Proposed Rosendale factory farm would be largest in Wisconsin

Opponents say environmental impact must be considered

Anita Weier  —  10/31/2008 11:50 am

Most people know Rosendale as a village speed trap along Highway 26 near Oshkosh.

But it soon might be known for the proposed Rosendale Dairy, potentially the largest dairy farm in the state, with 8,000 dairy cows and 300 beef steers.

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources is considering a pollutant discharge permit application by James Ostrom of Kaukauna, whose company MilkSource currently owns and operates two other large dairy operations -- a 7,000-cow farm in Outagamie County and a 2,500-cow facility in Winnebago County.

The current proposal covers phase one of the project, which would contain 4,000 dairy cows. A second phase would be considered by the DNR at a later time.

The DNR has completed an environmental analysis but hasn't decided whether the "confined animal feeding operation" -- more commonly known as a factory farm -- requires a full environmental impact statement.

Opponents, including residents of the Rosendale area and Midwest Environmental Advocates in Madison, say there should be no question that an operation that would produce 75 million gallons of manure and wastewater per year requires a thorough analysis.

"This would be in effect the third largest 'city' in Wisconsin in terms of biological waste production, after Milwaukee and Madison," said Jamie Saul, an attorney for Midwest Environmental Advocates.

Under state law, owners can populate a farm with up to 999 "animal units" -- 700 dairy cows -- without a DNR permit, Saul said, saying land has been cleared, concrete has been poured and construction has been started.

"The quality of the air we breathe and the water we drink is jeopardized by this new factory farm," said Elaine Swanson, who lives in nearby Pickett and is a member of People Empowered to Protect the Land.

The huge dairy operation would be located in Fond du Lac County, which already has seven large dairies with at least 1,000 cows, said Liz Spaeth-Werner, an agricultural environmental specialist for the DNR in the northeast region of the state.

According to Todd Ambs of the DNR, there are 178 of these industrial-type farms in the state. By far the largest number, 150, are dairy operations. There also are 11 poultry, nine swine and eight beef operations.

Ambs said that Rosendale would be the largest dairy in the state, though a existing turkey facility has more total animals.

"This is very much a booming industry in Wisconsin," Saul said, estimating that 40 applications are pending with the DNR, either for new mega-farms or expansions of existing farms.

"The law requires a more extensive environmental review than the DNR has provided," he added. "Until they do the full environmental impact statement, they can't have the best understanding of the impacts of this massive new facility. We are trying to persuade them to do that."

The farm would affect both air and groundwater, Saul said. Neighbors worry about odor and disruption of their rural life.

The DNR's environmental analysis says water usage at the farm would be 52.5 million gallons per year for phase one, which the state agency is now considering.

"This volume of water usage could have an effect on groundwater levels in the area," the document states.

The environmental analysis also says that four high-capacity wells, each 500 feet deep with 250 gallons per minute pumping capacity, have been proposed for the operation.

"Tests indicate there will be no drawdown to impact the neighbors' water," Ostrom said in a phone interview. "We will have a very environmentally sound farm."

He added that the efficiency and large scale of the farm means that it is a low-carbon footprint form of dairy farming.

"We spend less on carbon resources per pound of milk produced. We consume less petroleum-based products such as fuel, and we don't use chemical fertilizer. We likely will have advanced manure technology in the second phase," Ostrom said.

The application for the facility says there ultimately would be 10 tanker loads of milk leaving the dairy on a daily basis, as well as one load five days per week of protein mix coming in for feed and about 54 loads of haylage and silage per day during the harvest seasons.

"It is a good thing that there is traffic because then there are jobs," Ostrom said.

Fifty people would be employed at the dairy, the property tax base would improve and goods would be purchased locally, he said, adding that the company has contracted with dozens of small businesses for construction work.

According to the application submitted to the DNR: "The manure storage facilities only need to be emptied annually. 80 million gallons is equivalent to 13,000 semi-truck loads."

Stored manure would be land-applied to fields.

The DNR analysis says that primary potential impacts to water quality due to the Rosendale Dairy project are associated with the production of manure and process wastewater. Nitrogen, phosphorous and pathogens associated with manure and process wastewater can have detrimental effects on groundwater, surface water and wetlands. Forms of nitrogen are toxic to fish and can affect human health, primarily in fetuses and young children, when present in drinking water.

The company's other two farms have operated for 15 years and eight years respectively, Ostrom said. "Every time there is a concern we try to address it as best we can," he said when asked if there had been complaints from neighbors.

The company offered a tour of one of its existing dairies to those in the town and village of Rosendale, but few people attended.

"As with all their dairies, the owners of MilkSource have adopted a good neighbor policy and are willing to continue to be open and forthcoming about their plans," the document said.

Several sites in Fond du Lac County were considered, but this site was found to be best, the application said. "There is no evidence that these minimal impacts would be further reduced by scaling down the size of the operation."

Tom Bauman, permit coordinator for the DNR, said there is no set time for a decision on whether there should be a full environmental impact statement. "We are still looking at comments and formulating a response. There were good comments raised," he said.

Ambs said a public hearing will be conducted once a draft permit is available for comment, and that the permit can be rejected.

Anita Weier  —  10/31/2008 11:50 am