Editor, Times-Union: In the ongoing saga of the CAFO lament, please tell our group what part of health and environmental risks do the CAFO advocates not understand. Should a group be allowed to knowingly set out to foul the land, air and water and cause illness and health hazards for the rural population? Should they be allowed to shut down a long established business?
Our county is proud of our good farmers and agriculture is front and center, but we do have other resources. We have many lakes, rivers and streams. Most of us enjoy all kinds of outdoor activities, winter and summer. Are we to give up all else to allow a CAFO to rein supreme upon the land? Shall we be ruled by just a few people who have no concern for our health and environmental protection?
What’s wrong with this picture? We need to apply the precautionary principle and make sure that the burden of proof falls upon the ones creating the risk. Instead, they bring in agribusiness corporations, commodity associations and The Farm Bureau Federation to try and prohibit local communities from imposing health ordinances.
There is already a large and growing body of scientific evidence stating the public health risks associated with CAFOs. The potential exists for severe and irreversible health and environmental effects. Local ordinances are justified for the safety of all people.
