Environmental group slams Iowa Farm Bureau bid to "harass and intimidate"

by: desmoinesdem

Fri Aug 12, 2011 at 18:23:01 PM PDT

Iowa governor stacks environmental commission with agribusiness advocates

by: desmoinesdem

Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 06:00:00 AM PST

Iowa has notoriously poor water quality. Not only are there more than 400 "impaired waters" in the state, the Des Moines Water Works has the largest nitrate removal system in the world, because "the Raccoon River has the highest average nitrate concentration of any of the 42 largest tributaries in the Mississippi River Basin." Even so, the Water Works sometimes struggles to handle high levels of blue-green algae (cyanobacteria) in the Raccoon River, forcing the water treatment facility to draw from a secondary source. Iowa watersheds are also a major contributor to the "dead zone" in the Gulf of Mexico, and the nutrients from "Nitrogen and phosphorus pollution from commercial fertilizers and animal manure from farmland were the biggest contributing sources" of the excess nutrients that cause the dead zone.  

Despite those facts, Iowa Governor Terry Branstad (R) made clear throughout last year's campaign that he believes the state Department of Natural Resources takes too tough a stand in enforcing pollution rules. His appointee to run the DNR is a former head of the Iowa Association for Business and Industry and a partner in a law firm that has represented the Iowa Farm Bureau as well as corporations like Monsanto. Branstad is now considering moving all water quality and monitoring programs, as well as Clean Water Act compliance, from the DNR to the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship. I discussed that idea at more length here.

On March 2 Branstad announced more than 200 appointments to state boards and commissions, including four members of the state Environmental Protection Commission: Dolores Mertz, Brent Rastetter, Eugene Ver Steeg, and Mary Boote. All four have close ties to agribusiness interests. Details are after the jump.

Another study finds link between atrazine and birth defects

by: desmoinesdem

Thu Feb 11, 2010 at 05:18:29 AM PST

Living near farms that use the weed killer atrazine may up the risk of a rare birth defect, according to a study presented this past Friday [February 5] at the annual meeting of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine in Chicago.

About 1 in 5000 babies born in the U.S. each year suffers from gastroschisis, in which part of the intestines bulges through a separation in the belly, according to the March of Dimes. The rate of gastroschisis has risen 2- to 4-fold over the last three decades, according to Dr. Sarah Waller, of the University of Washington, Seattle, and colleagues. [...]

The researchers looked at more than 4,400 birth certificates from 1987-2006 - including more than 800 cases of gastroschisis -- and U.S. Geological Survey databases of agricultural spraying between 2001 and 2006.

Using Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards to define high chemical exposure levels in surface water, they found that the closer a mother lived to a site of high surface water contamination by atrazine, the more likely she was to deliver an infant with gastroschisis.

The birth defect occurred more often among infants who lived less than 25 km (about 15 miles) from one of these sites, and it occurred more often among babies conceived between March and May, when agricultural spraying is common.

Follow me after the jump for more.

Iowans, please contact legislators on bad CAFO pollution bill

by: desmoinesdem

Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 07:22:32 AM PST

[Department of Natural Resources] has proposed rules that would require existing facilities need to have at least 100 days of storage, in order to qualify for an emergency exemption for winter application because of full storage structures.  But HF 2324 exempts confinement feeding operations constructed before July 1, 2009 from this rule.  Specifically the bill states:

"A confinement feeding operation constructed before July 1, 2009, and not expanded after that date is not required to construct or expand a manure storage structure to comply with this section."  

Lack of adequate manure storage during winter months is a major cause of water pollution in Iowa.  Without adequate storage, farmers apply the manure to frozen or snow-covered farm fields, risking run-off into nearby streams at the first thaw or rain.

More details and contact information are after the jump.

Filthy Power Plant Sued!

by: Jill Richardson

Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 08:49:56 AM PST

Her column is about a fight against a local coal-fired power plant that got grandfathered in by the Clean Air Act in 1970 and to this day has not cleaned up its act. As Lori notes, "even though they have a more lax set of federal emission standards with which to comply, a recent examination of the plant's own records revealed hundreds of violations - 286 during 2005-2008 and the first three quarters of 2009." So a conservation group took them to court over it.

She ends by saying:

The stakeholders in this case are more than just the residents of Salem. While tax revenue stays within city limits, air pollution only listens to the wind. The plant's coal waste once contaminated drinking water for three communities, and mercury from the plant is ingested by the fish we eat. Everyone in the surrounding communities has a stake in this power plant and the outcome of this lawsuit.

We must no longer allow Dominion [the power company] to hijack our health for profit - they must be held accountable. This lawsuit will test in the courts the ability of the plant owners to ignore public health and sidestep federal regulations. In fact, they may choose to close the plant rather than comply. The city of Salem and its neighbors will need to plan for this eventuality and the reuse of this valuable property. Let us work together with our neighbors towards the day when a clean, sustainable use for that special place will replace this dirty, poisonous plant and provide real value to Salem and the surrounding communities.

