|
VOLUME XVI, NO. 2 |
TEXAS DAIRY REVIEW |
FEBRUARY 2007 |
 |
|
|
Same agenda stalls CAFO permit |
|
|
Different interest with Same agenda stalls CAFO permit |
|
|
The Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club recently stepped forward to file a comment letter and to request a hearing on an individual CAFO permit that was within a very short time of getting final approval from the state and federal regulatory agencies. The permit had successfully passed the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ( TCEQ) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reviews when the Sierra Club filed their letter. The individual CAFO permit owner was a defendant in the City of Waco lawsuits a few years ago. Part of the lawsuit agreement was that the City of Waco is prohibited from opposing this owner’s permit or any other dairies that were in the lawsuit. But, there’s nothing to stop the Sierra Club. While the City of Waco has remained relatively quiet since the lawsuits have been settled, the permit process has not moved forward for Bosque River CAFOs as dairymen had anticipated. There’s been a big lull on the part of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). New revised TCEQ rules have been in place for two-and-one-half years but CAFO producers are still operating under the authorization of the prior Subchapter B permits. This alone, should be reason enough for the ball to get rolling---especially since state and federal agencies and CAFO producers have worked long and hard to make CAFO operations environmentally safe and sound which is what the City of Waco insisted upon when they sued the dairies. Waco based their suit on claims that Bosque River dairies were polluting Lake Waco, making their water stink and causing algae blooms. The City of Waco was involved in the rulemaking process but some of their recommendations for CAFO operations did not make the final cut. Some dairy industry leaders believe Waco is still unhappy about that and is determined, one way or another, to get their way, even if it means using other interested parties as a means to obtain their goals.
John Cowan, executive director for the
Texas Association of Dairymen (TAD) believes that this interruption of
the permit by He said TCEQ’s next step now is to sort out their options. Most likely, he said, TCEQ will undergo a comment/review and response period that could take up to 90 days. It is up to the discretion of the TCEQ whether or not to grant the Sierra Club’s request for a hearing during the 90-day comment period. If TCEQ does not grant a hearing, the CAFO permit could be issued soon after the period is over. *by Sherry Webb |
|
|
|
|
|
Who's cheating who? Who's being true? Milk choice must be honest |
|
|
The one great thing about living in these great United States of America is that we’re given choices in every realm of life. In today’s world, consumers of all products can choose from several kinds of anything to everything, which of course, includes food. Lately, the dairy case in food stores has exploded with various types of milk, giving the consumer several choices to think about besides the price, brand, and shelf life. They are bombarded with organic, hormone-free, conventional, and sub-types of all of these. But, be reminded---too many choices often confuses people and no doubt, the general public is confused. And, it’s no wonder. Do they even know what they’re paying for? The choices in milk raises several issues. One is the processor’s insistence for hormone-free milk accompanied by new labeling on milk cartons that strongly suggests this kind of milk is “safer” or “healthier” than conventional milk. The milk classified as “hormone-free” is labeled on the front of the carton “naturally produced without artificial hormones;” meaning this milk comes from cows not injected with the genetically engineered growth hormone rbST. But, is an affidavit signed by producers who pledge they no longer use the growth supplement, believable? There are no tests that show a difference between rbST and the natural growth hormone that cows produce. According to Dairy Farmers of America (DFA) there are strict fines imposed on producers who cheat after pledging their honesty. But, who’s going to catch them if they cheat? The Milk Police? And, who’s checking on the cooperatives or milk marketing agencies to see if they’re cheating on the premiums they’ve promised producers when they got them to sign these affidavits? Are the dairymen really getting the .50 cwt premium they’ve been promised? If there’s only 33’% of fluid milk produced in the Greater Southwest Milk Marketing Agency (GSA), then where does the .50 cwt. figure come from? And just because a .50 cwt. premium shows up on a milk check, does that mean it’s really there? Do the math. Figure it out. Dr. Terry Etherton, from Penn State University, has carefully studied the rbST controversy and the consequences for both consumers and producers. He has made several presentations on the subject and through his studies has compared various retail prices to learn what kinds of “commissions” producers are getting. “The bottom line is that the milk processors stand to make a big profit from the new milk category, and producers are getting peanuts,” Etherton said. ”For example, in Philadelphia, regular 2 % milk is selling for $3.89 per gallon. Organic milk is selling for $3.99 per half gallon. Etherton said he and his team could not find any rbST-free milk. However, in the Northern New Jersey and New York City market, regular 1% milk is $3.05/gallon while 1% rbST free milk is $3.40 – 4.09/gallon. Organic milk is selling for $5.29/gallon. For every 8 cents a retailer charges for