MONROE - Green County Land and Water Conservation Committee members on Thursday instructed Corporation Counsel Brian Buchholz to draft an ordinance to allow moratoriums on new and expanding large farms considered Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations.
CAFOs are designated by the state as a farm operation with more than 1,000 animal units. In the case of dairy farms, this would equal roughly 714 animals or more.
A moratorium, or temporary halt on any large-scale facility for swine, poultry, dairy and beef cows, sheep and goats, was proposed by committee members previously and voted down during a meeting in March of 2016.
Following the lengthy process of CAFO permit applications for the recently-approved 5,800-cow facility Pinnacle Dairy Farm in Sylvester Township, committee member Russ Torkelson, who was originally against instituting a moratorium, noted that the costs of the application process are too high for the county. Per state law, a county is only allowed to collect a $1,000 permit application fee, but county conservationist Todd Jenson said evaluating the proposed Pinnacle dairy required roughly $50,000 worth of three employees' salaried time.
Committee members directed Buchholz to create an ordinance that would include a moratorium of six months with the option to extend its time by 45-day increments. The language would dictate that any new facilities looking to build in Green County, or those in existence looking to expand greater than 20 percent of the original farm, should be delayed by the moratorium in order for an appointed committee to more thoroughly examine the impact that additional facilities would have on groundwater and quality of life for surrounding residents.
Krist Leonard, a member of the committee, said hearing the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection is re-evaluating its odor requirements was enough cause for her to support a moratorium measure. Leonard questioned whether the moratorium could have an effect if it were instituted.
"When all is said and done, is there teeth in anything?" Leonard asked. "Does it still come back to the tools that we have?"Supervisor Jeff Williams, who owns a large-scale dairy farm in Green County, noted that the county would "need governance" and "the only way to do that is through nutrients and application," but also denounced the idea that all county residents pushing for change were educated on CAFOs and the possibility of contamination. There "may be power in numbers, but those numbers may be ill-informed," Williams said.
New Glarus resident Harry Pulliam urged committee members to allow more time to consider the impact of facilities which may cause irreparable harm to the public. While he conceded pollution is created in many forms, he said there was no reason efforts should not be made to address all of the issues rather than "either/or," and that the period for more time would allow officials to find the best possible location for an incoming facility to avoid negative impact on Green County.
"When you come to a scale of 6,000 cows, now you have a problem of the least little thing that could happen," Pulliam said. "It's just a matter of scale. If you have a leaking faucet in your house or your toilet's running, that's one thing. If hundreds of thousands of gallons of manure's spraying all over the place, that's a whole different situation. When you get to a certain scale, then I think you need to be a little more careful."
If a drafted ordinance is agreed upon by conservation committee members, who voted 5-1 against the measure last time, the draft would then need to be approved by the Green County Board. The study group outlined by members would include Jenson, committee chair Oscar Olson and four members of the public. Discussion included the possibility of using the expertise of the University of Wisconsin-Extension office within the county.
At their July meeting, members will evaluate the rough draft and make any changes if they feel are needed. If recommended, consideration by the county board would likely follow in July as well.
CAFOs are designated by the state as a farm operation with more than 1,000 animal units. In the case of dairy farms, this would equal roughly 714 animals or more.
A moratorium, or temporary halt on any large-scale facility for swine, poultry, dairy and beef cows, sheep and goats, was proposed by committee members previously and voted down during a meeting in March of 2016.
Following the lengthy process of CAFO permit applications for the recently-approved 5,800-cow facility Pinnacle Dairy Farm in Sylvester Township, committee member Russ Torkelson, who was originally against instituting a moratorium, noted that the costs of the application process are too high for the county. Per state law, a county is only allowed to collect a $1,000 permit application fee, but county conservationist Todd Jenson said evaluating the proposed Pinnacle dairy required roughly $50,000 worth of three employees' salaried time.
Committee members directed Buchholz to create an ordinance that would include a moratorium of six months with the option to extend its time by 45-day increments. The language would dictate that any new facilities looking to build in Green County, or those in existence looking to expand greater than 20 percent of the original farm, should be delayed by the moratorium in order for an appointed committee to more thoroughly examine the impact that additional facilities would have on groundwater and quality of life for surrounding residents.
Krist Leonard, a member of the committee, said hearing the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection is re-evaluating its odor requirements was enough cause for her to support a moratorium measure. Leonard questioned whether the moratorium could have an effect if it were instituted.
"When all is said and done, is there teeth in anything?" Leonard asked. "Does it still come back to the tools that we have?"Supervisor Jeff Williams, who owns a large-scale dairy farm in Green County, noted that the county would "need governance" and "the only way to do that is through nutrients and application," but also denounced the idea that all county residents pushing for change were educated on CAFOs and the possibility of contamination. There "may be power in numbers, but those numbers may be ill-informed," Williams said.
New Glarus resident Harry Pulliam urged committee members to allow more time to consider the impact of facilities which may cause irreparable harm to the public. While he conceded pollution is created in many forms, he said there was no reason efforts should not be made to address all of the issues rather than "either/or," and that the period for more time would allow officials to find the best possible location for an incoming facility to avoid negative impact on Green County.
"When you come to a scale of 6,000 cows, now you have a problem of the least little thing that could happen," Pulliam said. "It's just a matter of scale. If you have a leaking faucet in your house or your toilet's running, that's one thing. If hundreds of thousands of gallons of manure's spraying all over the place, that's a whole different situation. When you get to a certain scale, then I think you need to be a little more careful."
If a drafted ordinance is agreed upon by conservation committee members, who voted 5-1 against the measure last time, the draft would then need to be approved by the Green County Board. The study group outlined by members would include Jenson, committee chair Oscar Olson and four members of the public. Discussion included the possibility of using the expertise of the University of Wisconsin-Extension office within the county.
At their July meeting, members will evaluate the rough draft and make any changes if they feel are needed. If recommended, consideration by the county board would likely follow in July as well.