La Paz Loses Yakima Case

Little La Paz County, AZ, has failed at great cost in putting biosolids drier Yakima Company out of business. Jim Willett, owner, told me years ago about the bizarre goings on that precipitated his 2004 claim for damages of $20M, the amount he would lose over a 25 year period as a result of the County terminating its contract. The contract was for providing space for the drying operation, and to secure additional space for future expansion in exchange for a $/ton fee. The contract encouraged volume and, in hopes of generating County revenues as quickly as possible, the County allowed Jim to start operations on condition of working up a closure plan and bonding for the closure costs. Then something went sour, and the county stalled beyond reason their acceptance of first the plan and then the bonding. When they did accept, they didn't inform Jim.

It was a pretty simple business model: truck the solids in from LA, lay it out thin and dry it in the wind and sun, windrow it to finesse stabilization, pick it up and truck the now Class A fertilizer-esque material a few miles back to California to needy farmers. With the right combo of clients, farmers, and truckers, it was clean, simple, satisfying, and profitable in what can be a complex, and low margin business.

Last week a La Paz County jury awarded Jim $9.2M plus legal expenses. Jim regrets the process and takes no joy in the results. It is not the life, and not the legacy, that he wanted.

The local rag has posted several articles on the trial (1, 2, 3). The newspaper, which gamely supports comments on articles, was unprepared for the outpouring of vigorous support for the jurors courageous decision, and the level of outrage directed towards the County Board of Supervisors for their mismanagement of political power. The paper clearly slants its writing in support of the BoS, adding to the intensity of the backlash. The editor, John Gutekunst, selectively deletes comments but even at that the longest set of comments now prints out to 33 pages even when ported to Word in 10font.

According to comments, the County's $1.5 million in legal fees are not covered by insurance, and the County determined this early on in the process. Comments characterize the legal effort as a personal vendetta against Jim by Supervisor Gene Fisher. This vendetta included asking the sheriff to arrest Jim's clients at the drier site for trespassing on County property, and coaching employees against their better judgment to the point that one County employee quit their job. Word gets out fast on that type of work place abuse. Tossing aside the potential of $1-200K/yr in much needed tax free revenue for personal reasons has added to local dissatisfaction.

Despite a lack of public support, or financial capacity, it is clear that the County will appeal. A reinvigorated recall effort is mounting to pull the plug on this monster.

Agrichar trials in NSW

News and commentary on agrichar is flowing steadily this spring, first with the reporting on the 1st annual Agrichar Conference, and now with the reporting on initial agrichar trials by the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries (NSW DPI). Particularly encouraging is that the sophistication of the comments continues on the increase.

Snippets from ABC' Discovery channel ...

Recent greenhouse trials found soils mixed with the charred waste, called agrichar or biochar, were more attractive to worms and helpful microbes.

Agrichars trialled by NSW DPI include those from poultry litter, cattle feedlot waste as well as municipal green waste and paper mill sludge. Each agrichar has its own characteristics and interacts differently with different soil types.

Some agrichars raise soil pH at about one-third the rate of lime, raise calcium and reduce aluminium toxicity.

Kimber said more research needs to be done on working out which agrichars are best for which soils and on the impact of any contamination in biomass.

... reinforce the need for local pyrolysis pilot projects. The pyrolysis pilot hurdle is necessary where widespread agrichar use is the goal. Clean air concerns combines with the limited supply of local expertise and experience needed to achieve the low-temperature pyrolysis ideal for producing agrichar.

I have submitted comments emphasizing the need for pilot agrichar projects to our State's climate change folks.

(AP image source)

Soil and Bioavailability of P in Food

Researchers find that soil phosphorus levels may affect plant phytate levels as much as plant breeding. Phytate is the principal storage form of phosphorus in many plant tissues, especially bran and seeds.

Phytate is generally not bioavailable to humans and non-ruminant animals. Accordingly, there has been a push to develop low-phytate crop varieties. Not only is the phosphorus in low-phytate grain crops more digestible by people, low-phytate grains free up minerals essential to human nutrition: zinc, manganese and iron. This new research shows that grain raised with higher levels of soil phosphorus can have higher levels of phytate. I have not read ($) the journal article, but my thoughts are that the discovery of this soil connection was not anticipated: normally nutritional availability does not decrease with increased soil nutrient levels. If this relationship can be validated, it is an important breakthrough that affects human nutrition, efficient use of phosphorus (a non-renewable resource), farm costs, and environmental quality.

