Todd Ambs, who heads the DNR's Division of Water, said the permitted
farms are the most heavily regulated farms in the state. But he said
the regulation is a "work in progress," largely because the size of
the agency's inspection staff has not kept pace with the growth of
the large farms.
"We have roughly the same number of people doing
permits as we did 15 years ago," said Ambs. "It's simple math."
Ambs said the agency's goal is to inspect the large farms at
least once during the five-year life of the permit - generally when
the farm's permit is issued or renewed - but added that "we haven't
done as well as we would like to."
Records show the DNR carried out full inspections on 19 farms in
2009, all conducted as part of the farms' initial permit. No other
on-site inspections were recorded that year, or in four of the
preceding five years. In 2006, the records show, one farm was
inspected outside the initial permitting process.
Gordon Stevenson, chief of the DNR's runoff management section,
said there may be times when inspectors don't even make it out to a
farm for an initial permit inspection. In other cases, inspections
may have been done but not recorded.
"I can say candidly that all that information is not duly
recorded in the files," Stevenson said.
Big operation, big risk
The number of large permitted dairy farms in Wisconsin has grown
rapidly in the past 15 years, from eight in 1995 to 154 by the end
of 2009. Currently, the DNR has nearly 42 pending permit
applications.
Chief among the requirements in those permits is the safe
handling and disposal of manure, which is produced by the farms in
amounts that are difficult to comprehend. One cow can produce as
much waste as 18 people. Multiply that by 3,000 or 4,000 cows and
you have farms that produce as much waste as some small cities
produce in sewage.
But unlike cities, which treat their waste, most of the large
farms dispose of manure the same way farmers disposed of it in the
Middle Ages - by spreading it on fields as fertilizer. Only about 25
of the large farms use digesters or treatment systems.
Still, so great is the volume of manure that many factory farms
do not own enough nearby land to adequately dispose of the waste and
instead must haul it to distant fields owned by other farmers.
Though farms are required to submit detailed spreading plans before
receiving a permit, the plans deal mostly with the nutrient needs of
a crop.
Laurie Fischer, executive director of the Dairy Business
Association, said the manure is an important source of fertilizer
and reduces the need to use petroleum-based chemical fertilizers.
But in recent years, livestock manure from farms has become one
of the most frequently found contaminants in rural wells. While
smaller farms also spread manure on fields, the great volumes of
waste produced by factory farms pose a growing threat to surface
waters and private wells, conservationists say.
"My position is big operation, big potential" for harm, said Bill
Hafs, a county conservationist in Brown County, which has one of the
largest concentrations of factory farms in the state.
Tap water ran brown
That potential has sometimes been realized. It was in Brown
County that more than 100 private wells were contaminated by spring
runoff in 2006. Hafs, who helped investigate the incident, said some
people fell ill with stomach cramps, nausea, diarrhea and chills.
Though no single farm was found responsible, a DNR investigation did
turn up a break in a manure-spreading pipe at a nearby factory farm.
Other incidents of well contamination have been directly linked
to factory farms. In March 2004 in Kewaunee County, Judy Treml
turned on her tap and out flowed brown water that smelled like
manure. The family stopped using the water but the damage had
already been done: Samantha, Treml's 6-month-old daughter, became
violently ill with vomiting and diarrhea and had to be rushed to the
emergency room.
The Tremls' well had been contaminated after tens of thousands of
gallons of manure was spread on nearby frozen fields by Stahl Farms.
The DNR insisted at the time that the spreading hadn't violated the
farm's permit. The Wisconsin Department of Justice eventually fined
the farm $50,000 for spreading illegally. The farm also paid the
Tremls $80,000 in civil damages.
That incident also prompted changes in manure spreading laws. It
is now illegal to spread liquid manure when the ground is frozen or
snow-covered. Factory farms are also required to maintain lagoons
capable of holding at least six months' worth of manure.
