Chris McLaren Straight into the Water Have you ever turned on your kitchen faucet and smelled

the stench of fecal matter? Residents of Morrison, Wisconsin know exactly what it means to experience such filth through their local natural water supply. Agricultural runoff is the single largest source of water pollution in the nations rivers and streams, according to the E.P.A. (2013). When combined with careless farmers, the thousands of cows surrounding the area of Morrison, with their endless supply of fresh compost, are the main culprit effecting

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2009/09/17/bus iness/18dairy.ready.html

the water supply of the surrounding areas. The use of manure as fertilizer is an overly simple and useful method for farmers. When this manure is exceedingly used, it creates havoc for the surrounding towns. Even with local and federal governments working persistently to create new regulations, there is currently no solidified method for reducing agricultural run-off. Sometimes it smells like a barn coming out of the faucet, said Lisa Barnard, who lives in proximity to the town of Morrison (Duhigg, 2009). This comes as no surprise due to the large number of farms in the area holding thousands of cows; which is collectively producing over a million gallons of manure each day (Duhigg, 2009). This waste is used to help fertilize land in order to enrich the soil to grow food. Unfortunately, when the waste from cows is being

produced in excessive amounts, the compost slowly seeps into the natural reservoirs and wells of nearby towns due to rain and thawing. This introduces the water to bacteria and parasites, which is a large concern considering this water is used for drinking and bathing. In areas where there are drastic seasonal climate shifts, it becomes the prime component for runoff to make its way into local lakes and streams (Swanson, 2013). Evidently, this extreme runoff leads nearby residents to become ill due to the tainted water.

http://animalblawg.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/nonpointsources2.jpg When used in appropriate amounts, the manure from cows serves as a great tool for farmers to fertilize their crops. It enriches the soil with nutrients and creates a more stable environment for plants to grow. It also helps with water retention and prevents the erosion of soil (Animal Manure Management, 2011). The cows are fed a high protein diet in order to produce a more liquid manure that can be readily used to spread over the fields (Duhigg, 2009).This is theoretically an ingenious idea because it provides a cheap and efficient way to keep farm production high and costs low since manure is a naturally occurring byproduct from cows. However, it is the misuse of these cheap byproduct and careless disposal that leads to the contamination of local water supplies.

Agricultural run-off is not an issue isolated only to the town of Morrison. Run-off actually affects farming areas across the United States. As mentioned earlier, agricultural runoff is a national issue slowly making itself more apparent to the public, especially to those affected. Outside of the U.S., Canada witnessed a seismic disaster from the effects of surface runoff in the town of Walkerton (Parr, 2004).After a period of dense rain, the manure from the farms made their way into the local wells, infecting the water with E. Coli. These wells served as the water supply to drinking fountains in schools and to homes (Ogunba, 2012). Over two-thousand people became ill from the bacteria and seven people died. Evidently, this was one of the worst bacterial outbreaks in Canadian history, especially since the town had a population of 5,000 people (Ogunba, 2012). Run-off is not just limited to cows either. Other animals, such as chickens, pose a major threat to nearby water sources as well. In Maryland, local poultry farmers were charged for polluting the waters of Chesapeake Bay due to the run-off from chicken manure (Fahrenthold, 2010). Even California farms are undergoing similar pressure from the local towns. In fact, 15% of the farms in California are considered excessive in their production of manure (Duhigg, 2009). Once again, the main culprit has to do with the local farms, and the failure of the federal and local government to implement stricter regulations on these farms. The incident in Canada served as a neighboring reminder to the destructive outcome that could take place if towns such as Wisconsin continue to contribute to the mass production of fertilizer dumping without restriction. The towns that are within close range to these dairy farms are the most effected by agricultural run-off. The people of these towns usually find out about contaminants in their water by consuming the water directly. Only when people become sick does the town realize that a disaster has occurred. These people have to deal with a huge burden when their wells become

