what's New This Page contains all Media posts

 
Arkansas Democrat Gazette
Editorial: Legislature should fund Buffalo River water study
Legislature should fund Buffalo River water study
Posted: January 26, 2015 at 1:32 a.m.
 
In the debate over operation of a large hog farm near the Buffalo National River, supporters of the agricultural operation and those who fear its impact on the environment ought to be able to agree on one thing: Monitoring is the way to know.

The history of C&H Hog Farms is filled with controversy -- over the information in its applications for permits, over the state's administrative granting of permits, and over the response of state leaders to the potential for damage to the river. The operation is allowed to house 2,500 sows and as many as 4,000 piglets. It's located in Mount Judea near Big Creek, about 6 miles upstream from where it meets the Buffalo National River.

The river, of course, is one of the Natural State's most beautiful and popular destinations for visitors. The National Park Service estimated its recent annual figures at more than 1 million visitors who spent about $46 million.

State officials have said the operators of the first large-scale concentrated animal feeding operation for swine within the Buffalo watershed did everything they were supposed to do, so there's little that can be done about a legally operating facility.

The permitting of the farm has sparked a move to ban further encroachment on the national river by such agricultural operations. Of particular concern is the potential environment impact of the abundance of waste hogs produce.

Now comes word that the only state-sanctioned and state-funded study of water quality in the area around the hog farm is running out of money, and there's no plan in place to continue. The University of Arkansas study, led by Professor Andrew Sharpley, was designed as a five-year effort, but it only received funding for the first year.

State lawmakers continue to weight whether to impose a permanent ban on medium and large hog farms in the river's watershed. It seems only reasonable to conclude the way to reach a conclusion is through water quality data. That takes research, and that takes money.

How can state lawmakers legitimately evaluate what's happening in that watershed without an independent study? A year is simply not enough -- and results have so far been inconclusive.

Arkansas cannot afford to get this wrong. The Buffalo River is too valuable. If it ends up polluted, it will take untold millions and a long, long time to overcome the damage to the river's reputation.

Fund the study, lawmakers. It's money well spent.

Commentary on 01/26/2015

Arkansas Democrat Gazette

An unnecessary bill

Keep data open

Mike Masterson

Rep. Dan Douglas, R-Bentonville, may have good intentions in wanting to exempt academic research data as it’s being gathered by state universities from provisions of the state’s Freedom of Information Act.
But his recently introduced House Bill 1080 is, in my opinion and that of many others, unnecessary and a truly bad proposal that makes me wonder where such an idea originated.
Surely it can’t involve the fact that Rep. Douglas (elected in District 91 in 2013 without opposition) is a former president of the Benton County Farm Bureau, or serves on the House Agriculture Committee, or is in the leadership of the Illinois River Watershed Partnership. No way he’d be carrying water for those special interests.
Douglas explained the rationale behind his bill to veteran political reporter and observer Doug Thompson by saying he doesn’t believe disclosing snippets of data gathered while research is under way tells the people of Arkansas worthwhile information until the entire project is completed. However, the people can see the data after what could be years of research is completed.
That argument leaves me scratching my noggin since it runs counter to this Ozark boy’s limited understanding of pure-dee common sense.
It certainly wouldn’t affect the outcome of any research to reveal findings along the process. That’s especially valid if the study is examining a subject as potentially serious as the potential contamination of our Buffalo National River, or the Illinois River.
We the public who pay for the public research (as we do for Douglas’ elected services) deserve to know what’s being discovered rather than waiting long periods to know when something as toxic as hog waste has possibly contaminated the river.
Thompson reported that various topics of research by public universities and colleges are monumentally important to the people of Arkansas, including fluoridation of drinking water, as well as water quality in the Buffalo and Illinois rivers.
Douglas said that taking a couple of days of data from a two-year research study is comparable to “watching two or three frames out of a two-hour movie. You can’t really tell anything from that.”
But what relevant difference does it make whether Arkansans are following developments as they unfold? And why would Douglas, as a politically connected farmer by career, care enough to want to change a perfectly good law (among the best in the nation) unless it’s to manage the flow of any potentially negative and embarrassing results from being released to we the people?
Surely there would be no concern with disclosing positive results along the way.
Should the ongoing University of Arkansas water-quality studies hypothetically show that bacterial and chemical contamination from animal waste is occurring within the Buffalo National River and its environmentally sensitive, karst-riddled watershed, why should we the people need to wait years to learn that?
Revealing such findings as they are shown to be occurring clearly would generate a public outcry even longer and louder than what already has arisen since our state wrongheadedly allowed a controversial Cargill-supplied hog factory into the fragile watershed.
And therein lies what strikes me as one possible motive behind proposing this kind of misguided and unnecessary law.
What politico, corporation or responsible party would want to face a barrage of negative headlines and the pressures from further revelations should a devastating waste spill occur within the watershed?
Thompson reports research information withheld by the bill from the public until final conclusions are reached would include “manuscripts, preliminary analyses, drafts of scientific or academic papers, plans, or proposals for future research and pre-publication peer reviews, the papers, plans, or proposals for future research and pre-publication peer reviews.”
Douglas did concede that his bill needs further refining and that you and I could still examine, under the law, the methodology and scope and subjects involved in such studies.
The people of Arkansas just wouldn’t be able to know what’s being found along the way, not until those conducting the study at a state-owned college or university say their work is officially concluded, on their timetable.
By the way, why wouldn’t the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (chuckle) be up in arms over this kind of bill that restricts public access to significant environmental information?
I like what reader Joe Nix had to say about Douglas’ misguided bill now sitting in the House Education Committee: “So the state pays for research to determine impact, if any, of the hog farm on the Buffalo but public can’t see [ongoing] results … such legislation has far reaching implications for science in general.”
Let’s hope, for all our sakes, that this troublesome bill languishes in the education committee until its justifiable demise.
—–––––v–––––—
Mike Masterson’s column appears regularly in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Email him at mikemasterson10@hotmail.com.

