The Sterling Town Board approved the building permit for a proposed 2,400-head hog operation Monday night.

While those seeking to build the farm, Jeff and Bonnie Parr of Ferryville, have not yet applied for their state and federal permits to run the operation; it appears there is little to stop it from being built. This is despite considerable vocal opposition at public meetings where the farm project has been discussed.

In the past week, there have been three meetings dealing with the proposal, a meeting of the Vernon County Land and Water Conservation Committee and two meetings of the Sterling Town Board.

The land and water conservation committee voted to hold off on a decision on either a new livestock siting ordinance or a moratorium until the next land and water conservation meeting on July 13, which should be followed by a public hearing on the issue. From there the committee will have to forward either the ordinance or the moratorium to the county board, which isn't scheduled to meet until Aug. 7.

With the building permit approved, Bonnie Parr said on Tuesday morning that the couple is "just about ready" to submit paperwork for the only other two hurdles it must cross to run the facility — the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) 313 standards permit and the NRCS 590 nutrient management plan regulation permit.

"We have just a couple of things to finish up before they can be submitted," Bonnie Parr said.

The largest crowd appeared at the town of Sterling's regular board meeting last Thursday night. About 100 people showed up to participate despite pouring rain and thunderstorms. Sterling Town Chairman Marvin Christianson said it was the most people he's seen at a public meeting in West Prairie "ever — I can assure you of that."

The crowd heard from Jeff Parr, who owns the land near Retreat where the facility is planned. Parr said he wanted to address the group because of what he felt was misinformation being circulated. Parr passed out a photo of another hog barn that is similar to the one he wants to construct.

"One of the reasons we wanted to do this is because we were milking in a 42-cow barn and we are at the point we either have to expand the operation or do something else," Parr said. "I know down the road manure storage is going to be forced on everyone. Can you justify building a pit for 42 cows? I am at the age where I can build a new facility from scratch and do it right. I got the opportunity to do this and do it environmentally safe, to the best we can. It is time to do something."

Parr said the building would be 51 feet wide by 397 feet long and would be"open ventilation with side curtains." There would also be an eight foot manure pit underneath the floor. The facility would be able to store up to 1.2 million gallons of waste, Parr said.

Parr said the operation would be able to raise two groups of hogs per year from 12 pounds to 250 pounds and he estimates they would produce about 680,000 gallons of waste per year. The extra storage capacity would is designed in to accommodate times of the year when the application of waste is delayed because of weather or for any other reason, Parr said.

Parr said the building will be built to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) 313 standards which covers manure storage facilities, Parr said.

"We can't just build this thing," Parr said. "We have to submit what we want to do and the state is going to say 'yes it will work or it won't work. So, there are standards we have to follow.

Parr said the operation will be regulated by the NRCS 590 nutrient management plan regulation, which dictates how much waste can be applied per acre. Parr said according those standards he will be able to apply 3,800 gallons of manure per acre which means he will need 180 acres of cropland to apply the waste. Parr said he intends to "knife" the manure into the ground and none of it will be spread on the surface.

"The nutrient management plan, the more I get into, the more I think it is probably a good idea for anybody whether you are using commercial fertilizer or not," Parr said.

Parr said he is requires to sample to the soil in five- acre grids and will design the application of waste to fit the soil needs of those grid samples.

"So, I am hitting the spots that need more and the spots that need less I won't be over fertilizing," Parr said. "So, there is a good possibility I won't be putting on as much fertilizer. We are placing out there what we need."

Parr said he will be required to retest the soil every four years.

Parr said rumors that he will not have enough land to spread waste are unfounded as he will have 240 acres of land available between his land and land his family owns. Parr also addressed the issue of a shutdown plan and said he is required by the 313 standard to have a plan to close the operation if he is no longer in business.

Lynn Harrison, who is a former president of the Wisconsin Pork Association and is vice-president of the National Pork Board, also spoke, saying he raises 10,000 hogs a year in similar facilities within the village of Elk Mound. Harrison said he built his first building in 1987 and has barns located 500 feet from his house. Harrison said there is a grade school a quarter of a mile from his barns. Harrison said he has never had a complaint about odors from his neighbors.

When asked about neighbors with existing health problems Harrison said his wife has had asthma and is not affected by the hog operation, but is affected more by household dust.

