CALIFORNIA

• Many of California's 2,400 dairies appear to be illegally polluting water with cow manure, threatening the safety of drinking water supplies for millions of residents.
  
  
• California's Central Valley, the state's primary milk-producing region, is suffering severe surface and groundwater pollution from dairies. But the region only has four water quality inspectors and livestock operations have rarely been penalized for illegal pollution.

California is the number one milk producer in the nation.¹ Home to 1.3 million milk cows, California produces one of every five gallons of milk consumed in the United States.²

California's feedlots, and especially dairies, are highly concentrated in only a few regions of the state. Most dairies, egg, and poultry operations are concentrated in the Central Valley, whose rivers provide drinking water for cities nearby and as far south as Los Angeles. The majority of cattle feedlots are in the southwestern part of the state in the Colorado River Basin area.³

Pollution Problems

California's Central Valley is home to approximately 1,600 of the state's 2,400 dairies.⁴ Its 891,000 cows create as much waste as 21 million people⁵ with nominal treatment.

A mature dairy cow typically produces as much waste as 34 people.⁶ That's an average of 114 pounds of waste per day or 22.5 tons of manure a year.⁷ Dairy waste contains prodigious concentrations of ammonia that is highly toxic to aquatic life. Equally problematic are the huge piles of stored silage used to feed cows. Silage wastes, with high ammonia and low pH levels, result from the fermentation of sap or juices in forage crops.⁸

Long-time dairy inspector Louis Pratt puts it succinctly, "When a dairy has too many cows on too few acres with too small a waste lagoon, it's going to pollute."⁹ "The manure washing off the valley's dairy farms runs into creeks that empty into the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, an estuary that has long been home to rare fish and birds."¹⁰

Pollution in the extensive Central Valley affects much of the rest of the state, because the area is an important source of drinking water. Each year, approximately six million acre feet of water is pumped out of the Delta and sent south via aqueducts to irrigate crops and quench the insatiable thirst of Southern California urban areas.¹¹ Dairy manure in the form of polluted runoff poses a potential threat to the drinking water of some 20 million Californians -- about 65 percent of the state's population -- who are served by Delta water supplies.¹²

According to California's State Water Resources Control Board's 1996 water quality report, dairies and other animal feeding operations in California's Central Valley are responsible for poisoning hundreds of square miles of groundwater, rivers and streams. "Creeks upstream of the San Joaquin River and the Tuolumne River, a tributary, often contain 200 times more ammonia than the level that is poisonous for fish. Many creeks are already so polluted that there are no more fish left to kill."¹³

According to Bill Jennings of the DeltaKeeper, an environmental group that regularly patrols the Delta's waterways and tributaries by boat, land and aircraft, "Dairies are the single largest source of water pollution in San Joaquin and Stanislaus Counties. Our volunteers frequently encounter massive discharges of dairy waste that literally cauterize waterways and kill fish."

In April of 1998, the Los Angeles Times reported, "State and federal inspectors suspect that a majority of California's 2,400 dairies are illegally allowing manure to pollute water."¹⁴ "From Fresno to Kern County, where inspections began in January, more than half of the 50 farms inspected had problems that threaten groundwater, according to Lonnie Wass, a water board senior engineer."¹⁵

Jennings, who also chairs the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, observes that California's once legendary anadromous fisheries are in serious jeopardy: all of the Central Valley's salmon and steelhead runs and a number of native species like Delta smelt, threespine stickleback and Sacramento splittail are already listed or proposed for listing under the federal Endangered Species Act.¹⁶ Water quality officials suspect that dairy manure is a significant cause of fishery depletion, since the creeks feeding into the Delta's rivers and receiving dairy runoff are crucial spawning and feeding grounds.¹⁷ Zooplankton and phytoplankton, the tiny underwater plants and insects that form an essential link in the aquatic food chain, are down 90 to 99 percent since the early 1970s.¹⁸ Salmon and steelhead fisheries are down more than 90 percent from their historic levels.¹⁹ "We're in the process of losing one of the most marvelous and diverse aquatic ecosystems in the world," lamented Jennings.

Alarm over the degradation of the Delta has spurred a joint federal-state multi-billion dollar effort to clean up the estuary and to solve California's perennial water problems. The effort is known as the CALFED Bay Delta project. Los Angeles metropolitan water district officials involved in the project have expressed concern over cryptosporidium, a parasite in animal waste harmful to human health, and other disease-causing pathogens from the Central Valley's dairy waste that could contaminate Los Angeles drinking water. Los Angeles receives about 20 percent of its drinking water from the Delta.²⁰ "Any contaminants flowing into the Delta are pumped south to Los Angeles," Jennings said.

