KATV

Liquid livestock waste permit transfer causing a stink at the Arkansas Capitol

by Marine Glisovic

LITTLE ROCK (KATV) — An effort to move regulatory authority on liquid livestock waste permits over to another state entity is causing a stink at the Arkansas State Capitol.

SB550, filed by Rep. Gary Stubblefield, R-Branch, would transfer permitting authority from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality to the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission.

The Central Arkansas Water system is opposing this bill because it doesn’t guarantee the same standards and protocols will be used.

“The bill as its currently written doesn't really restrict where it can go," said Randy Easley, CAW’s Director of Water Quality." "We're concerned about our watershed so potentially those liquid waste could then be put in other areas particularly of interest to drinking water utilities that are more sensitive to some pollutants."

On Wednesday, the director of ADEQ received a letter from the United States Environmental Protection Agency stating they were keeping a close eye on the legislation. The letter also states that if adopted, the EPA would need to further review if the state program possesses adequate authority to issue permits while still complying with the Clean Water Act.

An ADEQ spokesperson told KATV they’re also concerned and released this statement:

“ADEQ has a number of significant and technical concerns about SB550. ADEQ agrees with EPA that SB550 raises concerns regarding potential impacts to state programs and ADEQ's delegated authority to protect water quality. The Arkansas program to protect water quality must remain at least as stringent as federal requirements and this bill does not provide adequate assurances that it will satisfy EPA requirements.”

The Arkansas Farm Bureau, who is pushing for this legislation, claims it’s about making the permitting process easier for hog, dairy and poultry farmers.

"We've had farmers for the last 15-20 years looking to see a simplification in their permitting process,” said AFB’s governmental relations spokesperson, Matt King. “We're not talking about reducing any regulations or anything like that. Right now you have farmers who have both a hog farm and poultry farm and even some dairies that are having to go to one agency to get this permit, another agency to get another permit."

On Thursday, Gov. Asa Hutchinson released a statement and said he has reservations about changing the current process.

"It is important that adequate protections remain in place so that we can continue our diligent work to protect the Buffalo National River. Historically, the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) has been the agency of record for this type of permitting, and they already have the necessary expertise in place to make a determination on a Regulation 5 application. I am confident in the current process at ADEQ, and I continue to have reservations with regard to SB550 and the transfer of Regulation 5 permitting authority from the ADEQ to the Arkansas Natural Resource Commission (ANRC). I will continue to monitor this legislation closely.” 

SB550 passed through the Arkansas Senate on Tuesday. 

Arkansasonline

Arkansas farm-permits bill progresses; authority shift given Senate nod

by Emily Walkenhorst 

A bill that would transfer hog and other farm permitting authority from one state agency to another passed in the Arkansas Senate on Tuesday after a brief discussion over whether the bill says what its sponsor claims it says.

Senate Bill 550 amends current law focused primarily on dry animal litter and poultry farms, gives the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission the responsibility to issue concentrated animal feeding operation permits, and gives decision-making power to local conservation districts on manure disposal permits. That authority is currently under the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality.

The bill also allows people applying for manure waste system permits to "waive" public notification requirements.

Concentrated animal feeding operations can include dairy and other farms of certain sizes. All hog farms must get permits if they operate liquid waste management operations, which nearly all hog farms do.

Currently, the department has more than 100 active hog farm permits, according to state data.

Agricultural groups have favored the bill, while environmental groups and water utilities have opposed it.

Sponsor Sen. Gary Stubblefield, R-Branch, said he introduced the bill to allow farmers who have dry poultry operations, in addition to liquid animal waste operations, to work with a single agency in the permitting process.

The bill passed Tuesday 25-5, with three people voting present and two not voting.

Sens. Will Bond, D-Little Rock; Joyce Elliott, D-Little Rock; Keith Ingram, D-West Memphis; Mark Johnson, R-Little Rock; and Greg Leding, D-Fayetteville, voted against the bill. Sens. Eddie Cheatham, D-Crossett; Linda Chesterfield, D-Little Rock; and Jason Rapert, R-Bigelow, voted present. Sens. Missy Irvin, R-Mountain View, and Dave Wallace, R-Leachville, did not vote.