Huffington Post

Farms Can Be Held Liable For Pollution From Manure, U.S. Federal Court Rules

By Ayesha Rascoe

WASHINGTON, Jan 16 (Reuters) - A U.S. federal court has ruled for the first time that manure from livestock facilities can be regulated as solid waste, a decision hailed by environmentalists as opening the door to potential legal challenges against facilities across the country.

A large dairy in Washington state, Cow Palace Dairy, polluted ground water by over applying manure to soil, ruled Judge Thomas Rice of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington on Wednesday.

"The practices of this mega-dairy are no different than thousands of others across the country," said Jessica Culpepper, an attorney at Public Justice, one of the firms that represented the plaintiffs, a collection of public advocacy groups.

The case is scheduled to go to trial in March to decide the extent of the contamination and the clean-up.

This is the first time the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, which governs the disposal of solid and hazardous waste, has been applied to animal waste from a farm.

Industrial livestock operations produce hundreds of millions of tons of manure annually.

The district court ruling, if upheld, could affect any large livestock facility that produces more manure than it can responsibly manage, including poultry, beef and hog farms, Culpepper said.

An attorney for Cow Palace said on Friday that it plans to ask for an appeal.

"There's a reason no court has ever done this. It's because the statute was not intended to apply to these situations," said Debora Kristensen, an attorney for Givens Pursley, a law firm that represented Cow Palace.

Kristensen said Cow Palace has already entered into a voluntary agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which enforces the act, to address water contamination concerns.

Fertilizer is not considered waste under the act, but the district court found that Cow Palace was applying more manure to crops than needed. In one instance, the plaintiffs in the case said Cow Palace applied more than 7 million gallons (26 million liters) of manure to an already "sufficiently fertilized field."

The district court said Cow Palace's excessive application transformed the waste, which is "an otherwise beneficial and useful product," into a discarded material.

The court found that Cow Palace's management of its manure violated the "open dumping" provisions of law.

Unlike other federal contamination laws, the act requires violators not only to stop polluting, but to clean up any damage it has caused.

The case is Community Association For Restoration Of The Environment, Inc. et al v. Cow Palace, LLC et al, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, No. 13-CV-3016 (Reporting by Ayesha Rascoe; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh)

