In the debate over operation of a large hog farm near the Buffalo National River, supporters of the agricultural operation and those who fear its impact on the environment ought to be able to agree on one thing: Monitoring is the way to know.
The history of C&H Hog Farms is filled with controversy -- over the information in its applications for permits, over the state's administrative granting of permits, and over the response of state leaders to the potential for damage to the river. The operation is allowed to house 2,500 sows and as many as 4,000 piglets. It's located in Mount Judea near Big Creek, about 6 miles upstream from where it meets the Buffalo National River.
What’s the point?
The state Legislature must fund continued study of water quality in and around the Buffalo River so it can make informed decisions about agricultural operations nearby.
The river, of course, is one of the Natural State's most beautiful and popular destinations for visitors. The National Park Service estimated its recent annual figures at more than 1 million visitors who spent about $46 million.
State officials have said the operators of the first large-scale concentrated animal feeding operation for swine within the Buffalo watershed did everything they were supposed to do, so there's little that can be done about a legally operating facility.
The permitting of the farm has sparked a move to ban further encroachment on the national river by such agricultural operations. Of particular concern is the potential environment impact of the abundance of waste hogs produce.
Now comes word that the only state-sanctioned and state-funded study of water quality in the area around the hog farm is running out of money, and there's no plan in place to continue. The University of Arkansas study, led by Professor Andrew Sharpley, was designed as a five-year effort, but it only received funding for the first year.
State lawmakers continue to weight whether to impose a permanent ban on medium and large hog farms in the river's watershed. It seems only reasonable to conclude the way to reach a conclusion is through water quality data. That takes research, and that takes money.
How can state lawmakers legitimately evaluate what's happening in that watershed without an independent study? A year is simply not enough -- and results have so far been inconclusive.
Arkansas cannot afford to get this wrong. The Buffalo River is too valuable. If it ends up polluted, it will take untold millions and a long, long time to overcome the damage to the river's reputation.
Fund the study, lawmakers. It's money well spent.
Commentary on 01/26/2015