The House Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development is to consider the bill as a special order of business March 27.

Stubblefield spoke for several minutes about misconceptions that he said people were emailing to senators, but two of the things Stubblefield stated were refuted by two other senators.

Ingram took issue with Stubblefield's characterization that the Natural Resources Commission would issue the permits.

Stubblefield has presented the bill as transferring all hog farm permitting responsibility to the commission, Ingram said, "but that's not really true." A portion of the bill stipulates that waste management permits would be determined by local conservation districts, Ingram said. Each county has a conservation district.

The commission could only affirm or overturn a conservation district decision to deny an application or to deny a portion of the application, according to the bill's language, Ingram said.

Stubblefield stood by his presentation and said conservation districts approve nutrient management plans and refer their decisions to the commission, which would issue the permit.

"This bill transfers all permits to" the commission, he said.

"OK, but I don't think that's what this reads," Ingram said.

Proposed Ark. Code Ann. 15-20-1115 refers to "liquid livestock litter utilization" and concerns "livestock litter management plans." Such plans spell out the process for disposal of animal manure generated by the waste management system, such as how and how much animal manure farmers will be allowed to apply to land as fertilizer.

Under the proposed subsection (c), the "liquid livestock litter management plan is subject to approval by the board of directors of the conservation district where the majority of the land ... is located."

It continues, saying that an applicant can appeal a disapproval of a management plan or the disapproval of a provision in a management plan to the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission's executive director.

Subsection (d) goes on to state that an approved plan "constitutes a permit to apply nutrients consistent with the liquid livestock litter management plan."

Proposed Ark. Code Ann. 15-20-1116 concerns "liquid livestock waste system permits." In the bill's definitions, "liquid livestock litter management system" refers to the "collection, storage, distribution, or disposal of livestock litter in liquid form."

That section of the bill says the commission is the agency that would act on permit applications.

Waste system permits that are active once the commission begins accepting permit applications would be transferred to the commission "without modification," the section reads.

The commission must adopt final rules by July 1, 2020, according to the bill, and the commission must begin accepting permit applications by Jan. 1, 2021.

Other than Stubblefield, three senators -- Blake Johnson, R-Corning, and Alan Clark, R-Lonsdale, and Ricky Hill, R-Cabot -- spoke in favor of the bill. Bond spoke against it.

Bond said the measure should be rejected in the spirit of Arkansas' nickname, the Natural State.

Senators in favor of the bill argued that farmers are good stewards of their land and that commission workers are good at what they do.

"Keeping the state the Natural State, I don't think, is up for debate," Clark said.

Bond spoke for several minutes and fielded a handful of questions from senators.

While Stubblefield told senators that the commission would have to write regulations that are just as stringent as the Environmental Quality Department's, Bond contended that the bill doesn't state that.

Critics of the bill have expressed concern that it would get rid of the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality's Regulation 5, under which liquid animal waste systems and waste management plans are currently permitted.

The current law, Ark. Code Ann. 15-20-1114, states that the law "shall not supersede" the existing requirements of the Arkansas Water and Air Pollution Control Act, but that waste management plans will not be subject to the law "or any regulations adopted under" the law. The department's Regulation 5, which covers all hog farms in the state except C&H Hog Farms in Newton County, is adopted under the law.

C&H Hog Farms, a 6,503-head hog farm near the Buffalo National River that had its permit denied last year, has a Regulation 6 permit that has expired, which is what prompted its owners to apply for a Regulation 5 permit, that was subsequently denied.

Environmental groups have opposed the farm's operation within the river's watershed and say it poses a threat to the river's water quality.

The commission may determine that certain activities are not in compliance with the law and shall be subject to regulation under the law, the bill continues.

The bill's passage would negate Regulation 5's moratorium on any new medium or large hog farms in the Buffalo River watershed, critics say.

During a review next year, Department of Environmental Quality Director Becky Keogh is to decide whether to keep the moratorium. The moratorium is not explicitly referred to in the bill, but Stubblefield said the department would retain decision-making authority.

