Doyle Childers, head of the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, claims to be looking out for the taxpayers' interests. He issued a statement May 18, 2005 in which he reiterated his support for removal of most of the structure of the Boonville Bridge, considered necessary by many for the future survival of the Katy Trail. Childers wants to save re-constructions costs, and liability insurance and maintenance expense.
But is Childers looking out for the taxpayers' interests when fostering the MoArk Productions hen-laying expansion project? What entity is going to pay to clean up the waterways polluted by chicken litter and manure from as many as 4 1/2 million birds?
According to documents gathered by Scott Dye, national director of the Sierra Club Water Sentinels Program, for well over a decade state officials, and now recently Childers, have been aware of numerous operational problems at MoArk's three existing egg production facilities. Although MDNR officials have documented manure leakage problems, improper and over-application of wastes spread too close to losing streams (recharge points for groundwater) and drinking water wells, and dumping of manure on highways by MoArk trucks, the MDNR has done nothing to stop these illegal practices. And what's even more egregious to many opposing the expansion, is that the MDNR has allowed MoArk to continue to operate without Missouri State Operating Permits and without certified wastewater operators. (MoArk alleged that their operators took a Crowder College program and received certificates upon completion; however, they failed to take individual tests provided for State certification.)
In a similar disregard for Missouri law, MDNR notes show that MoArk constructed and operated a water containment source and an associated composting facility without the required construction permit or Missouri State operating permit. For this and several other violations MoArk agreed to pay civil damages of $27,000, a compromise over the $50,000 the MDNR allegedly had sought. But with that "pat on the wrist" the violations continued.
"The MDNR has done a marvelous job of taking notes while watching crap rush into the streams," Dye said.
At one point Inspector George Parsons wrote:
Our office has been investigating the MoArk Egg Production facilities in Newton and Jasper counties. They have been doing a terrible job of managing the manure produced at these facilities. Several violation notices have been issued. I would like to request a geological evaluation of the areas around the MoArk Production barns.
Soon after the Division of Geology and Land Survey concluded that overall MoArk's sites "lie on very permeable residuum and bedrock. Surface contaminants will move eventually into the sub surface easily and quickly." This conclusion, according to Dye, means that Missouri has "an inch of dirt over Swiss cheese." "Shouldn't that be reason enough to disallow an operation that leeches manure everywhere?" Dye concludes.
"The script should read like a horror movie to those whose health and quality of life is affected," said Mark Adams, one of the organizers of the Southwest Missouri Citizens Against Local MoArk Expansion. Inspection after inspection noted lack of compliance in rectifying overflowing manure pits, repairing pit wall frames hit by loaders and preventing spillage of manure around loading areas. Citizens issued complaints about illegal dumping of manure near streams and private wells and even over private fences. One individual reported a fish kill on his pond from an above ground slurry application that caused the death of 32,230 fish. When MoArk employees spilled two tons of litter on a highway near Boulder City, according to a handwritten memo from Parsons, they cleaned it up with sawdust. Other MDNR violations stated that sawdust encrusted manure illegally was piled everywhere on MoArk's property.
When it became obvious that no more manure could be spread in the watersheds that already were becoming contaminated--a situation that takes many millions of dollars to alleviate according to clean water activists--a suggestion was made to "market the manure north of the Spring River in areas of row crop production."
"These watersheds to the north are not on any impaired list due to excess nutrients," a report states. "Also the areas in row crop country are a little more sparsely populated." In other words, move the contamination to another area less likely to bring complaints.
And what about odor control? In a report from the MDNR in August of 2001 "failure to have an approved odor control plan in place" was cited. Odor appears not to have been brought up again by the MDNR in spite of complaints made by citizens as far away from the site as 2 1/2 miles and as recently as April of 2005.
In a memo dated March 14, 2005 Childers told MoArk:
Please be aware that although we will do everything in our ability to keep this project on schedule, mitigating factors such as public interest has a tendency to impact those dates. The department does not wish to unduly delay your project. Please be aware that we have received a petition requesting a public meeting on this project.
"Most Americans believe that there are agencies to protect them until the sobering discovery that isn't the case," Dye said. Instead Dye believes that because of politics and budget cuts, the DNR needs the assistance of citizens. "Only citizens are minding the store." And whether Republican or Democrat, Dye believes "that there should be no partisanship when it comes to a clean environment."
Childers recently said that the state has lost jobs to other states that could have been preserved if the state had been more responsive to business. “We have got to use best-management practices and the best technology, but we can’t force these jobs out of our state and maintain our economy. That is part of the challenge the governor has given me......"
In response to why many citizens may not have spoken out regarding MoArk's practices, Dye believes that preserving jobs was a key issue, but, he countered, having a supply of uncontaminated drinking water should be a fundamental concern that outweighs all others. A contaminated water supply would "take generations and generations to restore," he concluded.
The public meeting is scheduled for June 8, 2005, beginning at 6 p.m. at Crowder College, Neosho.
Complete documents are listed below. Click on each link.
Neosho council dodges MOARK issue
Comments