’re supporting the DAIRY PRIDE Act as a congressional solution.

We’d encourage you to use the materials we provide as you compose your letter to FDA. Write it while you’re enjoying a peanut butter sandwich and cooking a coconut-milk-based curry. Maybe treat yourself to some chocolates for dessert (the cocoa butter in them must be 100 percent pure to meet FDA’s chocolate standard of identity, by the way).

Dairy is fine with that. We know who we are — and we know where the confusion always comes from. It’s time for it to end.

Application Deadline Approaching for National Dairy Leadership Scholarship

Posted on by Theresa Sweeney

The National Dairy Leadership Scholarship Program’s April 14 application deadline for academic year 2023-2024 is quickly approaching.

Each year, NMPF awards scholarships to outstanding students enrolled in master’s or doctoral programs actively pursuing dairy-related fields of research of immediate interest to NMPF member cooperatives and the U.S. dairy industry.

Graduate students pursuing research of direct benefit to milk marketing cooperatives and dairy producers are encouraged to submit an application. Applicants do not need to be NMPF members to qualify). Scholarship recipients will be invited to present their research via webinar this summer. Top applicants are eligible to be awarded the Hintz Memorial Scholarship, created in 2005 in honor of the late Cass-Clay Creamery Board Chairman Murray Hintz, who was instrumental in establishing NMPF’s scholarship program.

Recommended fields of study include but are not limited to Agriculture Communications and Journalism, Animal Health, Animal and/or Human Nutrition, Bovine Genetics, Dairy Products Processing, Dairy Science, Economics, Environmental Science, Food Science, Food Safety, Herd Management, and Marketing and Price Analysis.

For an application or more information, please visit the NMPF websiteNMPF website or email scholarship@nmpf.org.

The scholarship program is funded through the National Dairy Leadership Scholarship Fund. If you would like to support the scholarship fund, please consider a donation here.