Critics also worry about losing Regulation 5's requirement that facilities consider the Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook. The handbook has recommendations on farm siting, geologic investigations and manure pond liners, among other things.

In denying C&H's permit, state department regulators determined that C&H did not submit enough information to ensure the facility's site as safe, per handbook recommendations.

Senators discussed the department's "mistakes" in the C&H permitting process and questioned the need for keeping permitting authority with the department. Bond argued that the department has improved its operations.

The bill would not have any implications for C&H, Stubblefield said, because if C&H pulled its application, it would have to close. C&H remains open indefinitely while litigation related to its various permit denials remains in circuit court.

Bond said he isn't sure that C&H wouldn't benefit because its owners may be able to apply for a new permit with the commission.

Critics have noted other things that were not debated Tuesday in the Senate.

The bill allows applicants to waive public notification during the permitting process for waste management systems. Existing law allows applicants only to waive the "timeliness requirement," which stipulates that the department shall make decisions within limited time frames.

Stubblefield told senators Tuesday that his bill did not allow applicants to waive public notice requirements and that it allowed them only to waive the department's timeliness requirement.

He said the state administrative procedures law requires public notice.

Stubblefield submitted an amendment to his bill late Monday that would have changed the "notification period requirements" referred to in his bill back to "timeliness requirement" but later withdrew it.

The Beaver Water District, the main water source for Northwest Arkansas, and Central Arkansas Water, the main water source for central Arkansas, oppose the bill. The utilities contend that the bill would loosen permitting requirements and possibly expose drinking water sources to excess algae-causing phosphorus.

The Department of Environmental Quality has maintained that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency could raise concerns about the law as it relates to protections of waters under the Clean Water Act. An Arkansas Farm Bureau representative who used to work for the department disputed that assertion at a Senate committee meeting last week.

Many hog farms also need construction permits if they operate on enough acreage, said Jessie Green, executive director of the White River Waterkeeper and a former department engineer. The department would remain in charge of those, she said, without the ability to decide on the other permits.

Further, Green said, complaints and inspections of facilities are not provided on the commission's website, unlike the department's website. And, unlike at the department, people who complain about a facility to the commission must submit their complaints in writing, have them notarized and mailed with their names on them.

"That's a huge barrier to trying to get the public involved," Green said.

Fayetteville Flyer

Fayetteville City Council votes to oppose

Senate animal farm bill

By Todd Gill

The Fayetteville City Council on Tuesday voiced its opposition to a proposed Senate bill that would change the way animal farm permits are handled in Arkansas.

The council voted 6-0 to support a resolution to oppose Senate Bill 550, which would transfer regulation of farm permits from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality to the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission.

The bill was filed by Sen. Gary Stubblefield (R-Branch). Supporters say it would make the permitting process more efficient by moving farm permit approvals to one single state agency.

Opponents say it’s a response to last year’s controversial permit application for C&H Hog Farms in Newton County, which was denied by the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality.

Both the Central Arkansas Water District and the Beaver Water District have issued statements against the bill, partly because it would eliminate the current public notification requirements, but also because the groups say animal farms would operate in a “much more permissive environment,” and the prospect of liquid waste entering the water reservoirs would become a greater threat.

Fayetteville City Attorney Kit Williams said Council member Teresa Turk requested that the resolution be drafted and presented at Tuesday’s council meeting.

Turk said the lack of monitoring and oversight in the bill is cause for major concern when it comes to water quality.

Mayor Jordan said the bill is one of the worst pieces of legislation he’s seen in a while.

“There are two things I know,” said Jordan. “If you want to protect the environment, then you need to take care of your water and you need to take care of your air, and this bill is a fly in the face of both of those things.”

Greed over ecology

Good gobbledygook! They walk among us and sit in the state Legislature.

Just when we feel that the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality has gotten the message about hog waste, porous limestone and the resulting harm to the our nationally treasured Buffalo River, the self-servers that walk the halls of the Capitol are about to put a monkey wrench into the equation. Supported by the Farm Bureau, which is nothing more than a front for Big Agriculture, fat cats are wanting to transfer oversight to the Natural Resources Commission, which does not have the tools to do the job.