Swine and poultry operations benefit. Low-phytate feed results in lower manure phosphorus for these non-ruminants, a welcome prospect for waste management and addressing water quality concerns. Swine rations often need phosphorus added to ensure bone and muscle development for rapid growth, driving the market development for new, low-phytate crop varieties. The alternative to low-phytate feed is to use a feed additive, phytase. Currently, neither approach is particularly cheap.

Appreciation and attribution:
Sugar Creek Farm for a great photo.
GMO Pundit aka David Tribe for posting on this.

($) According to my read of HighWire Publishers Free Online Full-text Articles list, the journal article will be made available at no cost April 2, 2008 (18 months after publication).

Orange ooze gives clues for those in the know.

If you walk your property with an eye to understanding how it works, knowing what orange ooze is and what it means is a worthy skill. Orange ooze forms where anaerobic waters seep from the ground. This can be a good and natural thing, as in the image.
Reduced iron (Fe(II)) is a source of energy for life, including iron-oxidizing bacteria. The oxidized iron gives orange ooze its distinctive color. Another distinctive feature of anaerobic waters is a surface sheen, reminiscent in appearance of an oil sheen, but brittle.
Anaerobic waters form for specific reasons.
Unfortunately, one reason is contamination. A classic source of Fe(II) laden waters are acidified drain waters associated with mining and industrial wastes. Other reasons are septic systems, waste water lagoons and land fill leachate. Fuel leaking from a transfer line is a classic source. Any substance that can be rapidly decomposed by microbial activity, even a benign dust control product like lignin sulfonate, can result in anaerobic groundwater if concentrated by runoff in a roadside ditch.
Anaerobic groundwater formation is usually natural. Examples are flows through wetland conditions (as in the image) and through pond bottoms. In natural cases, orange ooze relates to elevated microbial activity. This biological activity usually needs a temperature above 41 degrees F (5 decrees C) and an adequate food supply to support microbial respiration in excess of oxygen supplies.
Now look closely at the image. Notice the greenest vegetation is in the band of water with the anaerobic sheen, parallel, and below the orange ooze. That is because the seep water is warmer than the surface water it is flowing into, stimulating a difference in plant growth. The elevation of the orange ooze shows the anaerobic water is dropping into the stream. Not shown is that it is on only one side of the stream and only along a limited stretch. This gives important clues as to where to look for the source, in this case wetland conditions in the pasture adjoining the stream. The warmth of the seep indicates that the hydrology supporting wetland living conditions is not localized winter precipitation and snow melt, but has deeper, less seasonal, origins.

Tech Tags: Soil science tips microbiology environment metal health wetland

Soil scientists required in Pennsylvania for septic system permits

Soil scientists at work. In many states, professional soil scientists conduct the septic system site assessments required for permit approval. Soil scientists also get involved in adapting alternative on-site disposal technologies. This brief newspaper interview with Leonard Cornish, owner of Pocono Soil and Environmental Consulting Inc., Wilkes-Barre, PA reveals some of the basic scientific and technical requirements needed in this type of a business. The news article should be of particular interest to soil scientists considering going into the business of environmental consulting or individuals looking to hire on with a soil scientist owned business.

Tech Tags: Soil science business job opportunity septic system government permit wetland land survey

Farm tile drainage progressing rapidly

As told by Chris Niskanen over at the St. Paul MN Pioneer Press there is a tremendous amount of tile drainage going on in the north central USA: 100 million feet per year or about 19,000 miles by one estimate. Improved flexible drain tile is making this unprecedented rate of installation possible. The article mentions a number of areas of potential concern: loss of duck habitat and increased nitrate levels in surface water. Where no jurisdictional wetlands are being tiled, no permits are needed to perform this work. However the extent of the practice has caught the attention of folks and a community effort to address the impact of farm drainage on wetland habitat is being discussed.
Image source: South Dakota State University – Ag environmental issues page
Tech Tags: farm soil edaphology tile drainage nitrate water environment wetland habitat

Tallahassee waste water sprayfield nitrate concern for Wakulla springs

I have been following news on a 2600 acre sprayfield on the edge of Tallahassee, Florida. It is suspected of causing environmental problems 10 miles away in Wakulla Springs State Park and the Wakulla River. A recent 1000 Friends of Florida report (pdf) ties excessive hydrilla plant growth to nitrate from the sprayfield. The news this week is that the city, USGS and Florida DEP will be conducting dye tests to better understand how the groundwater beneath the sprayfield moves down gradient. I am reading the report. Striking is the relatively low (1.0 mg/l)nitrate-N needed to control the situation.

