Animal Legal Defense Fund First Animal Law Symposium: Factory Farming: Impacts on Animals, Humans, and the Environment

CAFOs - Environmental Protection Perspective Session

“Ground Water & Soil Contamination:

Industrial Animal Agriculture’s Secret Sins”

Elisabeth Holmes, Attorney, Blue River Law, P.C. and Of Counsel, Center for Food Safety

   

The Goal

SDWA-10-2013-0080

SD

WA

-10-

2013

-008

0 A

PP

EN

DIX

A

The

info

rmat

ion

incl

uded

on

this

gra

phic

repr

esen

tatio

n ha

s be

en c

ompi

led

from

a v

arie

ty o

f sou

rces

and

is s

ubje

ct to

cha

nge

with

out n

otic

e. A

RC

AD

IS m

akes

no

repr

esen

tatio

ns o

r war

rant

ies,

ex

pres

s or

impl

ied,

as

to a

ccur

acy,

com

plet

enes

s, ti

mel

ines

s, o

r rig

hts

to th

e us

e of

suc

h in

form

atio

n. T

his

docu

men

t is

not i

nten

ded

for u

se a

s a

land

sur

vey

prod

uct n

or is

it d

esig

ned

or in

tend

ed

as a

con

stru

ctio

n de

sign

doc

umen

t. Th

e us

e or

mis

use

of th

e in

form

atio

n co

ntai

ned

on th

is g

raph

ic re

pres

enta

tion

is a

t the

sol

e ris

k of

the

party

usi

ng o

r mis

usin

g th

e in

form

atio

n.

APPENDIX A

0 2,000

FEET

APPROXIMATE SCALE

PHOTO SOURCE: WASHINGTON 2011 NAIP ORTHO-IMAGERY-18 INCH DATA, WASHINGTON STATE ORTHOIMAGE PORTAL [HTTP://GEOGRAPHY.WA.GOV/ORTHO/]

L

DC-14 DC-09

DC-07

DC-04

DC-05

DC-03

DC-01A

B

D

C

F

E G

XU3

H I

J

K

M(D) M(S)

N O

P

Q

DC-03D

DC-05D

XU1 XU2

LEGEND

“SHALLOW” SURFICIAL AQUIFER MONITORING WELL (17)

APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY OF DAIRY FACILITIES

EXISTING EPA WELL (7)(LOCATION APPROXIMATE)

“DEEP” SURFICIAL AQUIFER MONITORING WELL (3)

ADDITIONAL UPGRADIENT “SHALLOW” SURFICIAL AQUIFER MONITORING WELL [AT RESPONDENTS DISCRETION] (3)

LAND WITHIN BOUNDARY NOT OWNED OR OPERATED BY RESPONDENTS

RESPONDENTS OWNERSHIP BOUNDARIES

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH

The  Reality  –  Toxic  Algal  Bloom,  Lake  Erie  2014  

The Reality - Blue Baby Syndrome  • Reduction in oxygen carrying capacity of blood • Moderate symptoms include vomiting, diarrhea, lethargy • Severe symptoms include slate blue color of skin, lips, nails • Infants more susceptible because of low acidity in gastrointestinal systems

“Alarmingly, Defendant Cow Palace’s briefing seems to suggest that this Court wait to act until a young infant in the area is first diagnosed with methemoglobinemia, a health effect that occurs at the lowest dose of nitrate consumption. “ Judge Thomas O. Rice, Order re Cross Motions for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 320 at 103 (E.D. Wash. No. 13-CV-3016-TOR).

The Reality - Nitrates & Health Concerns

•  Pregnant women and infants (reproductive issues, neural tube defects)

•  Thyroid problems •  Cancers •  Compromised immune systems •  Lacking a certain enzyme •  Not just ingesting through water use in cooking,

but daily usages increase risks (e.g. brushing teeth).    

Soil •  Protects ground water and surface water •  Soil health influences crop health •  Long-term soil quality •  Filter •  Climate health / carbon storage •  We need to improve soil quality, not

saturate it with unnecessary nutrients.

