By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
We are not “activists”
Neighbors ask for answers about proposed CAFO
Kickapoo Lane

       Marietta Township

Editor,

We are not “activists,” whatever that label is supposed to mean.  We are certainly not anti-farming nor anti-business.  And, of course, we are not radical.  

What we are is neighbors, taxpayers and concerned citizens of a beautiful and fragile environment.  We live downhill of the proposed Roth II CAFO, should it be allowed to go forward, and we take offense at the labels and portrayals of us provided by Mr. Roth, Ms. Johnson-Smith and Mr. Bahr, in their comments to the recent Farm Bureau meeting, as printed in the December 10th edition of the Crawford County Independent.

Their effort to minimize our very legitimate concerns by simply dismissing us as “activists” and “radicals” would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious.  We are teachers, retirees, nurses, healthcare workers, store managers, hourly workers, doctors, office administrators, construction workers, and  homemakers. 

We are simply people who are concerned about a farm/factory  putting over 10,000 pigs on a hill above our homes.  We worry about the serious threat to our well water, the smell, the negative health effects, the noise of fans, the loss of our property values, and the potential damage to the environment of a place we love.

In the article, Mr. Roth is quoted as saying, “The activists don’t care what I say.  You have to talk to your neighbors and find out what their concerns are.”  

Well, here we are. We are your neighbors.  We’ve expressed our concerns, but they have not been addressed nor answered.  I hope the County Board will listen to Mr. Roth’s neighbors, as Mr. Roth has himself suggested, and extend the moratorium to allow more time for research into these issues to go forward.  If you were a downhill neighbor, wouldn’t you be concerned?

Kickapoo Lane Neighbors: 

- Jude and Sue Hartwick                                

- Gary Porter

-Ken and Martha Cornish

- Dr. Drew Watson and Chrissy Watson

- Bill and Gina Holtz

- Derrick and Sandy Warner
County should extend CAFO Moratorium
More time needed for discussion
Cty Bd CAFO moratorium
ALMOST 80 citizens at-tended the Crawford County Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday, Dec. 17. The citizens were there to offer input to the board about whether the county should enact a one-year moratorium on CAFOs.

                 Steuben

Editor,

As a concerned citizen and landowner in Crawford County, I am grateful that the Crawford County Board of Supervisors listened to the concerns of their constituents and passed the Moratorium on the Expansion and Creation of New Livestock Facility Siting Operations, a CAFO Moratorium, in December 2019. 

They recognized then, the importance of studying an issue that affects the health, safety, and welfare of all citizens and on Tuesday, they will once again have the opportunity to show support by voting to extend the CAFO Moratorium for one more year.  

As we all know, 2020 was an unprecedented year and due to COVID restrictions, the appointed CAFO study committee did not have the time to do their due diligence researching and learning about CAFO impacts, in depth water studies could not be completed as originally planned, and Board members have not had the necessary time to read, learn about and discuss County options concerning the siting and expansion of CAFOs in Crawford County. 

By extending the CAFO Moratorium, the CAFO Study Committee would have the time needed to thoroughly investigate the impacts that increased numbers of CAFOs within Crawford County may have on the County’s economy, environment, and citizens and it would give Board members adequate time to consider the information and how to best plan for the future of CAFOs in Crawford County.  

In the Crawford County Code of Ordinances, the responsibility of public office is stated as such: “Public officials and employees are agents of the public and hold office for the benefit of the public. They are bound to uphold…and carry out impartially the laws of the …County to observe in their official acts the highest standard of morality and to discharge faithfully the duties of their office regardless of personal considerations, recognizing that the public interest must be their prime concern.”

In the past months I have read many letters and articles from concerned citizens, township governing bodies, and local organizations like the Sterling-Crawford and the Vernon-Crawford chapter of the Wisconsin Farmers Union and the Coulee Region Chapter of Trout Unlimited, to name a few, that all feel that it would be in the best interest of Crawford County citizens to extend the moratorium.

I, as a concerned citizen, am appealing to all County Board Supervisors to “recognize that the public interests”, the public’s concerns about the health, economic, and environmental impacts that increased numbers of CAFOs in Crawford County could have, “must be their prime concern,” and urge them to vote to extend the moratorium.

Gina L. Holtz