Image source: Tallahassee Democrat

Tech Tags: science farm irrigation soil edaphology eutrophication environment karst groundwater quality nitrate TMDL USGS government news

Product review - new vadose zone research tool moves to farm

Irrigated farm fields lose water to deep percolation. This groundwater recharge, and what it contains, is difficult to research. This is because sampling tools designed to intercept saturated flow tend to miss unsaturated flow. And visa versa. New technology extracts deep soil moisture using a wick rather than the active suction or gravity.

The first wick samplers were passive capillary samplers (PCS). This approach has now evolved into the current water flux meter (WFM) designed recently by Batelle soil scientist Glendon Gee. Two offspring WFM designs are commercially available: the Gee passive capillary sampler drain gauge (Decagon Devices, Pullman WA) and the vadose zone water flux meter (Sledge Sales Consulting, Dayton OR). In a recent journal article, the Decagon device is referred to as a capacitance water flux meter (C-WFM) and the Sledge device is referred to as a tipping-bucket water flux meter (T-WFM). The T-WFM is close to Glendon Gee's designs published in journal articles. The C-WFM was developed by Decagon soil scientist Gaylon Campbell in collaboration with Glendon Gee.

The original PCS devices needed a pit, best dug with a backhoe. Fiberglass wick length and strand size were calibrated to site specific conditions to prevent oversampling of unsaturated conditions. Today's WFMs can be placed in an auger hole or hand-dug pit. WFM configurations use a standard size and length wick which works for most situations. A recent journal article has an example of an oversampling problem.

There are strong similarities and distinct differences between the two firms. Like Decagon, Sledge maintains strong ties with Glendon Gee. Like Decagon, many of the 200 devices Sledge has produced have been for agricultural research. Compared to Decagon, Sledge is more a hands on, farm service and farm chemical oriented consulting business. With Wayne Sledge, the T-WFM is his flagship product. With Decagon, the C-WFM is a sensible addition, part of an extensive and well supported line of soil and agricultural measurement instrumentation. It appears that Decagon and Sledge have produced a similar number of devices and they are clearly on parallel tracks of success in refining their individual product.

Both firms have supplied most of their instruments to agricultural researchers, farms and clients concerned with water use efficiency and nitrogen use eficiency such as golf courses. There has also been environmental project placements, most often associated with landfill and mine-tailing closure

Decagon has put considerable effort into refining unit capacity to record water flux, less into water sample handling. The larger base of the Sledge unit enhances water sample handling options. Decagon has a stepped design which accommodates hand auguring the deepest portion, shortening installation time. Decagon has an extensive list of complementary devices and highly capable technical support staff. The Sledge unit is substantially lower in price. Choice is good.

Of particular interest in Washington State is wastewater spray field management. As mentioned in a government report: "The Department of Ecology has identified 20 spray field situations where wastewater was [improperly] applied [and conditions] ... led to contamination of groundwater...". This report was discussed here previously.

I spoke with Don Nichols, with Washington Department of Ecology's Water Quality Program, Eastern Regional Office, Spokane, WA. Don has encouraged the installation of WFMs for gathering vadose zone water quality information. Don referred me to Cascade Earth Sciences and Soil Test Farm Consultants for more information.

Dan Burgard, soil scientist with Cascade Earth Sciences (CES) in Spokane, WA has installed 7 Decagon C-WFMs in the Pasco, WA area, and 11 Sledge T-WFMs in southern California. CES modified the equipment to enhance sample collection capabilities. (See his photos below)

Dan Nelson, soil scientist with Soiltest Farm Consultants, Inc. in Moses Lake, WA has four Decagon C-WFMs installed in the Moses Lake, WA area. Both had nothing but good things to say about the potential uses of this type of data. Mass balance calculations will demonstrate if target water use efficiency and target nitrogen use efficiency is being achieved. Detailed daily data logs show exactly when percolation occurs. Percolation events observed to date are closely correlated with irrigation and precipitation events and even soil thawing events. As expected with the difference in weight between soil and the field capacity water portion, percolate nitrate and dissolved solids (salts) are several times higher than soil levels above the sample point. The devices are performing as intended.

