Rob: In 2001, Oklahoma's attorney general's office issued an opinion that
poultry companies could be found liable for damages from phosphorus pollution,
even though it's contract farmers that actually own the litter, and no one's
broken any laws.
Subsequently, the city of Tulsa filed a lawsuit over high phosphorus levels in
its water supply.
The five companies named in the suit wound up settling out of court,
agreeing to pay $7.5 million in damages, as well as remove excess
litter in the future, which they have.
But in June of 2005, Oklahoma attorney general, Drew Edmonson, filed suit
on behalf of the state against 14 separate poultry companies for
litter applied in the region, a move that angered several farm
groups and even resulted in legislation to restrict
the attorney general's power.
Despite such opposition, Attorney General Edmonson has remained steadfast in
his pursuit of the lawsuit.
I sat down with him outside his office where I asked him why he believes
this issue should head to federal court.
Drew Edmondson: Well, the same thing that we hoped to accomplish when we
first started talking to the poultry industry in November of 2001.
Dating back that far, we were seeking solutions to the continuing pollution
of Oklahoma waters including the protected scenic rivers in the
Illinois River watershed.
Those discussions went on with not only the poultry industry, but with
municipalities, beginning in 2001 and through 2002 and 2003.
In December, 2003, we reached an agreement with the municipalities where
they agreed to spend millions of dollars in upgrading their facilities
to cut down on their phosphorous emissions.
Now we continue to talk to the poultry industry and through the whole process,
you know I telegraph my punches, I told them if we didn't reach a negotiated
settlement I was going to hire lawyers and we were going to sue them.
And we did not reach any kind of an agreement or settlement, and ultimately
I pulled the trigger.
In the summer of 2005, we filed the lawsuit.
Rob: Over the past several weeks, we've gotten to visit with some farmers in
northeastern Oklahoma.
And there's a great concern out there among many of them of the law of
unintended consequences while you may be going directly after the
out-of-state poultry companies, they in fact may be the ones that get
hurt in this lawsuit.
Edmondson: And we're doing our best to avoid that, and obviously in a
negotiated settlement, you've got more latitude to construct it in a way
that there are no unintended consequences; that's a little more
difficult if we actually end up going to trial and get a jury verdict or a
court verdict; it's a little harder to construct that than it is to
construct a negotiated settlement.
But, I would ask them as they consider that, and it's a very real concern,
to look what's happened in Tulsa's lawsuit in the Eucha/Spavinaw watersheds
where they reached a negotiated agreement, and today 70 percent of the
waste is being trucked out of Eucha/Spavinaw.
And to my knowledge, no poultry operation has shut down, no company went out
of business, no farmer had to close his chicken houses, and the industry
is proceeding as it did before except they're not
putting that waste down on the ground.
I think we can achieve that same result in the Illinois River watershed
and the other watersheds of eastern Oklahoma.
Rob: Now, you mentioned much of the poultry litter
is now being trucked out of state.
Ultimately if this litigation does go all the way through its course,
what would be the best results for the state of Oklahoma?
Edmondson: Well the best result would be both a thriving poultry industry,
both in Arkansas and Oklahoma, and the processing of the litter
in a way that does not adversely impact the environment.
I'd like to see our rivers restored to what they were in the 50s and 60s and
70s, the purity and clarity of the water that we enjoyed back then.
I'd like to see our farm operations continuing to go and the poultry
industry continuing to thrive.
That can be done.
The only thing that can't happen in that scenario is maintaining the low price
of chicken that we enjoy today.
The price of chicken would have to go up to make this a win-win for the
companies, the consumers and the environment.
I don't know how much, a quarter a bird, a nickel a pound, it's going to have
to go up something to pay for the transportation and processing of the litter.
The fact is, the farmers can't afford to do that.
It's an asset for them that needs to be compensated, but the
poultry companies can.
It's a multi-billion dollar business, and they can afford to process
their waste like every other company and industry in America does.
Rob: Is this an economic development issue, whether it be rural economic
development or what's going on in our urban areas?
Edmondson: Well, number one, it impacts on every urban area that extracts
water from the lakes and rivers of northeastern Oklahoma for human
consumption and for industrial needs.
But, you know, there are a lot of people involved in agriculture, not just the
farmers, but the feed stores and the people that support them.
But the number of people involved in agriculture in northeastern Oklahoma is
dwarfed by the number of people involved in recreation.
When you look at every boat dock, every marina, every bait shop, you know,
every canoe operator, every motel, you know, every job that's involved
in the attractiveness of our waters, that number far surpasses the number
of people involved in agriculture.
So if we allow our lakes and rivers to deteriorate to the point where
tourists are no longer interested in them, they are no longer attractive,
and they're no longer good sources of municipal water,
then we're taking a double hit.
We're taking a hit on human consumption, and we're also taking an
economic hit on tourism and recreation.
Rob: Since the lawsuit was filed, the poultry industry has committed to
removing excess poultry litter out of the Illinois watershed.
In the past year, over 70,000 tons of litter has so far been removed.
In addition, the first of four payments of $275,000 was donated to Oklahoma's
scenic river commission by the poultry industry.
Still, attorneys on both sides of the issue are preparing for a court date
in the middle of 2009.