Suit to be Filed over C&H Hog Farm

[Steve S]

The following press released was issued on Monday, May 6, 2013 to announce the intent to sue the USDA’s Farm Service Agency over the C&H Hog Farm.

Conservation Groups Notify USDA of Violations of Law Regarding Industrial Swine Facility in the Buffalo National River Watershed
Animal waste from factory farm could jeopardize endangered species, contaminate America’s first national river–

Mount Judea, Arkansas: A coalition of conservation and citizen groups sent a notice of intent to sue today to the U.S. Department of Agriculture regarding its Farm Service Agency’s loan guarantee for an industrial 6,500-pig swine facility on the banks of a tributary that flows straight into the Buffalo National River – an action that was not properly examined and may violate the Endangered Species Act. The facility, C&H Hog Farms, is under contract with Cargill, an international producer and marketer of agricultural products.

Designated in 1972 by President Richard Nixon as America's first national river, the Buffalo National River travels freely for 135 miles and is one of the few remaining undammed rivers in the lower 48 states. The river watershed is home to over 300 species of fish, insects, freshwater mussels, and aquatic plants, including the endangered snuffbox mussel, the endangered Gray bat, and the endangered Indiana bat. A popular camping, canoeing, and fishing destination, the Buffalo National River attracts more than one million visitors a year.

“This factory farm will produce massive quantities of waste just six miles from the Buffalo River, and that waste will be spread on land that is right next to one of the Buffalo’s major tributaries,” said Emily Jones, Senior Program Manager, Southeast Region at National Parks Conservation Association. “We are talking about one of the most beautiful areas in the country. To think that our government would allow this hog factory in the watershed without examining its impacts is unconscionable.”

C& H Hog Farms received a loan, 90 percent of it guaranteed by the FSA, for the purchase of 23.43 acres of land in Mount Judea, Arkansas, and for construction of two barns. The barns would house an estimated 6,500 pigs, making it by far the largest of six existing swine farms in the Buffalo River Watershed. Plans are to spread the estimated two million gallons of waste produced by the C&H facility on seventeen fields totaling 630 acres. Eleven fields are adjacent to Big Creek, a large tributary of the Buffalo National River.

"This is the greatest threat to the Buffalo River since the Corp of Engineer's dam proposal that we were able to thwart 50 years ago," said Robert Cross, president of the Ozark Society. “The porous limestone and karst that underlies all of the soil in the Mt. Judea region provides a direct passageway for leakage from the waste holding ponds and for untreated recharge from the waste application fields to reach the groundwater and thus Big Creek and the Buffalo River. The risk for contamination of the Buffalo River is unacceptably high."
The C&H facility’s loan and guarantee were issued in the summer and fall of 2012. Because of a failure to notify local residents, however, the community in and around Mount Judea did not find out about the facility’s construction until this year. The lack of adequate public notice is just one of a number of egregious failures on the part of the state and federal government to ensure that this facility will not have detrimental impacts on the exceptional natural resources of the Buffalo River watershed.

“The letter we are sending today is a notice to the Department of Agriculture that its Farm Service Agency failed to undertake the consultation that is required to ensure that endangered species are not harmed by this facility,” said Marianne Engelman Lado, an attorney with Earthjustice, a public interest law firm representing the groups.

“Our aim is to prevent this farm from going forward without a thorough examination of the consequences – consequences that could result in irreversible damage to one of America’s most treasured places, the Buffalo National River,” said Jack Stewart of the Buffalo River Watershed Alliance.

Earthjustice and Earthrise are representing the Buffalo River Watershed Alliance, the National Parks Conservation Association, and the Ozark Society in sending the notice of intent to the USDA.

[Canoe_Codger]

A link to the notice on the National Parks Conservation Association website:

http://www.npca.org/news/media-center/p ... otify.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For those not familiar with the NPCA here is a mission statement from their website:

•We advocate for the national parks and the National Park Service;
•we educate decision makers and the public about the importance of preserving the parks;
•we help to convince members of Congress to uphold the laws that protect the parks and to support new legislation to address threats to the parks;
•we fight attempts to weaken these laws in the courts;
•and we assess the health of the parks and park management to better inform our advocacy work.

