Buffalo River chief still hopes to stymie swine

Official: Pollution-risk report of farm flawed, permit invalid

Posted: March 26, 2013 at 2:21 a.m.

The chief administrator of the Buffalo National River said Monday that he is still hoping to pursue administrative remedies short of requesting an injunction in an attempt to halt the operation of a new hog farm in Newton County.

This story is only available from our archives.

Northwest Arkansas, Pages 7 on 03/26/2013

Excellent story, Ryan. Thanks for keeping this issue in the paper. NC has a moratorium on hog farms and we are afraid they are looking to move to other states that have lax regulations.

Posted by: dcoody06150747

March 26, 2013 at 7:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

only in Arkansas would the state approve a hog farm to destroy our crown jewel. But, stupidity has always been our strong point. This state deserves nothing but shame, tourists are already saying that they are not coming back.

Posted by: Osage

March 26, 2013 at 8:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

This is almost unbelievable to me. The absolute stupidity of even the THOUGHT of having a 6,500 animal hog farm on the banks of this tributary to a national scenic river in "The Natural State." But it surely does reinforce the stereotype of white-trash Arkies in the Ozarks, doesn't it? C & H Farms ought to be lynched and run out of the state.

Posted by: SPA

March 26, 2013 at 10:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

The Pollution Control and Ecology Commission has rarely lived up to its name.

Posted by: Coralie

March 26, 2013 at 12:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Serioulsy? A legitimate business is trying open in our state and all we can think about is that it might not be pretty along the banks of the river? I haven't been down the river since 1991, but I'm guessing this isn't the only farm along the river.

Posted by: superdave10

March 26, 2013 at 1:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "A legitimate business..."
Given the slipshod, and possibly illegal, way in which the permit was issued, "legitimate" is only an assumption.

RE "...is trying open in our state..."
In part because other suitable states had enough sense to prohibit CAFOs.

RE "...all we can think about is that it might not be pretty along the banks of the river?"
That is not the issue, and you would have to be ignorant of the situation or dishonest to ask that question.

RE "I'm guessing this isn't the only farm along the river."
If you think the CAFO is a farm like other farms in the area, you shouldn't pretend to post knowledgeably about farms.

Posted by: AlphaCat

March 26, 2013 at 2:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Never swim downstream of a pig farm or a sewer plant. Everythings got to go down the river sometime in one form or another.

Posted by: JailBird

March 26, 2013 at 4:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Right, Superdave, anything goes as long as it makes money for somebody.
Profit and jobs are the ultimate goals of humanity.
But I'm sure you wouldn't sell your own grandmother--or would you?

Posted by: Coralie

March 26, 2013 at 6:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

There's already chicken litter practically everywhere, above and below ground. Mix this extra phosphorus with the FRACKING chemicals that have recently been added, and then pile on a bunch of HOGWASH to make it just right. That's great, but please consider revising the name from "The Natural State" to something more appropriate.

Posted by: pyatt33

March 29, 2013 at 8:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Don't buy pork. When you say "I want sausage on my biscuit", you are really saying "I want a hog farm in my backyard".

Posted by: pyatt33

March 29, 2013 at 8:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Pork is not the problem, agri-business on the scale of this CAFO is the problem. Factory farm practices may enable pork at the supermarket to be cheaper but the true cost of all the external impacts will be borne by downstreamers forever.

Not all pork comes from CAFOs. Pork lovers can still in good conscience buy patronize small local producers like Mason Creek Farm, who exercise the highest standards both for the environment and for the quality of life of the livestock. Owners Glenn and Rose are very proud of their farm, and for good reason: it is one of just a handful of farms in Arkansas that are certified by the Animal Welfare Approved program. (see http://www.animalwelfareapproved.org/) Mason Creek Farm pork is free of additives, hormones, antibiotics etc. I enjoy it perhaps once a month at the most. I consider it a treat, not a daily staple.

When (if?) the true cost of meat production (all kinds) is passed on to the consumer of that meat instead of being heavily subsidized by USDA or whoever, economics will drive most folks to eat a lot less meat, resulting in a healthier diet for humans, and a happier planet for the rest of the creatures who live here.

Posted by: FayFan

March 29, 2013 at 12:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal )