By Mike Masterson
Posted: November 1, 2016 at 5:45 a.m.
NWAOnline
Months before a University of Arkansas agriculture professor was appointed head of the Big Creek Research and Extension Team formed to monitor waste from a hog factory in the Buffalo National River watershed, Dr. Andrew Sharpley's remarks to a 2013 conference revealed preferential regulatory practices and his priorities as an advocate for agriculture.
It's been three years since Teresa Marks, the previous Department of Environmental Quality (cough) director, said she didn't even realize her agency had issued a permit to C&H Hog Farms in Newton County until it had. Neither did former Gov. Mike Beebe, the National Park Service, or even Environmental Quality's own local inspectors know.
Beebe said the factory was his biggest regret in office. In an attempt to rectify such a wrongheaded decision, Beebe agreed on Sept 5, 2013, to form and fund the Big Creek team.
Centered at the University of Arkansas' Agriculture Division, the team was to ensure the toxic raw waste stored on-site and sprayed on fields around Big Creek (a major tributary of the Buffalo) wasn't polluting the karst-riddled watershed.
During an Extension Service conference in North Dakota in April 2013, Sharpley discussed the nature of so-called Discovery Farms. He'd said Arkansas farmers who participate in that experimental program strive to maintain a balance between profits and environmental preservation.
To me, his words reveal a relevant mindset when it comes to preserving the water quality of our country's first national river while describing a purported "gentlemen's agreement" involving the state's leniency in regulating and monitoring Discovery Farms.
In 38 minutes of speaking, he describes how he regularly assuages concerns of farmers invited to participate in the program and that Marks even served on a Discovery Farms committee. His talk strikes me as nothing short of disdain for the role of a pesky Environmental Protection Agency and the troubling protective approach regarding the state Department of Environmental Quality's regulatory practices. Decide for yourself.
"We wanted to have some protection for farmers," Sharpley told the audience. "We wanted EPA and ADEQ to give those farmers some protection from being cited if there was a problem, because we know we might find problems on these farms. But they wouldn't, they wouldn't write anything in paper but basically we have a gentlemen's agreement that if you do find a problem, because they're working under this program we'll give them some leniency to show that they're doing their best with the resources they've got to address those issues.
"That's always a question when we ask farmers if you would like to be involved in this program. The first question they always ask is are EPA going to come knocking on my door? We can't say no. Unfortunately, EPA are pretty aggressive in our part of the country and I suspect they're coming to a neighborhood near you too. If they're not already there, they're coming. And they would probably be coming further if they hadn't been sequestered and lost some dollars."
Suppose a similar policy applies today to C&H? Fair question.
While there's been discussion about including C&H among the state's eight Discovery Farms, Arkansas has yet to do so. Understandably, there's plenty of public opposition to the idea in the factory's present location. Yet it appears the state might be moving in that direction, according to Buffalo River Watershed Alliance leader Gordon Watkins. Two Discovery Farm technicians already serve on Sharpley's team. Watkins said current Environmental Quality Director Becky Keogh told him her agency is indeed considering C&H as a Discovery Farm.
Watkins' group and others strongly oppose that move because the Buffalo watershed is widely seen as "no place to be conducting risky experimental practices, especially given the alarming statement of Dr. Sharpley that there is a 'gentleman's agreement' with regulators to look the other way when permit violations occur."
He adds, "This sort of collusion to allow permit violations is not only totally unacceptable in the Buffalo River watershed, it raises serious questions about the Discovery Farm program in general."
Since Discovery Farms supposedly are considered "model farms" where new practices are developed to be replicated elsewhere, there also are concerns that placing C&H in this category would perpetuate its presence in the watershed. Moreover, it could become a model for other swine factories, thereby opening the door for the proliferation of such places in the watershed or other environmentally sensitive locations, Watkins said.
As with Watkins, I'm stunned by Sharpley's comments on protecting Discovery Farms from the reality of their problems through a "gentlemen's agreement" rather than regulating effective environmental quality above all else.
That certainly would include above special interests bent on protecting potential polluters.
------------v------------
Mike Masterson's column appears regularly in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Email him at mmasterson@arkansasonline.com.
Editorial on 11/01/2016
Posted: October 25, 2016 at 1 a.m.
Most paddlers who've gazed at the majesty of the Buffalo National River are thankful that it's still a river, free of the dams that were planned years ago.
So what better title than "Still a River," for the latest musical project by Kelly and Donna Mulhollan, who make up the Fayetteville duo Still on the Hill. Their compact disc and concert series tells the story of the Buffalo River in 11 original songs written by the Mulhollans.
