The state Department of Natural Resources is requiring a full environmental impact statement for an 8,000-cow confined animal feeding operation proposed for the town of Rosendale in Fond du Lac County.
A DNR spokeswoman confirmed that the decision had been made.
"It's great news," said Jamie Saul, an attorney for Midwest Environmental Advocates. "It will give the DNR time to look at the issues more thoroughly and give the citizens a chance to speak out in front of the DNR about their concerns."
Several residents of the Rosendale area have opposed the project, saying that the huge amount of manure produced could endanger water in the area, and that the huge farm would also threaten air quality.
Jim Ostrom called the DNR requirement an "unnecessary burden," but said that he and his partners have already completed extensive environmental research in their request for a pollution discharge permit from the DNR.
"At a time when the state of Wisconsin desperately needs new jobs, and our communities are in dire need of reinvestment, it is true that we also must remain vigilant about our environment," Ostrom said.
Extensive application materials have been on file at the DNR for 10 months, he said.
The DNR has the necessary information to complete a full environmental impact statement and expects to release the document in mid-December, followed by a 45-day comment period and a public hearing, according to Ostrom.
The DNR previously completed an environmental assessment for the dairy, but had not determined whether a full EIS would be required.
"We will be as cooperative as possible," Ostrom said.
The proposed farm would be set on 2,000 acres. It would create 70 permanent local jobs as well as hundreds of construction jobs, and would make $40 million in purchases per year from local contractors and vendors.
A total of $70 million would be invested by partners Ostrom, John Vosters and Todd Willer, Ostrom said.
Ostrom already owns the 6,500-cow Tidy View Dairy near Kaukauna and 2,500-cow Omro Dairy near Omro.
Mon. Nov. 17, 2008 2:20 pm
JB says:
Amazing what we put in our bodies:
Animals raised on pasture enjoy a much higher quality of life than those confined within factory farms. When raised on open pasture, animals are able to move around freely and carry out their natural behaviors. This lifestyle is impossible to achieve on industrial farms, where thousands of animals are crowded into confined facilities, often without access to fresh air or sunlight. These stressful conditions are a breeding ground for bacteria and the animals frequently become ill, so factory farms must routinely treat them with antibiotics to prevent outbreaks of disease.
Grazing on pasture is especially beneficial for cattle and other ruminants, whose bodies are developed to eat grass. The roughage provided by grasses and other plants allows ruminants to produce saliva, which helps neutralize acids that exist naturally in their digestive systems. When taken off pasture and put on a diet of grain, a ruminant will produce less saliva, causing an increase in acidity within its digestive tract. As a result, grain-fed cattle often suffer from a number of health problems including intestinal damage, dehydration, liver abscesses and even death. ii Despite the fact that grain diets can sicken cattle and other ruminants, factory farms feed these animals grain (usually corn or soybeans) because it's a cheap way to fatten animals and force them to grow to market weight as quickly as possible.
Mon. Nov. 17, 2008 2:28 pm
germantown_kid says:
MEA is an activist group that leftist Madison should love. http://www.midwestadvocates.org/
Since Wisconsin is no longer America's Dairyland, maybe MEA should petition the legislature to remove that title for Wisconsin. Change it to America's Leftist Wasteland. MEA mentions only Rosendale residents who are against this dairy operation. Uh, was there any mention of any Rosendale residents for it? NO!
Herd size of 8500 cows is slightly higher than the average herd size in California which produces more milk than Wisconsin. Do you rumhounds get the picture yet?
It's about time organizations like MEA advocate FOR Wisconsin instead of advocating against it. Find reasons TO HELP bring this large investment to fruition.
So much for John Nichols and TCT being for Wisconsin farmers and agribusiness.
Where was MEA when MMSD spent $1 Billion for a deep tunnel boondaggle that still dumps sewage water into Lake Michigan? The good old boys at the DNR like having their backs scratched by MMSD, and now the MEA.
Where was MEA when Milwaukee forced the suburbs (including Gtown) into MMSD with no representation? Then MEA has the gall to complain about SEWRPC having one Milwaukee rep on its board???