Comparison of Groundwater Use •  Nationally: Over 15 million households

rely on wells for drinking water. •  Arid State: In New Mexico 90% of

population relies on groundwater for drinking water (even those on public systems).

•  Water-Rich States: In the Great Lakes Basin 8 million people use groundwater for drinking water.

Groundwater – Surface Water Connection

•  Nationally: USGS estimates 30% of U.S. streamflow is ground water.

•  Arid State: In New Mexico ground water is a “major source” and “substantially contributes” to surface water flows.

•  Water-Rich States: In the Great Lakes, surface water’s groundwater content ranges from 60% up to 80% - 90% in some areas.

Contamination from groundwater can then enter

surface waters.

Regulatory Approaches? •  State NPDES / CAFO permits don’t usually

address groundwater. •  If they do, it is in a toothless fashion (e.g.

New Mexico’s stalled Dairy Rule, Michigan’s 5,000 animal unit requirement, or by “agency discretion”).

•  Soil health and groundwater concerns protected by nutrient management plans (a CAFO’s “blueprint”), but are not followed.

Focus on Fields: Nutrient Management Plans, aka the Dairy “Blueprint”  

•  Account for manure nutrient content before applying to crops

•  Account for soil nutrient levels before applying manure to crops

•  Apply nutrients based on realistic yields •  Apply when precipitation & winds are low •  Avoid applying to bare ground •  Test soils •  Maintain records •  Goals = prevent surface water runoff, protect

groundwater, protect soils  

Representative Sample of Efforts to Address Ground Water Contamination

from CAFOs

•  Washington – RCRA Lawsuit

•  Wisconsin – SDWA, RCRA, CERCLA Petition to EPA

•  California – RCRA, state tort lawsuit

Blue  River  Law,  P.C.  

ContaminatedDrinking Water

Wells

Dairy Farm

DrinkingWaterWell

Irrigated CroplandLeaching Fertilizer& Lagoon Nutrients

Sand & Silt

Lagoon

SepticLeaching to

Groundwater

ContaminatedDrinking Water

Well

Water Table

Yakima River

Water Table

Irrigated CroplandLeaching Fertilizer

Manure

GENERALGROUNDWATERFLOW GENERAL

GROUNDWATER

FLOW

Nutrient-Rich LagoonEffluent Applied to Fields

Preferential

Flow Path

ContaminatedDrinking Water

Well

DrinkingWaterWell

Septic Tank

Fractured Basalt

Fractured Basalt

Water-Bearing Zone

DeeperBasaltAquifer

Shallow Alluvial Aquifer

SaturatedZone

UnsaturatedZone

Figure 1: Conceptual Site Model for Lower Yakima Valley Project

EPA Study: Sources of Groundwater Contamination

Figure 2: Nitrogen Cycle

If nitrates get below crop root zones, they migrate down to ground water.  

EPA Nitrogen Cycle + Crop Root Zone

Crop Root Zone

Dairy *

Other Livestock *

Irrigated Cropland

Septic/Biosolids

Other

58%30%

7%

3% 2%

* Does not account forlosses due to volatilizationand dentrification

Figure 6: Nitrogen Generated by Major Sources in Yakima County

Dairies Contribute to the Nitrate Contamination Problem

EPA’s Initial Findings of Nitrate Contamination    

KJKJKJ

KJKJKJ

KJ

KJKJ

KJKJ

KJ

UW

UW

43UW

43

UW

43

UW

@?

&-

&-

&-

@?

@?

@?

@?@?

@?

@?@?

