Central Wisconsin Is Determined to Stop Proposed Factory Farm

Protect Wood County Wisconsin and Its Neighbors, says
a growing citizens movement in central Wisconsin

News the corporation owning a proposed factory farm is seeking Supreme Court review of a state appellate decision threatening the project has citizens determined to stop the operation of the complex first proposed in 2012 and sited in central Wisconsin.

Even as the Wysocki Family of Companies plans to pollute the region with 10s of millions of gallons of liquid cow manure annually while depleting ground and surface waters, communities plan to protect the water and their homes.

The case is 2015AP001258, Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga, [(Wisconsin Court System), (Mal Contends), (Mal Contends), (Golden Sands Dairy LLC v. Town of Saratoga, (Wisconsin Court System), (Wisconsin Rapids Daily Tribune), (Mal Contends), (WSAW-TV)]. [Note, enter   15ap1258   in the Appeal Number field, leave the rest of fields blank and hit search at bottom-left of the linked Wisconsin Supreme Court page.]

The prospects for Wysocki to succeed at the Wisconsin Supreme Court in this litigation are not conditioned on case and statutory law in Wisconsin with respect to an area of property rights in vested rights law.

Industrialized agriculture is power-politics, corruption of the law and the will to destroy entire communities without regard to anything or anybody beyond money for the publicly subsidized Wysocki corporation.

The Republican Party has backed Wysocki with a series of legislative and regulatory assaults on the generations-long commitment of Wisconsin to protect water.

Of the several sources contacted who oppose the Wysocki factory farm in central Wisconsin, all say they do agree their families mean little in the face of the Republican Party's commitment to abdicate protecting Wisconsin waters by simply declaring that protections such as Wisconsin's Public Trust doctrine have been misinterpreted by policymakers.

The language on the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources webpage now reads in part: "Wisconsin citizens have pursued legal and legislative action to clarify or change how this body of law is interpreted and implemented."

The Republican Party of Wisconsin looks for increased clarity in the coming months, (Johnson, Wisconsin Public Radio).

After-all, with respect to public water resources, recall the Orwellian report that "at just this moment it had been announced that Oceania was not after all at war with Eurasia. Oceania was at war with Eastasia," (Orwell, 1984).

From an email communication sent to supporters of Protect Wood County, (Wisconsin), and Its Neighbors, a motley crew of Winston Smith Wisconsinites refusing to bend to the threat to their homes and their health.
---
Phone contact this afternoon to the clerk's office of the Wisconsin Supreme Court confirmed Wysocki has appealed the State Appellate Court decision regarding vested rights.  He officially filed his appeal today to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. 

What now and what does this all mean?  First, the court will determine if it will indeed hear the case or reject the appeal. According to www.wicourts.gov The losing party in the Court of Appeals may ask the Wisconsin Supreme Court to hear the case, called a Petition for Review. The Supreme Court receives about 1,000 petitions for review each term, and agrees to hear approximately 100 of these cases (Sept.-June).

The Wysocki -vs- Saratoga case will first receive a preliminary review to determine if it should even be considered by the Justices.  If it is determined that no review is appropriate the case is over and the State Appellate ruling stands.  If it is determined that it may be a reviewable case it will then go before the Justices, it takes the vote of at least three justices to take a case on a Petition for Review and have it placed on the Supreme Court calendar.

There is no solid information on how long it will take to determine if our case will be heard at the Supreme Court level. We will be watching this closely and will let you know as soon as we hear a determination.

What can be done while we wait?  First and foremost, we continue to bring forth the truth regarding the effects of the proposed CAFO to our community and groundwater in a very public and outspoken manner.  Multiple avenues are open to us to continue to spread the word about Wysocki and the potential contamination from his proposed project.

Once again we need all hands on deck spreading the word loud and clear to Wysocki that we will continue to fight back no matter how far he chooses to push.

Assistance needed in the following areas.

Parade Crew Needed!

June 18th
12:00 pm - 2:00 pm
Once again we are looking for fresh ideas and friendly faces to join our Parade Committee.  We need to start brainstorming and organizing this year's float for the Cranberry Blossom Parade.

Participating in the parade allows us to connect with thousands of locals to spread the word about our situation and our fight. This event is an excellent opportunity to share our message and encourage others to stand with us.

The parade date will be upon us faster than you think, do not delay and register your commitment today.

Please click here to sign up for Parade Committee

Sign Crew

Spring repairs are needed after winter weather damage.

Some of our ladies need attention.  Sun damage, old age, and winter weather have taken a toll on signs throughout the community.  We are looking for volunteers to hit them with a little fresh paint and perhaps replace ones that have come down over the past few months.  Anyone willing to assist in this endeavor would be greatly appreciated. 

We will also be ordering new plastic signs for those lost to the winter snow.  We will keep you posted as to when these become available.

Please click here to sign up to be a part of the Sign Committee

Water Testing Event

Plans are in the works!

We have no idea what will happen in the courts with Wysocki. What we do know is we are not about to let our guard down and become complacent.  Instead we will continue to be proactive in protecting our community.  Part of being proactive is once again conducting tests to prove our water in Saratoga is pristine.