a gallon of milk it is equal to $1/cwt. Thus, a $3 gallon of milk sells for $37.5/cwt. “Depending on the locale, retailers are making $5 to $13 (40 cents premium /8 cents = $5 profit) per cwt on rbST free milk, but dairy producers are only receiving 3 to 12 cents per hundredweight or .6-2.4% of the premium, if that, for giving up the right to use th rbST technology. Even 75 cents only represents 10-15% of the premium. There have even been some examples of processors trying to get the milk from non-treated cows without paying any premium at all,” he said. Although some processors are claiming the hormone-free category is consumer-driven, Etherton said it remains to be seen if consumers are responding to the new category. He surmises if they do respond and dairymen have given up their right to use the rbST technology, the rbST- free category will become commodity milk, and the price will come down. Any premiums dairymen are getting will go away, and dairymen will have lost an important tool that makes them more efficient and profitable. The trend for “better” milk started last fall when the largest processor of all, Dean Foods, began a campaign to stop accepting milk produced from cows injected with rbST, claiming this action was the result of consumer-driven demands. But, no one seems to know who these consumers are and what sampling was used for these apparently lame surveys. It’s been reported in other publications that approximately 3-5% of milk consumers are asking for “better” milk. But, is it a fair sampling? Who are these consumers, where do they live, what age group, what income range, what ethnic background, what education level, etc.? There are broad assumptions, but no pat answers. It has also been reported that these supposed consumers are more educated. More educated than who? The 3-5% are paying a price for a difference in milk when there is no difference. The label and the price are the only things that make the milk “different.” The milk is the same. This fact is backed up by the FDA disclaimer on the back of a hormone-free milk carton that reads, “There’s no significant difference in this milk and conventional milk.” If these consumers are so educated, then why haven’t they studied the scientific information about rbST or read the FDA disclaimer? Apparently, the hormone-free milk lovers have been led to believe they’re doing the healthier thing to provide their families with “safer” milk, even if they have to pay an exorbitant price for it. But, as the milk industry knows, the general public is not very concerned about how cows produce milk and as long as it’s in the case, they don’t really care. It’s been assumed by many milk experts the demand for hormone-free milk is from consumers in metropolitan areas supplied by large grocers and specialty markets. But, city folks just don’t get it sometimes and to be involved in a purpose, as these hormone-free milk lovers are, does not necessarily mean they’re informed. One thing for sure, if you ask about hormone-free milk in rural Texas, most people will say, “what are you talking about?” It’s probably safe to assume there’s no great demand for hormone-free milk at the local grocers in Stephenville, Texas, which includes HEB, Wal-Mart and Piggly Wiggly. The actual labeling on hormone-free milk cartons has been called deceptive in more ways than one. Has anybody pointed out the other hormones injected in cows for reproductive purposes? According to the American Science on Food and Health all milk produced by cows contains hormones as part of the normal biology of reproduction and lactation. There is no such thing as hormone-free milk. To educators and other milk industry professionals, this little bit of fear that has been instigated so consumers will buy “safer” milk is a marketing tactic, a visual technique with labeling, that is just another way for the big guy to make a buck by clearly taking advantage of the consumer’s ignorance. There are discrepancies all over the place. It appears that processors are sabotaging their own industry by having milk compete against milk and taking away the “goodness of milk” by perpetuating a health issue that is not there. We all have the right to our choices. But, those providing the choices should provide honest products. Who’s cheating who? Who’s being true? *by Sherry Webb |
|
|
|
|
|
Governor appoints new TCEQ commissioner |
|
|
The good news for dairy producers is the recent appointment of a new commissioner for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). H.S. Buddy Garcia, of Austin, was appointed by Gov. Rick Perry for a term that will expire Aug., 31, 2011. Producers are hoping Garcia will look into the permit application delays and problems they have experienced since the new rules were approved in July, 2004. Producers are still operating under the authorization of prior Subchapter B permits. As Texas Deputy Secretary of State, Garcia is one of the state's top ambassadors and is a leader in efforts to promote new economic development. Garcia also works with the TCEQ, the U.S. International Boundary and Water Commission and their Mexican counterparts on numerous environmental concerns. He also serves as the border commerce coordinator, a position he has held since 2004.Garcia formerly served as deputy legislative director for the governor and special assistant to the governor for Texas/Mexico border affairs. As the governor's special assistant, he was instrumental in the negotiations between the State of Texas, the U.S. State Department and the Republic of Mexico with regard to water owed to Texas under a 1944 water treaty between the U.S. and Mexico. Garcia was also a special assistant to then-Lt. Gov. Perry for South Texas, Gulf Coast and environmental issues. From 1991 to 2000, Garcia served in various capacities for Sen. Eddie Lucio, including chief legislative director and policy advisor. During his service for Sen. Lucio, he was responsible for drafting legislation related to natural resources, agriculture and other issues, and also served as committee clerk for the Senate Committee on Agriculture. Garcia is the recipient of the prestigious 2006 Ohtli Award from the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He earned a bachelor's degree in political science from Southwest Texas State University. The appointment is subject to senate confirmation. *by Sherry Webb |