Tunes tell about the joy of floating on the revered Buffalo, as in the disc's first song, titled "Ponca to Pruitt." The album dives into into the history of the Buffalo. Lyrics tell stories about people who've lived along the Buffalo such as Eveline and Peter Tyler, namesakes of the Tyler Bend access and visitor center on the river south of Harrison. Another song is about Granny Henderson, who raised livestock and grew a garden while living along the Buffalo. She was featured in a National Geographic article about the river.
The album is great listening, but even better is hearing Still on the Hill do the songs live in the free concerts they're performing in Northwest Arkansas and around the state. Not only are the concerts free, but everyone in the audience gets a free "Still a River" CD, one per family.
They've just completed their first round of shows and are gearing up for another tour. The next free concert is at 3 p.m., on Nov. 25 at Hobbs State Park-Conservation Area, part of the park's Green Friday, the day after Thanksgiving. The Mulhollans will perform "Still a River" at 2 p.m. on Dec. 10 at the Bentonville Public Library. They'll be at the Walton Arts Center in Fayetteville on Feb. 3. More concert dates are in the works.
Everything is free thanks to donors who sponsored the project, including individuals, the Buffalo River Watershed Alliance, Ozark Society Foundation and National Park Service.
"Still a River" is a natural follow-up to their "Once a River" CD and concerts about Beaver Lake, Kelly said. The couple did those concerts last year.
After telling those stories about the White River and a reservoir, they focused on the Buffalo, still a free-flowing river with no dams.
"We appreciate that one river was spared," Kelly said.
The songs are a celebration of the river and don't delve into controversy, such as the hog farm near Big Creek, a tributary of the Buffalo.
Paddlers on the upstream end of the Buffalo have floated under Bee Bluff. One of the tunes tells how some local boys schemed to get the gallons of honey created by the bees, high upon the cliff face.
"At one concert, a woman came up to us and said 'one of those boys was my grandfather'" Kelly said.
A great-granddaughter of Granny Henderson came to the concert in Harrison, Kelly said. Other relatives and friends of people in their songs have come to the "Still a River"shows.
Each CD comes with a booklet that explains more about each tune, illustrated with photos and art of the river.
Inspiration for a lot of the songs came from Ken Smith's book, "Buffalo River Country," first published in the 1960s.
"It's such a poetically written book," Kelly said. "We're real admirers of Ken for his work and for building miles and miles of trails along the river. He's one of the true heroes of the Buffalo."
The concerts feature Donna's special "Power Point" presentation that use artwork on quilts instead of pictures on a screen. She did a similar "Power Point" project that was a hit during their Beaver Lake concert series.
Those concerts were held primarily in Northwest Arkansas in the Beaver Lake watershed. "Still a River" has more of a statewide interest, Kelly said. Concerts are planned across the state.
They hope "Still a River" accomplishes for the Buffalo what "Once a River" did for Beaver Lake.
"We hope by singing these songs it will make people aware and become good stewards of the Buffalo."
Flip Putthoff can be reached at fputthoff@nwadg.com or on Twitter @NWAFlip
Sports on 10/25/2016
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD OCT. 25, 2016
The landscape of eastern North Carolina is dotted with giant pools of bright pink sludge. These are waste lagoons, where industrial farms across the state dispose of billions of gallons of untreated pig urine and feces every year.
The waste can carry E. coli, salmonella, cryptosporidium and other bacteria that can lead to serious illness or death if they spread to humans. After Hurricane Matthew deluged North Carolina this month, at least 14 of the lagoons flooded.
Environmental advocates and state officials have been flying over regions to identify overflowing lagoons where floodwaters have become mixed with the waste, a public health hazard that could last for weeks as bacteria flow into rivers and streams, potentially sickening those who come into contact with those waters.
Bacteria can also contaminate groundwater, the main source of drinking water for more than three million North Carolinians. Meanwhile, the nitrogen and phosphorus in hog waste can kill fish and damage ecosystems. State officials are now beginning to test rivers to assess the level of contamination.
A research program at North Carolina State University has found several safer waste-disposal methods, including one that converts nitrogen in waste into harmless nitrogen gas and uses another process to eliminate harmful bacteria.
North Carolina took steps toward protecting its residents by passing a moratorium on new lagoons in 1997 and making it permanent in 2007. But around 4,000 lagoons constructed before 1997 remain in active use. Unless North Carolina and other states require agriculture companies to change their waste-disposal methods, what happened after Hurricane Matthew will happen again.
Politico
By CATHERINE BOUDREAU
10/24/2016
The Obama administration is slow-walking the credit it gives to large dairy and livestock farms out of fear that it could get slapped with another big environmental lawsuit, POLITICO has learned.
Big farms in the South, Midwest and Northeast are struggling to get the financing they need because of the slowdown, with applications for loan guarantees languishing for more than a year and a half in some cases, lenders and state farm groups say.