One question I have is how many devices are needed to achieve statistical confidence in a mass balance calculation? Users independently tend toward sets of 3 units, with singles for spot comparison data. That is a sensible starting point but determining coefficient of variability on selected data would put the results into perspective.

None of the installations have been entirely glitch-free, mostly due to various data logger challenges or site specific soil related factors, such as coarse sands or depth limits. Users of the units are looking forward to continued refinements in data logger compatibility and would like to see costs come down and but give high marks for ease of installation and setup. This and available tech support make sampler units from Sledge and Decagon an attractive alternative to the do-it-yourself installations that predate this equipment.

References:
Brown, K.W., J.C. Thomas, and M.W. Holder. 1986. Development of a capillary wick unsaturated zone water sampler. Coop. Agreement CR812316-01-0. USEPA Environ. Monit. Syst. Lab., Las Vegas, NV.
Cary, J.W. 1968. An instrument for in situ measurements of soil moisture flow and suction. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 32:3–5.
Gee, Glendon W., Zhang, Z. Fred, Ward, Andy L. 2003. A Modified Vadose Zone Fluxmeter with Solution Collection Capability Vadose Zone J 2003 2: 627-632 (highwire link) http://highwire.stanford.edu/
Knutson, J.H., and J.S. Selker. 1994. Unsaturated hydraulic conductivities of fiberglass wicks and designing capillary wick pore-water samplers. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 58:721–729.
Selker, J.S., C.K. Keller, J.T. McCord. 1999. Vadose Zone Processes, Lewis Publishers, ISBN 0-87371-953-0, GB1197.7.S46 1999 [1] [2]
van der Velde, M., Green, S. R., Gee, G. W., Vanclooster, M., Clothier, B. E. Evaluation of Drainage from Passive Suction and Nonsuction Flux Meters in a Volcanic Clay Soil under Tropical Conditions Vadose Zone J 2005 4: 1201-1209 (DOI: 10.2136/vzj2005.0011) (highwire link)

Tech Tags: soil science physics edaphology drainage new technology design product review information government best management research water environment

Science and nitrogen use efficiency

Nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) is a term maintaining its currency. Worldwide, NUE is 33%. Once a concern primarily due to groundwater quality and health concerns, rising natural gas prices have moved economic concerns to the forefront. Economics must certainly have resonated in the government NUE workshop "Roadmaps to more N efficiency" held in Germany recently and mentioned in a previous article. Climate change concerns have increased interest as well as the availability of grant funding for research. NUE is affected by many factors: fertilizer form and placement, irrigation management, climate, soil characteristics and CO2 levels.
Nitrogen loss due to denitrification is caused by microbial respiration when soil oxygen levels are depleted. It is negligible in some parts of the planet and the dominant form of loses in others. This from the University of Kentucky, somewhat buried in an article about economic concerns:

Worldwide nitrogen use efficiency is only about 33 percent, so 33 percent actually makes it into the crop. A lot of nitrogen is applied that never gets used by the crop. In the United States, the rate is 50 to 60 percent, but still half the nitrogen never makes it to the crop.

In Kentucky the biggest loss of nitrogen comes from denitrification, when nitrate is converted to nitrogen gas and dissipates into the air. By controlling denitrification, a farmer can potentially reduce the amount of nitrogen needed to produce a crop.

The other forms of reduced efficiency are leaching of nitrate and volatization of ammonia. Part of the loss to percolation can be attributed to uniformity of application and even off-target losses. Necessary to complete a zero-sum balance point of view is accounting for microbially fixed nitrogen, and changes in soil biomass,both microbial and plant roots.
Those of us who work in support of permitted land application of waste water and waste water solids are very interested in advances in understanding of NUE. Our client projects are generally held to a land treatment capacity based on a design philosophy that an NUE of 100% is a reasonable target, the legacy of a simpler time in history. With the higher level of information and better technology available today, this simplistic design standard may well be approaching the end of its useful life.

Tech Tags: soil science fertility nitrogen-use-efficiency nitrogen denitrification management research government environmental economics farm survival agriculture crop waste recycling

German science workshop news critical of precision agriculture performance

A German soil science research center reports that Precision Agriculture has not delivered on promised benefits, stating:

...worse are the actually reported effects of ..."Precision Agriculture" (PA) ...on N efficiency. Still after 15 years of implementation no results proving consistent increases in yields or decreased fertilizer application are available. Quite the contrary: some of the techniques developed in PA may even decrease fertilizer N efficiency...

