July 23, 2014 at 2:10 p.m.
Two more views offered on CAFO issue (03/08/07)
Letters to the Editor
To the editor:
How amazing. The anti-CAFO letter in last week's Commercial Review has a title over two times larger than the pro-CAFO article written two weeks ago. CR should try a little harder to come across at least a little non-biased, don't you think?
I know Laura Pursifull personally and she is one of the kindest people in Jay County. Julie Alexander's (from Delaware County) letter appeared to be a very contemptuous response aimed directly at Laura. I agree with Laura, there are plenty of women, who support CAFOs. Julie says it is not a gender issue, but she is one of the women mentioned in the Star's article. Laura was only responding to gender since the Star's article made it about women against CAFOs. Of course that article can mention women since it was an anti-CAFO article, right?
As for Julie being a farmer, it seems everyone likes to call themselves farmers, but she is part of a group who is very vocal in their opposition to farmers. Just to clarify - CAFO owners are farmers, too. Over 98 percent of all farms are family-owned. Just because they are CAFOs does not mean it is not family-owned or they are not farmers.
If a grain farmer owned 500 acres does that mean they are not farmers since they own more acreage than some others? It is a property rights issue. CAFOs are permitted in ag zoned areas by people who own the property and have a right to farm the property within the rules and regulations set by the state.
I find it perplexing that Julie mentions Jay County having more farm animals in the county than people. What is that supposed to mean? You are always going to have more food than you do people. We are not eating people. Farm animals are raised to feed people. If people did not eat farmers' products there would not be farmer products.
The state of Indiana had 4.2 million hogs in 1995. Today they have 3.3 million The state is only trying to bring the level back to where we were over 10 years ago.
What is not discussed is the improved control of the operations via CAFOs (confined feeding operations) rather than open feed lots where the animals and natural nutrients were open to the environment and wherever the rainwater flowed, so did everything else.
I would like to share a few more facts that we left out. Fact: Almost 75 percent of the environmental violations in Jay County are non-farm related. The state is already proposing several changes to farm regulations to improve farm management and compliance. The EPA has national studies underway which will help everyone know more about the proper way to manage the air quality for CAFOs (by the way these studies are funded by farmers.)
Another fact: There are also studies that show there is less impact to air quality from a CAFO than the air found in a normal home every day. Also, for anyone who might grain farm and agree to arbitrary rules against CAFO farmers, EPA is also studying the effects of grain farming and how the dust from combines impacts the environment, just in case there are any grain farmers who are against CAFOs.
Whether you farm ground or rent ground, a grain farmer against CAFOs is like The Ford Motor Company being against drivers. If these anti-farm groups are really concerned about health, they should focus on the sewer/septic issues.
I also take exception to J.R.'s editorial he wrote about the commissioners "not listening" to the people. I guess the 200 farmers that were at the Jay County hearing to oppose the additional farm ordinances do not count as people. I don't understand how someone has issues with the commissioners for trying to look at things objectively. Just because the same people show up every week to the commissioners' meeting, demanding they get their way, does not make them right. There are plenty of those who are opposed to arbitrary ordinances and according to what I learned from ISDA, many of the requests are preempted by the state and the commissioners and zoning do not have the authority to enforce some of these ordinance requests.
I mentioned in a previous letter some time ago that everyone should be careful about pointing fingers, and they should focus on what they can do to protect the environment. The Commercial Review replied with a footnote at the bottom of my editorial stating they use soy-based ink. Did you know that soybean oil is extracted from soybeans, a sustainable resource produced by nearly 400,000 American farmers (so J.R. you are welcome for breakfast and for your ink).
Another point that needs to be clarified is your remark that those soy-based inks are non-toxic; this is not true. Although the soy part of the ink is non-toxic (the part the farmers produce) ink made with soybean oil contains waxes, pigments, and other additives. This makes it no easier to dispose of a soy oil-based ink than a petro-based ink, printed or non-printed.
Soy-based inks require the same considerations for disposal in a landfill or incineration as petro-based inks. While soy or vegetable containing inks may help reduce the measured VOCs (volatile organic compound content), the EPA has not exempted vegetable oils as a VOC. They believe that while all vegetable oils are not VOCs, they are "precursors to precursors of ozone."
When vegetable oils, including soy, dry by oxidation, there is evidence that minute amounts of VOCs are released, so says the Environmental Conservation Board. Also, there are secondary fluids and solvents used by newspaper printers which are also considered potentially hazardous to the environment.
We can all line up and complain about one another, CR, anti-farm groups, etc. In the upcoming week it will be National Ag Week. What a great time for everyone (men and women) to let all farmers know how much you appreciate all they do.
