States set the rules on intrastate sales of raw milk; the issue is getting more attention with the enactment of new laws and spread of avian flu to cattle

Across the 11-state Midwest, thousands of dairy farms produce approximately 38 percent of the nation’s milk supply.

Tens of billions of pounds of it is produced in a single year for distribution and consumption under a federal regulation in place for more than 50 years: The milk crossing interstate lines must be pasteurized.

This 1973 rule of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (and a 1987 rule that removed an exemption for “certified” raw milk) capped a decades-long movement toward requiring pasteurization to protect the public health from foodborne illnesses caused by viruses or bacteria.

The FDA’s regulatory reach, however, is limited to interstate sales.

States and their legislatures retain authority to prescribe how unpasteurized, or raw, milk can be sold within their borders. In recent years, some states have eased restrictions on raw milk sales, at a time when interest in and consumption of the product have been on the rise.

Now, though, there is another point for lawmakers to consider in their rules on raw milk sales: the spread of avian influenza to cattle.

In spring 2024, veterinarians found that the same H5N1 virus infecting poultry flocks had reached U.S. cattle herds, with symptoms that included reduced milk supply.

Dr. John Lucey, a food scientist with the Center for Dairy Research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, explains that while the virus is less lethal in cows than poultry, it is highly concentrated in the milk they produce.

“[The H5N1 virus] is relatively heat sensitive,” Lucey notes, “so pasteurization is enough to inactivate it.” This makes pasteurized milk safe to consume, he adds, but the virus persists in raw milk for up to three weeks.

Laws vary on sales of raw milk

Left to decide the legality of intrastate sales of raw milk, state legislators ultimately must choose between competing interests: consumer choice vs. consumer protection, for example, and the balance between providing new options for smaller dairy farmers and protecting the dairy industry.

Regulation of raw milk sales in the Midwest generally falls into one of two categories:

• Raw milk is available (incidentally or expressly) only through herdshare agreements, under which consumers purchase a share of the farm’s livestock and then get a share of the milk that is produced; or
• Direct farmer-to-consumer sales are allowed, in addition to herdshare agreements.

Twelve U.S. states (none in the Midwest; most in the West) also allow for retail sales of raw milk and raw milk products.

Details of recent changes in Iowa, North Dakota

In 2023, Iowa and North Dakota joined the five other Midwestern states with laws that permit direct farmer-to-consumer sales of some kind.

North Dakota’s HB 1515 allows for raw milk sales on the farm, by delivery or at farmers markets. (HB 1131, signed into law in 2025, also now permits similar sales of raw milk products.)

Notably, the 2023 law expressly exempts raw milk sales from labeling, testing, permitting or licensing requirements. The North Dakota Department of Agriculture has noted in a guide for consumers and farmers that there is no liability protection for producers should anyone become harmed from consuming raw milk.

Iowa’s SF 315 allows for on-farm sales of raw milk from producers with 10 or fewer dairy animals.

Under the law, producers must have a veterinarian examine each animal once per year, ensure cold storage of raw milk, properly label it, and sell it within seven days of production. The producer also must conduct monthly tests for pathogens and post the results at the point of distribution. Iowa does not allow for online orders.

Minnesota bill eyes more options, with safeguards

In Minnesota, direct farm-to-consumer sales currently are allowed on a limited basis. A bill introduced in 2025 by Sen. Steve Green would ease some of the restrictions.

Green grew up on a farm in his home state and drank raw milk as a child. But that isn’t why he introduced SF 490, a bill that would expand sales options for dairy producers.

“I really didn’t like the fact that years ago, they changed over to having to sell everything [pasteurized],” he says. “I thought that was a little bit intrusive to the smaller farmers.”

And after several years in the Legislature, representing a rural part of the state, he realized a considerable number of people were interested in consuming and selling raw milk.

Under SF 490, farmers with fewer than 12 animal units could sell raw milk at farmers markets and community events, provided the product had this labeling: “These are raw milk products that are not subject to state inspection.”

Anyone selling raw milk in Minnesota would need to be licensed — a process requiring an annual fee (if sales were greater than $5,000); veterinarian testing for tuberculosis and brucellosis; and completion of a class on food safety, animal health and safe milk handling.

Green notes that SF 490 puts more procedural safeguards in place (testing and licensure) than are currently required of raw milk producers, but he believes it’s a good balance to provide some protection while expanding where raw milk can be sold.

Questions about public health, dairy economy

According to Lucey, testing raw milk for H5N1 or any other pathogen, prior to sale, is not an effective tool to combat foodborne illness because testing is not frequent enough. He adds that the product is usually distributed and consumed before lab results come back.

Despite raw milk being attributed to sporadic foodborne illness outbreaks across Europe, many countries there permit on-farm raw milk sales, while mandating that milk be kept at a certain temperature, be labeled with health warnings, and be regularly tested for pathogens. Canada, on the other hand, strictly prohibits the sale of non-pasteurized milk.

In addition to human health concerns, there are potential economic consequences when outbreaks occur.

Dairy farmers are financially impacted when their herd is infected with H5N1. The milk from infected cows cannot be sold, and the virus naturally suppresses milk production. In September 2024, the U.S. Department of Agriculture began compensating farmers for these losses through an emergency livestock assistance program.

There also can be reputational risks to the industry.

Should the H5N1 spread due to raw milk consumption, Lucey says, consumers may broadly attribute it to all dairy products — pasteurized and raw alike.

Green doesn’t see his bill as a threat to the industry. Rather, he promotes it as creating a niche market that gives smaller dairy operations an alternative revenue source and consumers access to a product they want.