![]() |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
of Waseca County Factory Farm Injunction Hearing Set for Sept. 25 in Waseca County District Court Contact: Bobby King, Land Stewardship Project, 507-523-3366; Richard Scholligerdes, 507-835-4181; James Peters, 320-634-5175 or 320-763-8458 9/24/01WASECA, Minn.-A request to impose an injunction on the construction of a controversial Waseca County factory hog operation will be considered by Waseca County District Court Judge Renee L. Worke on Sept. 25. The injunction hearing will begin at 2:30 p.m. at the Waseca County Courthouse in Waseca. Citizens Concerned for Waseca County has requested that construction on a 2,400-sow facility and two million gallon liquid manure pit be put on hold until the courts decide whether the proposed facility should complete an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). The facility is being built in Woodville Township by Peter and Paul Zimmerman. Citizens for Waseca County formed over a year ago with the help of the Land Stewardship Project to fight the rapid growth of large factory farms in Waseca County. The 2,400 sows translate into 960 animal units. If the facility had involved 1,000 animal units, state law would have required an EAW. Because of the environmental sensitivity of the area, local residents petitioned Waseca County to order an EAW. On July 3, the Waseca County Board refused to order the assessment, and the citizens have filed a lawsuit to overturn that decision. The citizens will present the arguments for an EAW Oct. 16 before Judge Worke in Waseca County District Court. The injunction seeks to stop construction until the court can rule on whether or not an EAW should be required. In addition, local citizens have requested that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) require a Federal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit for the facility. Such permits are mandatory for livestock facilities of 1,000 animal units or more or where there is a potential discharge to an already "impaired" waterway. The "impaired" designation means a waterway is too polluted to safely serve its primary purpose, such as swimming or fishing. The MPCA has refused to require such a permit on this project, despite the fact that nearby Crane Creek and the Straight River watersheds are both listed as impaired waterways. Meanwhile, the Zimmermans have started construction of the facility at a rapid pace. "We hate to go to court in order to get officials to do their job but we're running out of time," said Richard Scholligerdes, a Woodville Township farmer and Land Stewardship Project member. "We couldn't even get the MPCA or the county to do a spot inspection of the construction site when we raised concerns about how the manure pit was being built. These agencies seemed to have just handed our environment over to corporate agriculture, but we aren't going to stand for it." Earlier in the year, the Zimmermans proposed building on the same site a 1,600-cow dairy with a 25 million-gallon capacity manure lagoon system. Citizens Concerned for Waseca County filed an appeal of the MPCA Citizens' Board's decision not to order an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed dairy. The hog facility is an "alternative" to the dairy, according to a letter written by the Waseca County Pollution Control Officer. The attorney for the citizens' group, James Peters, said, "An injunction is necessary to preserve the status quo while the court hears the case for an EAW. Unfortunately, the rapid pace of construction of the hog barn forces the group to obtain a court order. Minnesota law allows citizens to petition for EAWs on controversial projects, such as this large feedlot. Waseca County should set aside the politics of industrial agriculture and follow Minnesota law." The law firm of Peters and Peters practices extensively in the area of land use regulation and environmental review. The firm has won other court cases involving environmental review of animal feedlots in Minnesota, including in Fillmore and Pope counties. In both cases, District Court judges ordered that Environmental Impact Statements be conducted for large industrial feedlots, reversing decisions by the MPCA not to require such reviews. -30- |
||||||
|
||||||