This is just a heads up that we once again will be hosting a water testing event later this summer.  We do not have specifics cemented in stone, but wanted to alert everyone to be watching for further information.

Regardless of the latest court decision, our fight with Wysocki is not over.  Everyone is once again encouraged to have their water tested and included in the town's records.

Stay tuned for further updates coming soon.

Wisconsin Clean Water Activists Post New Video, Enough Is Enough

Clean water advocates from across Wisconsin gathered
at the state capitol in Madison to demand clean and
safe water. Image is from a video filmed in November 2015
(Mal Contends)

Clean water assaults have citizens on edge

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."
—Martin Luther King, Jr.

The Public Trust Doctrine Article 9, Section 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution states the waters are in trust for public purposes. The Public Trust Doctrine is the foundation of water law in Wisconsin, and it is under full-spectrum attack by Republicans.

To politicians' claims of 'we didn't know,' the cesspool of Republican politics becomes clear as children are rushed to hospitals because mothers bathed infants and toddlers in toxic bath water, (Seely, WisconsinWatch),

A child at a Wisconsin clean water rally holds a
sign reading A CAFO poisoned my water.
Image is from the Video, Enough Is Enough, by Eric Peterson

Protect Wood County and Its Neighbors from central Wisconsin is out this week with a video chronicling the fight for clean water in the Badger State.

People want fresh water and protections for their families from Big Ag operations, CAFOs. CAFOs are massive factories that render tourism and recreational regions economic and environmental moonscapes by poisoning groundwater and surface water.

Clean water advocates face a sophisticated political machine protecting polluters. Two pro-pollution Wisconsin state representatives are betraying

Bill Iwen of Kewaunee County, Wisconsin has his retirement
cut short by corporate polluter

their communities to protect corporations that direct pathogens into families' homes and environments. This is a simple fact that caused one polluters' protector, State Rep. Scott Krug, to threaten a libel suit against this site in 2014. Krug backed down.

The pro-polluters are State Rep. Joel Kitchens (R-Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin) and State Rep. Scott Krug (R-Nekoosa, Wisconsin). They are considered vulnerable Republicans despite representing gerrymandered districts drawn to elect Republicans, and are protected by their areas' corporate media.

From Criste Greening of Protect Wood County in central Wisconsin:

For those of us living in Saratoga and Rome and who have been in our fight from the beginning, it has been a long and emotional four years. Four years of frustration, long hours of travel, thousands of meetings, and complete mental and physical exhaustion.

Clean water drives are a common site in Kewaunee County
in northeastern Wisconsin.

However, there has also been life-long friendships made spanning the miles across our beautiful Wisconsin countryside. Connections that will not diminish and fade when this fight finally comes to an end.

Thank you Eric Peterson for producing such a heart wrenching video that brought me to tears. And thank you to all our brave citizen warriors across Wisconsin who are standing up and fighting back.
---

Lynn Utesch at center is a veteran, small farmer and clean water
activist. Utesch and family live in Kewaunee County
in northeastern Wisconsin. Utesch has launched a state assembly
campaign against a prominent political shill for water polluters,
State Rep. Joel Kitchens (R-Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin).

The new video produced by Eric Peterson of Protect Wood County is below. It chronicles the fight for clean water from people in northern Wisconsin, northeastern Wisconsin and central Wisconsin as citizens now see the normalization of water poisoning.

"I watched the people watching the video at the meeting last night and the emotion was strong; frustration with the weakening of our protections, anger at the people supposed to be protecting our environment, and encouragement with the power of our group and like minded citizens successfully making progress around our state," writes Don Ystad of Rome, Wisconsin in an email this morning.

Enough is Enough

Big Ag Pressures Wood County Board to Drop Groundwater Protection Initiative

Dairy Business Association fights local efforts
protecting against toxic, liquidized cow manure. DBA
members are the worst polluters of Wisconsin waters.

Protect groundwater and we'll pollute more, says Dairy Business Association

Update: See also this morning's Farms, environmentalists spar over manure measure (Jonathan Anderson, Gannett Co. Newspapers); and rebuttal letter to the Board by Midwestern Environmental Advocates, dated August 12, 2015.
 ---
As residents of Wood and Adams counties fight to protect groundwater, Big Ag in Wisconsin as embodied in the Dairy Business Association, is arguing for the right to pollute.

The Dairy Business Association (DBA) in a letter dated August 6, 2015 to the Chair of the Wood County Board of Supervisors (and Cced to Board members) calls a proposed groundwater protection ordinance "unnecessary and potentially counterproductive."

The proposed ordinance will be considered in a County Board meeting on August 18th.

The DBA's members are among the worst polluters in Wisconsin, and DBA lobbyists still disingenuously cloak its operations in the image of the small farmer as industrialized factory farming corporations take over the production of agriculture in the Dairy State in the model of the huge Concentrated (Confined) Agricultural Feeding Operation (CAFO).

The text of the August 6 DBA letter by John Holevoet, Director of Government Affairs for the DBA, is reproduced below.

