Reaping fines, subsidies
BY GAVIN OFF World Data Editor
Monday, November 10, 2008
11/10/08 at 12:41 PM
Read part 1 of this series: Data show that about 1,000 professionals in Oklahoma have received nearly $50 million in subsidies.
Related Story: State, feds fail to compare fines, subsidies
Slideshow:
Listen to an interview with family farmer Lyle Sneary.
Search: Search the Tulsa World database of U.S. Department of Agriculture subsidies for Oklahoma-based farms.
Search: Search the Tulsa World database of Oklahoma Department of Agriculture Fines against farmers from 1997-2008.
Several farms received federal subsidies the same year they were fined for pollution and other environmental hazards, data show.
Editor's note: This is the second of a two-part series on who receives farm subsidies.
The federal government has awarded millions of dollars in subsidies to Oklahoma animal farms that have been fined for violating state and federal environmental laws, a Tulsa World investigation found.
Some of the state's worst polluting farms have collected hundreds of thousands of dollars in subsidies — money generated by taxpayer dollars.
Some farms have been fined and have collected subsidies in the same year. Some farms repeatedly pollute and repeatedly collect subsidies, records show.
In all, 56 penalized farms have collected more than $2.5 million in subsidies in recent years, according to a World analysis of data from the U.S. and Oklahoma departments of agriculture.
Offenses include dumping manure into surface water, allowing toxins to contaminate groundwater, failing to obtain federal permits and allowing dead animals to rot on site, federal and state records show.
Single fines have ranged from $100 to $145,000.
"Anyone who is caught violating the Clean Water Act, polluting the environment, causing a public nuisance with dead animals should not be treated as the next farmer who is not causing those problems," said Michelle Perez, a senior analyst for the Environmental Working Group, a Washington nonprofit. "The average taxpayer would be appalled and horrified."
John Johnson, the deputy administrator for the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Farm Service Agency, said the fines assessed to farms for polluting and the subsidies awarded to them for conservation or crop production should not affect one another.
Fines and farm subsidies fall under two distinct programs offered by two distinct agencies, he said.
Others disagree.
Perez said that the federal government is enabling the pollution by subsidizing those who are fined. The federal government needs to reexamine the way it awards subsidies, she said.
"If you get taxpayer support and you're allowed to do all sorts of environmental and public health problems, it definitely sounds like the system is broken," Perez said.
Alan Ritchey Inc.
On acres of pastures and crop land near Yuba just north of the Texas border stretches a dairy farm owned by Alan Ritchey Inc. The concentrated animal feeding operation that overlooks the Red River was at one time one of the country's largest dairies.
But it has recently gained a different reputation to some.
The company has garnered two Oklahoma Department of Agriculture fines, 17 now-closed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency enforcement cases and at least one ongoing case since 2001. During that time, the farm has been fined at least $350,000 for failing to comply with environmental laws, records show.
The fines could have been higher if the company hadn't agreed to carry out at least $100,000 worth of environmentally friendly projects, such as vegetation buffers to filter runoff.
Yet Alan Ritchey Inc.'s Oklahoma dairy has received more than $880,000 in USDA farm subsidies since the mid-1990s. Much of it goes to Ritchey family members who live in Texas, the agency reports.
"They're costing the taxpayers when they're polluting and they're allowed to take taxpayers' money again," former state Sen. Paul Muegge of Tonkawa said. "Now that's a disgrace."
Fines and enforcement cases against Alan Ritchey Inc. include:
In 2001, the state fined the farm $5,000 for dumping more than 100 dead cattle in a pit immediately adjacent to a channel that flowed into the Red River, reports state.
In 2004, the EPA settled eight enforcement actions against Alan Ritchey Inc., including one about improper disposure of dead animals.
In 2006, the EPA settled five enforcement actions against the company, one after the agency found inadequate wastewater storage.
In 2007, the EPA settled two enforcement actions against Alan Ritchey Inc., including one about violating the Clean Water Act.
Executives of Alan Ritchey Inc. did not return the World's phone calls. In the settlements, the company never admitted liability.
Seaboard Foods Inc.
While Alan Ritchey Inc. is a leader in the dairy industry, Seaboard Foods Inc. (also known as Seaboard Farms Inc.) of Guymon is a hog-producing heavyweight.
But Seaboard, too, has had problems complying with environmental laws. The Oklahoma Department of Agriculture has fined the company six times for a total of $227,950 since 1998, state records show.
The company was fined in the late 1990s for having a broken methane gas collection system.
"This causes a potential pollution, health and safety problem," a state report said.
The state later penalized Seaboard for failing to handle and remove animal waste properly.
In 2002, the EPA fined the company $105,000 for failing to obtain stormwater construction permits for at least 125 facilities, according to federal records. It fined Seaboard $3,850 in 2007 for failing to comply with a risk management plan.
Despite being assessed more than $300,000 in state and federal environmental penalties, Seaboard Farms Inc. has collected $359,053 in federal subsidies from the mid-1990s through 2005. Much of the money went to trusts or residents of Massachusetts.
Those subsidies include more than $230,000 from 1998 to 2002, the period in which the state and federal governments levied most of their fines against the company.
"If we're going to throw money to the guys who cut corners, how are the responsible farmers going to compete with them?" said Chuck Hassebrook, the executive director of the nonprofit Center for Rural Affairs, which is based in Nebraska. "It puts the good guys at a disadvantage, and we shouldn't do that."
Seaboard officials declined to comment.
In all, the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture fined the 56 farms nearly $400,000 since 1997.
Seven farms were fined several times, and others have had EPA actions placed against them.
Kimsey Land and Cattle of Guymon, for example, received an EPA administrative order in 2003 for violating its permit. That year, it collected $6,000 in subsidies.
McNeff Dairy in Chickasha was received an EPA administrative order in 2004 for failing to dispose of animal waste properly. That year, it collected $30,300 in subsidies.
Gavin Off 732-8106
gavin.off@tulsaworld.com
Associated Images:
Pigs at Seaboard Farms are pictured in 1998. The company is among Oklahoma farms that have been fined thousands of dollars by the state and federal governments for environmental violations while collecting more thousands in federal farm subsidies.Tulsa World file
Pigs at Seaboard Farms are pictured in 1998. The company is among Oklahoma farms that have been fined thousands of dollars by the state and federal governments for environmental violations while collecting more thousands in federal farm subsidies.Tulsa World file
Pigs at Seaboard Foods Inc. are pictured in 1998. The company was among many farms fined by the state and federal government for environmental violations. Tulsa World file
|