If we do not stop this travesty in the Legislature, the governor's faith will be tested about taking care of God's Earth. Obviously those devout Christians in the Senate adhere to greed over environmental responsibility.

MIKE MASTERSON: A real stinkerby Mike Masterson | Today at 2:15 a.m.

Senate Bill 550, sponsored by state Sen. Gary Stubblefield, a former dairy farmer from Branch, aims to replace the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality's permitting system for hog factories with a far less demanding "certification" process by the Natural Resources Commission, which lacks knowledge or experience in preventing waste contamination of our state's water quality.

Supported whole hog by the state's Farm Bureau (most visibly executive John Bailey, who in 2012 was a key player the state agency that wrongheadedly permitted C&H Hog Farms near a tributary of the Buffalo National River), Stubblefield's bill is likely the worst piece of needless legislation I've seen, so much so that I hereby deem it the "Superfluous Stubblefield Stinker."

Obviously I'm not alone by a long shot, as evidenced by the following position statement (edited for space) by Central Arkansas Water. (The Beaver Water District of Northwest Arkansas has issued similar opposition to this legislation).

"SB550 presents a threat to the health and well-being of the people of Arkansas. If enacted, this bill would completely change the way liquid animal waste disposal systems, which are used primarily by large swine to dispose of liquid swine waste, are regulated in Arkansas. Although characterized by supporters of the bill as an effort to achieve greater efficiency in the permitting process, SB550 has the potential to expose some of the state's most important natural resources, including public drinking water reservoirs, to liquid animal waste.

"Currently ADEQ is charged with issuing permits and conducting oversight of [such] disposal systems. ADEQ's process is effective and fair. It balances the needs of swine and daily farmers with the right of the public to a safe and clean environment. It ensures the involvement of well-trained, knowledgeable professionals with years of experience.

"SB550 would wipe out the current permitting process and oversight of these facilities and gut current regulatory protections. Public notification requirements would be eliminated. Minimum distance setback from neighbors, streams and lakes could be lost. Subsurface investigation requirements to determine suitability for waste lagoons would no longer be required. Anonymous complaints would not be accepted or investigated, and public reporting necessarily would be deterred. Established, effective enforcement protocol would go by the wayside. As a result, swine farms would operate in a much more permissive environment. And the prospect of liquid animal waste entering the water reservoirs of our great state would become a much greater threat."

The statement concluded: "While swine farms serve a role in the state's economy and culture, that industry should not be bolstered at the expense of the state's water systems and all of the state's people who rely on clean, healthy drinking water every day. As a result, Central Arkansas Water urges each member of the House and Senate to vote to preserve the current liquid animal waste permitting regimen by opposing SB550."

Those who care about preserving Arkansas' water quality in the country's first national river and elsewhere need to contact their elected representatives and senators and share your thoughts about the Superfluous Stubblefield Stinker. Time is critical.

Smoke and water 

Anyone else find it interesting that our state and national elected leaders showed up at the stump dump fire in Bella Vista to express concern over that legitimate health threat? They've declared it an emergency and pledged tens of millions in tax dollars to extinguish the mess.

But what of the equally clear and present emergency along our treasured Buffalo National River? I've heard very little outcry from the same officials over the ongoing contamination and health threats within our Buffalo.

I'm certainly not denigrating the need to get Bella Vista's subterranean blaze finally smothered. I am saying potential health threats posed to those who splash around in the Buffalo (officially ailing along 14.3 miles because of elevated nutrients and potentially dangerous pathogens) represent a serious state and national issue.

That unacceptable situation surely deserves far more official attention and concern than it's received over the past six-plus years since C&H Hog Farms began spraying hog waste across hundreds of acres in the Buffalo's watershed. Some who've played in the Buffalo in recent years have reported becoming ill.

While residents of the Trafalgar Road section of Bella Vista have suffered, the impairment of our Buffalo and 15 miles of its tributary Big Creek that flows along the factory's spray fields also potentially affects many livelihoods in and around impoverished Newton County.

Wouldn't it have been refreshing to see our elected leaders stand beneath the river's majestic bluffs to denounce the pollution while vowing to spend whatever necessary to pinpoint and stop the cause of her sickness for the sake of all of Arkansas and millions of visitors?

