Arkansas Canoe Club Forums

I wonder if Neil Compton would agree with your current view, Halfton.

.. I challenge you to step forward to protect and care for the wild places you love best"

- Neil Compton

So, stop chopping people down for feeling this permit is a direct threat to the Buffalo River. It may be one of the wild places they love the best. And their going to do what they can to keep it from tarnishing a beautiful, protected place.

Just remember what old Ed said, next time you say that people should just give up.....

Yay Doug!

I hear comments about needing economic development in Newton County and I shudder. It's possibly the most beautiful county in Arkanistan and a large part of that beauty is the lack of people and the large tracts of wild land.

No one travels to Washington or Pulaski counties because of the scenery.

But on the other hand, No one living in Washington or Pulaski counties would like it if folks from elsewhere dictated to them what they can and cannot do. Like most coins, this one has two sides.

jrex wrote:The reply I received from my e-mail to ADEQ was that they held public forums on the hog farm in Fayetteville, Danville, Monticello, Hope, and Little Rock. Public notices were only posted in the Arkansas Democrat. They completed avoided the immediate area. I'm all for positive economics, but this is wrong.

I would think a public notice in the Democrat would be better than one in a small town rag with very little circulation. I would also think that having a good spread of the Public Hearings would allow more people to comment since it seems the majority of those interested in this issue don't live in the Buffalo River Valley.

The ADEQ regs don't seem to require a public hearing at all unless a citizen requests one or the ADEQ themselves deem it necessary. They also don't seem to address how the location will be determined. If they did indeed have five spread across the state it would be interesting to know why. Maybe someone recognized this would be controversial and did it on purpose? I would hope so.

As far as my personal opinion on the farm itself. I am going to stay quiet.

I wonder if the ACC or through a joint effort or some type of quick fundraising if we could pull several water samples tested from various locations along the tributary and the area at the mouth in the buffalo river to have a "baseline" of water quality before the hog farm goes in. This would give the ACC some awesome power and some irrefutable evidence if the water quality changes at a later date. I would also like that the ADEQ would not be the only ones who knew what the quality was like before and after. This way they can't make the statement "no noticeable impact has been detected" when in fact the impact is not obvious yet.

I know how big corporates work, they usually get their way, especially after money is moved around. But if we had this in our pocket and do testing from time to time on our own separate from ADEQ, then we could file our own violation with ADEQ. We would probably need a reputable trusted 3rd party lab to do the testing that will testify in court if need be. I'm going to post the petion on my FB page, but does anyone have the ozark society link to the more info so I can read up on it some more?

Thanks!

http://www.ozarksociety.net/2013/01/con ... big-creek/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Doug - First of all, unlike you, I would not use a dead hero’s name in attempt to make a person feel shame at any level.
FYI – Dr. Compton, is a hero of mine, and as such I’ve had some of his words as a tag for about two years or so now. I was kind of thinking about replacing them, but I think I’ll keep it on for another two years or so now just because of your emotional attack and attempt to shame....which really doesn’t bother me because I am sure you have heard about sticks and stones and how they don’t brake bones by now.

I became a member of OS in large part because the legacy that he and OS members created. Many other OS members are also role models of mine, that I don’t always see eye to eye with. And that is healthy. Think of family and friends. Do you always agree with what they do or think?

For your info, I have also wondered “WWNC” do, and what if he AND the entire ACC and OS membership were to see and/or listen to my perspective” and I decided, that I would make all of comments as if that was the case. In fact, that is why I made those comments.

I’ll bet there might be a lot more that is agreed upon, rather than not. He was a friend maker and understood that you have to have friends to make change. At this point, that’s not what it looks like is happening with nearly ALL of the local population that has a VERY LARGE say and impact on the watershed.

I’m not scared of being bullied, or of being an outcast because people might not like my perspectives. I decided a long time ago that I would rather speak the truth and be an outsider, than jump on bandwagons for causes that are flawed to an extent I just can’t go along with.

To point out though, I didn’t attempt to chop anyone down or say the effort was completely useless and ineffective. I did though mention, that there are other perspectives and other ways to go about being effective in seeking such protective measures in a way that don’t make enemies and which can lead to positive change in respect to the local folks and decision makers in this case. The same folk in charge of what happens in the watershed to an extent.

Also of note, I left pointers about ways to be more proactive and to address even greater looming potential threats out there that are certainly going to become a reality and show their face at some point. (Note: SIG – I don’t really want to see the watershed over developed and hurt the river, but to deny the potential is there and can happen is not a realistic expectation). Sad but true.

