‘It'll go as long as it needs to go'

By M. Liebler / The Citizen

Saturday, August 18, 2007 11:33 PM EDT

From a passenger window, the southern Cayuga County landscape looks friendly and familiar - robust crop fields, grassy hills, healthy trees swaying in the summer breeze. But to Connie Mather, something more sinister lurks behind the trees, in the dirt and just beyond the lush hillsides.
Jason Rearick / The Citizen
Connie Mather said she has abandoned her house, which sits near Willet Dairy in Genoa, because of health problems for her and her son that she says are a direct result of pollution from the dairy. In the background and across the street from her abandoned house is Willet's silage bunkers, which she says produce some of the pollution. A lawsuit filed against the farm, however, was dismissed.
“This is CAFO country,” she said on a scenic drive down Genoa's rural roads.

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations of 200 or more dairy cows dot the many vistas and valleys here. According to a lawsuit filed by Mather and some East Genoa neighbors five years ago, these large dairy farms also pollute the land, air and water with thousands of tons of manure each day.

But a U.S. District Court judge dismissed the lawsuit against Willet Dairy and two of its operators July 17. An appeal is in the works.

The dairy has more than 6,500 cows at four facilities, including 379 Route 34 next to a home owned by Mather and her husband, Scott, as well as 4150 Lamphier Road near the home of Karen Strecker and her ailing father, Fred Coon.

The complaint filed in September 2002 alleges water, odors and other air pollution as well as obstruction of various waterways by Willet that drove Mather from her East Genoa home and made life for the Coons and other co-defendants miserable. Mather filed a similar lawsuit arguing the pollution had caused health problems for her teenage son in 2004 and both have proceeded through court together.

“It'll go as long as it needs to go,” Mather said in a recent interview at her home in Aurora.

Senior U.S. District Court Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. issued a summary judgment that dismissed the entire list of complaints.

A complaint alleging Willet polluted runoff and discharged pollutants in violation of the federal Clean Water Act was dismissed on the grounds the plaintiffs failed to prove repeat or continuous violations. Another alleging Willet filled streams and wetlands was dismissed on the grounds no permit is required to construct or maintain farm ponds.

Several similar complaints that claimed state law violations were ruled irrelevant in light of the other dismissals.

The plaintiffs' attorney, Gary Abraham, believes the dismissal is too brief and merits revisiting in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

“The court refused to look at the facts and there's a lot more there,” Abraham said. “We found these violations and they were ignored by the court.”

His side collected data and investigated the Willet comprehensive nutrient management plan to make a case centered around what they view as U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Clean Water Act violations.

“The ruling did not meet the merits, did not address the factual information that we presented,” Abraham said. “This is the largest dairy farm in the state. It has overspread manure on its fields.”

The defendants successfully argued they've followed the CNMP laid out in their CAFO permit.

“It's a huge victory not only for this farm, but the entire industry,” Willet attorney David L. Cook said. “We took the position that the plaintiffs were absolutely dead wrong in the claims and had no basis.”

He said the defendant compiled factual data as well, information that ultimately discredited the claims of Mather and company.

“We took the position that all the data didn't prove the violation,” Cook said. “They might show an elevated hit (of nutrients) here or there, but an isolated incident doesn't qualify as a violation.”

“Whenever the DEC or EPA has looked at these farms that these people say are a mess, there is nothing wrong with them,” Cook said.

The Mathers and Coons argue that the oversight never takes place at all.

“The DEC is not looking,” Abraham said. “What we did was a mathematical analysis based on their (nutrient management) plan. Then we compared the plan to their own logs,” he said, adding his legal team performed four inspections.

“Every time we came back, we found the same problems.”

The Coon and Mather families argue the CAFO system introduced in the 1990s as a safeguard is flawed and offers a false sense of security to large farm neighbors.

“There is a bad problem,” said Fred Coon, 82. “They keep letting these guys go.

“They're going to ruin our land, steal our water,” he said. “They're getting away with murder.”

Coon's garage is decorated with woodwork crafted in protest. The state Department of Environmental Conservation, or DEC by acronym, becomes Dangerous Environmental Consequences on one piece. “Got water?” poses another in a parody of the “Got milk?” dairy marketing slogan.

“Not only is it toxic, outside they've contaminated our wells,” Coon's daughter, Karen Strecker said. “I'm ashamed they sold America out like this.

“You have some smaller farmers grazing in the area, so you always have hope,” she said.

Cook said after representing both sides of the farm debate, he'd still take a CAFO over the traditional farm.