UA hog study

Speaking of bacon, it's time to decide if our state will cough up a few hundred thousand more tax dollars so the University of Arkansas geosciences folks can continue monitoring that hog factory our state allowed into the precious Buffalo National River watershed back in 2012.
Former Gov. Mike Beebe, under whose administration this factory with up to 6,500 wrongheadedly gained entry to the most environmentally sensitive region of our state, initially allocated $340,000 for the university to monitor possible hog-waste contamination in the watershed.
That expenditure thus far has resulted in "inconclusive" results based on examining a fraction of the spray fields.
Now the decision on whether a lot more money is needed to continue studying the millions of gallons of waste from the swine factory: If the location isn't critical, why spend so much money and energy to monitor the castoffs being regularly sprayed on watershed fields?
Truth is, it matters a lot. The state created a terrible situation that now we are paying to police. What's wrong with this picture? And why is this Cargill-supplied factory being so coddled? Yes, the factory jumped through the state's hoops for a permit, but those upfront requirements clearly weren't close to stringent enough, as evidenced by the game of "pay money, watch and see" we're playing now.
Denying a hog-factory permit in this location to begin with would have saved so much time, energy and taxpayer dollars.
------------v------------
Mike Masterson's column appears regularly in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Email him at mikemasterson10@hotmail.com.
Editorial on 01/20/2015

 http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2015/jan/20/douglas-bill-would-exempt-academic-stud/

Douglas' Bill would exempt academic studies from FOI
By Doug Thompson
Posted: January 20, 2015 at 1 a.m.

Research data gathered by state colleges and universities would be exempt from disclosure under the state Freedom of Information Act until the project involved is finished if a new bill becomes law.

Research topics ranging from fluoride use in public drinking water to ongoing studies of water quality in the Illinois and Buffalo rivers attract attention from interested parties, said Rep. Dan Douglas, R-Bentonville. He decided to file House Bill 1080 after seeing email and online articles that included partial results of studies in progress, Douglas said.

"Taking a couple of days of data out of a two-year study is like watching two or three frames out of a two-hour movie," he said. "You can't really tell anything from that." Under the bill, any data collected by a study would be available under FOI once the study was complete, he said.

The bill isn't needed because the results of any good scientific study will not be affected by a study being done in the open, Dane Schumacher of Berryville said Monday. Schumacher is chairwoman of the legal committee of the Buffalo River Watershed Alliance. The nonprofit alliance opposes approval of a large-scale hog farm in the watershed of the Buffalo National River. She has filed FOI requests for research data in an ongoing study monitoring of that farm.

HB 1080 could affect information both timely and important to the public while it's also subject of an academic study, Schumacher said. For instance, monitoring of C&H Hog Farms near Jasper was turned over to the University of Arkansas in a memorandum of understanding drawn up by the governor's office, she said.

The agreement was reached after the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality approved the farm. The memorandum makes the research data being collected and the monitoring of the farm the same, Schumacher said. If this bill became law, a spill at the farm could be exempt from immediate disclosure.

The Arkansas Freedom of Information Coalition will meet today for the first time since the bill was filed, said Tom Larimer, spokesman. The watchdog group of journalists, legal and government scholars and government officials knows about the bill but hasn't taken a position, Larimer said. Spokesmen for the University of Arkansas and the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, which does medical research, had no comment on the bill Monday.

Documents detailing how the research is done and the subjects of the research wouldn't be exempt under the provisions of the bill, Douglas said. The bill is assigned to the House Education Committee.

"Anything regarding a study's scope or methodology would still be subject to the FOI under this bill from the beginning of any study," Douglas said. "I don't want to do anything to reduce the transparency of the method that a study uses. People need to know if the way the study's being conducted is valid.

"Right now, the bill is too broad," Douglas said. "I want to tighten it up and make sure nobody can interpret this as something that restricts access to administrative records or emails or anything like that. The best way to do that is get the bill out there and talk to people who are concerned about that."

The exemption would cover "manuscripts, preliminary analyses, drafts of scientific or academic papers, plans, or proposals for future research and pre-publication peer reviews," according to the bill.

Doug Thompson may be reached at dthompson@nwadg.com or @nwadoug.

NW News on 01/20/2015

Northwest Arkansas-Democrat Gazette

Funds, future unsure for UA's Big Creek hog-farm study
By Emily Walkenhorst
Posted: January 17, 2015 at 1 a.m.
 

A University of Arkansas study on the impact of C&H Hog Farms on the Buffalo River's watershed is running out of money, and no plan is yet in place to continuing its funding.

The study is one of two being done in the area, although it's the only state-sanctioned and state-funded study.

The UA study has so far been inconclusive, said Andrew Sharpley, Big Creek Research Team leader, as the data gathered hasn't been consistent. Sharpley is a professor of soils and water quality at the University of Arkansas.

Last month, lawmakers spent a few hours debating whether to impose a permanent ban on medium and large hog farms in the watershed and repeatedly mentioned the lack of conclusive evidence from the study so far.

Several legislators said they didn't want to make a decision without evidence the large hog farm is causing any damage.