While Bella Vista residents can and should protest their serious dilemma, our river has no voice, vote, or ability to personally lobby and influence legislators.

JOHN BRUMMETT: Listen to the experts, Gusby John Brummett | Today at 4:30 a.m.

Lonesome Dove is an epic novel and a masterpiece in the television miniseries genre.

Augustus McCrae leaps from the pages and screen to charm and inspire with his cad's exterior and hero's heart.

But those were the 1870s. The old Texas Ranger and his buddies were driving cattle through the untamed American West. They didn't worry so much about disposing of their animals' leavings, whether along the trail or on the lush fields of Montana where they'd made the white man's first foray and claim.

State Sen. Gary Stubblefield of Branch, a Republican and west Arkansas farmer, deems Augustus a hero and role model. He and now-defeated Bryan King of Green Forest used to pal around the Senate calling themselves Augustus McCrae and Woodrow Call.

One could do worse for role models. Rugged independence and down-deep compassion and integrity are hardly bad qualities.

But I speak of human character, not contemporary environmental policy.

Stubblefield also likes Rooster Cogburn; hence his bill to establish a True Grit Trail in western Arkansas.

That's a darned sight better bill than this one on hog poop.

There are more of us now than there were then. We live closer together than they did then. We raise a lot more hogs, and do so commercially, rather than household to household.

That's because we have a lot more eaters and a great many of them seem to like bacon and sausage and barbecue and ham and pork tenderloin.

Somebody must raise all those hogs for all those appetites. They're not going to do it in Silicon Valley or in Manhattan. So we'll do it down here.

We're not squeamish. We'll sling the slop and hose the manure. It's honest work.

We'll feed the world.

But we can't just go around anymore letting people start up pig farms anywhere they want and then rinse off the waste any old way they please.

Well, we could, presumably, if Stubblefield's Senate Bill 550 passes.

Complaining as Gus might've about pointy-headed college graduates making rules for the real men on the ranch or farm, Stubblefield already has flown the bill out of the Senate Agriculture, Forestry and Economic Development Committee.

All the measure does is move the regulation of hog-farm permits from the Department of Environmental Quality, which has rules and procedures on such things and sometimes applies them competently, to a state Natural Resources Commission.

This Natural Resources Commission has no such procedures and presumably merely would "certify" applications that looked all right rather than grant formal permits designed to comply with federal Environmental Protection Agency policies.

The bill also says applicants could "waive" the current requirement that they make formal public notification as part of the application process.

The Natural Resources Commission would be required to meet in public.

So anyone complaining under this proposed new system that several hundred hogs had moved in next door and that no one ever notified them such a thing was even in the works ... they should have taken off work and gone to that commission meeting that they were never informed of.

Stubblefield can complain all he wants about the pointy-headed college guys. But perhaps we ought to listen to the folks at Central Arkansas Water, which serves a couple of hundred thousand metro-area customers in Little Rock, North Little Rock and surrounding communities with some of the nation's best drinking water.

Here's the statement CAW put out over the weekend:

"SB550 presents a threat to the health and well-being of the people of Arkansas ... . [It] has the potential to expose some of the state's most important natural resources including public drinking water reservoirs to liquid animal waste. ...

"ADEQ's process is effective and fair. It balances the needs of swine and dairy farmers with the right of the public to a safe and clean environment. . . .

"SB550 would wipe out the current permitting process and oversight of these facilities, and gut current regulatory protections. Public notification requirements would be eliminated. Minimum distance setback from neighbors, streams and lakes could be lost. Subsurface investigation requirements to determine suitability for waste lagoons would no longer be required. Anonymous complaints would not be accepted or investigated ... .

"As a result, swine farms would operate in a much more permissive environment, and the prospect of liquid animal waste entering the water reservoirs of our great state would become a much greater threat."

Other than that, it's just a little ol' bill to try to help some people make a hardworking living without all that regulatory hassle.

Pork chops don't grow on trees, you know. Unless the trees are next door.