About that pig odor earmark

by: desmoinesdem

Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 06:30:00 AM PDT

Although I think concerns about earmarks are exaggerated, I do want to examine the origin of Senator Tom Harkin's $1.8 million earmark for studying odors from large hog confinements (CAFOs) in Iowa. It has become the poster child for Republican taunts about useless earmarks, prompting Harkin to defend himself (see here and here).

Jill posted about this earlier in the week, noting that Harkin's earmark is for research on how to reduce the smell and nuisance from CAFOs. I completely agree with her point that CAFOs (not taxpayers) should fund this kind of research.

I wanted to give the La Vida Locavore community more background on the odor study research that the federal government will fund at Iowa State University. I'm sorry to say that I agree with those who say this research is part of a stalling strategy by CAFOs.

Harkin's earmark has its roots in unfortunate decisions that Iowa Democratic leaders made last year--with the enthusiastic support of statehouse Republicans and corporate ag groups. If you care to read more, follow me into the Iowa weeds after the jump.

Bush's parting gifts, part 1

by: desmoinesdem

Tue Nov 11, 2008 at 15:51:44 PM PST

This comes from the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition's e-mail newsletter:

EPA Administrator Signs Off on Final CAFO Rule:  Last Friday, as a "Halloween trick" for the environment and public health, EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson signed a revised Clean Water Act final regulation for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) permits and effluent limitations.  EPA revised the CAFO regulations in response to legal challenges to a 2003 CAFO final regulation, brought in the case Waterkeeper Alliance Inc. v. EPA by both environmental organizations and the CAFO sector.  

The revision opens a gaping hole in the 2003 regulation by allowing a CAFO, no matter how large, to self-certify that the CAFO does not "intend" to discharge to the waters of the U.S.   EPA ignored the recommendation of the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals to establish a regulatory presumption that large-scale CAFOs discharge pollutants.  The presumption would have required that a large-scale CAFO demonstrate to regulatory authorities that it is designed and can be operated to avoid all discharges of regulated pollutants.  

EPA also rejected making improvements in technology that reduce harmful bacteria and other pathogens that threaten public health, a problem aggravated by the development of antibiotic resistant pathogens in CAFOs.  The revised rule does include one improvement required in Waterkeeper -- that a CAFO nutrient management plan must be included in a Clean Water Act permit for the CAFO and made available for public review and comment.

EPA is expected publish the revised final regulation in the Federal Register before the end of November. In the meantime, a copy of the unofficial version of the revised regulation is posted on the EPA website. You can also register on the website for a November 19 EPA webcast about the revised CAFO regulation.

SAC will be urging the new Administration to revisit this rulemaking on an expedited basis.

Why am I not surprised that industrial ag profits are a higher priority than the environment and public health?

I hope that the Obama administration will put this on the list of actions to be overturned.  

Rural development "got the very short end of the stick" in Farm Bill

by: desmoinesdem

Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 09:17:48 AM PDT

I learned today from the Public News Service that Jon Bailey of the Center for Rural Affairs

has done an analysis of the 2008 Farm Bill, and found 233 times more spending on commodity subsidies than on rural development.

"Initiatives that would help start businesses, create jobs, make communities attractive places for people to relocate to, were left out of the farm bill."

In contrast, Bailey notes, the Farm Bill allocates $35 billion for commodity subsidies, which makes the amount for revitalizing rural areas seem paltry.

"There are only three programs totaling $150 million for rural development in the final Farm Bill. Rural development got the very short end of the stick."

Bailey noted that the 2002 Farm Bill included "more than $1 billion in mandatory spending for rural development programs."

If you go to this page at the Center for Rural Affairs, you can find a link to a pdf version of the full report.

As much as I admire Senator Tom Harkin, I was very disappointed by how the Farm Bill (officially known as the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008) turned out. I have no idea what can be done to get Congress to redirect government funding toward sustainable farming practices and programs that improve the quality of life in rural areas.

Meanwhile, Susan Heathcote, the water program director of the Iowa Environmental Council and a member of the state Environmental Protection Commission, wrote a good guest editorial for the Des Moines Register about the need for better monitoring of drinking-water sources.

She mentioned two recent incidents of conventional farming polluting drinking water in the Des Moines area. Farms 80 miles upstream contributed to high ammonia levels found in the Des Moines and Raccoon Rivers last spring, and a cyanobacteria "algae bloom" prompted the Des Moines Water Works to stop drawing from the Raccoon River in August.

End Iowa's "don't ask, don't tell" approach to water quality

by: desmoinesdem

Mon Sep 29, 2008 at 14:16:02 PM PDT

High levels of blue-green algae (cyanobacteria) in the Raccoon River forced the Des Moines Water Works to switch to a secondary source in August.