While the name might be new to many, they were founded in 1919 and currently have 3/4 million members and supporters.

[sig]

Sometimes lawyers are useful. Best of luck with the lawsuit, Big Ag doesn't go down easily.

Remember to not feed the trolls!

[hollohead]

I normally would not be in favor of such action, however, this has been a fiasco from the first moment with ZERO leadership from Teresa Marks and Mike Beebe. Hopefully, this lawsuit prevails and this mind boggling dumb idea is stopped in it's tracks. In my mind, the state is liable for money spent after the permit was issued. In a vacuum of leadership, this is the only option left.

[Half Ton]

Well, I'm not going to say it. But I did say it already several times.

Of course, this is not the last shot though chances are more slim each day for the opponents - although if it were the last shot, perhaps we could then move on to using the watershed approach and working to reduce all current pollution sources, and addressing all the other future potential sources that have been left out of the equation so far and will be a major problem to the river if left unchecked.

I wonder if it will take 5 years for permit renewal and comment and repermitting before we can start working the watershed approach? Or, are you all ready to waste a decade and risk potentially losing any ability to be able to protect the river for a century or more?

[Canoe_Codger]

Not increasing polution exponentially in the watershed seems like a good start. One that State environmental agencies should have thought of long before this point without direct public intervention via lobbying and the court system.

[Cadron Boy]

Pure Bunk: "Heck, if outsiders had minded their own business back when, we could be jet skiing on Lake Gilbert now! And the locals whose land wasn't flooded could be wealthy marina and resort owners."

Folks who don't know what they are talkin' about love to grasp onto and perpetuate this little "myth" to rationalize self-righteous aspirations. Here's the truth: Even the lake was an outsider pursuit -- folks in Washington including the Corps of Engineers and a handful of developers chiefly from beyond the confines of the Buffalo River watershed were its biggest proponents. Impounding the Buffalo River was never sought by locals aside from a handful of real estate men and a couple of politicians wishing to enrich themselves. To suggest otherwise is absolutely false. The vast majority of people by far living within the Buffalo River watershed were opposed to both the dam and the development of the national park.

Moreover no one locally was looking to be wealthy marina and resort owners. Yeah we heard promises of such -- by both those who wanted to impound the Buffalo and those who wanted to make it a national park. We were told that whether the Buffalo were to become a lake or a national park that tourists would bring millions of dollars to the area, that there would be restaurants, hotels, conference centers, new schools, industry and dollars galore. Yeah sure.... Most folks in these parts still live way below the poverty level -- were it not for the collapse of the delta we'd still rank at the bottom for per capita income. Moreover the earlier impoundment of the White River to create Bull Shoals Lake in the early 50s had already taught folks here a valuable lesson: our land would be taken, homesteads and entire communities would be flooded, and the lake would create very few opportiunities and even fewer "wealthy marina and resort owners". We had already lived it 20 years prior -- and we were still spitting out the "stink" when outsiders came again to "take" another one of our rivers.

When someone comes on this board and implies that folks on the Buffalo River are greedy and are "unfulfilled" by their loss to become "wealthy" due to the formation of Buffalo River National Park -- well I have a big problem with that!!
Unless you were living on the Buffalo prior to the formation of the national park and really knew the people most greatly impacted by the park -- you are out of place to comment concerning the real motives and intentions of those people who actually grew up on the river prior to the 1970s. And to perpetuate a myth of greed and desire to impound the Buffalo River on the locals who once lived in the watershed prior to the creation of the national park is both wrong and unjust.

[Canoe_Codger]

National Park Tourism in Arkansas Creates $151 Million in Economic Benefit

A new National Park Service (NPS) report for 2011 shows that the 2,879,494 visitors to national parks in Arkansas spent $151,000,000 in communities surrounding those parks. This spending supported 2,515 jobs across the state.

Darn us outsiders.