The foot-dragging stems from a 2013 lawsuit that the environmental law nonprofit Earthjustice filed against the administration over loans it guaranteed for farmers to build a concentrated animal feeding operation in northern Arkansas. The litigation has forced the Small Business Administration to reevaluate the way it vets the loan applications to include an assessment of the environmental impact of construction, causing major delays in approvals.
The Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency, too, is taking longer to approve guaranteed farm loans for new construction due to stricter environmental scrutiny, lenders say, although an agency spokesman said its environmental assessment process hasn’t changed as a result of the lawsuit, with the exception of that one Arkansas case.
The backlog of loan applications in Arkansas, New York, Wisconsin and other dairy and meat-producing states is hurting the already sluggish rural economy, lawmakers say, and comes as the agriculture industry faces increasing pressure from the federal government, environmental groups and the public to reduce the impact of farming on land, water and climate.
“This lack of clarity from the SBA is effectively rendering a potentially valuable economic development tool unavailable to dairy operations,” costing about $100 million in potential agribusiness investment in Wisconsin, the state’s congressional delegation said in a letter this summer asking the agency to fix the situation. The lawmakers added that while they understand the need to protect natural resources, the SBA must outline its expectations on how loan applicants can comply with federal regulations.
The agency asserts that it continues to make loans to farmers and ranchers, but the process “may take a bit longer now as we continue to thoroughly review and ensure environmental compliance,” spokesman Terry Sutherland said.
Because major farm construction projects are capital intensive and often cost more than the $1.39 million cap FSA places on guaranteed loans, farmers can use SBA programs to make up the difference. Commercial and Farm Credit System bankers often seek these government-backed loans to reduce their risk and offer farmers long-term loans at lower fixed rates.
Earthjustice, representing four Arkansas conservation groups, sued the SBA and FSA for guaranteeing $3.6 million in loans to a Cargill contract farm. The suit argued the SBA violated both the National Environmental Policy and Endangered Species acts by not assessing the environmental impact of C&H Hog Farms building housing for 6500-swine in Mount Judea.
The complaint also said the FSA’s evaluation was flawed because, for example, it didn’t mention the Buffalo National River and its tributary, Big Creek, even though nine fields where manure is spread border the tributary.
A federal judge agreed, ordering the agencies to conduct a joint environmental assessment. Although the administration again found that the hog farm would have “ no significant impact” on the environment, the lawsuit forced the SBA to update its more than 30-year-old environmental policy, which the agency hadn’t been applying to loans, to determine what environmental evaluations should entail.
In a letter to Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.) in August, the SBA said it was reviewing its mandate under NEPA and “giving special attention to large dollar loans” to livestock operations, especially those of $2 million or more.
The complexity of the NEPA process means any number of issues can delay a project, such as the need for numerous permits for things like animal waste disposal, SBA Associate General Counsel Eric Benderson said.
In addition, Benderson said reviews of farm expansion proposals need to consider the impact on wetlands and endangered species, requiring another layer of sign-off by the Fish and Wildlife Service.
The American Bankers Association, in letters to both the SBA and FSA this month, characterized the situation as a moratorium on lending to livestock facilities based on feedback from its members. The industry group also said the EPA’s Waters of the U.S. final rule, which is being challenged in court by scores of states and agricultural industry groups, is partly to blame for the administration’s display of caution.
Both the SBA and FSA insist there is no moratorium on loan guarantees and they continue to finance animal agriculture. They also denied that WOTUS litigation is affecting lending activity.
In a letter last week to Steve Apodaca, ABA’s senior vice president of agricultural and rural banking, FSA Administrator Val Dolcini said “it is unfortunate that some of our lender partners have received inaccurate information,” adding that FSA’s normal environmental compliance process can take time, but it should not be confused with a moratorium. He also noted that the agency’s guaranteed loan activity reached an all-time high in fiscal 2016, totaling nearly $4 billion dollars, although that figure reflects financing for all types of farm operations, not just the livestock sector.
The Agriculture Department also said USDA-required environmental assessments are in a borrower’s best interest and help them to avoid headaches down the line.
“The situation in Arkansas is a case in point,” said Matt Herrick, the department’s director of communications. “The operator’s loan was held up for years in litigation. We want to get credit to those who qualify as expeditiously as possible and prevent headaches down the line; following the rules when an assessment is necessary is part of that process.”
For its part, the SBA more than doubled the value of the general small business loans it guaranteed to CAFOs from fiscal years 2012-15, which went from $224 million to more than $652 million, the agency’s figures show. But that amount dropped to about $604 million in fiscal 2016.
Over that same period, the SBA’s real estate and equipment loans to dairy and livestock farms fell from slightly more than $21 million to less than $13 million, with the exception of fiscal 2015, which saw a spike to about $25 million, the agency said.