Rep. Kelley Linck, R-Yellville, chairwoman of the Public Health Committee, reminded legislators they need to decide during the session whether to continue funding the study, which is designed to last five years. The study is in its second year.

J.R. Davis, a spokesman for Gov. Asa Hutchinson, said Hutchinson was aware of "what's going on at the hog farm" but he didn't believe Hutchinson had been approached about continuing funding for the study.

Gov. Mike Beebe proposed spending $340,000 in 'rainy day' money in 2013 to pay for a study monitoring the farm's impacts, which was later approved by a Legislative subcommittee. The expense was only set to last a year.

"We can't keep doing it forever without some continuing lower level of funding for the analyses, but we will make every effort to do as such as we can so there's no gaps," Sharpley said.

The study has measured water and soil samples since late 2013, when it first began trying to establish a baseline from which to draw conclusions on future water and soil conditions. The study is being done in three fields around the farm along Big Creek, which C&H Hog Farms sits along.

Sharpley's team, which is also working with the U.S. Geological Survey, hasn't been able to access more fields around the hog farm because the researchers don't have permission from landowners. Sharpley has said he would like to do more.

So far, Sharpley said, the study has shown peaks and falls in some minerals and e.coli. The data showed a spike in e.coli in early 2014.

"It's too early to say that there's no impact. It's too early to draw any conclusions," Sharpley said, noting researchers haven't been able to discern consistent patterns in the data in such a short time span.

Environmental groups opposed to the hog farm's presence in the Buffalo River watershed continually note another study being done by a retired University of Arkansas Geosciences Department professor, Van Brahana. He believes his voluntary research indicates a decrease in dissolved oxygen in Big Creek both last summer and this winter.

Low levels of dissolved oxygen can be damaging to aquatic life, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

Brahana and volunteers are studying the water in Big Creek and around it, including minerals and the flow of the water. Brahana's team has put dyes in the water to detect patterns showing the interconnection of water basins, Big Creek and the Buffalo National River.

Brahana said his team has spent $14,000 on that study, with a lot of time and equipment being donated.

"We watch both of the activities and read the reports with interest," said Duane Woltjen, vice president of the Ozark Society, adding he believes Brahana's study is particularly important.

Richard Davies, director of the Arkansas Department of Tourism, said the UA study is important because of the value of the Buffalo National River to tourism and the difficulty of turning around a bad reputation that could come with too much pollution.

"I hope that we would continue to monitor it from now on," he said.

C&H Hog Farms is permitted to house about 2,500 sows and as many as 4,000 piglets at a time. It's in Mount Judea near Big Creek, about 6 miles upstream from where it meets the Buffalo National River.

C&H Hog Farms is the first large-scale, swine-concentrated animal-feeding operation to receive a Regulation 6 permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality inside the Buffalo National River watershed. It's still the only one, as the watershed has a temporary ban on new medium and large hog farms.

The Buffalo National River had more than 1 million visitors in 2013 who spent about $46 million collectively, according to National Park Service data.

Metro on 01/17/2015

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2015-01-14/how-chipotle-got-religion-on-sustainable-pork

Federal judge rules against Washington state dairy, says manure pollution threatens water
Article by: NICHOLAS K. GERANIOS , Associated Press 

Updated: January 15, 2015

SPOKANE, Wash. — A federal judge has ruled that a large industrial dairy in eastern Washington has polluted drinking water through its application, storage and management of manure, in a case that could set precedents across the nation.

U.S. District Judge Thomas O. Rice of Spokane ruled Wednesday that the pollution posed an "imminent and substantial endangerment" to the environment and to people who drink the water.

Rice wrote that he "could come to no other conclusion than that the Dairy's operations are contributing to the high levels of nitrate that are currently contaminating — and will continue to contaminate ... the underlying groundwater."

"Any attempt to diminish the Dairy's contribution to the nitrate contamination is disingenuous, at best," Rice wrote in the 111-page opinion, in which he granted partial summary judgment in favor of environmental groups that sued the dairy.

A trial has been scheduled for March 23 in Yakima to decide how much pollution the Cow Palace dairy of Granger was causing and what steps should be taken as a remedy.

Jessica Culpepper — an attorney for Public Justice, who helped represent the environmental groups — said this was the first time a federal court has ruled that improperly managed manure is a solid waste, rather than a beneficial farm product. This is also the first time that the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, which governs the disposal of solid and hazardous waste, was applied to farm animals, Culpepper said.