[Cadron Boy]

Always trying to rationalize one's perspective and what a better way than playing on economic sentiments -- an old ploy in these parts. But let's look a little closer at these (biased) figures put out there by the National Park Service. Well according to the latest NPS figures (2010) the Buffalo River National Park brings in 1.5 million visitors a year and generates an economic impact of $48 million or about $32 per day per visitor. Big whoop! No wonder Searcy, Marion and Newton county are bedrocks of prosperity. Additionally the BRNP claims to support nearly 590 jobs. Big whoop again as nearly all are minimum wage jobs -- I assure you no one is getting wealthy renting, hauling and repairing canoes and dishin' out vittles at local cafes. In fact, I could always make far more money hauling hay off river valley fields than hauling canoes for nose-in-the-air tourists. Moreover most of the jobs are seasonal at best and all the "best iobs" offered by the NPS are typically given to folks that aren't even from Arkansas.

In return we have over 100,000 acres withdrawn from use within the national park and removed from property tax assessments. Hundreds of thousands of additional acres within the watershed are now under significant regulation and/or oversight that limit further development including many agricultural pursuits. Moreover, hundreds of people were displaced from their homes and farms and a campaign has long been in place to further reduce public use of the park by locals in numerous ways from the erection of numerous barriers to just plain out harassment. And now we have to shoulder the impact and burden of 1.5 million visitors each year and deal with the insults and condescending attitude of self-righteous outsiders who think they know what is best for us greedy ignorant hillbillies. Folks think they can just throw us some chump change our way and we'll just step aside with a smile as the daggers fly when we turn our back.

Toot your horn, take your position and continue to tell us how much better and richer we are now that we have "outsiders" such as yourself" looking after our best interests. From bribes to regulatory man-handling, we certainly know how "outsiders" operate to take away our freedon, our land and our future.

[Canoe_Codger]

FYI, I was born and grew up in Arkansas. On a farm. We were Farm Family of the Year one year for our county. After graduating from the university (in Arkansas), I moved to Central Arkansas where I raised my family. My wife, former state social worker (and daughter of an Arkansas farmer), died a few years ago and her ashes were scattered along the Bufflao as mine will be soon enough. My parents and grandparents are buried in Arkansas as well. One ancestor was a sheriff in Fort Smith when Roy Bean presided. Greatgrandfather came there just after the Civil War and was a circuit riding preacher in Northwest Arkansas. Grandfather was Vice President of a bank in Russelville (one that survived the Depression), founder and first President of the Kiwanis there, and his son, my Dad, joined the Navy during WWII and served in both theaters as did his younger twin brothers just after the war. Darn us outsiders with our noses in the air and no concept of what it is like to be an Arky.

[Half Ton]

CC - I have a similar heritage to you in many ways, from farm family to civil war to lawman in outlaw days, and family members ashes. I grew up in the watershed just south of the BNR in Johnson County- However, I consider my self an outsider in this issue.

CB- wow, thanks for offering your unique perspective! I have had this same insight verified over and over again in recent months (part of why I have been presenting a very strong and tenacious view on the matter as well). Working with this mindset and realization is the only best way to ensure high water quality for centuries to come. Working against it, is like swimming against a flood current.

Here is the most recent take on the local perspective, that is also very informative - including note of EPA environmental stewardship awards for hog farming in the BNR. Check out page 4 or 5:

http://issuu.com/arfb/docs/aragri_29?mode=mobile" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Valuable insight - all would do better to now realize what CC and me have been presenting is not hog wash, but instead real fact and circumstance that must be respected and honored in order to successfully work with the locals to protect BNR long term.

Period.

[Cadron Boy]

Codger - Given some Arkansas roots then I must wonder why you are perpetuating the myth and denigrating those of us -- a strong majority that grew up within the Buffalo River watershed -- with such claims that were we for the dam; we were not! Or that we had expectations of being "wealthy marina and resort" owners -- no such perceptions ever existed. Or that we would intentionally foul the Buffalo in order to make a dime -- total "hogwash" as those of us that grew up on the river have a healthy respect and admiration for the river and remain committed to its continued preservation. You insinuate that were it not for the NPS and outsiders that Buffalo simply could not survive under the stewardship of those who live within the watershed.

You paint a big picture with big broad strokes that simply doesn't accurately reflect upon the woodland and environmental ethics of those that grew up on the Buffalo. I can only assume that while living in Arkansas you were many miles away and simply were blissfully ignorant of the people who once held claim to the land now within the national park to make such comments. I for one will not cower when so insulted.

