|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CAFOs don’t respect neighbors’ rights |
|
|
|
Dear Editor,
The Dec. 3 issue of Farm World included an article by Michele Mihaljevich titled Indiana Couple Fights for Clearance to Build CAFO. As we read the article, we couldn’t help but reflect on the experiences in our rural neighborhood with CAFOs in Indiana. We initially did not oppose the CAFOs in any way.
Even with a CAFO a mile away, and another one moving in right next door, the seriousness of the issue did not register with us. We are pro-agriculture, not strong environmentalists, and not at all against farmers making their living through livestock. Plus, we thought the state of Indiana would not allow something that would negatively impact neighbors.
In direct contrast to CAFO wannabe farmer Doug Bradtmueller’s comments in the article, which stated, “We’re wondering why a lot of (neighbors) are complaining now when they don’t understand and don’t know what they’re complaining about.”
It was only as we became more aware of the issues and the effects on us that we became concerned. We take issue with the often-repeated comment that neighbors are simply ignorant and that’s why they oppose CAFOs. The opposite was true for us and many of our neighbors. Our concerns are based on our personal experience living near two CAFOs. Three of our main concerns are strong frequent manure odor, strong dead animal odor and diminished property values.
Bradtmueller continued, “We’re not trying to upset them. We’re just trying to make a living.” Join the club. The neighbors of CAFOs were minding their own business, when along comes someone who negatively impacts their quality of life, and their own investment. Why wouldn’t this “upset” any one of us?
Mihaljevich quoted Chad Towell of Fort Recovery Construction & Equipment as saying, “But once the buildings were up and neighbors see how it is, the complaints stopped.”
Actually, once the buildings are up, there’s not much neighbors can do. We know CAFO operators who say their neighbors don’t complain, when in fact their neighbors do complain. Neighbors who do complain are often ignored or labeled as crazy or unreasonable (these are labels from CAFO operators). Keep in mind that Towell’s own pocketbook benefits from building CAFOs.
The article goes on to state that there are assumptions that manure is mismanaged.
These are not assumptions; there are cases where manure is mismanaged. Standing manure in a field, manure spilled on the road, and inadequate freeboard in a lagoon are all examples of mismanaged manure and are apparently not cause for concern with IDEM.
IDEM is only concerned with manure management when contamination of state waters has occurred or is imminent. IDEM also is not adequately staffed to respond to the many issues created by the existence of CAFOs.
Mihaljevich ended the article with a plea from the Bradtmuellers, “We’re doing it for our children … we’re also trying to teach them responsibility. It’s just something for our children.”
Those who are negatively impacted by CAFOs also have children they wish to benefit from their investments. Some are on the opposite side of this issue because of their own retirement. Some are concerned about health issues. People are beginning to see how CAFOs negatively impact the quality of life in rural Indiana. If the Bradtmuellers wish to teach responsibility, they should consider teaching their children how to respect the investment of property, the health and the quality of life of their neighbors.
Curtis and Rachel Ramer |
| 12/10/2008 |
|
|
|
|
