NWA editorial

A ban worth having

Governor, advocates agree on Buffalo approach

Arkansas' stated policy should be the protection of the Buffalo National River, but figuring out exactly how to do that can hardly be summed up in such a simple sentence.

The Buffalo is a natural asset one would think the Natural State would jealously guard. And many folks thought that was the case until state and federal agencies were either rendered impotent or, maybe worse, collaborative in the establishment of a large-scale hog farm within the geographic area that feeds the state's most famous river (except, perhaps, the one that bears its name). C&H Hog Farms received a general permit to operate with up to 2,500 sows and 4,000 piglets at a time, all part of an operation to supply Cargill Inc. with meat. The decision stirred up many Arkansans for its apparent lack of concern about potential pollution of the country's first national river.

What’s the point?

A negotiated proposal for a five-year ban on hog farm permitting near the Buffalo River is a step in the right direction.

Last week, we got a little clearer picture of the future from Gov. Asa Hutchinson and advocates of a permanent ban on hog farms in the watershed. The idea of a permanent ban has failed to garner the kind of legislative support it needs, so Hutchinson and those advocates have agreed to propose a five-year ban instead.

Why? Because scientists with the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture are studying the impact of C&H in Mount Judea, to gather data on what its operation means to the Buffalo River watershed.

We hope lawmakers will support the five-year ban, which Hutchinson backs because it will give state officials time to evaluate the science. Advocates for a longer-term ban believe the science will matter in building support for a longer-term ban, but are glad to have the governor's support for the five-year version for now.

After five years, the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality director would be required to decide whether to extend the ban to a permanent rule or to do away with the ban altogether.

Kicking the can down the road, as they say, looks like the right move today. If the science shows water quality issues, the state will have more evidence on which to base its response.

But what if the science doesn't provide the evidence necessary?

Even then, Arkansas should take all steps necessary to ensure any new proposal are critically analyzed and given public scrutiny. One of the most disappointing aspects of C&H Hog Farms' process was how easily it was permitted without the public knowing much about it.

There is no place -- certainly not in Arkansas -- like the Buffalo River. It is ludicrous to have gone through the long and laborious process to have it named a national river to then allow operations nearby that will have harmful impacts on the river. Arkansas has plenty of places where hog farms and the like can be built; it has only one Buffalo River.

Commentary on 07/06/2015

Upcoming Events