Those standards can now be applied across the nation, Culpepper, of Washington, D.C., said.

Attorneys for Cow Palace said they were already considering an appeal, regardless of the trial outcome.

"It may very well be that the appeal will happen sooner than expected," said attorney Brendan Monahan of Yakima.

The civil lawsuit was filed by environmental groups — including the Community Association for Restoration of the Environment and the Center for Food Safety — and relied only on the likelihood of unlawful pollution, not absolute proof as in criminal cases.

According to the ruling, Cow Palace has 11,000 cows that create more than 100 million gallons of manure each year.

The decision "connects these industrial dairies to contamination of the drinking water of thousands of lower Yakima Valley residents," the environmental groups said in a press release.

The manure is spread on fields, turned into compost and stored in large impoundments.

"They were storing it in lagoons that are leaking like crazy," Culpepper said. "It will take a lot of work to clean it up."

The environmental groups sued on behalf of thousands of families in the lower Yakima Valley who rely on groundwater through wells. The valley is a heavily agricultural area located about 150 miles east of Seattle.

"It is long past due that these dairy factories be held accountable for their toxic waste and compromising of human health," said George Kimbrell, attorney for the Center for Food Safety.

Rice's ruling criticized the Cow Palace and its owners, Bill and Adam Dolsen, saying they appeared to minimize the dangers posed by nitrates, including "Blue Baby Syndrome," a condition that can result when babies consume formula mixed with nitrate-contaminated water.

"Alarmingly, Defendant Cow Palace's briefing seems to suggest that this Court wait to act until a young infant in the area is first diagnosed with methemoglobinemia, a health effect that occurs at the lowest dose of nitrate consumption," Rice wrote.

Cow Palace owners said they are deciding what to do next.

"We are reviewing the ruling and will be charting a course forward with our attorneys," president Adam Dolsen said in a statement.

"We understand that this case has wide-reaching implications that extend far beyond the Yakima Valley and throughout agriculture," Dolsen's statement said.

Rice also rejected Cow Palace's defense that septic tanks contribute significantly to contaminated groundwater, noting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found that 224 residential septic systems near the dairies produced less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the waste generated by the other dairy defendants.

The environmental groups in 2013 filed lawsuits against Cow Palace, Liberty Dairy, H&S Bosma Dairy and George DeRuyter and Son Dairy. The case against Cow Palace was scheduled for trial first. The dairies are located close to each other, and the facts and arguments are the same in all four lawsuits, Culpepper said.

The dairies contended that manure was a beneficial farm product.

"We argued there was so much manure it can't be used as a beneficial product," Culpepper said.

A 2012 EPA study showed that 20 percent of the 331 wells tested in the lower Yakima Valley had nitrate levels above federal drinking water standards, posing a serious danger to the more than 24,000 residents who rely on private wells.

Nitrates can cause other severe health problems such as several forms of cancer, autoimmune system dysfunction, and reproductive problems.

Teresa Turk

Public Viewpoint

Northwest Arkansas Times

December 24, 2014

What Will Beebe’s Legacy Be?

According to a recent column by John Brummett, outgoing Governor Mike Beebe enjoys over a 60% approval rate by the citizens of Arkansas. This is an incredible statistic given the Republican wave that just swept through Arkansas’ November election. For the most part, the Governor has served our state well during his eight year tenure-implementing the highly successful (just copied by Utah) private option despite well -organized Republican opposition.

This past month, the Governor has taken some heat for pardoning his son. Unlike his actions with his son, the governor said he regretted allowing the placement of a huge hog feeding operation near the Buffalo River. The Governor doesn’t seem to have a strong personal connection with the river. Has he ever camped out on a gravel bar telling stories with his friends and family while staring at a gorgeous limestone bluff? Has he ever watched a pair of bald eagles dive for fish at the bow of a kayak? Has he ever felt that bone-chilling whoosh of water as he shot through a narrow white water rapid?

Evidence exists that the Buffalo River is already being contaminated by hog waste. This data is from the National Park Service that, unlike the University of Arkansas, has been collecting water quality information on Big Creek, upstream and downstream of Carver (where Big Creek enters the Buffalo) before and after the C&H hog farm became operational. The only thing that has changed in the past year is the over 2,000,000 gallons of hog waste produced by C&H stored in 2 unlined lagoons and then spread on 17 fields that are in close proximity to Big Creek.