The state of California has classified 22 groundwater basins and 15 areas of waterways as "impaired" or significantly polluted by livestock operations.²¹

In a state like California, plagued with chronic water supply problems, groundwater from underground aquifers constitute a crucial contribution to the water supply.²² "According to California's water quality report, more than 10,000 square miles of aquifers in California are polluted with nitrates, and state officials say that agriculture, including cows, is the major source.²³ In high concentrations, nitrates in drinking water can cause "blue-baby syndrome," a disease in which an infant's red blood cells are unable to carry sufficient oxygen. High nitrate levels have also been linked to miscarriages in women.²⁴ Some dairy farmers have found that their cows abort their calves after drinking water polluted with nitrates and have been forced to dig deeper wells in search of water for their cows to drink.²⁵

The Chino Basin was once the number one milk-producing area in California. Regional water quality officials say dairies deserve much of the blame for contaminating the groundwater in an area whose permeable soil made underground water supplies particularly vulnerable.²⁶ "We had the highest concentration of cows in the country and the soils were sandy in many places," said Mark Kinsey, water resources engineer for the Chino Basin Municipal Water District.²⁷

In Chino, 300,000 cows in 50 square miles generate a football-field sized pile of manure as high as the Empire State Building. The manure mixes with some 15 million gallons of water each day used to wash the cows and clean the barns, and some of it seeps into the groundwater. Heavy rains in 1998 washed manure downstream from the Chino dairies straight down the Santa Ana River and into the aquifer that supplies half of Orange County's drinking water... ²⁸

Ever since the widespread contamination of Chino Basin, many dairies have moved further north to Tulare County, contributing to a doubling of the dairy herds there over the past 10 years, making Tulare the top milk-producing county in the nation.²⁹ Almost 40 percent of the 100 dairies in Tulare County are located within seven miles of the city of Tulare.³⁰ This high concentration of dairies elevates the risk of severe nitrate contamination of groundwater sources. Nitrate levels have increased in city wells around Tulare County but the water is still within state standards, officials say.³¹

Regulatory Climate

A dearth of inspectors in California's biggest dairy producing region has contributed to some of the worst water pollution in the nation.³²

"Until the Spring of 1998, the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board has had only one water pollution inspector for the 1,600 dairies in the valley. The most productive dairies in the state's top milk-producing county, Tulare, had not undergone inspection for 18 months as of March 1998."³³ As part of a recent effort to crack down on dairies, three more inspectors have recently been hired for the region, but a force of four inspectors is still inadequate to inspect all of the Valley's dairies.³⁴

"A new clean water task force was recently formed to crack down on Central Valley dairies, beef up inspections and prosecute farmers violating environmental laws."³⁵ In March, the operator of a large dairy near Stockton became the first dairyman in the state to receive a jail sentence for polluting water. He was charged with multiple counts of discharging dairy wastes into streams over four years. Under a plea bargain, the farmer received a 90-day jail term, a $100,000 fine and agreed to make $101,000 worth of improvements to his dairy.³⁶

Despite this high-profile case and the protests it roused in the dairy industry, "The reality of the crackdown is less than the promise," says DeltaKeeper's Bill Jennings. Monitoring hundreds of dairies will require enormous resources. "Enforcement is substantially less than the pledges made by state and local officials," Jennings observes.

There are several levels of permitting in California. The State Water Resources Control Board is divided into a Division of Water Rights and a Division of Water Quality.. Under the state board are nine regional water quality boards. It is these regional boards that can decide whether or not to issue waste discharge permits at all, whether to waive them in most cases or to issue the permits universally to all large feedlots. Large feedlots that constitute a point source pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act are required to have a Clean Water Act permit under the state's General Industrial Stormwater Permit. However, in the Central Valley Region less than half of the 400 dairies subject to this permit have filed the required Notice of Intent to comply.³⁷

California also issues waste discharge permits, covering pollution discharges to land, surface water and groundwater under the state's Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. In 1996 the Central Valley Regional Board issued a general waste discharge requirement applicable to dairies.

However, if an operation is in compliance with the state requirements for feedlots, such as preventing water pollution from manure, ensuring that waste lagoons do not leak, limiting the amount of liquid manure sprayed on fields or fixing faulty wastewater equipment, the regional water board may waive the issuance of a waste discharge permit. Almost all of the dairies in the Central Valley are operating under waivers.³⁸

The waiver process waives the permits and the fees associated with permits, which are $2,000 for a waste discharge permit and $2,000 for a NPDES permits. (By contrast, factories, sewage plants and other industries pay annual fees, to help fund regulation of their waste.) If a producer violates the regulations (waiver terms) and pollutes, that producer may be issued a permit which includes a compliance schedule.

