>> A CLOSER LOOK NOW AS TO ONE
REASON THE REPUBLICAN HELD
STATE SENATE REJECTED THE
GOVERNOR'S NOMINEE FOR AG
SECRETARY.
MANY IN OPPOSITION TO BRAD
PFAFF'S SELECTION SAID IT WAS
HIS AGENCY'S PROPOSED CHANGES
TO LIVESTOCK SITING RULES FOR
NEW AND EXPANDING OPERATIONS IN
THE STATE.
THE RULES WOULD INCLUDE WHERE
LIVESTOCK FACILITIES COULD BE
PLACED, ODOR AND RUNOFF
MANAGEMENT AND REGULATION OF
MANURE STORAGE FACILITIES.
FARM GROUPS AND WISCONSIN
MANUFACTURERS IN COMMERCE WERE
OPPOSED SAYING THE REGULATIONS
WOULD BE BURDENSOME.
THE WISCONSIN FARM BUREAU SAID
THEY WITH STIFLE THE GROWTH OF
THE STATE'S AG ECONOMY.
THE FARMERS UNION AND ITS
PRESIDENT TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW.
VON RUDE EN JOINS US FROM LA
CROSSE.
WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION TO THE
REJECTION AND OUSTER OF THE AG
SECRETARY DESIGNEE?
>> REALLY DISAPPOINTING AND
DISHEARTENING.
BRAD GREW UP IN WESTERN
WISCONSIN ON A DAIRY FARM AND
BEEN INVOLVED IN AGRICULTURAL
HIS LIFE EVEN THOUGH HE WAS
INVOLVED IN POLITICS.
BUT HE WAS INVOLVED IN THE AG
SIDE OF WORKING WITH SENATOR
RON KIND AND ALSO --
CONGRESSMAN RON KIND AND ALSO
SENATOR HERB KOHL.
HE KNOWS THE AGRICULTURE
INDUSTRY INSIDE AND OUT AND
WOULD BE A GREAT SPOKESMAN FOR
THE AG INDUSTRY HERE.
>> EARLIER YOU HAD SAID YOU
THOUGHT PERHAPS THE DECISION
WAS POLITICAL.
HOW SO?
>> I THINK JUST LOOKING AT SOME
OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENED
THIS SUMMER WITH JOINT FINANCE
COMMITTEE TYING UP THE $100,000
ON THE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE
UNTIL THE SENATOR FITZGERALD'S
TASK FORCE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS
AND THEN ONE OF THEIR
RECOMMENDATIONS WAS ACTUALLY
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AG TO GET
THAT $100,000.
SENATOR FITZGERALD REALLY
DIDN'T LIKE THAT BACKLASH.
BUT I GUESS WHAT BRAD WAS DOING
WAS CALLING A SPADE A SPADE.
>> AS FOR DEBT CAPS PROPOSED
RULE REVISION ON NEW OR
EXPANDING LIVESTOCK OPERATION
WHAT'S YOUR REACTION THAT THEY
WOULD BE BURDENSOME, HURT
AGRICULTURE AND PUT PEOPLE OUT
OF BUSINESS?
>> RIGHT NOW IN THE DAIRY STATE
WE'RE LOSING TWO DAIRY FARMS A
DAY.
SO WHAT IS THE REAL ISSUE?
IT'S MORE ECONOMICS THAN
REGULATIONS.
FARMERS ARE NOT RECOVERING WHAT
THEIR COSTS ARE RIGHT NOW AND
HAVEN'T BEEN FOR FIVE YEARS NOW.
WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT
ECONOMICS AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT
HOW TO GET THOSE INTO MORE OF A
BALANCE SO MORE FARMERS STAY IN
BUSINESS.
>> DO YOU FEEL THE REVISED
RULES ARE A GOOD THING?
>> YES, I DO.
EPISCOPAL
-- ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT
SOME OF THE COSTS THEY HAVE IN
THE PERMITTING PROCESS FOR
THESE LARGE FARMS CAN RUN INTO
THE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
DOLLARS SOMETIMES.
AND A LOT OF TIMES THE COUNTIES
ONLY GET 300 TO 500 TO LOOK AT
THAT.
THEY USE TAXPAYER MONEY TO
OFFSET THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
WHAT THEY ARE RECEIVING FROM
THEIR PERMITEE AND WHAT THE
ACTUAL COSTS ARE.
ONE OF THE THINGS THE PROPOSED
NEW RULE WAS GOING TO DO WAS TO
ALLOW THESE MUNICIPALITIES AND
TOWNSHIPS TO SET A FEE THAT
THEY COULD RECOVER THEIR COSTS.
>> I KNOW SOME PEOPLE ARE
SAYING THESE NEW REVISED RULES
ARE NOT JUST FOR THE LARGEST
FARMS OUT THERE BUT FOR
OPERATIONS EXPANDING TO LIKE
500 ANIMALS.
THE LARGER OPERATIONS ARE
REALLY NOW PART OF OUR FARMING
MIX.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THEM EVEN
MORE STRICTLY REGULATED OR
PROHIBITED EVEN?
>> WE REALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT
THAT.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE LARGEST OF
BUSINESSES AROUND THE COUNTRY
THEY'RE REGULATED MORE THAN THE
MOM AND POP SHOPS ARE.
AS A ORGANIC DAIRY FARMER THE
ONLY REGULATIONS I HAVE IS
FOLLOWING THE ORGANIC STANDARDS
THE CONSUMERS WANT TO SEE
ENFORCED.
THEY COST MONEY BUT THOSE
CONSUMERS ARE WILLING TO PAY
THAT LITTLE BIT EXTRA TO MAKE
SURE THE FARMER STAYS IN
COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT THE
ORGANIC STANDARDS ARE.
SO LOOKING AT WHAT LARGER
FARMING OPERATIONS ARE DOING,
TOO, IF WE LOOK AT HOW OUR
DOLLARS COME BACK TO US FROM
THE CONSUMER, THEY CAN RECOVER
THOSE COSTS FROM REGULATIONS IF
WE LOOK AT HOW WE PRICE OUR
PRODUCT.
>> WE NEED TO LEAVE IT THERE.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.