The overall drop in financing for both programs in fiscal 2016 coincides with when Wisconsin Business Development, an SBA-certified development company, and lenders interviewed for this story recall first seeing the slowdown, with some saying they saw delays halfway through fiscal 2015 and others the following fiscal year.
Wisconsin Business Development, based in Madison, has been in a “holding pattern” for about a year in a half while the agency tries to “find a balance” between its role as lender and its requirements under NEPA, said Michael Hitt, the organization’s vice president and legal counsel.
While the nonprofit managed to get SBA to back a couple of projects, it’s not a pattern, he said.
Meanwhile, the agency has yet to say which environmental documents applicants need to provide, Hitt said. The lack of information has led his organization to shy away from advising clients on the expected costs and time frame for completing the loan process, he added.
And while the dairy industry makes up only 10 percent of the nonprofit’s portfolio, it’s an important piece; the organization has helped secure nearly $285 million for 80 producers over the last 20 years.
“We don’t want to actively market a program that we’re not comfortable concluding,” Hitt said. “That is dangerous in the short term, and we can lose credibility with banks.”
Dave Coggins, an agricultural lender at Investors Community Bank in Wisconsin, said five of the six projects his bank is financing with SBA have been in limbo for more than a year. Without the assurance that their loan rates are locked in, those farmers are finding it hard to plan ahead.
“The most frustrating part is that there is no predictability,” Coggins said, noting that the costs of the environmental assessments, which farmers have to pay, could go up after SBA finishes its review. “I hope that in the end it will still be a viable program for animal agriculture and that it isn’t priced out of our marketplace.”
While organizations such as Coggins’ and Hitt’s are trying to impress upon the SBA that Wisconsin already has stringent environmental standards for CAFOs, the agency seems to be undervaluing those standards, they say.
“There’s a lot going on regarding agriculture and the environment, and I think this is a program that is getting unnecessarily caught in the crossfire,” Coggins said.
Coggins said his bank hasn’t had difficulty obtaining guaranteed loans from the FSA, although that could change as a result of a final rule the agency published in August that made minor changes to its NEPA regulations. He and his colleagues plan to meet with the FSA at the end of the month to go over implementation.
But in New York, the FSA has been extremely cautious about guaranteeing large loans to dairy farms because of environmental concerns, said Edward Coates, regional agriculture banking manager for NBT Bank in Norwich, N.Y.
When his bank applied for the agency’s backing to reduce its risk on a $1 million loan for a 1,000-cow family farm, what would typically take 30 days dragged out for eight months — and cost the farm $400,000 in lost revenue — as the FSA conducted its own review of the farm’s waste-management plan, Coates said. In the past, the agency has relied on documents showing the farm is in compliance with the state’s Department of Environmental Conservation nutrient management requirements, he said.
“I have had discussions with regional credit officers, and the stories are virtually identical,” Coates said, noting that there hasn’t been any trouble with smaller projects. “We’ll continue to have conversations with FSA to see if there can be more consistency so lenders and applicants know what they need to do and not be blindsided.”
A similar situation is playing out in Arkansas, where farmers trying to get into the poultry business are struggling to get loan guarantees, especially in the northeastern part of the state, where processor Peco Foods recently built a new plant, said Travis Justice, the state Farm Bureau’s chief economist and director of commodity and regulatory affairs.
“The agencies are caught between an industry ripe for expansion and those concerned about environment, so farmers, bankers and poultry companies are all in a quagmire trying to navigate the rules of the game,” he said.
http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-agriculture/2016/10/cafo-limbo-over-loan-approval-slowdown-216968
Slow loans over green woes put CAFOs in limbo
By Catherine Boudreau
10/20/2016 05:00 AM EDT
The Department of Agriculture's Farm Service Agency, too, is taking longer to approve guaranteed farm loans for new construction due to stricter environmental scrutiny, lenders say, although an agency spokesman said its environmental assessment process hasn't changed as a result of the lawsuit, with the exception of that one Arkansas case.
"This lack of clarity from the SBA is effectively rendering a potentially valuable economic development tool unavailable to dairy operations," costing about $100 million in potential agribusiness investment in Wisconsin, the state's congressional delegation said in a letter this summer asking the agency to fix the situation. The lawmakers added that while they understand the need to protect natural resources, the SBA must outline its expectations on how loan applicants can comply with federal regulations.
The agency asserts that it continues to make loans to farmers and ranchers, but the process "may take a bit longer now as we continue to thoroughly review and ensure environmental compliance," spokesman Terry Sutherland said.
Because major farm construction projects are capital intensive and often cost more than the $1.39 million cap FSA places on both direct and guaranteed loans, farmers can use SBA programs to make up the difference. Commercial and Farm Credit System bankers often seek these government-backed loans to reduce their risk and offer farmers long-term loans at lower fixed rates.