Only about 100 dairies are operating under this permit.³⁹ Regional Boards have been reluctant to issue many of these state permits since the associated fees do not begin to cover the cost of administering the permits and the dairy industry has been exempted from payment of annual waste fees by the Legislature.⁴⁰

Inspection and enforcement is so lax in California's major dairy-producing regions that most dairy operators are effectively living under a self-enforcing compliance program. On the whole, the state of California does not routinely inspect livestock operations. Inspections are primarily complaint-driven. Louis Pratt, the Central Valley Regional Board's dairy specialist, estimates that "60 percent of the region's dairies are in non-compliance with water quality laws and that during particularly wet winters this number can increase to almost 80 percent."⁴¹ The opportunity to conduct more inspections is hindered by a chronic lack of funds.

The political power of the dairy industry in California cannot be ignored. Dairies are California's largest agricultural industry churning out $3 billion worth of milk and cream each year. Dairy groups have contributed more than $700,000 in state election campaigns over the last six years.⁴² Larry Glandon, who retired as a dairy inspector after 16 years, observes, "Dairies have been rather untouchable, They have a lot of political significance in Sacramento. It's kind of understood."⁴³ When David Irey of the San Joaquin's County's Environmental Prosecutions Unit brought charges against 12 dairies,⁴⁴ winning fines or settlements of between $3,000 and $80,000, dairy operators appealed to the County Board of Supervisors. Three county supervisors accused the District Attorney's Office of a "reign of terror," "harassment" and "Gestapo" and "secret police" tactics and unsuccessfully attempted to reduce the District Attorney's budget.⁴⁵

Individual Permits

The state issues individual permits when there is something unique about the location of a livestock operation. It may be on a slope or close to a waterway. The state may also issue an individual permit to an operation with a history of pollution problems to keep a closer eye on it.

California is one of the top egg producers in the country, but only a handful of its poultry operations have permits -- typically those that are on a slope or near a waterway. Nearly all poultry farms operate under waivers of wastewater discharge requirements.⁴⁶ In January 1998, the Justice Department announced that it fined Modesto area Foster (Poultry) Farms $500,000 for massive violations of the federal Clean Water Act.⁴⁷

Citizen Influence

Farm operators applying for waivers of waste discharge requirements present their proposal to their regional Water Quality Control Board in a public hearing. Meeting notices are published in local newspapers and members of the public may appear or submit comments in writing.⁴⁸

Citizens groups are increasingly working with enforcement and regulatory agencies to augment their limited resources. For example, the DeltaKeeper sends out volunteers equipped with cameras, sample bottles and electronic meters to measure conductivity, pH and dissolved oxygen two or three times a week during the rainy season. When illegal dairy discharges are discovered, samples are collected for analysis and state and local agencies are notified.

Local Control

Counties have the authority to regulate factory farms and can pass regulations that are stricter than the state's. Tulare County, for example, requires that the bottom of manure lagoons be placed at least 10 feet above the top of the groundwater table.⁴⁹ However, the county does not require linings for lagoons, claiming that the clay soil seals the bottoms.⁵⁰

Primary interviewees for this chapter:

Bill Jennings
DeltaKeeper
Project of San Francisco BayKeeper
3536 Rainier Avenue
Stockton, CA 95204
Phone: 209-464-5090
Hotline to report incidents: 1-800-KeepBay
e-mail: deltakeep@aol.com
bill@sfbaykeeper.org

Bill Craven
Sierra Club California
1414 K Street, Suite 330
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-557-1100
Fax: 916-557-9669
e-mail: bobcat1@motherlode.org

Ronnie Cohen
Natural Resources Defense Council
71 Stevenson Street, Suite 1825
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: 415-777-0220
Fax: 415-777-4083
e-mail: rcohen@nrdc.org

Notes

1. California Department of Food and Agriculture, 1997 California Dairy Information, Internet, www.cdfa,ca.gov/agfacts/dairy.

2. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

3. Personal communicaton beteen Rebecca Knuffke and Jack Hodges, Dairy Program Coordinator, Division of Water Quality, State Water Resources Control Board (October 19, 1998).

4. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section; EIliot Diringer, "In Central Valley, Defiant Dairies Foul the Waters," San Francisco Chronicle (July 7, 1997).

5. Personal communication between Bill Jennings, DeltaKeeper, and Louis Pratt, Inspector, Regional Water Quality Control Board (Spring 1998).

6. EIliot Diringer, "In Central Valley, Defiant Dairies Foul the Waters," San Francisco Chronicle (July 7, 1997); Jim Nickles, "Pollution Detectives Beefing Up Surveillance," The Stockton Record (January 11, 1998).