SO-10 | 3590 ppm

WW-10 | ND

WW-06 | 0.73 ppm

WW-17 | 22.7 ppm

WW-16 | 23.4 ppm

WW-12 | 46.7 ppm

WW-13 | 44.4 ppm

WW-14 | 43.4 ppm

WW-11 | 23 ppm

LG-15 | 900 ppm

WW-15 | 30.2 ppm

LG-14 | 1400 ppm

LG-13 | 1703 ppm

SO-09 | 13700 ppm

W

est Lateral

0 0.45 0.9 1.35 1.80.225Miles¯

Gro

undw

ater

Flo

w D

irect

ion

Sample Type@? Upgradient Well

&- Supply Well

KJ Dairy Lagoon43 Manure PileUW Application Field

@? Downgradient WellDairies

Liberty/BosmaDeRuyterCow PalaceD & A Dairy

Gro

undw

ater

Flo

w D

irect

ion

* D

eriv

ed fr

om U

SGS

SO-07 | 16100 ppm

WW-09 | ND LG-10 | 380 ppm

LG-11 | 500 ppm

SO-08 | 3040 ppm

WW-07 | 1.2 ppm

SO-03 | 9210 ppm

LG-04 | 1600 ppm

LG-05 | 1600 ppm

LG-06 | 1803 ppm

SO-04 | 2110 ppm

WW-08 | 12.9 ppm

LG-07 | 1703 ppm

LG-09 | 1100 ppm

LG-08 | 1200 ppm

SO-05 | 13600 ppm

SO-06 | 960 ppm

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000Dairy Cluster: Total Nitrogen (ppm)

upgradient ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- downgradient* Data Represented in Log Scale

ND ND

LG-12 | 290 ppm

Figure 15: Dairy Cluster: Total Nitrogen Concentrations in Water Wells, Lagoons, Manure Piles, and Application Fields

Resource Conservation & Recovery Act 42 U.S.C. § 6972 Citizen Suit Provision

• Past or present generators, transporters, owners, operators of treatment, storage, or disposal facility,

• Who is or has contributed to past or present storage, treatment, transportation or disposal of solid or hazardous waste,

•  Which may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to human health or the environment.  

RCRA Open Dumping •  RCRA outlaws disposal of solid waste in a

manner that constitutes “open dumping”. (42 U.S.C. § 6945(a))

•  “Disposal” is the discharge, deposit, injection, dumping, spilling, leaking or placing of any solid waste… (42 U.S.C. § 6903(3))

•  Into or on land or water such that the solid waste or any constituent thereof may enter the environment or be emitted into the air, or discharged into any waters, including ground waters. (Id.) (emphasis added)

•  Contamination occurs beyond “solid waste boundary” (40 C.F.R. Part 257.3-4(a))

CARE and CFS v. Cow Palace Dairy, et al. (E.D. Wash. Case No. 2:13-cv-3016-TOR)

•  15+ years in the making •  Grassroots advocacy to pushed for data collection •  Sampling results confirmed residents’ fears •  Majority of residents on well water •  EPA’s Agreement with Dairies did not go far enough. •  Plaintiffs’ Lawsuit: Under RCRA, these Dairies’

manure management practices cause: –  Imminent & substantial endangerment to human

health and the environment –  Violation of open dumping laws

Blue  River  Law,  P.C.  

Cracked  Manure  “Seal”  

Blue  River  Law,  P.C.  

Calf  Pen  Drainage  &  Cracked  Catch  Basin  

Blue  River  Law,  P.C.  

Silage  Leachate  

Blue  River  Law,  P.C.  

Stockpiled  manure  &  compost  rows  

Blue  River  Law,  P.C.  

Compost  

Animal Pens

Blue  River  Law,  P.C.  

CARE and CFS v. Cow Palace Dairy, et al. (E.D. Wash. Case No. 2:13-cv-3016-TOR) Order on Motion for Summary Judgment

(Jan. 14, 2015)

•  Manure is a “solid waste” under RCRA. •  Over-applications “untethered” to DNMP. •  Lagoons leak, compost leaches. •  Human health impacts = environmental impacts. •  Factually specific case, with egregious practices. •  Remediation trial May 2015. •  Industry push for federal legislation.

California CAFO

•  RCRA and state tort law claims •  Minority community below poverty line •  Thick fly infestations •  Unendurable stench •  Completely unusable water •  Years of Water Board enforcement actions

disobeyed and inadequate to clean-up pollution •  August 2014 Plaintiffs won opposition to motion

to dismiss: bad actors must comply with federal and state laws

Questions

Lynn Henning, Goldman Environmental Prize Winner (2010)

Lynn Henning, Goldman Environmental Prize Winner (2010)