|
|
|
|
|
Well is very deep subject at Huckabay, Texas |
|
|
Huckabay and other Erath County residents are up in arms about a proposed commercial waste disposal well to be located on a 10-acre parcel of land in a major recharge zone of the Trinity Aquifer. The property is on State Hwy. 108, eight miles north of Stephenville, Texas, and two miles south of the Huckabay Independent School, grades K-12. Community residents fear if this well is approved by the Texas Railroad Commission, it could possibly endanger the county's underground drinking water supply and has the potential to present other hazards initiated from the well's physical location. A commercial oil and gas waste disposal well is subject to ad valorem taxes by the county, the school district and the Middle Trinity Groundwater District. It also allows the owner and/or operator to be paid a considerable amount of money to accept oil and gas industry waste from anywhere outside Erath County and even outside the state. Although 729 individuals opposed the well by sending letters to the Commission asking that the permit not be approved, their requests were denied. The permit applicant and owner of the property, N. Barba Enterprises, asked for, and was granted, a public hearing by the Commission set for some time in March. In response to Barba's actions for a hearing, Huckabay residents, with the help of Bill Gordon, are organizing a public meeting to inform citizens of the dangers associated with commercial oil and gas waste disposal wells. Gordon is a retired manufacturing engineer with 40 years experience including 20 years in the oil and gas industry. He has been active in opposing these particular kinds of wells in Erath County since January, 2006. He was recently elected president of Erath County Citizens for Clean Water. The "Huckabay Oil and Gas Waste Disposal Town Hall Meeting" is scheduled for Sat., Feb. 17, 7 p.m., at the Huckabay School gymnasium. Guest speakers will be Dale Henry and Jim Popp. Henry is a retired petroleum engineer with 40 years experience and served 15 years as chairman of the Fox Crossing Water District in Mills County. Popp is chairman of the board of directors for Texas Citizens for a Safe Future and Clean Water---a Wise County group that has been fighting a commercial disposal well since March 2005. The people who live in the quiet little community of Huckabay are largely farmers who own multi-acres of land that in some cases has been handed down from generation to generation. These farmers and other community residents are worried that because the proposed disposal well would be located in a major aquifer recharge zone, it could destroy the current water supply, deplete and contaminate it, for future use. It has been noted although oil and gas companies assure residents commercial disposal wells are safe, containment failure and surface spills have definitely occurred in many documented cases, resulting in water contamination and land value losses. Should the well be approved, opponents surmise State Hwy. 108 would be beat down heavily because of increased truck traffic as tankers deliver loads of salt water and possibly other materials from production and newly drilled wells to the waste disposal site. A major concern is for the Huckabay school located only two miles from the well site. The excessive truck traffic would pose a severe road hazard to school buses, students, parents and other residents on the much-traveled highway. Opponents expect tanker trucks would be running seven days a week, 24 hours a day creating excessive nigh time noise and traffic hazards. The havoc, disturbance, and overall danger, is much more than what the community wants to deal with. The permit application proposes to inject, under pressure, up to 30,000 barrels (1,260,000 gallons) of oil and gas waste per day. “This could happen every day of every week of every month of every year,” one local resident said. Others agree, "This is something we just don't want around here." It has been pointed out that the main water supply for Stephenville, rural Erath County and most surrounding counties is from groundwater wells. Part of the recharge (from rainfall) area for this aquifer, or ground water supply, is north and northwest of Stephenville. The proposed commercial waste disposal well would be located within the recharge area for this aquifer. Because the proposed disposal would be located north of Stephenville, water from rainfall entering into the aquifer (water supply) will "flow" north-to-south and get into the city of Stephenville's water supply from fresh water wells located around town. "We have to remember that we all share the same aquifer and any time contamination enters the aquifer at one point, that contaminant can migrate for miles and show up anywhere. All who share this same ground water supply need to be concerned and get involved," said Roger Pack, who assumes an active position along with his wife Bonnie, in opposing the proposed commercial waste disposal well.