I also pointed out that freaking out over battles lost, does not help win battles to come. AND I did go ahead and thank everyone for being involved and concerned, even if a little misguided and I disagree with. So, you might wanna keep that in mind.

I am all for people doing what they can to help out, but I always prefer educated activism over sensational activism.
I can remember you from swiftwater rescue class, by the way, were I tossed you some lines and volunteered for you in addition to doing a mini litter cleanup at our practice sight down at the bridge. I will still throw you a rope any day you need one, and allow you to shuttle with me should you need one. I’ll file your comments in the emotionally charged and has mis-understood category for now....as obviously that’s the case. In your defense I am long winded, and it’s easy to miss some of what I wrote and am writing and electronic comms arent my specialty.

I am also aware of your efforts in helping to cleanup litter around the places you paddle, like the Fourche and Cadron and Ouachita and am tremendously grateful that folks like you that care and are actively stewards are out there. FYI – I’d still like to know about those efforts so that I can put them into the ENVY award nomination I am working on for ACC which has been posted in the forum and is on the second or third page by now I think (granted at this point I am thinking of nominating TURNER BEND instead since ACC is not really appearing to like ADEQ at this point in time.
Still yet, certain realities cannot be escaped, and should not be overlooked. Sometimes failures are what lead to our successes. Missed opportunities sometimes are what lead to being ready for the next opportunities when they show up. If a person never worked to hone a skill or tactile approach, they probably never got much better at said skill.

Back to conservationists – just like parents, lawyers, teachers, doctors and so on.....put a few in a room together give them some scenario’s and see how many perspectives you come up with on how to best address a situation. There will be more than 1, and sometimes more than 1 which are valid and beneficial options to consider.
I’ve researched parts of the science personally, I’ve knowledge of the system, and I’ve practice in the field of working to address these types of things. I’ve also worked on a Hog Farm. If you don’t like or care for some of these realities and experience based knowledge’s I’ve acquired and learned and am sharing for everyone’s benefit. I’m sorry.
If you thought it was a good idea to jump from a building to escape a fire, but a fire escape was nearby I’d for sure let you know that if you jump you’ll likely die for sure, but if you take the fire escape you’ll likely live.
Physics is hard to get away from here on Earth. Working on conservation rules and regs and especially topics with populations that don’t understand or don’t want help has some similar physics if you will. Piss em off good and see how much they’ll listen to you then over about quarter centuries time or more.

As a member of the ACC and the OS for several years, I am wholeheartedly on board for many but not all campaigns. When I see my folks that I identify with be mis-informed or maybe not understanding an issue completely I will always try to fill in some gaps where I can. Even when I disagree, based on experience and knowledge.
Shoot, some of the best pep talks I’ve had are with people that don’t agree with me and don’t sugar coat stuff.
I do find the OS link and blog that Duece posted to be much more realistic, though not completely accurate, and still a little sensational.

Again, I do agree that I don’t like the public comment policies that a lot of public entity’s utilize and would like to see that be better geared toward actually trying to reach the public to let them know what’s at stake. Unfortuneatly, that means a bigger government with more money to have a person that is constantly searching for places to get the info out......which is not free. A quarter page add in DemGazette is pricey. Think about if all agencies had people that just did this, and had a large budget that would be needed to do so. Is it possible? Yes. Is it wanted by all of the ACC and OS? No.
Why? Politics buddy.

Also of interest a neat research finding about sewage lagoons, and one advantage they have over other human and animal waste treatment methods.

http://freshare.net/article/sewage_lago ... Sfmh-ta2gQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Alright then, that wraps up this go round.

Economic development in Newton County will be dynamic due to a hog production facility located near a tributary of the Buffalo River?

Yeah, a few folks come in and build the holding pens, sheds, wastewater pit, etc. and then leave. Only takes a couple of family members/employees to make the operation run.

Then the rains come and the pits overflow. The waste will go somewhere.

Some battles never end.

Half Ton, no disrespect intended, but frankly I don't think you get it. The report contained in that link concerns pollutants from medications, not fecal matter, and it was focused on discharge that had already been treated, so it has absolutely no relevance to this discussion. The greatest concern with regard to the hog farm in question is the potential for its shallow waste lagoons to be compromised in a high water event thereby polluting the watershed with high volumes of pig manure. The Ozark Society piece says the same thing, so I fail to see how it could be any more or less "realistic".