The complaint also said the FSA's evaluation was flawed because, for example, it didn't mention the Buffalo National River and its tributary, Big Creek, even though nine fields where manure is spread border the tributary.
A federal judge agreed, ordering the agencies to conduct a joint environmental assessment. Although the administration again found that the hog farm would have "no significant impact" on the environment, the lawsuit forced the SBA to update its more than 30-year-old environmental policy, which the agency hadn't been applying to loans, to determine what environmental evaluations should entail.
In a letter to Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.) in August, the SBA said it was reviewing its mandate under NEPA and "giving special attention to large dollar loans" to livestock operations, especially those of $2 million or more.
The American Bankers Association, in letters to both the SBA and FSA this month, characterized the situation as a moratorium on lending to livestock facilities based on feedback from its members. The industry group also said the EPA's Waters of the U.S. final rule, which is being challenged in court by scores of states and agricultural industry groups, is partly to blame for the administration's display of caution.
In a letter last week to Steve Apodaca, ABA's senior vice president of agricultural and rural banking, FSA Administrator Val Dolcini said "it is unfortunate that some of our lender partners have received inaccurate information," adding that FSA's normal environmental compliance process can take time, but it should not be confused with a moratorium. He also noted that the agency's guaranteed loan activity reached an all-time high in fiscal 2016, totaling nearly $4 billion dollars, although that figure reflects financing for all types of farm operations, not just the livestock sector.
The Agriculture Department also said USDA-required environmental assessments are in a borrower's best interest and help them to avoid headaches down the line.
"The situation in Arkansas is a case in point," said Matt Herrick, the department's director of communications. "The operator's loan was held up for years in litigation. We want to get credit to those who qualify as expeditiously as possible and prevent headaches down the line; following the rules when an assessment is necessary is part of that process."
For its part, the SBA more than doubled the value of the general small business loans it guaranteed to CAFOs from fiscal years 2012-15, which went from $224 million to more than $652 million, the agency's figures show. But that amount dropped to about $604 million in fiscal 2016.
Over that same period, the SBA's real estate and equipment loans to dairy and livestock farms fell from slightly more than $21 million to less than $13 million, with the exception of fiscal 2015, which saw a spike to about $25 million, the agency said.
Wisconsin Business Development, based in Madison, has been in a "holding pattern" for about a year in a half while the agency tries to "find a balance" between its role as lender and its requirements under NEPA, said Michael Hitt, the organization's vice president and legal counsel.
While the nonprofit managed to get SBA to back a couple of projects, it's not a pattern, he said.
And while the dairy industry makes up only 10 percent of the nonprofit's portfolio, it's an important piece; the organization has helped secure nearly $285 million for 80 producers over the last 20 years.
"We don't want to actively market a program that we're not comfortable concluding," Hitt said. "That is dangerous in the short term, and we can lose credibility with banks."
"The most frustrating part is that there is no predictability," Coggins said, noting that the costs of the environmental assessments, which farmers have to pay, could go up after SBA finishes its review. "I hope that in the end it will still be a viable program for animal agriculture and that it isn't priced out of our marketplace."
While organizations such as Coggins' and Hitt's are trying to impress upon the SBA that Wisconsin already has stringent environmental standards for CAFOs, the agency seems to be undervaluing those standards, they say.
"There's a lot going on regarding agriculture and the environment, and I think this is a program that is getting unnecessarily caught in the crossfire," Coggins said.
Coggins said his bank hasn't had difficulty obtaining guaranteed loans from the FSA, although that could change as a result of a final rule the agency published in August that made minor changes to its NEPA regulations. He and his colleagues plan to meet with the FSA at the end of the month to go over implementation.
When his bank applied for the agency's backing to reduce its risk on a $1 million loan for a 1,000-cow family farm, what would typically take 30 days dragged out for eight months — and cost the farm $400,000 in lost revenue — as the FSA conducted its own review of the farm's waste-management plan, Coates said. In the past, the agency has relied on documents showing the farm is in compliance with the state's Department of Environmental Conservation nutrient management requirements, he said.
"I have had discussions with regional credit officers, and the stories are virtually identical," Coates said, noting that there hasn't been any trouble with smaller projects. "We'll continue to have conversations with FSA to see if there can be more consistency so lenders and applicants know what they need to do and not be blindsided."
A similar situation is playing out in Arkansas, where farmers trying to get into the poultry business are struggling to get loan guarantees, especially in the northeastern part of the state, where processor Peco Foods recently built a new plant, said Travis Justice, the state Farm Bureau's chief economist and director of commodity and regulatory affairs.
"The agencies are caught between an industry ripe for expansion and those concerned about environment, so farmers, bankers and poultry companies are all in a quagmire trying to navigate the rules of the game," he said.
TOM PHILPOTT
Use link above to read article with photos
By Brenda Blagg
Posted: October 5, 2016 at 1 a.m.