Erath County Citizens for Clean Water is
accepting donations for the legal fund which will fight the approval of
this and other commercial waste disposal wells seeking permits in Erath
County. Please send donations to: ECCCW, PO Box 166, Bluff Dale, TX 76433.
Contact info: Roger & Other factors to be considered are potential surface problems associated with the proposed well, such as, the many documented instances of surface spills and other discarded pollutants at some well sights. The proposed well would be located approximately one-half mile from the headwaters of the North Bosque River which could result in runoff contamination of the river system. In speaking with other community leaders who have had such waste disposal wells imposed in their areas, residents said the result has been an extreme reduction in land values surrounding such sites. Sources said this occurs immediately upon approval of the permit for the site. If groundwater contamination occurs, everyone in the greater area will suffer the same result because of the shared underground water supply. Property owners many miles away, especially downstream from the site, could experience the same results as someone closer to the site. *by Sherry Webb |
|
|
|
|
|
Texas tailgate team bound for World Expo |
|
|
The High Ground of Texas is sending a team of over 100 community members and regional Tailgate Party Sponsors to the World Ag Expo 2007 on Feb., 13-15, 2007. Contacts made from this show will add to the successful recruitment and expansion of the dairy industry and the various value-added agriculture projects into the West Texas region. The World Ag Expo is the largest event of its kind in the world and is held annually at the International Agri-Center in Tulare, California. Based on the show’s current growth and momentum in the agriculture and dairy industry, this internationally recognized event will attract exhibitors and visitors from 50 states and more than 75 foreign countries. There will be over 2,000 exhibitors and over 250,000 attendees at the show. Providing over 2 million square feet of exhibits, the show also offers over 100 seminars on a variety of ag-related topics and hosts the Hi-Tech Heritage Complex, The Farm Equipment Museum, and the Agriculture Learning Center. Additional industries will be targeted during the show, including Heifer Replacement Companies, Dairy Veterinary Services, Dairy Processing Plants, Manufacturing Companies of Ag Equipment, Implement Companies, Livestock Transportation Companies, Ethanol, Distribution Centers, Ag-Service Suppliers, and more. Since 1999, the marketing efforts of the High Ground of Texas at the World Ag Expo has resulted in over $250 million dollars of new investment and hundreds of new jobs in the region. Since that time, the High Ground has welcomed more than 65 new dairies to the region with 10 more currently under construction. The High Ground of Texas will host their famous hospitality event, the “5th Annual High Ground of Texas Tailgate Party” on Wed., February 14. from 3:00 – 5:00 pm in the VIP tent on the show grounds. This annual Tailgate Party continues to be a huge success, serving over 500 potential clients each year, resulting in over 150 annual visits to the region regarding business opportunities. Inquiries from prospective new clients have also been made following the event by numerous ag-related businesses soliciting information about possible expansion projects. Back by popular demand, the entertainment for the event will be provided by the band “Texas Crossroads” from Shamrock, Texas. Catering will be provided by Lynn Allen of Stratford, Texas. Major Sponsors for the 2006 event included First Ag Credit, Wells Fargo, Enviro-Ag Engineering, Hilmar Cheese Company, Don Pool Construction, Brandon Reid Construction, Select Milk Inc., Lonestar Milk, Inc., and Dairy Farmers of America (DFA). Brown, Graham & Co. will sponsor entertainment and DeLaval, Inc. will sponsor catering. Over 65 Regional Partners continue to help host and sponsor this exciting marketing event. The Amarillo Economic Development Corporation is, once again, sponsoring a Hospitality RV to be located in the parking lot of the World Ag Expo for the pleasure of all prospects, regional dairymen, sponsors and guests of the High Ground. Sponsorships for the 2007 upcoming event are currently available. High Ground Representatives from Perryton, Dumas, Dalhart, Stratford, Hereford, Friona, Muleshoe, Borger, Amarillo, Tulia, Plainview, Dimmitt, Brownfield, Levelland, Canadian, and Shamrock have made their plans to attend the 2007 World Ag Expo. For more information about the 2007 World Ag Expo marketing initiatives, contact the High Ground of Texas office at (806)366-7510, higround@xit.net, or www.highground.org. |
|
|
|
|
|
All internet content of this site
are Copyright © 2005-2007 TDR Publishing Co. All Rights Reserved. |
The
ugly snake has raised its head again. It might be a different color,
but apparently it has the same agenda in mind. Plain and simple, it’s
what you call stalling the process.
