Why does MN recognize this, but not the SDDENR?
Subject: Jan 2010 MPCA report showing Veblen not in compliance as reported to Minnesota


> Permit MN0068594 Veblen East Dairy & Veblen West Dairy - Marshall County,
> South Dakota
>
> Veblen East Dairy is an 8,176 head dairy facility that consists of six total
> confinement barns and eight manure storage basins. Veblen West Dairy,
> previously known as MCC Dairy, is a 5,500 head dairy facility that consists
> of five total confinement barns and five manure storage basins. Rick Milner
> is the managing partner for the entity that owns both facilities. On October
> 23, 2009, the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources
> (South Dakota DENR) issued a Notice of Violation, Order, and Settlement
> Agreement.
>
> On July 10, 2008, the South Dakota DENR inspected both Veblen East and
> Veblen West Dairies. During the inspection, it was noted that the basins at
> Veblen West were at their maximum operating level and the basins at Veblen
> East were below the maximum operating level. On July 18, 2008, the South
> Dakota DENR approved the transfer of 10 million gallons of manure from
> Veblen West to Veblen East. This manure was to be land applied in the fall
> of 2008 prior to soil freeze, and the South Dakota DENR was to be notified
> when this was complete. A notification was not received.
>
> In April 2009, the South Dakota DENR received notification from the
> facilities that the basins at both Veblen East and Veblen West Dairies were
> above the maximum operating level and into the freeboard of the basins. This
> was confirmed during a May 6, 2009, site inspection by the South Dakota
> DENR. On May 20, 2009, Rick Milner contacted the South Dakota DENR to inform
> them that high winds were causing manure spray to blow over the berms of the
> north basins and that a line of straw bales was erected to keep the spray
> from leaving the basins. Various correspondence and inspections in the
> months of June, July, and August indicated that the basins at both Veblen
> East and Veblen West were above the maximum operating levels and into the
> freeboard.
>
> The order required both Dairies to, as soon as possible, remove a sufficient
> amount of manure to return them to compliance with the freeboard
> requirements. The order went on to require the removal of manure from all
> basins to have no more than one foot of residual material remaining by
> November 1, 2009.
>
> In discussions with the South Dakota DENR staff, it was revealed that the
> manure removal to a depth of no more than one foot was not accomplished by
> November 1, 2009; however, levels in the basins had been lowered. Further
> action may be forthcoming from the South Dakota DENR.
>
> The MPCA has also received complaints about and photos of these facilities,
> specifically regarding the lack of freeboard, potential for overflow, and
> pollution resulting from improper land application of manure. The MPCA has
> received these complaints as the facilities sit at the head of the watershed
> of Big Stone Lake, located at the border of Minnesota (Big Stone County) and
> South Dakota.
>
> The MPCA’s Commissioner has considered the above compliance issues at all
> seven dairies in the preliminary determination to deny reissuance of
> NPDES/SDS Permit MN0068594 to Excel Dairy.
>
>

DENR has noticed the level in the manure holding at the large Veblen Dairies. Last time I checked there had not been a breach of the manure holding ponds. Don't you think that's a pretty darn good manure holding pond that can contain manure in an exceptionally wet fall? No one wants a manure spill up there and I think that DENR has now required Milner to add to the manure transport system up there so that it doesn't get this close to trouble ever again. Close to trouble, but not a spill.

Of course, feedlots that had nothing but open manure stacks contributed plenty of manure to the water. One here, one there, hundreds of manure stacks all wet and water running everywhere. I wish the EQIP cost share was not so difficult for farmers to use, but the tax payer must be protected and there is a lot of red tape and extra cost to using cost share for building manure containment.

I saw a lot of acres of frozen ground spread with manure in Grant and Roberts County last winter. It was a tough fall for manure handling. I learned at the training in Huron what the State requires for manure application on frozen ground and when they allow it from CAFOs and what rates they recommend for the environment and the crop. Any livestock operator would have been interested and most of the classmates were beef guys, some swine, several people that didn't have CAFOs but had some livestock. Manure is good fertilizer especially if it is processed right away and not allowed to sit around in the open air too long.

Do you think that no manure containment is a better way to keep animals?