“I've represented a lot of dairy farms over the years; I've represented some of the biggest farms in the state and many of the smaller farms,” Cook said. “I can tell you almost without exception, large dairy farms are much better stewards of the land.

“It may look great to have cows wandering and grazing, but when that happens, where does the manure go?” he said. “It goes into the ground, into the streams, wherever the cows may go with no control.”

The CAFO permit system uses science to determine appropriate manure spreading depending on the soil.

“You've got a system where you're managing the manure instead of letting cows wander,” Cook said. “This concept that big is bad is nonsense.”

Others beg to differ. Fred's son, Lewis Coon, left New York decades ago, but has shared the family's frustration over the phone and during visits.

“I would come home and I would step out of the vehicle and sometimes my eyes would water,” Coon said. “It's obvious there's chemicals in that stuff.”

For Coon the greatest evidence of agricultural pollution rests in the poor health of his father and siblings who stayed in New York compared to his own.

“I'll be 62 in August, the Willet Dairy wasn't there when I left,” he said. “I don't have any of the kinds of issues that my mother or father have had health-wise.

“The rest of my family that stayed there ... these people have incredible health problems,” Coon said.

In addition to raising pigs on the Coon property in East Genoa, Coon also spent most of his youth working with area farmers.

“I had a good working relationship with these people,” Coon said during a telephone interview from his home in Idaho. “They were neighbors. Did they get cow manure on the road? Sure. But, nothing like it is today.

“It's like they have no liability. I guess that's why they call them an LLC, limited liability corporation,” he said. “These aren't the kind of farmers I grew up with.”

He insists his sister and father's suit is about principle more than money.

“The only major concern is that the damages are punitive enough that it really hurts them and gets their attention,” Coon said.

“If I destroyed a large pond or marsh on my private land, the DEC or someone would be on my (butt),” he said. “They've destroyed hundreds of acres, hundreds, and nobody says a word.”

The DEC defends its oversight of CAFOs. The agency has issued four Clean Water Act violations to CAFOs since the beginning of the year, department spokeswoman Diane Carlton said. CAFO permits require annual reporting and inspections.

“We're out there,” Carlton said.

The state has added several CAFO-dedicated field officers in recent years, including one in the Region 7 office this year, she said. In addition to the annual protocol, conservation officers also do spot inspections on CAFOs.

“This is a highly regulated industry, these farms have spent thousands and thousands in compliance,” Cook said.

The DEC State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System general permit for CAFOs depends heavily on record keeping and reporting by the farms themselves. The maximum penalty of $75,000 and up to four years in prison for each violation is the only official deterrent to keep corporate farms from falsifying records.

But, there are additional safeguards, Carlton said. The annual reports are created and submitted by state-certified CAFO planners on behalf of the farms, which essentially means false statistics would put their jobs on the line.

The DEC also responds to complaints that neighbors and others phone in, Carlton said.

“The better thing to do is call our environmental conservation officers' numbers,” she said, adding they're listed on the DEC Web site.

While the DEC stands by its regulations, a growing group of New Yorkers, namely the Citizens' Environmental Coalition, is calling for a moratorium on CAFO creation and expansion until the rules are changed.

Shortly after her legal battle with Willet began, Mather incorporated Neighbors United for the Finger Lakes. The grassroots group hopes to unite like-minded rural residents in calling for a moratorium.

Like Mather, Barbara Lonsky never pictured herself becoming an activist. Neither considers themselves activists now.

“I think there needs to be some type of checks and balances in place, there needs to be some accountability,” Lonsky said. “There's a lot at stake.

“I know there are repercussions, but if I don't stand for truth and that's what I'm trying to teach my children ... ,” Lonsky said. “I have to stand up for what I believe in.”

The advocacy and education organization aims to enlist more rural citizens to speak up about environmental worries linked to manure.

“We just decided that where we went for help, there was no help,” Mather said.

Lonsky started to take notice of her CAFO neighbors when their properties lines gradually grew closer to her Connell Road home in Venice.

“And it's really starting to encroach,” Lonsky said. “I've watched them just kind of absorb the property around us.”

She noticed the crops were being sprayed three times each day with manure and her son was getting sick more frequently. Her suspicion that her wells were being contaminated with nitrates was confirmed with testing.

“When it comes to the point that it affects you personally, you have to stand up and say, 'That's not right,” Lonsky said.

Now a PowerPoint presentation tells her story through photos from around her property. Lonsky is also upset with the changing face of smaller tributaries that no longer run through her land.

Mather calls them “unstreams” and identifies them from her vehicle at spots near Southern Cayuga CAFOs.

