CAFO's Does Anybody Have A Solution?

For the last few days I have pondered my feelings about Grant County Commissioners response to the recent Grant County Concerned Citizens attempts to change setbacks. I am troubled that one side feels they have to win and the other side, take it or leave it.

CAFO's by their very nature pit neighbors against neighbors. Nationwide this is a major detracting feature of CAFO's. So how did the Grant County Attorney handle this issue? His opinion was this was a legal issue and bury the Petitioner's because their ideas do not matter. Is this the normal way we treat individuals with a differing opinion?

CAFO's and the problems they bring are not legal issues. They are political issues. The problem is that the tactics used are not in the best interest of the community. Elected officials that follow instead of lead need to be replaced and this group of Commissioners has failed the real test.

Here is the issue that Grant Couunty needs to resolve and with the intelluct we have in this community we need to sit down and find a solution.

There are two competing interests. The first employs numerous jobs at the plant in Milbank. It would be equally deplorable for the other side to take the position that "we do not care about jobs, we want to get rid of all CAFO's. This is poor and irresponsible. It does not take into account the needs of the cheese plant or its employees.

The evidence indicates that the demand for milk cannot be met entirely by family farmers and the could the costs of transportation of the milk to the cheese plant would increase, driving down profits. Those that advocate for the family farmers need to brainstorm and come up with ways to meet this issue head on.

Those that advocate that all family farmers are radical and selfish also miss the point. The studies indicated from the University of Iowa and other major universities do not support the CAFO's. All reliable studies indicate that the growth's of CAFO's will cause a deterioration of our rural communities to the point that we will have few laborers to meet the needs of the cheese plant?

Is this desirable? NO!

There is a gigantic middle ground and as long as we stop the discussions of the problem we will continue to move in a direction of self destruction.

Those that advocate a winner take all philosphy are creating an incredible disservice to our communities.

Our role as politicians is to solve problem. Politicians that are not stalwarts in solving problems need to be replaced.

I actually did see this motion in 2008 and presently. My concern is how we get there. Deny the request but grant studies? This seemed like a little bit of political manuevering.

I am also concerned that we need to meet the needs of the cheese plant. Everyone needs to be at the table to have a meaningful discussion.

Is this part of the plan? Was CGGCE satisfied with this proposal or are they going to continue to litigate?

Good Job! The newpaper report of this study group was unclear as to the direction of the group. The newspaper was my source of information.

Level heads will prevail and we need consensus. I think the cheese plants response is also well deserved and the county attorney as well.

My apology. The real news here is not what the vote was as reported by the newspaper. The real news is that there appears to be a willingness to sit down and find a solution.

Excellent to all involved.

This has been very interesting. What has happened here is a continuation of a story. While we may read a story in a paper it is limited to it's scope and for some people there is still more to say. Dialog adds so much more to an event than one persons perspective. I appreciate the above dialog by both participants. Communication is the key to get things done.

I imagine with so many groups using similar initials (CGGCE, CCGC, and GCCC) it does get confusing. Thanks CGGCE for letting us know what Citizens for a Growing Grant County Economy are for.

CGGCE wrote:

Carefully thought out changes to the GC Zoning Ordinance could be good for the economy and the environment.

I agree in that if any good is to be done it needs to meet the criteria of filling the need for milk AND limiting the negative impact to the environment. My understanding is that as it stands now there are not enough small farms to fill the need. Therefore large ones have filled the gap. Any studies that are used should be accurate. With accurate studies better decisions can be made to benefit everyone. I look forward to hearing more on this subject from both sides.

If you will allow a lay person to ask a question. I was wondering about one thing. Is all this talk because there is a CAFO that wants to come in now or is all this talk because people are trying to establish the rules before anymore come in?

It has been a number of days and the issue of the task force just seems sitting there. Then I reviewed your posts and and I am curious to know how large is the task force? Why are the interests of the cattle owners different than the cheese plant? Who else is on the task force? How are the studies related to CAFO's going to be distributed or are we going to keep the masses uneducated?

Will there be meaningful discussions or much of the same thing as in the past meetings? Who is setting this up and who has been invited? What steps are being taken to assure that all sides will be listened to?

If anybody knows the answer to these questions let me know.