The governor has stated on several occasions that if there was any evidence of the C&H operation polluting the Buffalo, he would shut it down. Is this enough evidence? In addition to the E. coli spikes, what about the unprecedented large algal blooms in both Big Creek and the Buffalo that occurred this spring and summer? How much more evidence do you require before acting?

This river is a profoundly personal experience for many Arkansans. Pardon the river and fix this mistake of your administration before it is too late. Shut the hog factory down not only to preserve your legacy, but to preserve the river for Arkansas and posterity. It deserves a second chance.

Click here for related data

 

Earthjustice - Because the Earth needs a good lawyer

A DAY IN HOG HEAVEN AFTER JUDGE ORDERS FEDS TO EVALUATE FACTORY FARM'S IMPACTS

By Marianne Engelman Lado | Thursday, December 18, 2014
 
In early December, environmentalists and community members celebrated a rare win against industrial agriculture and federal malfeasance in Arkansas. In a court case brought by Earthjustice, U.S. District Judge Price Marshall issued a decision finding that federal agencies illegally guaranteed loans to C&H Hog Farms, a factory farm near the Buffalo National River, without first effectively evaluating the potential environmental impacts of this swine operation.

The Buffalo National River was established as America’s first National River in 1978, and it is one of the few remaining undammed rivers in the lower 48 states. The river’s 135-mile course is cherished for its untouched beauty and the diversity of its roaring rapids and tranquil pools that hug the Ozark Mountains. The park was designed to protect the historical and cultural history of the region, which was first settled close to 10,000 years ago. The region is home to over 300 species of fish, insects, freshwater mussels and aquatic plants – including the endangered Gray bat, Indiana bat and snuffbox mussel. Unfortunately, this pristine wilderness is now also home thousands of pigs and their waste: supported by American tax dollars.

C&H Hog Farms, a producer for Cargill, Inc., one of the largest privately held corporations in the United States, is the first large concentrated animal-feeding operation (CAFO) in the Buffalo River watershed and the first to receive an operating permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality. In order to get the permit approved, the company proposed a plan for managing the waste of its 6,500 pigs. The plan indicated that the pigs create more than one million gallons of waste-filled water every year, approximately the equivalent to the waste generated by a city of 35,000 people. This contaminated water is stored in two small, unlined and uncovered settling ponds in a region geologically known for its porous limestone. These ponds are then periodically drained, and the liquid waste is sprayed over nearby fields on the banks of a tributary to the Buffalo National River.

In 2012 C&H applied for $3.6 million in loans from Farm Credit Services of Western Arkansas. To receive these loans, the hog farm applied for loan guaranties from two federal agencies. The first agency, the Small Business Administration, guaranteed 75% of a $2.3 million loan without taking any action to evaluate environmental impacts.

The second backer, Farm Service Agency, was required by standard practice to prepare an environmental assessment before granting C&H’s request. In the words of the district court, the evaluation prepared by this agency “was cursory and flawed. It didn’t mention the Buffalo River. It didn’t mention Big Creek,” the tributary next to the sprayfields. “It didn’t mention the nearby Mt. Judea school. It didn’t mention the Gray Bat.”

The evaluation concluded without explanation that measures to prevent environmental harm were unnecessary and then quietly published the notice of its conclusions only in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, a state-wide Little Rock-based newspaper , despite a requirement that the agency also publish in a local or community paper. Not surprisingly, they received no comments, and in August 2012, the agency established that C&H Hog Farms would have no significant environmental impact and guaranteed 90% of another $1.3 million loan.

In a letter from the Buffalo National River Superintendent, Kevin Cheri, to the Farm Service Agency, Cheri claimed this finding was “very weak from an environmental point of view.” Despite the fact that the Farm Service Agency’s evaluation identified the National Park Service as a cooperating agency, Cheri made clear that the National Park Service had not been informed about the environmental review until after it was complete. The letter identified 45 problems with the evaluation.

Because of the minimal public communication about this assessment, few people living near the C&H property realized what had been approved on the backs of federal taxpayers before it was too late, and the farm began operating in 2013.

Judge Marshall’s finding that these federal agencies are liable for their wanton disregard of environmental safeguards and inadequate impact evaluations confirms a standard that should apply when future factory farms look for federal support. If the ruling is not appealed, agencies around the country may be called to meet environmental standards that have not been effectively applied to loan guarantees for these facilities. This decision is an important step forward in preserving the Buffalo National River, and a poignant reminder of the public’s crucial role in protecting communities and the environment.