Even so, problems continue to surface. In 2006, the Nehls
Brothers farm in Dodge County was ordered to pay more than $42,000
to reimburse three private well owners whose water was contaminated
by manure spread by the farm. And enforcement records show several
permit violations by factory farms late last year. Among those cited
in recent months was Stahl Farms, the same farm involved in the
Treml case.
Farmer: I drink the water, too
Farmer A.V. Roth, who has applied for a permit from the DNR to
expand his Crawford County pig farm to more than 2,500 pigs, said
he's doing everything he can, including ensuring adequate manure
storage and following a spreading plan, to avoid contaminating
groundwater or the nearby lower Wisconsin River - DNR or no DNR.
"Why would I pollute the water in this area?" Roth asked. "There
have been five generations on this farm. I plan on passing it on to
my daughter. She's going to be here. I won't let this farm pollute
the water. It's just plain and simple. It's ridiculous to even think
I would let that happen."
Few disagree that there is a real threat posed by the large farms
to the environment and to water supplies. "These are not zero-risk
permits," said Tom Bauman, a runoff management engineer with the
DNR.
Even the rule the DNR uses to regulate the operations
acknowledges that the large farms will pollute and that manure
runoff "will reach waters of the state."
Yet that threat does not always translate into heightened
vigilance at the DNR.
In 2000, when factory farm permit applications started to climb,
the DNR had four full-time employees and one part-timer working out
of the agency's central office in Madison, assisted by seven
regional employees, working on permits and inspections. Today, with
more than four times the number of factory farms, the size of the
central office staff is unchanged while the number of regional
employees has grown to 10. Two of those regional positions are
vacant, however, with no immediate plans to fill them, Ambs said.
Inspectors are also charged with keeping tabs on thousands of
smaller farms, so they rely on operators to self-report permit
violations.
Does that happen? Wastewater specialist Casey Jones said some
operators will call to report broken pipes or overtopping manure
storage lagoons. But the frequency of such reports is difficult to
track because the source of complaints about the farms - whether
from the farmer, a DNR inspector, or a member of the public - is not
something that is regularly noted in agency records.
Is simpler permit the answer?
To pay for more inspectors, critics of the program say, the
department should consider increasing the $345 fee the farms pay for
their permits. Municipalities pay thousands of dollars for similar
permits.
But Ambs said the most effective way to give inspectors more time
in the field would be to have them spend less time on the initial
permits. That's the idea behind the proposed general permit, a
simpler permitting system for dairy farms with 4,000 or fewer cows.
Under such a system, the state would not be required to conduct an
environmental assessment and hold a public hearing if the farm meets
certain requirements. Hearings on the proposal are scheduled for
March and April.
A few of the state's largest farms, such as the 4,000-cow
Rosendale Dairy near Ripon, have received more attention. Jim
Ostrom, one of the Rosendale owners, said a DNR inspector was a
frequent visitor while the farm was being built. The farm recently
received approval to expand to 8,000 cows.
"In our case, I feel the DNR has been extremely thorough and
extremely diligent," Ostrom said.
Ostrom said the large farms are necessary to provide food for a
growing world population and said he doesn't believe the expansion
threatens the environment. "We're designed, built and permitted with
more scrutiny than any dairy this state has seen," he said. "It's a
badge of honor when you get through it."
But Treml, whose daughter was sickened after the family's well
was tainted by manure, still casts a wary eye at the millions of
gallons of manure that continue to be spread on the land around her
home. She's doubtful the DNR has learned from her nightmare and
fears that, as the big farms have continued to grow, the agency is
leaving families such as hers at risk.
"Have things gotten better?" Treml asked. "I don't see it. I
don't think anything has changed."
For more information on the state's factory farms, also known as
concentrated animal feeding operations or CAFOs, go to the state
Department of Natural
Resources Web site.
For information on a group
fighting factory farms in Southwest Wisconsin.
For background and UW-Madison
research on manure and
other issues related to factory farms.