Post A Comment
Email
Print
Type Size:
Small
Large

County votes against proposed dairy

By Nick Hytrek Journal staff writer | Posted: Wednesday, January 30, 2008
story_photo

SIoux City attorney Jeff Poulson, representing opponents of a3,600-head dairy operation near Lawton, Iowa, speaks during a public hearing by the Woodbury County Board of Supervisors Tuesday. At left is farm opponent Kevin Miller of Lawton, Iowa. (Journal photo by Tim Hynds)

SIOUX CITY -- Developers proposing a 3,600-head dairy north of Lawton, Iowa, were dealt a setback Tuesday when the Woodbury County Board of Supervisors voted to recommend the denial of the group's construction permit application.

The board's 4-1 vote, along with the transcript of nearly two hours of public testimony, will be forwarded to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, which will decide whether to issue the permit in early March.

"Obviously, we're disappointed," said Dr. Greg Bleeker, a Visalia, Calif., veterinarian who would operate the dairy as a partner with Lance Mouw of Tulare, Calif. "I think from the state of Iowa's standpoint, our permit application and manure management plans will be at and above what the state requires.

"But at the end of the day, you have to ask, 'Is that where we want to be?' There's a strong sentiment against the dairy. Where we go from here is a good question."

Could Tuesday's vote cause developers to scrap plans to invest an estimated $25 million in the Jersey North dairy three miles north of Lawton?

"We'll see," said Bleeker, a Sioux Center, Iowa, native.

Meanwhile, dairy opponents rejoiced in the board's decision, but acknowledged that their fight is not finished.

"We're very ecstatic. We hope (it leads to) a new change in Iowa law," said Kevin Miller, who lives a mile from the proposed site. "We need to keep sending letters to the DNR and our representatives."

The county's action does not kill the project. Its recommendation is one of many criteria the DNR considers when deciding whether to issue a permit. The DNR has issued permits to projects in which a county has recommended a denial, said Bob Palla, a DNR environmental engineer.

"Normally, if they meet the rules and standards and the law, we would issue the permit," Palla said.

The majority of the more than 100 people who attended the hearing in the Woodbury County Courthouse basement opposed the dairy, which would occupy 120 acres currently owned by Walter Reinholdt near the intersection of 120th Street and County Road K49.

Several of those who spoke against the dairy said they were concerned how the farm would affect their quality of life and property valuations. They voiced concerns about odor, erosion and potential threats to water quality. They pointed to what they said were flaws in proposed manure management plans that have yet to gain DNR approval.

"What really bothers me is you guys have not had a town hall meeting to tell us what is going on. You thought you would just slide it in under us," said Jason Schoenrock, who lives in rural Hinton four miles from the site.

Engineers and agronomists said the dairy is designed to meet all state regulations. The dairy also would have a positive economic impact on the area, said Chris Mondak, a dairy specialist with the Iowa State University Extension.

"Dairies generate jobs," Mondak said. "Dairy owners do tend to purchase goods and services locally."

Before voting against the project, county board members said there were too many unknowns about the dairy's potential effects on the environment.

"I can't see any way to vote for this," supervisor Larry Clausen said. "I'd love to, but there are too many unanswered questions."

Bob Batcheller, who cast the lone vote in support of the dairy, said he has always supported economic development in the county and that the DNR wouldn't grant a permit if the project didn't meet state environmental regulations.

"I trust the DNR. I trust them to do right by the people of Woodbury County," Batcheller said.

Nick Hytrek can be reached at 712-293-4226 or nickhytrek@siouxcityjournal.com.