Also, did you know Indiana's accidental death rates for farmers are much higher than police or firefighters? In Indiana (2004) 30 farmers died in job accidents vs. three police officers. I am grateful for our law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line to protect our lives, just as I am grateful for all of the farmers who put their lives on the line to sustain our life, oh and yes, that includes CAFO farmers.
Let me finish by saying thank you to all of our farmers, (CAFO, CFO, AFO, grain, fruit, vegetable, nuts, fish, small, medium, and large farmers alike), for providing my family with domestically produced under USDA/FDA standards, the safe and wholesome food we buy and eat everyday.
One other point I would like to make is regarding the GreenFlash company mentioned in a letter from Sharon Taylor. The Jay County Farm Bureau has been actively looking into this product. One of our board members attended the December 2006 presentations made by the company. Although there have been many products in the past which have made similar promises and have failed miserable, we have contacted the CEO of the company and have discussed possible trials with CAFOs in the area.
Vicky Lochtefeld
Portland
Control needed
To the editor:
Please, you do not have to tell me about agriculture. As a child I watched my parents farm in the primitive way of the times. I remember them picking tomatoes by hand and my dad hauling them to the canning factory on a hay wagon. He was also a beef butcher in a dirty back-breaking industry so he farmed at night and on weekends. Mom was as much farmer as she was housewife and mother. Even in later years my dad freely helped tenants, just to be on a tractor and in the fields.
After my mother's death I was an absentee farm owner for awhile. Finally, I had to make the decision to either sell or move to the farm. I moved. I became a novice farm-owner who continues to learn on a day-to-day basis. Fortunately, I have a tenant who is willing to spend time educating me as the industry changes.
So, I chew nails with him and his dad when the creek floods the fields, and worry with them when it is hot and dry on a fragile crop. I cheer with them when prices are good and sympathize when prices are bad. I care about their well-being in this crazy world called farming.
I would probably have little opinion about CAFOs if they were not being built in populated areas and if they were constructed and maintained in the most progressive scientific way possible, especially fly and odor control. The mechanics are developed and available.
I would have no objection to manure application if done correctly and honestly. (We applied chicken manure some years ago.) However, the soil can only absorb so much nutrient. What does become of the excess manure? Some of it may be hauled elsewhere as Ohio has done to Indiana but through dishonest over-application, it can eventually leech into the underground water system. (Oklahoma has lawsuits pending at present regarding excess chicken manure polluting watersheds.)
My negative opinion has continued as I have observed an arrogant attitude that says, "It's my right, you don't count ..." I am afraid that the Right to Farm Act has encouraged this attitude. As far as I am concerned, every resident of a given area counts, whether it be a grain farmer, a widow on a half-acre plot or a "city slicker" moving to the country.
I was furious when I first read of the governor's election campaign promise to double the number of CAFOs in Indiana. 1. Doubling the number in Jay County meant how many more when we were already a leader in the state. 2. Indiana was/is a wide-open territory for CAFO expansion due to lax regulations on the part of state and county agencies compared to other states. 3. It hinted highly of out-of-state mega-business interests with a large local farm debt attached. The irony of that political goodie was that the broader voting base of Indiana had little knowledge about his "ag" promise. The information was released primarily in farm publications.
I would probably not speak out about CAFOs if I did not care about Jay County as my home. It is a county with many positives (i.e. the article about the Jay County Fairgrounds as being one of the best in Indiana is an example.) However, drive along highways and county roads in given winds and it becomes a smelly negative. Recently a building permit was granted so that an estate can be expanded into a country bed/breakfast. Then it was discovered that CAFOs may be constructed within a mile or so of the estate. Is that realistic planning?
Everyone in government has and is procrastinating. The state had dragged its feet and the counties keep saying to wait and see what the state does. Consequently, the issue is not being resolved and more permits are being applied for and granted on a month-to-month basis.
People such as Paula Confer and Janet Walker Confer have a right to be heard just as others are heard. If you, as Jay County citizens, are concerned about your neighborhood and its future regarding CAFOs, then it behooves you to find out everything you can about the situation and to make your county government aware of your concerns.
Contact your state legislators, too, if you are concerned. It is my understanding that many are not aware of how serious the problem is becoming. Some have indicated that CAFOs are liked in counties such as Jay County.
Ultimately, will the value of the CAFOs located over a majority of the county compensate for the value lost by a large number of residents who are infuriated at having their air space invaded by odors, their homes invaded by flies and their properties devalued?
A $64,000 question that needs a resolution soon.
