Search Site   
News Stories at a Glance
Painted Mail Pouch barns going, going, but not gone
Pork exports are up 14%; beef exports are down
Miami County family receives Hoosier Homestead Awards 
OBC culinary studio to enhance impact of beef marketing efforts
Baltimore bridge collapse will have some impact on ag industry
Michigan, Ohio latest states to find HPAI in dairy herds
The USDA’s Farmers.gov local dashboard available nationwide
Urban Acres helpng Peoria residents grow food locally
Illinois dairy farmers were digging into soil health week

Farmers expected to plant less corn, more soybeans, in 2024
Deere 4440 cab tractor racked up $18,000 at farm retirement auction
   
Archive
Search Archive  
   
Ohio dairy appealing denial of permit in Michigan

By KEVIN WALKER
Michigan Correspondent

 
LANSING, Mich. — The Vreba-Hoff Dairy Development Co. of Wauseon, Ohio, is poised file an appeal with an administrative law judge seeking to have the state’s denial of a permit for the proposed Bustorf Dairy overturned.

“We believe very strongly in the permit application,” said Cecelia Conway, a partner at Vreba-Hoff, about the proposed dairy. “It’s a good site. It’s got very strong environmental protections, with a three-lagoon system. There’s no valid reason for the denial.”
Bob McCann, press secretary at the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), said the denial of the permit was very specific to this proposed operation in Leonidas Township, which is in St. Joseph County.

“During the public comment period, the public submitted a number of rebuttals to the anti-degradation determination,” McCann said. “There wasn’t a valid anti-degradation determination. That’s specifically required by the federal Clean Water Act.”

The anti-degradation demonstration is the part of the application where the applicant for the permit shows how they will meet certain economic and social standards as required by law. The written decision states: “… the department has determined that the applicant’s anti-degradation demonstration has not shown that lowering of water quality is necessary to support important social and economic development in the area.”

Therefore, wrote the DEQ’s Water Bureau Permits Section Chief William Creal, the permit “is hereby denied.” The decision was signed June 30.

McCann said a recent study concerning the effects of large farms on surrounding communities had an impact on the department’s decision, but that the study’s findings were supplemented by local examples provided by the public.

“Each permitting process is just a completely separate story,” he said. “We’ve gotten a lot of people thanking us for this decision.”
Wayne Wood, president of the Michigan Farm Bureau (MFB), wasn’t one of them.

“The agency’s latest action to base permit approval on unverified social and economic concerns rather than scientific and technical standards is a symptom of a much larger disease that should trouble all of Michigan, particularly the state’s businesses,” he said in a press release. “Until the DEQ changes its attitude and tactics, the agency will continue to be one of the greatest deterrents to Michigan’s economic recovery.”

The MFB listed 18 other agricultural organizations that are opposed to the permit denial. The Michigan Milk Producers Assoc. (MMPA) was one of them, and its reaction was similar to Wood’s.
“We are opposed to the basis on which the DEQ denied this particular permit,” said Ken Nobis, president of the MMPA and a dairy farmer in St. Johns. “There’s no apparent reason for the denial based on environmental issues, but instead it appears the DEQ based their decision on social and supposed economic issues.
“This sets a dangerous precedent not only for the livestock community, but for all businesses in Michigan.”

Thomas Hughes, supervisor for Leonidas Township, where the proposed dairy would be located, was present at a public meeting in May about the issue. It was facilitated by the DEQ. Hughes said more than 100 people showed up for the meeting, creating a crowded situation.

Most of those who spoke were opposed to the proposed dairy. Out of 30-35 people who spoke publicly, only a couple spoke out in favor of the new business.

“People were afraid of runoff into ditches and into a small stream and, eventually, into the St. Joseph River,” Hughes said.
He said people also expressed concern about the spreading of manure “all over the county.” He said there are already two similar large farms nearby, one in St. Joseph County and another only four or five miles away in Kalamazoo County.

Conway said Vreba-Hoff invests considerable funds to prevent or mitigate problems at the farms the company develops.
“There are very few residences near the proposed Bustorf Dairy,” Conway said. “Most of the most vocal opponents of our farms don’t live anywhere near one.”

She also described the DEQ’s decision as precedent-setting. “It’s kind of expanding their jurisdiction based on a kind of social engineering,” she said.

She promised that if they don’t get relief in the administrative hearing, they would take their case to circuit court.

According to a spokesman for the DEQ, an administrative law judge within the Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Growth will hear Vreba-Hoff’s appeal, but “the final decision-maker is the director of the DEQ,” Stephen E. Chester. McCann said the director could uphold or overrule the recommendation from the judge, depending on the facts and circumstances of the case.

7/30/2008