Confronting the Environmental Irresponsibility of the Dairy Industry

On December 1, the Wisconsin Dairy Business Association held their annual meeting in Madison, an event that was met by protestors attempting to raise the public’s level of concern for the environmental effects of large industrial animal feeding operations.  The Wisconsin DBA is a private lobbying entity representing the interests of the dairy industry, with board members who own and operate related businesses within the state. 

 

The protestors were particularly driven by a memorandum of understanding between the private DBA, and the public agencies Department of Natural Resources and Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection.  The memorandum was to be unveiled at the annual meeting held at the Concourse hotel.  The protestors believe that this gives DBA members an unfair foothold with public affairs officials based upon their lobbying power, despite the fact that the pure number of member operations makes them disproportionately small in comparison to their influence.

 

“The issue here is that there are memorandums of understanding between the dairy business association with the DNR and the Department of Agriculture,” said Edie Ehlert of the Crawford Stewardship Project of Crawford Country, Wisconsin.  “We don’t think that a corporate based organization has any business meddling with our state agencies.  It’s the people who are supposed to be represented by our agencies, not large corporate interests.”

 

The economic power of the Wisconsin dairy industry is largely centered on Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), which are defined as farms with 1,000 or more animal units.  CAFOs are characterized by confining a large numbers of animals of the same species in relatively small areas, raising serious concerns about the quality of life of the animals.  The intensive confinement practices that are common in CAFOs so severely restrict movement and natural behaviors that the animal may not be able to turn around or walk at all.

 

Statistics issued by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources show that there are currently 165 CAFOs operating by permit in the state.  Within the state, these operations are required to have a Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit issued by the Department of Natural Resources, which are meant to ensure that all CAFOs manage their manure in an environmentally acceptable manner.  Proper manure management is critical given the amount of waste produced by these large farms.  In many cases, the waste is eliminated through liquid systems and stored in open pit lagoons, creating a potential for untreated waste polluting public groundwater. 

 

“We’re concerned about a number of issues, including water quality, especially from Vernon and Crawford County where many of us are from,” said Matt Urch, who was also in attendance at the protest.  Urch owns and operates a family farm specializing in grass-fed beef.  “We have very fragile carse topography, and easily contaminated water.  We’re worried about our air quality, and unlike family farms CAFOs can create serious air quality standards.”

 

 

With the struggling economy, the Wisconsin dairy industry has experienced a significant economic downturn, forcing the DBA to address the business conditions that it operates within.  In a press release dated October 23, DBA President Jerry Meissner addressed the possibility of new state and federal regulations for the industry, and their potential to negatively affect the industry further.

“We support the ‘zero discharge’ standard that all permitted dairy facilities must meet to protect Wisconsin’s precious water resources,” says Meissner.  “However, we believe it’s time to pause from this race to over-regulate and truly understand the science and impact of our existing regulations before adding more.  It seems to be ‘open season’ for adding new regulations to dairy farmers and they come with enormous costs.”

 

The DBA press release cites numerous regulations that are viewed as being in conflict with the development or expansion of dairy operations.  The first two, listed here, both relate to regulations based upon soil survey maps that have become outdated.

 

1. Restrictions on land applying manure on land designated as having “W” Soils (areas that are possibly seasonally wet.)  Over 50% of the State has these types of soils and farmers are told where these soils are located from maps that were developed over 40 years ago.  These maps are inaccurate and were never intended to be used for regulation.

 

2. Restrictions on land apply manure on land designated as having “R” Soils (areas that may have bedrock near the soil surface).  Again, these maps are inaccurate and were never intended to be used for regulation.

 

While the DBA should be concerned about the age and accuracy of these maps, their belief that these discrepancies should exempt them from these manure application restrictions is environmentally irresponsible, since an unofficial map does not mean the information is invalid.  Rather, it should strengthen the need for further regulation of the industry until the areas have been remapped and resurveyed because of the severe risks of runoff into groundwater. 

 

Without an accurate soil map or bedrock geological survey, the risk of water contamination is heightened.  Meissner states the need to understand the science of behind existing regulations, yet at the same time the DBA suggests eliminating regulations on manure application because of a lack of scientific understanding of the soils.  For Wisconsin residents, erring on the side of caution before deregulation would be the most responsible course of action.

 

The risk of groundwater pollution has already become reality in some Wisconsin communities.  Following an early thaw in 2006, over 100 wells in Morrison, WI were polluted by agricultural runoff.  This contamination caused residents to suffer from chronic diarrhea, stomach illnesses and severe ear infections.