Eugenia Herrman
Redkey[[In-content Ad]]
How amazing. The anti-CAFO letter in last week's Commercial Review has a title over two times larger than the pro-CAFO article written two weeks ago. CR should try a little harder to come across at least a little non-biased, don't you think?
I know Laura Pursifull personally and she is one of the kindest people in Jay County. Julie Alexander's (from Delaware County) letter appeared to be a very contemptuous response aimed directly at Laura. I agree with Laura, there are plenty of women, who support CAFOs. Julie says it is not a gender issue, but she is one of the women mentioned in the Star's article. Laura was only responding to gender since the Star's article made it about women against CAFOs. Of course that article can mention women since it was an anti-CAFO article, right?
As for Julie being a farmer, it seems everyone likes to call themselves farmers, but she is part of a group who is very vocal in their opposition to farmers. Just to clarify - CAFO owners are farmers, too. Over 98 percent of all farms are family-owned. Just because they are CAFOs does not mean it is not family-owned or they are not farmers.
If a grain farmer owned 500 acres does that mean they are not farmers since they own more acreage than some others? It is a property rights issue. CAFOs are permitted in ag zoned areas by people who own the property and have a right to farm the property within the rules and regulations set by the state.
I find it perplexing that Julie mentions Jay County having more farm animals in the county than people. What is that supposed to mean? You are always going to have more food than you do people. We are not eating people. Farm animals are raised to feed people. If people did not eat farmers' products there would not be farmer products.
The state of Indiana had 4.2 million hogs in 1995. Today they have 3.3 million The state is only trying to bring the level back to where we were over 10 years ago.
What is not discussed is the improved control of the operations via CAFOs (confined feeding operations) rather than open feed lots where the animals and natural nutrients were open to the environment and wherever the rainwater flowed, so did everything else.
I would like to share a few more facts that we left out. Fact: Almost 75 percent of the environmental violations in Jay County are non-farm related. The state is already proposing several changes to farm regulations to improve farm management and compliance. The EPA has national studies underway which will help everyone know more about the proper way to manage the air quality for CAFOs (by the way these studies are funded by farmers.)
Another fact: There are also studies that show there is less impact to air quality from a CAFO than the air found in a normal home every day. Also, for anyone who might grain farm and agree to arbitrary rules against CAFO farmers, EPA is also studying the effects of grain farming and how the dust from combines impacts the environment, just in case there are any grain farmers who are against CAFOs.
Whether you farm ground or rent ground, a grain farmer against CAFOs is like The Ford Motor Company being against drivers. If these anti-farm groups are really concerned about health, they should focus on the sewer/septic issues.
I also take exception to J.R.'s editorial he wrote about the commissioners "not listening" to the people. I guess the 200 farmers that were at the Jay County hearing to oppose the additional farm ordinances do not count as people. I don't understand how someone has issues with the commissioners for trying to look at things objectively. Just because the same people show up every week to the commissioners' meeting, demanding they get their way, does not make them right. There are plenty of those who are opposed to arbitrary ordinances and according to what I learned from ISDA, many of the requests are preempted by the state and the commissioners and zoning do not have the authority to enforce some of these ordinance requests.
I mentioned in a previous letter some time ago that everyone should be careful about pointing fingers, and they should focus on what they can do to protect the environment. The Commercial Review replied with a footnote at the bottom of my editorial stating they use soy-based ink. Did you know that soybean oil is extracted from soybeans, a sustainable resource produced by nearly 400,000 American farmers (so J.R. you are welcome for breakfast and for your ink).
Another point that needs to be clarified is your remark that those soy-based inks are non-toxic; this is not true. Although the soy part of the ink is non-toxic (the part the farmers produce) ink made with soybean oil contains waxes, pigments, and other additives. This makes it no easier to dispose of a soy oil-based ink than a petro-based ink, printed or non-printed.
Soy-based inks require the same considerations for disposal in a landfill or incineration as petro-based inks. While soy or vegetable containing inks may help reduce the measured VOCs (volatile organic compound content), the EPA has not exempted vegetable oils as a VOC. They believe that while all vegetable oils are not VOCs, they are "precursors to precursors of ozone."
When vegetable oils, including soy, dry by oxidation, there is evidence that minute amounts of VOCs are released, so says the Environmental Conservation Board. Also, there are secondary fluids and solvents used by newspaper printers which are also considered potentially hazardous to the environment.
We can all line up and complain about one another, CR, anti-farm groups, etc. In the upcoming week it will be National Ag Week. What a great time for everyone (men and women) to let all farmers know how much you appreciate all they do.