The DBA is politically aligned with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and local State Rep. Scott Krug (R-Nekoosa) both of whom worked to decimate the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources water protection division, with Walker now calling for dismantling the federal EPA to whom clean water advocates have appealed for water protection from DBA members.

The DBA's Holevoet admits clean water advocates' point on groundwater and pollution and argues in a ludicrous line of reasoning that protecting groundwater by law will "discourage investments in new technologies and facilities that would better prevent the possibility of groundwater contamination."

Protecting groundwater by law will only hurt you, argues the DBA in its letter reading more like a threat.

Blue Baby syndrome (aka methemoglobinemia now prevalent in Yakima Valley in Washington state, caused by too many nitrates in surface waters and aquifers) will come to Wisconsin, and the DBA will keep on its pursuit for money over people.
---
August 6, 2015

Mr. Lance Pliml

Wood County Board of Supervisors, Chairman
4030 Woodhaven Court
Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54494

Dear Chairman Pliml:

This letter is written on behalf of the Dairy Business Association (DBA) and its Wood County members, regarding the proposed Animal Waste Storage, Nutrient Management and Groundwater Protection Ordinance. DBA urges you to vote against this proposed ordinance, which has a questionable legal basis. This type of regulation is unnecessary and potentially counterproductive.

When the County Board previously discussed the proposed ordinance, Corporation Counsel Peter Kastenholz was clear that he did not believe the county has the authority to impose its own groundwater standards. The authority to produce such regulations has been granted to Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR); it has not been delegated to the counties. This is no doubt why the most recent ordinance draft avoids direct groundwater regulation and attempts to address this issue through manure storage standards and the implementation of nutrient management plans (NMPs). These are areas over which counties have had some limited authority.

The ordinance's attempt to walk the fine line between legality and illegality calls its enforceability into question. At a minimum, concerns over the legality of certain provisions will likely produce legal challenges if enforcement attempts are made. For example, the ordinance has the potential to require NMPs for some very small farming operations. Any farmer who builds or alters a manure storage facility is subject to the requirements of the new ordinance, which includes the preparation of an NMP.

Nutrient management planning is worthwhile and should be encouraged, but it is doubtful the county can require it for non-CAFO farms unless the county provides cost sharing. (See ATCP 50.54(2).) Large farms that fit the legal definition of CAFO already have to prepare NMPs. This ordinance would impose additional requirements on such farms. This could create an issue if/when the requirements in a county manure storage permit conflict with the state requirements these farms must follow. This ordinance sets the stage for a situation where the county would deny a permit to a farm seeking to make an alteration to their manure storage that is required of them by WDNR.

This ordinance is meant to safeguard groundwater quality, but it will likely discourage investments in new technologies and facilities that would better prevent the possibility of groundwater contamination. Existing manure storage facilities are not generally subject to regulation under the proposed ordinance, unless they are altered in some way. This would discourage farmers from adding additional storage or updating existing facilities because that would subject them to all of the requirements associated with an animal waste storage plan. Discouraging investment and improvements on farms is not good public policy.

Farmers that only stack manure but might be considering constructing a more secure manure storage facility could be discouraged by the ordinance requirements. This could prevent them from growing their herd size and leave them stacking manure even if the runoff risk from their stacking location is far greater than it would be from a new manure storage facility. We want to encourage farmers to grow, invest, and innovate. This ordinance does the opposite.

Agriculture plays a vital role in Wood County economies. Our farmers are valuable members of our community. They are our neighbors and we know them to be good stewards of the land. This ordinance is a solution in search of a problem. There is no reason to believe that groundwater quality is significant concern in Wood County, nor that it is likely to become one. DBA asks you to seriously consider whether this ordinance is worth the added costs to farmers and all the taxpayers of Wood County, especially considering that portions of it may be unenforceable.

Unfortunately, this ordinance appears to be an example of legislating rules for the entire county based upon unfounded concerns regarding one proposed farm in one small section of the county. Wood County is home to a handful of geographic regions, two radically different types of soil, nearly three dozen municipalities, and approximately 1,000 farms ranging from cranberries to dairy. It is a diverse place. Even if the proposed ordinance was a sensible approach for southern Wood County, which it is not, it would make absolutely no sense for the clay fields found in the northern portion of the county. To dictate policy for the entire county based upon incorrect perceptions that only relate to a small corner of the county anyway is foolish. It would be bad governance, and we ask that you reject it.

Regards,

John Holevoet
Director of Government Affairs

cc: Wood County Board of Supervisors

Groundwater: Diminishing Resource, Increasing Conflict

Christa Westerberg has a piece out in the Wisconsin Lawyer.

As Scott Walker partners with polluters to befoul our waters, Westerberg writes:

Wisconsin’s waters have been protected since before it was a state. The concept of the public trust doctrine, or the state holding navigable waters in trust so they remain forever free and open to the public, was passed down from the Northwest Ordinance to the Wisconsin Constitution, article IX, section 1.1 State statutes have since been crafted to protect Wisconsin’s groundwater and surface water and to give the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) primary responsibility for overseeing this resource.

What Walker and Big Ag are doing in befouling our waters is crazy and likely unconstitutional.