Synopsis: Among other things, includes the ban of sale or barter of raw milk.
BAD BILL!
UPDATE 6/17/25: The raw milk restrictions and study commission have been removed from the bill. The Department of Agriculture having their own police force has been PARTIALLY stricken from the bill, leaving their police with forest ranger authority and power.
HOWEVER, Section 19 remains to protect pesticide companies.
Farmers from across the state have traveled to Raleigh to beg their senators not to advance this bill.
Section 17 of NCFA2025 gives the state Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services their own police force. These Agriculture cops will have the authority to enforce DoA’s regulations and other state laws, to the point of doubling as forest rangers, conducting their own surprise inspections, traffic stops, and arrests without warrants.
In Section 15, the state Agriculture and Forestry Awareness Study Commission will consult with dairy “stakeholders” in a study on the legality of local farms’ raw milk sales and distribution. This will likely include ‘big dairy,’ who of course will not want raw milk to be legal.
Section 20 will ban raw milk entirely for humans or pets off the shelf and restrict raw milk sales to herd-sharing (where you have partial ownership of a cow). This will make it extremely difficult for suburb- and city-people to acquire raw milk for health-related reasons. Organizations like animal rescues will not be able to save as many animals whose age or illnesses require raw milk. The sponsors of this section of the bill claim bird flu is contractable through drinking raw milk. The attached studies from the NIH suggest the exact opposite - raw milk is safe to drink.
Section 19 will protect pesticide companies from liability if the pesticide had been labeled as “safe” by the EPA. In order to sue a pesticide company, the plaintiff must supply their own professional, replicable, academically published, peer-reviewed scientific study proving that the pesticide’s safety studies are flawed.
Respiratory Virus Consumption Risks:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7963685/ “According to the evidence from the scientific literature reviewed in the present article, transmission of respiratory viruses through contaminated foods does not seem a potential route of exposure.”
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8035669/ “[T]here are no well-documented cases of human IAV infection from food, where respiratory exposure could be completely ruled out.”
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5816034/ “The existing epidemiological evidence suggests that the consumption of raw cow’s milk contributes to protection against allergies and asthma and respiratory tract infections.”
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6413174/ “There is no doubt that the components of raw milk can influence the immune function”
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37517304/ “We found that higher milk intake was inversely associated with respiratory infections in children older than preschool age.”
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/testing-transmission-infection-h5n1-cows “[The H5N1] virus isn’t likely to spread [through cow milk], limiting its potential to cause a human pandemic.”
To find your State Representative or Senator:
https://www.ncleg.gov/FindYourLegislators
Bill:
https://www.ncleg.gov/BillLookUp/2025/s639