Also, did you know Indiana's accidental death rates for farmers are much higher than police or firefighters? In Indiana (2004) 30 farmers died in job accidents vs. three police officers. I am grateful for our law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line to protect our lives, just as I am grateful for all of the farmers who put their lives on the line to sustain our life, oh and yes, that includes CAFO farmers.
Let me finish by saying thank you to all of our farmers, (CAFO, CFO, AFO, grain, fruit, vegetable, nuts, fish, small, medium, and large farmers alike), for providing my family with domestically produced under USDA/FDA standards, the safe and wholesome food we buy and eat everyday.
One other point I would like to make is regarding the GreenFlash company mentioned in a letter from Sharon Taylor. The Jay County Farm Bureau has been actively looking into this product. One of our board members attended the December 2006 presentations made by the company. Although there have been many products in the past which have made similar promises and have failed miserable, we have contacted the CEO of the company and have discussed possible trials with CAFOs in the area.
Vicky Lochtefeld
Portland
Control needed
To the editor:
Please, you do not have to tell me about agriculture. As a child I watched my parents farm in the primitive way of the times. I remember them picking tomatoes by hand and my dad hauling them to the canning factory on a hay wagon. He was also a beef butcher in a dirty back-breaking industry so he farmed at night and on weekends. Mom was as much farmer as she was housewife and mother. Even in later years my dad freely helped tenants, just to be on a tractor and in the fields.
After my mother's death I was an absentee farm owner for awhile. Finally, I had to make the decision to either sell or move to the farm. I moved. I became a novice farm-owner who continues to learn on a day-to-day basis. Fortunately, I have a tenant who is willing to spend time educating me as the industry changes.
So, I chew nails with him and his dad when the creek floods the fields, and worry with them when it is hot and dry on a fragile crop. I cheer with them when prices are good and sympathize when prices are bad. I care about their well-being in this crazy world called farming.
I would probably have little opinion about CAFOs if they were not being built in populated areas and if they were constructed and maintained in the most progressive scientific way possible, especially fly and odor control. The mechanics are developed and available.
I would have no objection to manure application if done correctly and honestly. (We applied chicken manure some years ago.) However, the soil can only absorb so much nutrient. What does become of the excess manure? Some of it may be hauled elsewhere as Ohio has done to Indiana but through dishonest over-application, it can eventually leech into the underground water system. (Oklahoma has lawsuits pending at present regarding excess chicken manure polluting watersheds.)
My negative opinion has continued as I have observed an arrogant attitude that says, "It's my right, you don't count ..." I am afraid that the Right to Farm Act has encouraged this attitude. As far as I am concerned, every resident of a given area counts, whether it be a grain farmer, a widow on a half-acre plot or a "city slicker" moving to the country.
I was furious when I first read of the governor's election campaign promise to double the number of CAFOs in Indiana. 1. Doubling the number in Jay County meant how many more when we were already a leader in the state. 2. Indiana was/is a wide-open territory for CAFO expansion due to lax regulations on the part of state and county agencies compared to other states. 3. It hinted highly of out-of-state mega-business interests with a large local farm debt attached. The irony of that political goodie was that the broader voting base of Indiana had little knowledge about his "ag" promise. The information was released primarily in farm publications.
I would probably not speak out about CAFOs if I did not care about Jay County as my home. It is a county with many positives (i.e. the article about the Jay County Fairgrounds as being one of the best in Indiana is an example.) However, drive along highways and county roads in given winds and it becomes a smelly negative. Recently a building permit was granted so that an estate can be expanded into a country bed/breakfast. Then it was discovered that CAFOs may be constructed within a mile or so of the estate. Is that realistic planning?
Everyone in government has and is procrastinating. The state had dragged its feet and the counties keep saying to wait and see what the state does. Consequently, the issue is not being resolved and more permits are being applied for and granted on a month-to-month basis.
People such as Paula Confer and Janet Walker Confer have a right to be heard just as others are heard. If you, as Jay County citizens, are concerned about your neighborhood and its future regarding CAFOs, then it behooves you to find out everything you can about the situation and to make your county government aware of your concerns.
Contact your state legislators, too, if you are concerned. It is my understanding that many are not aware of how serious the problem is becoming. Some have indicated that CAFOs are liked in counties such as Jay County.
Ultimately, will the value of the CAFOs located over a majority of the county compensate for the value lost by a large number of residents who are infuriated at having their air space invaded by odors, their homes invaded by flies and their properties devalued?
A $64,000 question that needs a resolution soon.
Eugenia Herrman
Redkey[[In-content Ad]]
Top Stories
9/11 NEVER FORGET Mobile Exhibit
Chartwells marketing
September 17, 2024 7:36 a.m.
Events
250 X 250 AD