Stubblefield told me by email Sunday that, yes, Gus was his hero, but the backlash on this bill has him feeling lately a bit like Jake Spoon.

Jake Spoon got hanged for horse thievery. That's rather extreme.

Stubblefield deserves only to have his bill drubbed right out of the Capitol.

MIKE MASTERSON: End run in Ledge

Did you read about the latest legislative end run around the existing authority responsible for issuing permits to meat-raising facilities like C&H Hog Farms in Newton County?

Turning into law Sen. Gary Stubblefield's Senate Bill 550--which would transfer the authority for approval of concentrated animal feeding operations from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (cough) to the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission--would effectively toll the death knell for our treasured Buffalo National River and any streams or natural waters located near such factories.

Yet Stubblefield, a Republican from Branch, insists SB550 has nothing to do with the existing controversy over the Department of Environmental Quality last year denying a Regulation 5 permit to C&H after it failed to submit an environmentally adequate application.

Despite Stubblefield's insistence that his bill does not involve C&H, I've always been stunned at the lengths our state and certain members of the Legislature will go to to protect this single misplaced factory.

Stubblefield, a former dairy farmer, has introduced his wholly unnecessary plan to eliminate permitting requirements altogether for liquid animal waste factories, while moving responsibility for approving potential polluters to the commission (whose leaders apparently didn't even attend last week's legislative committee hearing).

Senators could vote on this bad and unnecessary legislation as early as Monday or Tuesday, which means those who truly care about the future of our precious Buffalo should contact their elected representatives immediately.

Gordon Watkins, who heads the Buffalo River Watershed Alliance, held few punches: "Stubblefield's bill weakens existing water and air quality regulations and undermines current efforts to protect the Buffalo National River from degradation due to swine CAFOs and threatens water quality across the state," he told me. "It does away with permitting requirements for liquid animal waste systems altogether, replacing a permit with mere 'certification'."

Watkins said SB550 also removes all CAFOs currently covered under the Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission's Regulation 5 (historically regulated and enforced by the Department of Environmental Quality), instead placing them under the authority of the Natural Resources Commission, apparently without the requirement for possessing a permit at all. All existing Regulation 5 CAFO permits would be transferred effective Jan. 1, 2021.

"SB550 exempts most CAFOs from regulation under the Arkansas Water and Air Pollution Control Act. Moreover, it allows an applicant to 'waive ... public notification period requirements,'" he continued, saying the Department of Environmental Quality "will be consulted only for technical assistance in the event of violations or modifications" despite being "acknowledged as having the greatest expertise in permitting, regulating and enforcing CAFO permits."

Watkins emphasized that raw-waste application rates to fields have been guided by the Arkansas Phosphorus Index with no regard for agronomic limits. That means sole reliance on this index is known to result in excessive nutrient applications and degraded water quality.

Authority for approving, denying or "certifying" a nutrient management plan would be vested with the local Natural Resources Commission board of directors in the district where the operator lives. C&H is in Newton County where local politics have supported the factory's presence despite the impaired state of the river that regularly brings million into the impoverished region.

"Just because such a board is 'local' does not ensure its members have the necessary expertise to provide adequate technical review of an application," Watkins understated. "Under Stubblefield's plan, while having expertise in reviewing nutrient management plans, [the department] will not be consulted before a CAFO is allowed to operate. Only in the event of a violation is [the Department of Environmental Quality] to be consulted."

He said considerable state resources have been invested over decades to provide the agency with necessary expertise to properly permit, regulate and enforce factory farm operations, and Stubblefield's bill increases the chance of further contamination of the river by removing the department's Regulation 5 permit authority and giving greatly weakened oversight to commission members, who do not issue permits.

I cringe (and cough) as I write since the Department of Environmental Quality needlessly created this mess when in 2012 it wrongheadedly granted C&H its initial Regulation 6 permit without insisting on intense testing and oversight in the Ozark environment. Nonetheless, this department is clearly the most qualified to retain authority and oversight over our state's water-quality permits to better ensure protection of environmental resources.

Please let your elected representatives and our governor know before Tuesday how you feel about Stubblefield's bill ever becoming a needless law.