<!--vmix_1683534-->



Previous Next
Post A Comment
Email
Print

Story Comments

JustZFacts wrote on Feb 17, 2008 12:41 PM:

" We're facing a similar situation in Carrington, North Dakota. A mega-dairy from Canada wants to locate within 3 miles of our town... seemingly not caring about close neighbors and townspeople who don't want to put up with the stink, ground water contamination, and health issues that seem to come along with huge operations of this sort. It was gratifying to find this news article online and read the comment section. Hooray for your County Board of Supervisors! It must feel great to know that they listened to your facts and opinions, took them to heart and voted accordingly. We're not so sure about some of our community leaders who have seemingly been working for months (or longer) on this project without telling the public about their dealings. If you would like to read about our plight, go to www.stinkfreecarrington.com. I've put a link to your site so that our concerned citizens can read your article. We would appreciate any helpful information about facing a situation of this sort. And, thanks again for such an informative article.

"

Reality Check wrote on Jan 30, 2008 9:35 PM:

" Looks like some of the Superviors had some backbone and listened to the people for a change. As for Mr. Batcheller who voted for the project because he votes for economic development projects, get a clue - do you pay attention to anything, boy am I glad your not running again. This was all about a stinking dairy that was trying to fly in under the radar.

As far as providing any economic boost with jobs with great wages, it wouldn't be here. Go down to the dairy in Luton or Wayne and see for yourself who works there. I doubt very few if any of these people lived in the comunity before the dairy at Luton opened. Did anyone see the pictures of trailer park in Nebraska where these migrant dairy workers lived? Who is supporting who?

What these developers need to realize it's not about them but the people who live in the area now!

"

Not fooled! wrote on Jan 30, 2008 8:56 PM:

" Well fortunately with this proposal, unlike the Luton location, we had the ability to talk to people from Luton and Sloan and get some "facts" and the fact of the matter is this: They did NOT produce the local economy boost they claimed they would. They did NOT produce the "quality" jobs they said they would. And without welfare, foodstamps and free healthcare their labor force wouldn't be able to afford working there either!! BUT, they most certainly DID produce the odor and nuisance they said they WOULDN'T. Now why would anybody possibily think this site would be any different!! And you know why these guys are trying to shove these on us? Have you priced property in CA lately? $7000/acre wouldn't make a good down payment. And check into CA air quality laws once. We and Iowa law are easy prey. And thanks to quiet,peaceful communities like ours these people have a dumping ground for their multi million dollar operations so they can make their dough to afford their plush lifestyles in CA. If this onslaught continues expect one in a community near you!!! Iowa legislators, wake up already!!!! "

inbred wrote on Jan 30, 2008 5:23 PM:

" I'm sure that the lawton resident that called me inbred would not be willing to lose 20 to 50 percent of the value of their home in the name of progress. "

Serious? wrote on Jan 30, 2008 10:56 AM:

" It was estimated that this structure would contribute 88,000 to Woodbury...and that's a generous estimate, assuming they kept on their promise and purchased equipment and material locally (which if the Jersey South operation in Luton is any indication they wouldn't). With the amount of damage they would do to all the major roads in the area, the loss of property values (estimated 20% accross the board), the harm to local farmers that already live in the area, and the distruption to local businesses...there is no way you can argue that this project would be "good business". And that's all totally economic. Their going "beyond DNR requiremts" was attempting to claim 450 points on their Mater Matrix out of 880, 10 over the minimum, and over 50 of those points were legitimately challenged at the meeting. Even with all of that aside, are you really willing to sacrifice the well-being of dozens of families living within 2 miles of the proposed site for the possibility of a very small amount of economic development? When did people stop mattering?

I congratulate the Supervisors for doing what was right and the citizens of Lawton for putting up a fight!

"

Read More and Post Comments 10 comment(s)

Please note: The following are comments from readers. In no way do they represent the views of The Sioux City Journal or Lee Enterprises. We will not edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to not post or to remove comments that violate our code of conduct. No comment may contain potentially libelous statements; obscene, explicit or racist language; personal attacks, insults or threats. Terms of Service

Sponsored by

Weather

Currently
64°
Sun
83°/58°
Mon
86°/62°

Events Calendar

Other Publications