You would think that a problem affecting the state's largest water treatment facility would grab the attention of the state Department of Natural Resources. The U.S. Department of Interior's official definition of "natural resources" mentions "Land, fish, wildlife, biota, air, water, ground water, drinking water supplies and other such resources belonging to, managed by, held in trust by, appertaining to, or otherwise controlled by the U.S., any state or local government [...]."

But you would be wrong, because the Iowa DNR didn't bother to look into what caused the Raccoon River's elevated levels of cyanobacteria.  

Corporate ag ally resigns from Iowa environmental commission

by: desmoinesdem

Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 17:42:20 PM PDT

Sometimes one small step against confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) leads to another.

Over at Iowa Independent, Jason Hancock reports that

A member of the state's Environmental Protection Commission who has been labeled by critics as "pro-factory farms" has stepped down.

Ralph Klemme, a former Republican state representative from LeMars, resigned from the nine-person oversight panel, which is part of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, late last week. He told the Coalition to Support Iowa's Farmers that the commission's "increasing tilt against agriculture" was his main reason to step down.

The commission's recent vote to reject permits for two hog confinements in Dallas County appears to have been a major factor in Klemme's decision.

I was against Klemme's appointment to this commission in 2007 because of his involvement with corporate agriculture groups.

My suspicions were warranted. In a statement welcoming Klemme's resignation, Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement recounted his record of looking out for agribusiness instead of the environment:

Klemme voted in May to approve a large hog factory in Greene County that was overwhelmingly opposed by local residents, county officials and local business leaders. He also voted against a common-sense rule that would have limited the amount of manure that factory farm owners could be spread on soybean crops.

Governor Chet Culver should replace Klemme with someone committed to protecting the environment. Otherwise why call it an Environmental Protection Commission?

I am hopeful because several of Culver's appointments to this body have been quite good.

On the other hand, I wouldn't underestimate the clout of corporate agriculture groups that will lobby the governor to replace Klemme with a person who is equally sympathetic to their interests. We saw this summer that agriculture trumped the environment on the task forces associated with the Rebuild Iowa Commission.

Whoever takes Klemme's place on the Environmental Protection Commission, I view his resignation as a healthy sign. The majority of commission members are not willing to look the other way regarding the environmental impacts of CAFOs.

Iowa commission takes one small step against CAFOs

by: desmoinesdem

Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 16:09:14 PM PDT

Iowa's legislature and state agencies have been notorious for doing nothing to address huge pollution problems stemming from confined-animal feeding operations (CAFOs).

But some big news came out of the Iowa Environmental Protection Commission today:

The state Environmental Protection Commission today rejected previously approved permits for two large hog confinements in Dallas County.

The surprise move came after a two-hour meeting in Urbandale at which commissioners said rules drawn up to dictate approval of large-scale confinement permits leave out important environmental considerations and neighbors' quality-of-life concerns.

"There are battle lines being drawn on this, and it creates a political situation that the Legislature cannot ignore," commission chairman Henry Marquard said.

Only a handful of permits have been denied in Iowa, but rarely has one been turned down after it met approval from the Department of Natural Resources and passed a complicated scoring system adopted by counties, including Dallas.

The nine-member commission voted to block these permits on a strong 6-2 vote. I wouldn't be surprised if the matter ends up in court, however.

Noneed4thneed wrote about the controversy over the new Dallas County CAFOs in late July:

The proposed hog confinements would have a total of 7,440 hogs in rural Dallas County, which is the fastest growing county in the state. These confinements will produce as much waste as a town of 30,000 people and it will go untreated.

Earlier this month, Dallas County Supervisors voted against allowing these proposed hog confinements, but in reality there isn't much the local people can do about the hog confinements that will be owned by the out of state company, Cargill.

We need federal legislation to make CAFOs pay for the harm they cause, because our state legislature has shown itself to be unwilling to act to protect air and water quality in Iowa.

But in the absence of federal action, a state law giving counties "local control" (agricultural zoning rights) would at least offer some protection. Some county supervisors would rubber-stamp every proposed CAFO, but others would follow the lead of the Dallas County supervisors.

For all I know, Cargill will sue to reinstate their permits to open these hog confinements. But however this story ends, it's good to see the majority of the Environmental Protection Commission's members doing something to protect the environment.

UPDATE: I learned from the online newsletter of Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement that the Iowa Department of Natural Resources recently denied a permit for a different proposed CAFO.

Because of the efforts of CCI members and other local residents, the DNR recently denied a 4,900-head hog factory proposed for southern Appanoose County. The permit application did not meet legal requirements, nor did their master matrix pass muster. Although the applicant for this proposed confinement is a local resident, the 4,900 hogs would have been owned by Cargill. Cargill, one of the largest privately-held corporations in the world, has been behind a number of proposed factory farms around the state, including two proposed 7,440-head hog factories in northwest Dallas County.