NWAonline

Owners seek second hog farm permit

by Emily Walkenhorst

Co-owners of a Newton County hog farm have resubmitted their application to build a hog farm in Franklin County.

Philip Campbell and Jason Henson, who co-own C&H Hog Farms with Richard Campbell, withdrew the application late last year after the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality asked for more information, saying they needed more time. They stated that they would resubmit the application, which they did on Feb. 21.

The farm, which would be called Coon Tree Farm after the road its located on near Denning, would have up to 10,374 hogs: 1,248 gilts of an average weight of 150 pounds; 4,728 gestation sows of an average 425 pounds, 840 lactating sows of an average 400 pounds; 576 nursery pigs of an average 30 pounds, 2,400 hot nursery pigs of an average 12 pounds, 576 gilt development pigs of an average 325 pounds and six boars of an average 450 pounds.

It would have two pits for hog manure with a storage capacity of a year, and manure would be land applied as fertilizer.

The barns and pits would be built up several feet to remove them from the flood hazard zone they are located in, according to the application.

The application is for a permit under Regulation 5, which, if approved, would be permanent.

The proposal has faced local opposition from residents, business owners and politicians, including state Rep. Sarah Capp, R-Ozark, concerned about nearby waters and the possible smell.

NW News on 03/17/2019

NWAonline

Bill seeks to diminish oversight of hog farms

On Thursday, Senate Bill 550 passed the Arkansas Senate Agricultural Committee. A Farm Bureau agent sat next to the bill's sponsor.

This bill is meant to gut the regulations that got the C&H Hog Farm permit denied.

This bill weakens existing water and air quality regulations regarding liquid waste operations, which are primarily confined hog feeding operations (often known as CAFOs) such as the controversial swine C&H hog factory in the Buffalo River watershed.

Hog CAFOs oversight would be moved out of Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality's purview into the more lax Arkansas Natural Resource Commission.

SB550 undermines efforts to protect the Buffalo National River from degradation due to swine CAFOs.

There are numerous reasons to implore our governor and legislators to stop this highly ambiguous and vague legislation. Not small among them:

• Public participation and transparency is significantly weakened. It is unclear as to what the public notification and appeal processes would look like.

• The moratorium on swine CAFOs in the Buffalo River watershed could become moot. With the weaker oversight this bill proposes, we could have more and even dirtier CAFOs in the Buffalo's watershed. And, more and dirtier ones in the rest of the state.

• This purposefully weakened code of practice would have an impact on the state's drinking water sources as well. Imagine CAFOs going in near those sources.

• Enforcement is gutted, as inspections will require at least 72-hour notice before conducting a site visit. The bill even acknowledges that resources council does not have the technical ability to regulate when it says that ADEQ will be consulted for violations or modifications.

This is chaos, not efficiency, as the Farm Bureau claims. There's more, a lot more, that's wrong with SB550. It damages years of effort to protect the Buffalo River from swine factory farming and threatens all the waters of Arkansas.

SB550 will be on the Senate agenda Monday, March 18.

Ginny Masullo

Fayetteville

Must protect our river

As someone who has witnessed firsthand the precipitous degradation of the Buffalo River, I took heart when the state agency that granted the initial permit finally recognized what the experts had said from the start: The geology of the watershed was far too porous, the transmission of groundwater too rapid and unpredictable to safely contain millions of gallons of hog waste sprayed on the ground every year. Now segments of the river meet the criteria to be designated as impaired, and as such, protections should immediately be extended.

Instead, it seems some state senators down at the Capitol have been busy cooking up a scheme to pass a bill taking the permitting of liquid waste-generating CAFOs out of the hands of the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality and placing it with Arkansas Natural Resources Commission, whose commissioners lack the means to monitor operations or even much desire to do so. Under their lenient oversight, we can probably kiss any hope of a recovered Buffalo River in our lifetime goodbye.

If our state can't protect this beloved river from the power of corporate agriculture and its paid lobbyists, no river is safe. These senators were elected to represent the people's interests. Call your senator and tell him what you think about Senate Bill 550. Don't delay. The guys are in a big hurry.

LIN WELLFORD

Green Forest