contaminated. They must treat or boil the water they use, and even spend thousands of dollars on digging new wells (Duhigg, 2009). It is extremely unfortunate for the victims of these nearby towns to have to endure the uncertainty of their water quality. The Federal and local government are as accountable as farmers for the contamination of the wells in these rural areas. The Clean Water Act of 1972 has done wonders in regulating contaminants from pipes and sewage (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2013). However, in reference to agricultural runoff that indirectly makes its way into water sources, the CWA simply encourages farmers to be conscious of the situation. Basically, it is the business of the state to try and control the runoff, and they mostly deal with issues on a case to case basis. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is slowly trying to make progress in dealing with this national affair. The EPA has created new regulations for farms housing 700 or more cows. However, as with all control efforts, there comes resistance. It is very difficult for the government to implement new regulations without the compliance of the farmers. Unfortunately, since following some of these guidelines would require more work and money on the part of the farmer, they fail to report their numbers and paperwork accurately; if at all. The EPA has being working diligently on controlling animal farms since 1999 and still has not come to a final conclusion on controlling these animal feeding operations (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2012). This ultimately leaves the problem in the hands of the state and local government. The downside to this is that funding severely limits the amount of involvement the state has over their farms. When farmers are pushed to follow certain guidelines or protocols, the farmers then ask for funding in order to help fulfill these new requirements. If there is no money available to be allocated towards these farmers, then nothing takes place (Duhigg, 2009).

It is ultimately the responsibility of the farmer to cut back on the amount of compost disposed over their land. In an interview with Mr. Dan Natzke, who owns one of the largest farms in Brown County, he was asked by kindergarteners where the poop goes and what happens when the cows die. He answered that he owns one thousand acres of land and rents another eighteen hundred for proper disposal of waste. Mr. Natzke claimed that All of our waste management is reviewed by our agronomist and by the states regulatorswe follow all the rules (Duhigg, 2009). It was unfortunate that records showed he was fined $56,000 for excessive disposal of waste the year prior. This indicates that not only was he not being truthful, but that there is a chance other farmers may be misleading as well. When farmers take the appropriate action to reduce the risks of run-off and consult with agronomists, it can prove very beneficial in the prevention of bacterial outbreaks. One example of prevention is recognizing areas that are much more prone to heavy rainfall and emergency procedures to take in case accidents do occur. The use of proper judgment alone can be a huge factor in combating agricultural run-off (Livestock to Land, 2013). Until now, there is still no clear cut method for eliminating the excessive waste being produced by the cows in these local farms. The use of manure to help fertilize the land is a great tool to keep the soil healthy and productive. However, it seems evident that much of the responsibility, at this point, lies with the farmers use of good judgment when using and disposing of their millions of gallons of cow manure each year. Although federal and local governments are making efforts to develop new regulations and policies for farmers to abide by, it is an extremely slow process that takes many years of revisions before a conclusion can be reached. In the meantime, it seems like an enduring period for these rural towns. Farmers will simply have to take better precautions when dumping their compost and towns will have to

remain cautious about their water supply. It is, after all, their main source of water.

http://fe867b.medialib.glogster.com/media/1b/1b591a5396965e8fcd7656f95778cde2dcc66 e86c9889765172f6e58650c0ba3/argicultural-runoff-jpg.jpg

References Animal Manure Management (2011). Environmental benefits of manure application. Extension. Retrieved from http://www.extension.org/pages/14879/environmental-benefits-ofmanure-application#.UlzOClCkofW Duhigg, C. (2009, September 17). Health ills abound as farm runoff fouls wells. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/us/18dairy.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0 Fahrenthold, D.A. (2010, March 2). Perdue, poultry farm sued for polluting Chesapeake bar. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2010/03/02/AR2010030202408.html Livestock to Land (2013, May 3). What to do when runoff happens. Retrieved from http://livestocktoland.blogs.govdelivery.com/2013/05/03/what-to-do-when-runoffhappens/ Ogunba, A. (2012). Threats to groundwater: lessons from Canada and selected jurisdictions. Journal of Energy and Natural Resources Law, 30, 2, 159-184. Parr, J. (2004). Local water diversely known: walkerton Ontario, 2000 and after. Environmental and Planning D: Society and Space 2005, 23, 251-271. Swanson, A. F. (2013). What is farm runoff doing to the water? The Salt. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/07/09/199095108/Whats-In-The-Water-SearchingMidwest-Streams-For-Crop-Runoff U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2013). Water: office of wetlands, oceans and watersheds.Water Quality Facts. Retrieved from http://water.epa.gov/aboutow/owow/waterqualityfacts.cfm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2013). Water: pollution prevention and control. Pollution Control. Retrieved from http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2012). Region 7 concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOS). What is a CAFO? Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/region7/water/cafo/ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2013). Agriculture. Clean Water Act. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/lcwa.html