The Federal Agricultural Research Center (FAL) - Institute of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science's workshop, Options for reducing the nitrogen surplus in plant production, has individual presentation pdf files available, including the one on PA.

Tech Tags: soil science fertility farm productivity dairy waste management manure efficiency environment GPS data analysis precision agriculture workshop news

Tetany animal health issue and soil, hay links

Tetany is a complex disease in that no specific condition triggers it in all cases. Gauge tetany risk using soil and tissue analysis when growing or feeding hay comprised solely of cool-season grasses. A grass-legume mix does not have this risk.

Tetany is a disease affecting ruminants and is associated with feeding or grazing bluegrass, bromegrass, fescue, orchardgrass, ryegrass, timothy and wheatgrass. It is caused by low blood levels of calcium and/or magnesium. Classic risk conditions occur when the forage grass is growing quickly in the spring and nitrogen levels are high. Less well known is that tetany can be a problem when hay is grown on soils with excessive soil potassium. Manure and potassium hydroxide cleansers are two potential sources. Lactating animals are more susceptible to tetany, thus dairies are particularly alert to the concern and tend to avoid growing or feeding grass hay exclusively. Forage guides may not mention it as a concern. A forage tissue ratio of K/(Ca+Mg) of more than 2.2 indicates a high risk of tetany and the need to supplement feed with magnesium (Mg) (see also). If an animal goes down and tetany is suspected, a veterinarian should be contacted for immediate treatment. Often an animal will recover if it can be given an injection of magnesium sulfate (Epsom salts) early on.

Preventative Mg feed supplement and the ready supply of alfalfa tends to keep the incidence of tetany to a minimum. My thought is that tetany is additionally controlled by the close knit nature of farm communities. Caring neighbors and long memories tend to interact sufficiently that tetany symptoms don't take more than an animal or two, usually the weakest anyway, before it is figured out. Perhaps this explains why analytical laboratories in my region are generally unaware of tetany or the role of soil and tissue nutrient levels. My opinion is that cooperative extension publications in the Pacific Northwest can do better in this area. Tips for preventing animal loss due to tetany should be included in the fertility guides published to help folk interpret forage test results.

See also:
Spring Mineral Considerations by Jeff Heldt (link added 03MAR06)
Controlling Grass Tetany in Livestock, by Cooperative Extension, New Mexico State University, available in pdf format

Tech Tags: soil science animal nutrition environment chemistry dairy manure farm waste recycling land treatment information

Dept of Licensing Surveys Soil Science Practice, Recommends Regulation

The Washington State Department of Licensing (DOL) has submitted a requested Sunrise Review of Soil Scientists to the State House Commerce & Labor Committee. The report recommends that the practice of soil science be regulated.

Members of the Washington Society of Professional Soil Scientists (WSPSS) can find much to be proud of as well as cause for renewed vigilance in DOL's report. Soil science has been in DOL's sights before but the current set of events that led to the sunrise report started in 2001. That was the year that soil scientists became concerned that under the Geologists Licensing Act, practicing soil science would require being a registered geologist. Timely action by WSPSS resulted in an exclusion for the practice of soil. It also reignited WSPSS' interest in licensing.

Renewed efforts followed shortly in 2002 when soil reports prepared by a soil scientist were rejected by the Pierce County Planning Department. The planning department required a licensed geologist, consistent with a draft model Critical Area's Ordinance (CAO) being prepared by the State Department of Community, Trade & Economic Development (CTED). Subsequent effort by WSPSS to revise CTED's Model CAO to include soil scientists as qualified to submit soil reports were initially successful but, for reasons that have not been determined, the soil science profession was not included in the final draft.

Without licensing, soil scientists are failing in their efforts to maintain their professional standing with county planning departments, health districts and permitting agencies in Washingtonm State. Draft legislation to license the practice of soil science was submitted to both State Senate and House committees during the 2004/2005 legislative session. Lobbying efforts resulted in the House Commerce & Labor Committee request to the Department of Licensing to prepare a “sunrise� report that would define the reasoning and metrics underlying the request to be regulated.