Mon. Nov. 17, 2008 3:31 pm
tasman says:
Yes, lets return to the good old days when cows grazed freely on pastures, albeit for just 6 months of the year. The rest of the time, they were tied up by the neck in a stall unable to move more than a couple of feet for 23 or 24 hours a day, every day from Fall through Spring.
Following the ingestion of tasty grass and a few noxious weeks that imparted an adverse taste to milk and cheese, the cute little bovines, like many of us often yearn to visit the bathroom.
Being untrained in proper potty procedure, Bessy would deposit their discharge on the pasture, perhaps just before a rain or if the weather was warm, would take their bathroom break whilst standing in the local stream. 'dem carp loved 'dem cows back then, as they feasted on undigested corn and other organic matter.
Yes, the good old days were not good for the environment. Every 120 acre farm had 40 cows pooping everywhere they stood.
You won't see any of this type of environmental degradation with a modern new farm. And you won't see the cows tied up 'like animals' for 23 hours a day throughout the winter season. With this farm, they'll be lounging in what is called the loafing shed between their morning and evening 10 minute jobs of providing milk destined to nourish the bodies of those who oppose them.
Mon. Nov. 17, 2008 3:39 pm
Andy Olsen says:
I really don't see what is objectionable here. Anyone who enjoys fishing, swimming or simply seeing clean surface waters should appreciate the caution DNR is exercising here.
8,500 head is mammoth by Wisconsin standards! That farm will generate more crap than a small city. If someone wanted to plop (get it, 'plop') a small city down someplace, isn't it wise to think for a bit on what impact that will have on everyone else?
If Wisconsin was a land of clear running waters, the objections would be understandable. As it is, the evidence of the need for careful action for cleaner water flows all around us.
germantown_kid, more light and less heat, please!
Mon. Nov. 17, 2008 3:45 pm
says:
8,500 head. What will that do to other other Wisconsin farmers trying to get a good price for their milk and meat?
Mon. Nov. 17, 2008 6:35 pm
Bill says:
Just make certain that the WDNR does the job they are supposed to do. Mega dairys can be sited and instructed to follow the requirements but with the downturn in the economy I doubt if the DNR has the manpower to adequatly inspect the facility to ensure those regulations are followed and maintained. Voluntary enforcement does not work well and coverups of problems will be easily done.
Mon. Nov. 17, 2008 7:31 pm
Zimmy says:
Is this the same so called farm ,Rosendale Dairy, that is already well on the way to completion on County Rd. M in the Town of Rosendale ? It has a published herd total of 11,000 as an end goal. If this is a different operation, I'd say that the town is well on the way to the cowshit capital title. People should keep in mind that it's not just about animal welfare here. Cows need water, lots, and that means high capacity wells. If the neighbors well goes dry I'm sure these 'farmers' will step up and help them out. You don't grow feed for this many animals in your back yard. It has to be trucked in and I don't mean pick-ups. Again, the milk needs to be either processed on-site or hauled away for processing; more heavy trucks either way. The other out-puts from cattle,manure,urine,methane and CO2 occur anywhere but not in this concentration. It needs to be hauled away for distribution and you don't want to be down-wind from that (it's moved by heavy truck). Who pays to build the roads for all these trucks? The 'farmers'?
For you animal lovers,in order for cows to lactate (give milk) they must first give birth. Baby cows can end up as heifers(girl cows) and go in the herd as replacements for those whose milk production falls off,die or whatever. Bulls(boy cows) most likely are castrated and become steers to become your steaks,roasts etc. Of course either sex can be turned into delicious veal.
70 minimum wage jobs. Let's all vote for that.
Mon. Nov. 17, 2008 8:06 pm
Zimmy says:
Page two,
Before you holler that it's just another NIMBY rant you should know that although I live(and have for over 50 years)within 4 miles of this so-called dairy,I had no say about it as it's in a different county and town. I just get to put up with the trucks,smells,water draw-down etc.
If you buy a house next to an airport,you probably shouldn't later complain about noise;you knew it was there. It's a different thing to have an airport built next to you without even being asked if noise bothers you
Post a Comment:
Captimes.com monitors Community Comments posted online. We reserve the right to edit or delete any message or shut down a discussion at any time if, in our judgment, comments become offensive, threatening or libelous.
Here are the top reasons a comment would be deleted.