If you think of the Buffalo National River, the image of soaring bluffs rising over free-flowing, pristine water immediately comes to mind.
That's been the case for generations in these Ozark Mountains where the river cuts through rugged wilderness and is so beloved that it was named America's first national river in 1972.
That image, if not the river itself, has been sullied in more recent years amid serious concern for the river's water quality.
The views are as striking as ever beneath those bluffs, enough to draw millions of visitors to the region. Last year, 1.4 million came and the Buffalo remains a major tourism attraction.
Yet, thick ropes of algae, enough to stop a canoe, have been visible in the river.
Presence of the algae suggests high levels of nutrients in the water. Such issues have been among the concerns of the river's advocates, who worry the area's porous karst terrain could be contaminated by nearby development, such as a controversial hog farm near Mount Judea.
Indeed, much of the concern has resulted from the permitting of that industrial hog farm on a nearby tributary to the Buffalo. The permitting prompted public outcry and legal action from those who continue the fight to protect the river.
Of course, environmentalists and outdoor enthusiasts have been stirred to action. But this controversy has reached much more deeply into the Arkansas psyche. Last week, Gov. Asa Hutchinson said he has received as many letters from constituents regarding the Buffalo River as he has for any issue.
"That says something," he said.
Hutchinson made the remark as he named a committee of state agency representatives to create a watershed management plan for the Buffalo.
The intent is to prevent complaints, not just respond to them.
The Arkansas Natural Resources Commission and the state departments of Environmental Quality, Health, Parks and Tourism, and Agriculture will be involved. Collectively, they'll make up the Beautiful Buffalo River Action Committee and their goal will reportedly be to protect the watershed proactively.
They'll have no new regulatory power over development but can guide development and assist landowners in securing grants to implement protective measures.
The committee is supposed to meet quarterly and provide annual reports to the governor, the first of which will be due Jan. 31, 2018.
So the first reactions to its creation are naturally of the wait-and-see variety, especially from some of those who've been most involved in fighting the hog farm. Those are the people who still provide the most intense eyes on the operation, largely through the Buffalo River Watershed Alliance. The group formed in 2013 to fight C&H Hog Farms.
The state has since hired researchers from the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture to monitor the hog farm and its surrounding area continuously. Most recently, the state funded a drilling project to detect any leakage from a waste pond. That report is due by the end of the year.
Creation of the committee is at least an acknowledgement by the governor that protection of the river and its watershed is a priority for many Arkansans.
Time will tell how much more this effort to coordinate state agencies will actually mean.
The president of the watershed alliance, Gordon Watkins of Jasper, called the committee's creation a "good step," but he also encouraged public input to the process.
Watkins specifically mentioned the need for limits on nutrient levels. He noted that poultry farmers in the Illinois River watershed must have nutrient management plans to address waste runoff.
In a subsequent statement, the Buffalo River Watershed Alliance went further in its reaction:
"For this to be viewed as more than a public relations initiative, we would expect to see actual good faith steps taken by the governor's office and (Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality) to identify and eliminate the obvious risks to the Buffalo."
The alliance wants the governor's office to add a review of permitting processes, specifically for operations in karst geology where groundwater can flow swiftly.
It mentioned making a state moratorium on medium and large commercial animal feeding operations permanent. And, of course, the organization suggested an initiative to reduce nutrients from all nearby activities from polluting the Buffalo.
Obviously, stakeholder support for the governor's initiative is, at best, cautious.
The governor and this committee of agencies have their work cut out for them -- not just to create a watershed management plan but also to persuade Arkansans that the state really will protect the Buffalo.
Commentary on 10/05/2016
By Lydia Mulvany and Jen Skerritt Bloomberg New
Posted: October 4, 2016 at 2:05 a.m.
Ham, bacon, ribs, pork loins -- if it has to do with pigs, prices are in the doldrums.
Hog futures were the worst investment in commodities recently ended third quarter and in the past year. That's because there are simply too many pigs. They're so numerous these days that slaughterhouses will have to add shifts and operate on Saturdays in November and December to process them all into food, according to Will Sawyer, an Atlanta-based vice president for Rabobank International.
The oversupply comes at a time of tepid export demand. China, which more than doubled U.S. pork purchases in the first half of the year, has now put the brakes on buying. Devaluation of the peso also threatens shipments to Mexico, the destination for 40 percent of U.S. hams. Wholesale prices for pork cuts such as ham and ribs are the lowest for this time of year since 2009. Hedge funds are signaling the meat will probably stay cheap, as speculators cut their bets on a hogs rally in four of the past five weeks.
"We have a black cloud over the market as a whole," Dustin Guy, a broker at PCI Advisory Services Inc. in Waucoma, Iowa, said by phone. "The slaughter numbers have scared people from going long in the market."