An excerpt from that report:

Considerable evidence compiled in this report, through out-of-court settlements and litigation, show harm to property, health, safety and welfare of the public. Public health endangered by improper soil analysis ... has led to contaminated wells and groundwater; septic system failures; and compromised wetlands. Harm to the public exists when [action] is approved without a comprehensive soil analysis conducted by a soil expert to support decision[s] taken. Public harm occurs when ordinances excludes a professional group that hold an expertise through education and experience. Exclusion of a qualified group to practice diminishes choice. A significant number of court settlements indicate that there are professionals [who] practice soil science beyond the scope of their expertise. In view of the findings regarding the practice of soil science, the following recommendations [are] made for consideration by the Legislature:

1. That Soil Scientists be regulated; and
2. expertise should be defined to minimize overlap of work to be performed.
   

The sunrise report goes on to indicate that defining what is soil science, and identifying who is a soil scientist is a challenge. Furthermore, without a commercial yellow pages heading for the profession, consumer access to soil scientists is limited to an informal referral system. Professional soil science societies are viewed in the report as ineffective in protecting the public from unprofessional acts by soil scientists or purported soil scientists. Specific examples of damage are provided in the report, including at least $3,000,000 in damage claims due to septic system problems in Cowlitz County in western Washington. Also cited were 20 cases in eastern Washington, provided to DOL by the Washington Department of Ecology, where earlier or more competent soil science consultation could have saved resources and protected human health.

Now that the sunrise report has been submitted, the legislature can move forward during the 2006/2007 legislative session to act on the previous draft. Prospects look good for passage, but regardless of the outcome, Washington soil scientists cannot help but be lifted up by the findings of the sunrise report: Practitioners of soil science are needed in Washington State to a degree that individual practitioners could not have been aware of. While it is extremely disturbing to learn of several instances of unprofessional work by purported soil scientists, it is good to read that quality work is highly valued and recognized as critical to protecting health and resources. Washington soil scientists already know that we are in some demand: once a soil scientist establishes a niche, it is rare to find that individual idle. DOL's survey offers us a unique glimpse into the bigger picture as to why that is.

1997 photo of sprayfield with soil problem.
Olympia Cheese. Lacey, WA.

Technorati Tag: Soil science Licensing

Biosolids, Politics and Character

Biosolids, aka domestic wastewater (sewage) treatment solids, is pretty interesting stuff, to me anyway. From a soil scientist's perspective it is chock full of good stuff: Essential plant nutrients and humic substances (humic acid, fulvic acid) beneficial to soil quality. Biosolids is superior to chemical fertilizers from both a crop production perspective and an environmental protection perspective.

This is not raw sewage solids or raw septic tank solids. This is the microbial biomass solids produced during the time the sewage is being treated, usually a 20-30 day process, prior to the treated liquid being discharged to a surface water body. These solids have about the same ratio of N:P:K:S present in soil microbial biomass.

Since the 1972 Clean Water Act, USEPA has been encouraging treatment facilities to give preferential consideration to recycling the soil property enhancing constituents in biosolids. These constituents were originally derived from crops grown on agricultural land and federal legislative intent is to see these materials recycled and put to beneficial use at their source. At the basis of this intent is a conviction that the overall benefits of beneficial use exceeds the added economic and regulatory burden placed upon the local and regional taxpayer and the wastewater treatment ratepayer.

Because of costs to transport material beyond the reach of urban sprawl, it would be cheaper to dispose of it in the ocean, or, for interior cities, in a landfill.

The constituents within biosolids are derived from nonrenewable resources and energy intensive processes and, being a regulated material under the authority of the federal government, cannot responsibly be allowed to be simply discarded when the opportunity for beneficial use is available. This policy makes more sense with each passing year.

Critics and skeptics of beneficial reuse on farm land abound, but fears of environmental degradation have yet to be borne out by events.

Once I had the opportunity in the 1980's to ask the then-President of the Washington State Farm Bureau why the American Farm Bureau Federation had a policy in opposition to land application of biosolids on farmland. He was a respected, retired soil scientist, and I asked for a science-based explanation. Instead, he explained that the national Farm Bureau was using their opposition to biosolids to persuade legislators to address burdensome regulation of farmers related to wetlands and surface water quality. They correctly recognized that Farm Bureau support was valuable and wanted a quid-pro-quo accommodation or to at least be able to make a statement.

You have to respect this point of view. It may not be science-based but its not off base either. That Farm Bureau fellow was just staying in character.

Technorati tags: Soil science Biosolids