Editorial: Payout is great for polluting the Buffalo

Recent news that the State of Arkansas had reached a settlement to pay the owners of C&H Farms $6.2 million to shut down the confined animal feeding operation (CAFO) allowed to house up to 6,503 hogs was largely met with jubilation. This was after years of legal action and activism led by the Buffalo River Watershed Alliance because of concerns that hog waste in lagoons and spread onto surrounding farm lands in the leaky karst terrain was resulting in pollution harmful to the Buffalo National River.

The CAFO received permits from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality in 2012 under a cover of darkness. The public didn’t know about the facility until it was already under construction.

At the present time, spray fields surrounding the facility are above recommended levels for phosphorus, a nutrient that can cause excess algae blooms that harm water quality and aquatic life. People who treasure the Buffalo National River had been concerned about seeing more algae blooms the longer the CAFO was in operation. In addition to water pollution, few things smell worse than hog manure – particularly from thousands of hogs in a small area.

But the settlement also raises questions. First is the secrecy surrounding the deal. There was no public input into the use of taxpayer money to buy out the owners of C&H Farms, or terms of the settlement. While The Nature Conservancy had pledged to help with funding up to $1 million, most of the money comes from the taxpayers.

Litigation to close the facility could have gone on for years without the issue being resolved. But the nature of the settlement also raised concerns. As one river supporter put it, “The problem is what got us into this mess was what got us out of it. Political backroom deals.”

Did bad behavior pay? You could say C&H Farms not only got away with polluting the Buffalo River Watershed for years, but they won the lottery on the way out. Were the farm owners made millionaires off the deal? According to the National Parks and Conservation Association, the C&H facility received more than $3.4 million in loan guarantee assistance from the federal government in 2012. One assumes that had been paid down considerably in the past seven years. So, what were the additional millions for?

The three owners retain ownership but will put it in a conservation easement. Will that also be worth a considerable amount in tax credits?

The many people who dug deep into their pockets to fund the legal challenges to the hog factory are certainly not getting reimbursed. In addition to the settlement, taxpayers had already paid several million for studies done by the Big Creek Research and Extension Team. Taxpayers are the ones taking the hit for consistently ill-conceived, ill-advised actions and decisions.

Some concerns that have been raised by advocates for the Buffalo River watershed include:

1. C&H has been exonerated instead of being held accountable for its pollution harming the number one tourist attraction in Arkansas.
2. The agreement appears to circumvent the formal claims process as outlined in Arkansas Code, which requires ADEQ to admit liability.
3. Who will be responsible for any pollution related to possible contamination from seepage/leakage from facility to wells, springs, tributaries, and waters of the State?
4. Why are only large CAFOs reportedly excluded from the state’s moratorium on siting large CAFOs from the Buffalo River watershed? Another small or medium CAFO could apply for a permit in the same area.
5. Could CAFO operators who are permitted under current regulations in other watersheds use this same kind of deal to extract funds from the state?
6. Does closure of C&H and termination of permits let C&H off the hook if any endangered species have been adversely affected by C&H’s operation?
7. C&H gets to continue to use the land for agricultural purposes, free-range livestock, forestry and single-family dwellings.
8. Does C&H have plans to apply for a permit in another watershed? Should those who live in other watersheds worry?

A recent Facebook post said those who live in other watersheds should definitely worry. “Where will the next CAFO pop up? To a river community of less importance where they can get away with whatever they please? Man, with little to no regulation, we should all start a CAFO. The payout is great.”

Becky Gillette