[ieatcrayons]

well said CB. i voice not heard much in the chatter topic's of the buffalo river. i have more than a few friends who grew up there in the area. they do not deal with it like there parents did...the people whom you refer to. we are a bit younger. even tho they enjoy the river and the area more than most. some of them will speak of family land once owned or family once removed form the area. and all... ALL of them talk of the remarks of the 'visitors' that come to float that see them all as backwoods hillbilly's. aka locals.

[gma06001-]

I think we all know that it is silly to put outsiders and locals into any 1 category. I know locals as well, been there for 4 generations, and they don't agree with the hog farm going in on their river, and they genuinely appreciate the business of other Arkansans renting boats and floating the Buffalo. And although some outsiders may look at the locals as hillbillies, I hardly believe that to be a majority of those using the river and park. There are great locals and great Arkansans from other parts of the state that love the river, and there are outsiders and locals that have intentions that may not be in the best interest of the river. Let's be realistic.

I think there will be a few options coming out of this hog farm business, some involving how the waste is handled, and some involving how many animals are on the grounds. Whether it's good or bad for the relationship between outsiders and locals, the negative media created by so many is of concern to Cargill, and seems to be the only way that those against the farm will get any sort of action that they are looking for. Also, I do not think that by speaking out against the farm in any way affects our ability to further protect the river for the future as John says. In fact, I believe that legislation and future planning will be looked at VERY closely regardless of the outcome of this particular farm. Hopefully we can all find a way to work together on this and realize that a CAFO (not all farms) is a bad deal regardless of where it is on the Springfield or Salem Plateaus.

Mitch Allen

[Cadron Boy]

Well said Mitch - that's the problem when you make all inclusive statements. I know/think CC had no idea that his comment would be taken "wrong" but I do remember. I can't remember the filling of Bull Shoals Lake but I remember the formation of the Buffalo River National Park. I remember people having to leave their homes -- forced to take whatever Uncle Sam was offering under threat of eviction and eminent domain. I remember sitting at the table as family and friends studied maps trying to ascertain what land would be lost, what land could be saved. And I remember in 1973 when RAREI inventories were being acquired and all roadless land in the area was considered ripe for the taking in another landgrab. Farmers were compelled to build roads through tractless wilderness or risk having their land taken -- truly a lose:lose proposition. RAREII in 1977 was even more threatening -- and more comprehensive. And then that was followed by the Arkansas Wilderness Act of 1984 . And each and every time land was taken from private land owners... by "outsiders". The truth: Folks in those hills gave a lot in order that others may visit and cherish the Buffalo and its environs.

Yet their giving has been colored by a myth perpetuated by many "outsiders" that those who lived within the Buffalo River watershed wanted to impound the river and that it was only through the efforts of "outsiders" and agencies such as the Ozark Society that the Buffalo could be "saved". Pure spin...pure poppycock. But sadly, time and socioeconomic and cultural constraints have effectively silenced those who know the truth and who can still try to set the record straight. Moreover, we are obviously outnumbered by the "outsiders" who hang onto the myth of "saving" the river as it feeds their sentiments and who vigourously support their self-righteous belief system of being a better determinant/judge of the affairs of others.

That said -- yeah all CAFOs be BAD to some extent -- whether fish farms or hog farms -- its an unnatural/unhealthy way for animals to live! Regardless of location. But we be lazy and cheap when it comes to food -- free range livestock is simply too inefficient a means to feed the masses and no one has a garden any more. Most of my business is the result of poor lifestyles and poor food choices and all the affordable care in the world isn't going to reduce my workload or society's cost to secure adequate healthcare until people start examining their lifes and what they consume (and not just what they ingest).

We're all in this together so we might as well learn to work together. This CAFO is but a small problem in the grand scheme of things. We have really "mucked" up this earth and certain processes have now been put into motion that could be cataclysmic for mankind. Even as we work on such local issues as CAFOs within the BRNP we can't lose sight of the global problems with which we are faced. The tragedy of the commons befalls us -- and places our very survival as a species at risk -- simply because we can't all work together.