If we want to consider the issue merely within the context of regional economics we can. If the upper Buffalo were suddenly polluted with tons of contaminants due to a washout of the lagoons the effluent would flow all the way down the Buffalo and into the White. What economic effect would that have on the numerous outfitters on that river along with the ancillary businesses that largely depend on them and how long would that effect last?

Do you really not see this as the issue that everyone else does? This is not a rhetorical question and no snark is intended. I just don't really understand your position.

First of all, the manure will not be applied every single day as is stated in the is report, secondly the amount of manure that might overflow if it rains hard enough is not a massive amount like everyone is saying, thirdly the point of the lagoon article was to show that lagoons have some advantage to water quality that thousands of septic systems also in karst topography don't, fourthly my position is not that outfitters will not lose money, but that nobody besides them that is not a river person does not get the benefits of tourism to the local economy and are on charge and don't care for outsiders trying to control what can and can't be done on their property, and finally there are a great many pollutants that are in the river from many other sources that are just as bad and cause the same set of problems as the proposed agricultural operation. Further more poultry farming did not pollute the Illinois river, and this particular farmer in this case does not have a history of violations.

My main point in all of this is that the locals are in charge of almost all land use decisions on provate lands which make up a large part of the watershed. To save the watershed from increasing threats means to proactively work to win over hearts and minds an to teach most of them all of the good things the river does for them. At this point, not too many besides the outfitters get that.

Luke, this fight has been lost. Time to start making moves not to lose the rest of the future. That is my point. Also, battles have many small fights. And to Rogers points, I've not seen any proactive measures regarding issues on the buffalo for a long time. I have seen a bunch of folk enjoying the river and hiking and such. Not battling. Maybe if folks had thought about the list of stuff they did not want in the watershed they could have averted this crisis all together.

The fact is though, that the stewards of the river have been complacent and not pro-active and are fighting from behind right now a Skirmish that will not be won. Again, time to look to the other battles going on and soon to be underway.

FYI hog manure gets treated a little bit too similar to human manure as in the article listed, by the way hogs get pharmaceuticals just like humans do.

Hey, if you don't get it then you just don't and I can't help you with that, but you will see here in about a decade or two.

http://legalruralism.blogspot.com/2013/ ... -over.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Say what you will. Something smells.

and here's a wee bit more fodder for arguement. carry on.

http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/ar ... we-know-it" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The blog link is still using some of the inaccurate info from the OS blog that Luke shared. As in manure will not be applied each day. And the "shallow lagoon was built to handle going half a year without being cleaned out......and can still tolerate a 7 inch 24 hour rain if so. The pond is built for extra capacity, has a free board elevation, and does not allow for runoff to enter. If it were to overflow there is a whole suite of bmps that can minimize impacts from such an occurrence and keep manure out of the waterways.

Sounds like NPS was resting on there laurels on this one, and whining after the fact. C,mon you know that the state, fed, and county guvments don't communicate that we'll. this is typical I tell ya.

The property rights law that was passed could be an even larger blow, although it might be more bark than bite and many public needs could probably trump....0r at least have lawyers on retainer to fight when they determine need be. Gonna cost money to challenge each time for now it looks like anyways.

Ain't no doubt things are changing, and there really is not as much time to enjoy these rivers since working to keep'em in good shape is an every day battle.

You almost made me give up yesterday Halfton, but serendipity walked in my door and shed light on this sordid affair from the inside out. At the very least, the inner workings of ADEQ and the subversion of processes intended to protect the public from back door deals needs the light of day, and the power of FOI act. You say this is lost, and you may be right, but I have not seen one powerful TV commercial, and I have not seen any legal action taken YET. Working within the usual frameworks will not work, only bold and aggressive action has a chance to turn this thing around. By the way Halfton, as far as the studies go, if the data is not right(underestimating average weight of hogs) the results are junk. These facilities pollute from the very first day. Use common sense, if you squeezed 6500 people into a square mile, never let them leave, feed them all day, and concentrate their waste into lagoons within that square mile and then spread that waste on the remaining acreage within that same square mile, would anyone in their right mind say this is not going to be a problem for the streams nearby? Trust me folks, NO ONE believes that, if I'm not mistaken, the dams that would have drowned the Buffalo had already been approved when the fight for the river began.

hollohead wrote:You almost made me give up yesterday Halfton

He'll wear you out. I believe he's drank the Big Ag koolaid.