Hog futures for December settlement on Friday fell 6.4 percent to 43.98 cents a pound on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. The contract fell 32 percent last quarter. It was the biggest decline in the Bloomberg Commodity Index of 22 raw materials, which lost 3.9 percent.
Futures could fall to as low as 40 cents, Guy said. Prices haven't been seen that low since 2002.
Pork output surged 10 percent in August to 2.15 billion pounds, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data released Sept. 22. The trend is expected to continue as weekly figures show that the number of slaughtered animals has consistently climbed in September from a year earlier. Hog supplies typically peak in the fourth quarter, which means even more animals are coming. U.S. production of the meat this year is forecast to be the largest ever.
"We could have not just a record but an obscene record supply," Rich Nelson, chief strategist at Allendale Inc. in McHenry, Ill., said by telephone.
As of Sept. 1, the U.S. hog herd rose 2.4 percent from a year earlier to 70.85 million head, according to a USDA report released Friday. That's the highest ever for the month in data that goes back to 1866. Analysts in a Bloomberg survey expected a gain of 1.2 percent.
Producers expanded after cheap grain made it easier to fatten up pigs -- the average hog weight is almost 211 pounds, about 4 pounds more than the 10-year average. At the same time, there were expectations that demand would stay robust in China, the world's biggest pork-consuming nation, after the country's hog farmers culled herds. While exports in some weeks during April and May exceeded 5,500 tons, they sank below 1,100 tons in mid-September, USDA data show.
The supply glut is a boon for consumers. Wholesale prices for hams, pork bellies, ribs and loins are all at the lowest in seven years for this time of year, and costs in grocery stores are reflecting declines. Pork is leading the way in meat deflation, which is occurring as the cattle, hog and chicken industries expand simultaneously. The USDA cut its forecast for 2016 pork prices Sept. 23, forecasting a drop of as much as 5.5 percent from last year.
Even though pork is cheap, hogs are cheaper, meaning that packers are still making money -- margins have been profitable since July 2015. Earlier this month, margins were $52.20 a head, the highest in at least three years, according to HedgersEdge data.
Information for this article was contributed by Megan Durisin of Bloomberg News.
Business on 10/04/2016
It would be wrong not to commend Gov. Asa Hutchinson for his new plan whereby five state agencies comprising the "Beautiful Buffalo River Action Committee" will create a watershed management plan to help Arkansas secure funding for conservation projects within the environmentally fragile Buffalo National River watershed.
The "Beautiful Buffalo" and "action" parts are spot on. Wish it had been a factor four years ago.
Look, I'm for anything meaningful the governor can do to keep our precious national river in God's Country from becoming needlessly contaminated at the expense of tourism and recreation for so many thousands.
But as for yet another political committee, I've discovered a pattern over years as a journalist. When many in high elected office sense dissension and displeasure among the populace on important matters, they form a committee to file reports and hold hearings. Sure hope this latest one with such a pleasant name isn't more of the same ol' politically expedient, do-nothing dodge designed to deflect.
The committee will consist of the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission and the state departments of Environmental Quality (cough), Health, Parks and Tourism, and Agriculture.
I wonder, with widespread frustration over the state wrongheadedly permitting C&H Hog Farms in this sacred watershed, why no Farm Bureau or Pork Producers on the action committee? How can that be when these special interests are so outspoken in defense of the factory and generous politically?
Reporter Emily Walkenhorst writes that Hutchinson said his Beautiful Buffalo Committee, assisted by a $107,000 grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, will retain an engineer to help analyze data and develop a plan to protect the Buffalo. I already have a foolproof plan for free. I'll discuss a few paragraphs down.
The Department of Environmental Quality's latest director, Becky Keogh, said the new committee's actions will include public meetings and input from stakeholders. Meetings and input! Wow!
Many Arkansans closely watching how the governor and this state agency deal with the potential pollution of the Buffalo from waste consider themselves the ultimate major stakeholders, as do many thousands of others across America who annually come to spend millions of dollars enjoying the Buffalo.
Hutchinson acknowledges as much when he says he's received as many comments about the Buffalo from constituents as on any other topic. "The Buffalo River is an extraordinary national river that we are blessed to have here in Arkansas," he said.
I'm also strongly assuming when Hutchinson refers to receiving comments about the Buffalo he really means comments about this swine factory the Department of Environmental Quality approved for one Newton County family to set up and operate in the worst possible environmental location in Arkansas.
Keogh reassured prospective swine factories and others this new watershed protection plan won't regulate development. Instead, it will provide a guide for development and, as Walkenhorst wrote, "a catalyst for obtaining additional grants for landowners in the watershed who want to implement protective measures."
Finally, Hutchison's memorandum says his committee will identify projects that can be achieved immediately. Toward that end, I offer a sincere suggestion for one project.