When asked about building the facility just under the 1,000 animal unit limit that has tighter regulations, Parr said he will have 95 percent of those regulations covered by the records he will be required for his nutrient management plan. Harrison said the difference is the 1,000 animal unit operation or Confined Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) has to submit those records to the state instead of a local agency. Harrison said Parr will keep those records, but will not be required to send them to the state every year.

When asked about concerns over building on karst topography that is known for leakage into the groundwater, Parr said he is following all state and county regulations that control building or injecting manure near sinkholes.

Another resident asked about rumors that Parr is considering partnering with other producers and eventually putting up eight additional structures like the one being proposed. Parr said, "We don't know at this time what is going to happen for sure. It might be that another company puts them up, too, I can't answer that."

When asked if there have been health studies done on these types of facilities Harrison said the Pork Council has done studies and they have found adverse long-term health effects from confinement operations. Sterling resident Jane Brothen asked about a John Hopkins study that indicated that fumes from these types of facilities can be toxic even miles away. Parr handed out his own study saying household chemicals can produce more harmful effects than a hog facility.

"There are all kinds of studies out there that can give you any answer you want for whatever question you are asking," Parr said.

Brothen asked Parr if he intends to test all the neighboring wells to make sure there is no contamination, to which Parr responded that he will not.

Anita Zibton asked State Senator Dan Kapanke about state regulations that seem to prevent local units of government from controlling operations like the one being proposed. Kapanke said the state animal siting regulations in DATCP 51 were developed with many public hearings that took into account many points of view.

"Everybody had a say," Kapanke said. "The whole idea behind the agriculture siting rule is to grow agriculture in Wisconsin. We are an agriculture state. If someone like Jeff wants to put in hog or dairy or chicken operation there are rules and regulations that apply, that are very strict by the way. If they follow the rules as stated, they can do it, and Jeff is doing that."

"But if the local people say they don't want it, we don't have the power to enforce that," Zibton said.

Kapanke said the county needs to consider zoning to have more control over land use issues.

"If you as a group want to zone you have to step forward," Kapanke said. "That is a decision you have to make."

Crawford County board member Phil Mueller was present at the meeting and said Crawford County was one of the first with an animal siting ordinance and asked if Parr would voluntarily go under the more restrictive CAFO regulations even though they would be under 1,000 animal units. Parr said he had "not ruled that out."

County supervisor Maynard Cox said he was upset that so many oppose a legitimate farming operation that is following the rules.

"I am the county board supervisor for this area and I have kept an open mind as much as I can possibly keep it," Cox said. "Right now there is nothing the town can do and there is nothing that the county can do."

Cox said his property value has more than tripled in 20 years because it is in Sterling Township and the hog operation is less of an impact than some existing farms.

"I probably won't get elected again, but I don't care," Cox said. "Some of the questions you are putting this man through… this is an entrepreneur.”

Brothen and William Holzi asked the town board not make a decision on the building permit or any other action, so they can pursue and injunction with the DNR.

LWC Meeting

The concerns over the status of the operation and what the county can do to ensure it is safe continued at a special land and water conservation meeting on Monday.

The committee considered how to proceed issue by either recommending the county board pass new county livestock ordinance that would require a county permit and lower the CAFO standards down to farming operations that are between 500 and 1,000 animal units, or to impose a moratorium on all construction in that range until the county has time to consider its options.

Brent Denzin of Midwest Environmental Advocates said it is typical in such situations that counties use a moratorium to give then time to make decisions on ordinances that will have a long-term impact.

Richard Castelnuovo of the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture and Attorney Stephanie Hopkins said using a moratorium on operations of this size and including the Parrs could have a legal ramification. Castelnuovo said it is common to use zoning to keep agricultural land use and residential areas separated to minimize conflict. Castelnuovo said it is also common to use moratoria to give public bodies time to sort out the issue, but in this case the Parrs may be too far along in the process and even if the county was able to implement zoning, this operation would likely be in an agricultural zone.

Hopkins said the county may not be able to be more restrictive than the ordinance that is already proposed, so a moratorium may not be worth the risk.

"It is difficult to come here and hear that one individual has more rights than a bunch of individuals," said county resident Adrian Caldwell. "How can we move forward when there are so many voices saying what we need to do is to look at this?"

Caldwell asked the committee look for a "win-win" solution.

Jessica Luhning asked the committee to consider the possibility that the Parrs may be able to incrementally expand their operations, as has happened in other locations around the state, and end up with a number of hog facilities instead of just one.