Three Important Tables on Raw Milk Safety
May 28, 2026by Pete Kennedy, Esq.
Pennsylvania – Legal Raw Butter Sales
The Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA) has finished drafting a final rule, amending its dairy regulations that would, among other things, legalize sales of raw butter. The new laws should go into effect this spring; under the regulation, dairy farmers who hold a permit to produce and sell raw milk can obtain an additional permit to produce and sell raw butter. Permit holders can use only raw milk produced on their farm; there are testing requirements for the butter and the milk used to make the butter, as well as requirements for labeling and the physical facility. State law allows the sale of any legal raw dairy product in retail stores. PDA officials initially made the decision to legalize raw butter sales in 2019, but Covid and other factors sidetracked the rulemaking process. Arguably, the department has authority to allow raw milk permit holders to legally sell other raw dairy products, such as cream, kefir and yogurt by just reinterpreting existing law. But for now PDA is limiting raw dairy sales to milk, cheese and butter. In addition to raw butter sales, PDA made another potentially impactful change in amending the section of code that prohibits the sale of raw milk without a permit. The department has added a definition of “sell” stating, “the term ‛sell̕ also includes selling, exchanging, or delivering to a customer who is a member of a buyers club, cow herd share agreement, or other type of membership purchasing group.”
PDA has had a policy in recent years of recognizing the legality of herd share agreements, even if a dairy farm did not have a permit. A bigger issue is CARE (Community Alliance for Responsible Eco-agriculture), food buyers club that has mostly unpermitted farmer members selling raw dairy to consumer members. CARE has been in existence for over 20 years and has had a truce with PDA for much of that time, even though the department has taken enforcement actions against CARE farmers. CARE has employed its own inspector and its farmer members have a good track record for safety. The question now is whether PDA will be more aggressive in going after herdshare and CARE farmers, or will exercise its discretion to leave them alone unless a farm is a genuine threat making people sick.
Utah – Raw Milk Bill on Governor’s Desk
Since 2015, the mother/daughter team of Symbria and Sara Patterson, founders of the advocacy nonprofit Red Acre Center (RCA), have had a remarkable run of success, being largely responsible for the passage of five raw milk bills into law in Utah. House Bill 179 (HB 179), which has passed out of the legislature and is now on Governor Spence Coxʼs desk, would make six. Representative Kristen Chevrier is the lead sponsor.
HB 179 will bring about major changes in the stateʼs raw milk laws. Currently, a dairy producer can sell raw dairy at retail only if the producer is licensed and owns at least 51 percent of the retail store; HB 179 would eliminate the ownership requirement. Current law allows an unlicensed dairy to sell up to 120 gallons a month directly to the consumer on the farm only; HB 179 would not only remove the cap on raw milk sales, but would allow the producer to sell any other raw dairy product directly to the consumer as well. Sales of the raw milk and raw milk products could take place not only on the farm, but through delivery via a “designated agent” as well.
There are minimal labeling, handling and record-keeping requirements. Dairies operating under this exemption would be required to notify the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (UDAF) of their intent to produce and sell raw dairy by providing UDAF their name and “a valid current address of where the producer is operating.” For dairies producing five hundred gallons or less in a month and selling raw dairy only on the farm, there is a further exemption for which only the notification requirement would apply.
What was impressive about the billʼs passage through the legislature is that it advanced in the face of competition from another bill, House Bill 283 (HB 283) that UDAF was pushing. The House Health and Human Services Committee held a hearing for both bills on January 30, voting to send HB 179 out of committee to the House floor while not taking action on HB 283.
It is rare when the legislature favors a competing bill over legislation backed by a regulatory agency; itʼs a testimony to the relationships and influence that the Pattersons and RAC have built during their years lobbying in Utah. In the end, both UDAF and Utah Farm Bureau (most State Farm Bureaus are anti-raw milk) threw their support to HB 179. RAC has been a juggernaut in the Utah legislature. The command and mastery of the legislative process has been outstanding. The Pattersons handle the lobbying and big picture, while RAC analyst Paula Milby takes care of the bill drafting. In Chevrier they have a tough, engaged champion for a sponsor; before her, former Representative Mark Roberts was also a champion for the cause. It is a formula for success that has made a huge impact in changing Utahʼs local food system for the better.
Kentucky – New State Interpretation on Raw Pet Milk Sales
The Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services (CHFS), according to a report, has changed its interpretation of the law and is no longer allowing sales of raw pet milk. CHFS has sent a letter to all county and municipal health departments about this new policy. Kentucky, like all other states, has adopted as law some or all of the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) Official Publication. The AAFCO publication governs the production and sale of animal feed, including pet food. The publication, through its definition of “milk” and provisions in other sections of the document, allow the sale of raw milk for animal consumption. Kentucky has adopted the AAFCO definition of “milk”, so that adoption should supersede any conflicting provision of state law. Kentucky dairy farms should not let CHFS’s interpretation of the law stand.
Florida – Lawsuit against Keely Family Farms Withdrawn
Last summer the Florida Department of Health issued a press release, alleging that raw milk produced by Keely Family Farms, LLC (“Keely”) was responsible for twenty-one cases of illness. (See Wise Traditions Fall 2025 issue for background.) A short time later, a woman filed a lawsuit against the dairy for illness she and her toddler contracted allegedly caused by the dairy; the woman admitted she did not consume any of the milk the farm produced. Keely was not actually served with the lawsuit until December. On February 9, Keely Farms filed a motion to dismiss against the plaintiff, claiming that the complaint did not show facts establishing contamination of the milk, and that the product complied with state labeling requirements warning the milk was not for human consumption. In Florida, sales of raw milk for pet consumption only are legal. Both farm owner, Keely Exum, and microbiologist Dr. Peg Coleman filed affidavits in support of the motion to dismiss. On February 13, the woman voluntarily withdrew her lawsuit against the dairy. As far as is known, no other lawsuits have been filed against Keely for allegedly causing illness.