Have this potential environmental and economic catastrophe that neither Hutchinson nor Keogh created (and which Hutchinson's predecessor calls his biggest regret) immediately closed. Then relocate the factory to an environmentally appropriate location. Make the C&H owners whole financially. Then let us, as stewards of such an inspiring spiritual and physical gift, begin vigilantly protecting this beautiful asset that draws up to 1.5 million visitors a year.
By Emily Walkenhorst
Posted: October 1, 2016 at 3:35 a.m. Updated: October 1, 2016 at 3:35 a.m.
Five state agencies will participate in the creation of a watershed management plan for the Buffalo National River with a goal of helping the state leverage funding for conservation projects in the watershed, Gov. Asa Hutchinson announced Friday.
The Arkansas Natural Resources Commission and the state departments of Environmental Quality, Health, Parks and Tourism, and Agriculture will make up the Beautiful Buffalo River Action Committee.
That committee, with the help of a $107,000 grant from the Environmental Protection Agency, will hire an engineer to assist in analyzing data and developing a plan to protect the Buffalo River, Environmental Quality Department Director Becky Keogh said. The process will include public meetings and input from stakeholders.
The watershed protection plan will not regulate development. It will be a guide for development and a catalyst for obtaining additional grants for landowners in the watershed who want to implement protective measures, Keogh said.
The committee also will identify projects that can be done immediately, according to an accompanying memorandum issued by Hutchinson.
The committee will meet quarterly and provide recommendations on actions and annual reports to the governor. The first report will be due Jan. 31, 2018.
A watershed is the area from which materials can drain into a body of water.
Watershed management plans exist for other major bodies of water in Arkansas -- the Illinois River, Beaver Lake and Lake Maumelle, for example -- and have been developed by a variety of groups. In Pulaski County, aspects of the Lake Maumelle watershed management plan became regulatory after the Quorum Court adopted them into a zoning code for the portion of the watershed that was in the county.
"The Buffalo River is an extraordinary national river that we are blessed to have here in Arkansas," Hutchinson said Friday morning at a news conference.
The governor said the formation of a plan would be a proactive measure to protect the Buffalo and prevent complaints, not just respond to them. He said he's received as many letters from constituents regarding the Buffalo River as he has for any other issue.
"That says something," Hutchinson said.
Gordon Watkins, a Jasper resident and president of the Buffalo River Watershed Alliance, said the creation of the committee was "a good step."
Watkins said he hopes the group will consider and use public input, but he was given "a little bit of pause" to find out the watershed protection plan would not be a regulatory document.
Watkins said he'd like to see limits on nutrient levels in the river, such as those that exist in the Illinois River watershed, where poultry farmers are required by law to have nutrient management plans.
Watkins said he'd also like to see the karst terrain near the Buffalo factored in when the Environmental Quality Department considers permit applications in the region. The department and opponents of a large industrial hog farm in the watershed have been at odds over whether the land where C&H Hog Farms was permitted is karst -- a porous landscape with caves, springs and aquifers.
The Buffalo River Watershed Alliance was formed in 2013 to oppose the operation of C&H, and other groups and private citizens across Arkansas have voiced concern about the potential of a hog farm to pollute the Buffalo via open manure ponds.
They've raised concerns in 2016 about pollution levels in some tributaries of the river and about a study conducted in 2015 that showed higher-than-expected moisture levels below one of the manure ponds.
Keogh said the Buffalo River meets the standards for an Extraordinary Resource Water, which the EPA defines as a body "characterized by scenic beauty, aesthetics, scientific values, broad scope recreation potential and intangible social values." A few dozen bodies of water in Arkansas are considered Extraordinary Resource Waters.
Hutchinson noted Friday that the state has hired researchers from the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture to continuously monitor the hog farm and its surrounding area. The state also recently funded a drilling project to detect whether one of the manure ponds had been leaking. The project wrapped up Monday, and a report is expected by the end of the year, Keogh said Friday.
In 1972, 135 miles of the 150-mile Buffalo River became the country's first national river at the urging of U.S. Rep. John Paul Hammerschmidt and U.S. Sens. J. William Fulbright and John McClellan, all of Arkansas. Some area residents objected to selling land to the federal government and were wary of the presence of a national park.
Since early 2013, many people across Arkansas, including some watershed residents, have objected to the permitting of C&H Hog Farms on one of the river's tributaries.
C&H, near Mount Judea in Newton County, sits on Big Creek about 6 miles from where it converges with the Buffalo River. It is the only federally classified large hog farm in the river's watershed and is permitted to house up to 6,000 piglets and 2,503 sows.
The Buffalo River had 1.46 million visitors last year, the third-highest total since it became a national river and the highest since a record count of 1.55 million in 2009.
Metro on 10/01/2016