“We're trying to protect what's left and maybe restore what can be brought back,” Mather said.

But her biggest worry is the spreading.

“There are definite health risks associated with the overspraying of fields and the impact to the environment around them,” Mather said. “I don't think enough attention is being paid to what's going on.

“If it's allowed to go unchecked, we won't have anything left,” she said.

NUFF recently joined with the nationwide Dairy Education Alliance, a point of contact for similar groups across the country. With the affiliation, Mather hopes to turn up the pressure on farmers and fellow citizens who could help with regular water testing and pollution pin-pointing.

In addition to the environmental worries, NUFF also points to indirect costs to the tax base brought on by the wear and tear CAFO machinery causes to town roads.

“We're paying for all this stuff and the people they are giving the tax breaks to are the people that are causing the problem,” Lonsky said, referring to government dollars that go to dairy operations across the county and state.

CAFO alternatives, like grazing, should have more government and industry support, Mather said. Existing grazers and organic farmers prove the plans are feasible.

“If you've got rich soil, Honeoye soil as we do in this area, you don't need a lot of fertilizer,” Mather said. “You would do better with a smaller hear and less pressure for production.”

Later she illustrates her point while driving along Route 34.

“This guy has a little lagoon and he sprays once a year,” Mather said. “That we could live with.”

Staff writer Shane Liebler can be reached at 253-5311 ext. 248 or shane.liebler@lee.net

The Citizens' Say

Post your comment - click here

There are 7 comment(s)

fortunatefrog wrote on Feb 9, 2008 12:06 PM:

" I am a concerned citizen in a rural community in Illinois. We are faceing what you have already been exposed to. I am looking for any suggestions on how to battle against these mega farms being built in our community. We have a corporation from California trying to build a 12000 cow operation in our backyard. The communities here are adamantly against this happening but it seems there is nothing in place to legally stop them. Hind sight is usually 20/20 so I am hoping to get some help from those of you who may have some ideas on how to stop this mess before it is built. Thanks in advance. "

Farmer's Gal wrote on Aug 26, 2007 8:19 AM:

" Their day in court?!?? What a joke. The regulations are stacked against the earnestly concerned citizen and in favor of corporations of all kinds, whether agricultural or any other industry. ##***--***## Yes, all farms, regardless of size, should be required to use environmentally safe practices, though there is the matter of scale: if a farmer with 75 animals has an accident it will not have nearly the impact that a CAFO accident, with its millions of gallons manure ponds will have. That doesn't mean small farms shouldn't be careful too. ##***--***## Back to those regulations: How is the concerned citizen to judge whether the guidelines set by the government really are safe or not when the whole process is cloaked in secrecy and purposely made as complex as can be? Does anyone seriously think we can trust Cornell, who is in the back pocket of the CAFOs and shares land, water and projects with some in this area, to set safety guidelines that might limit the CAFOs profits? The guidelines for manure spreading take as the first priority how much nutrient will yield the best crop -- NOT how much it is safe to spread without danger of leaching into the air and groundwater. In fact, the guidelines advise spreading more nutrient than the crops can take up specifically because they COUNT on a certain amount leaching into the air, being consumed by microbes in the soil, and leaching out into the groundwater -- "lost to the environment," it's called. ##***--***## The DEC is supposed to inspect these places, but how can they tell if the CAFO is sticking to its secret plan or not? The DEC is the one agency which is allowed to see the NMP, but they make a point of not keeping a copy -- that way no concerned citizen can file a Freedom of Information Act request later, since no government agency holds a copy. And what can the DEC tell if they even bother to inspect a CAFO (which they do very seldom) -- all they can do is compare the self-kept plan against the self-kept records and there's no one to tell if they really spread the amount they said they did or if it were more; heck, there isn't even anyone to say if their plans are truly safe. ##****--***## There are too many wells around here contaminated with e.coli for the people who live here buy this nonsense about the CAFOs staying within safe parameters for manure storage and spreading. There are too many for them to be all compromised septic or "deer pooping in the woods" as the officials like to tell us as a dodge. Either the CAFOs are NOT staying inside their supposedly safe guidelines, or those guidelines are NOT safe after all -- either way, something is wrong with the whole system. ##***--***## Corporations are NOT persons, and they should not for one minute be exempt from the same kinds of responsibilities towards the environment every other individual or agency should have. Fighting the battle in terms of regulations is a losing battle, as Connie Mather and her group are learning the hard way. The only way to solve the problem is to attack it at the root cause rather than fragmenting our resources issue-by-issue: the root cause is the perverse and wrongful interpretation of the Constitution giving corporations the rights of real natural persons while exempting them from the responsibilities of the same. Until that is changed, all of us trying to protect our homes and the natural environment around us are going to go right on losing ground ... literally. "

dairygal wrote on Aug 23, 2007 10:36 AM:

" It's interesting that Ms. Mathers says that she'll continue suing until she wins. Isn't that harrassment? Should Willet countersue her or is that picking on the poor neighbor? If she manages to close Willet, will she go after other neighboring farms? If the government says that Willet is doing the job correctly, where did Ms. Mathers go to school to learn differently? "

bigpicture wrote on Aug 21, 2007 4:49 PM:

" Connie Mathers is out to pasture. She and her crew had their day in court and were dismissed on all counts. A federal judge threw out ALL OF her agruments and she still has the time and engery to continue her frivolous law suit. Farm size has no impact on water quality, farm management does. While the small farms she is in favor of operate with out ANY environmental oversight or the ability to afford to make improvements to ageing systems if they had too. She should be glad to live in New York where every CAFO facility is regulated and regualtions enforced. Where is the pollution from this farm that she is convinced of? "

Farmer's Gal wrote on Aug 20, 2007 12:49 PM:

" Please make a distinction between corporate agribusiness and farming, which has been the backbone of this country. Small unincorporated family farms are not the problem. "

hooter wrote on Aug 20, 2007 11:00 AM:

" Agriculture has polluted the worlds groundwater, lakes, rivers, and streams. High Nitrates in wells here in which mine peaked at 22.7mgl and politicians paid by Farm Subsidies turn there heads while cancer,heartdisease, bluebaby syndrome and special education are door to door here in the Ringtown Valley Pa. Signs all around my home which is worthless because of Agriculture who also destroyed hunting and fishing as we knew it. The newsmedia here also are owned by Agriculture which never reports on this antienvironmental Farm Family that has many health problems including cancer. Hay and potatos grown here should not be eaten by farm animals or people and lawyers better put a stop to farmers also. Keep fighting Mrs. Mather help is on the way. PS American farmers are in China trying to stop organic farmers there from producing healthy foods which will clean up our environment also. "

Farmer's Gal wrote on Aug 20, 2007 7:47 AM:

" This is sadly just another case of how the regulatory process does not work - it shields the corporations, whether they are agribusines or quarry operations or low-level nuclear dumps. As they teach us in Democracy School, you have to work at the root of the problem, not chase your tail trying to get justice via the useless regulatory process. The problem is that in a very wrongful decision, under influence from the railroads, the Supreme Court declared in 1896 (I think it was Santa Clara vs. Southern Pacific RR) that corporations are "persons" with the same consitutional rights as natural human persons. But due to other factors (mostly having to do with the chartering process), they have limited liability. That means corporations get all the benefits of being "persons" with none of the responsibilities, and they are shielded from consequences of their destructive activities towards the environment and towards people, by hiding behind the manipulation of these supposed rights. Try to stop a corporation -- including agribusiness CAFO corporations -- from doing destructive things, and they will twist you up in regulatory cr*p thicker than what they are spreading on the fields and allowing to leach into our air and water, all the while using their supposed constitutional rights as "persons" to override the real inalienable rights of natural human persons and the environment. Finish your fight and more power to you, but don't hold your breath for the courts to find in your favor no matter how just your cause. Nothing is going to change until we force a change in that very wrongful and immoral interpretation of the Constitution. That's no short-term battle, but it is the critical one of our age. "

REGISTRATION IS FREE.
Registered users sign in here:
*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
 
Unregistered users can register here:

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!

*Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
*E-mail Address:
*Year of Birth:
 

(children under 13 cannot register)

First Name:
Last Name:
Company:
Home Phone:
Business Phone:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
 
E-Citizen
E-Edition
Wheels Etc.
Find a vehicle
Hot Jobs
Find a Job
Homes Etc.
Find a Home
TV Week
Find a program
Search Classifieds
Find, Buy
Place a Classified Ad
Sell
Skaneateles Journal
The Journal
New! Best Bridal
Here comes the bride. . .
Liven Up the Holidays
Fa-la-la-la-la-la-la-laaaaaa
Logo HereNew! Off the Menu
Good Eatin'!
Newspaper Ads
See it again
CNY Boats Etc.
Achors aweigh!
New! School Project
A breakdown of the new school project.
Sections
Special Sections

Top Jobs

The Citizen Copyright ©2009
A division of Lee Publications, Inc.
25 Dill Street
Auburn, NY 13021

Contact Us

Add to My Yahoo!