7. Jim Nickles, "Pollution Detectives Beefing Up Surveillance," The Stockton Record (January 11 1998).

8. Personal communication between Bill Jennings and Louis Pratt, Dairy Inspector, Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Fall 1998).

9. Personal communication between Bill Jennings and Louis Pratt, Dairy Inspector, Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Fall 1998).

10. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

11. California Department of Water Resources, California Water Plan Update, Bulletin 190-93, 1993

12. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

13. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

14. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

15. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

16. Personal communication between Rebecca Knuffke and DeltaKeeper Bill Jennings (November 1998).

17. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

18. S. Obrebski, et al., "Long Term Trends in Zooplankton Distribution and Abundance in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary," Technical Report 32, Interagency Ecological Studies Program for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary (1992).

19. California Department of Fish and Game Records reported by Bill Jennings. For example, the federally listed winter-run chinook salmon declined from 108,853 spawners in 1969 to just 153 in 1991.

20. California Department of Water Resources, California Water Plan Update, Bulletin 190-93 (1993).

21. 1996 California 303(d) and TMDL Priority List, contained in the 305(b) Report of Water Quality, State Water Resources Control Board (August 1996).

22. California Department of Water Resources, California Water Plan Update, Bulletin 190-93 (1993).

23. California Department of Water Resources, California Water Plan Update, Bulletin 190-93 (1993).

24. Centers for Disease Control, "Spontaneous Abortions Possibly Related to Ingestion of Nitrate-Contaminated Well Water - La Grange County, Indiana, 1991-1994," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Vol. 45, No. 26 (July 5, 1996).

25. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

26. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

27. Mark Grossi, "Dairy Waste: Is Water Safe?" Fresno Bee (March 2, 1998).

28. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

29. Mark Grossi, "Dairy Waste: Is Water Safe?" Fresno Bee (March 2, 1998).

30. Mark Grossi, "Dairy Waste: Is Water Safe?" Fresno Bee (March 2, 1998).

31. Mark Grossi, "Dairy Waste: Is Water Safe?" Fresno Bee (March 2, 1998).

32. The U.S. Geological Survey has concluded that the San Joaquin and Tulare water basins are among the most polluted basins in the country, N.M. Dubrovsky, et al., "Water Quality in the San Joaquin-Tulare Basins, California, 1992-1995," U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1159 (1998).

33. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

34. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

35. Personal communication between Rebecca Knuffke and Jack Hodges, Dairy Program Coordinator, Division of Water Quality, State Water Resources Control Board (October 19, 1998).

36. Stuart Gordon and Alvie Lindsay, "Polluting Dairyman Gets Jail," The Modesto Bee (March 14, 1998).

37. Personal communication between Bill Jennings and Louis Pratt, Dairy Inspector, Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Fall 1998).

38. Personal communication between Rebecca Knuffke and Jack Hodges, Dairy Program Coordinator, Division of Water Quality, State Water Resources Control Board (October 19, 1998).

39. Personal communication between Bill Jennings and Louis Pratt, Dairy Inspector, Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Fall 1998).

40. Elliot Diringer, "Regulators Go After Polluting Dairies, Central Valley Water Endangered by Cows," San Francisco Chronicle (July 19, 1997).

41. Personal communication between Bill Jennings and Louis Pratt, Dairy Inspector, Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Fall 1998).

42. EIliot Diringer, "In Central Valley, Defiant Dairies Foul the Waters," San Francisco Chronicle July 7, 1997).

43. EIliot Diringer, "In Central Valley, Defiant Dairies Foul the Waters," San Francisco Chronicle (July 7, 1997).

44. Jim Nickles, "Pollution Detectives Beefing Up Surveillance," The Stockton Record (January 11, 1997).

45. Jim Miller, "SJ Board Set to Hold DA Funding, Supervisors Lambast Environmental Team," Modesto Bee (June 26, 1998); Amy Starnes, "Supervisors to Vote on Budget," Stockton Record (June 26 1998).

46. Mark Grossi, "Dairy Waste: Is Water Safe?" Fresno Bee (March 2, 1998).

47. Stuart Gordon and Alvie Lindsay, "Polluting Dairyman Gets Jail," The Modesto Bee (March 4, 1998).

48. Marla Cone, "State Dairy Farms Try to Clean Up Their Act," Los Angeles Times (April 28, 1998), A Section.

49. Mark Grossi, "Dairy Waste: Is Water Safe?" Fresno Bee (March 2, 1998).

50. Mark Grossi, "Dairy Waste: Is Water Safe?" Fresno Bee (March 2, 1998).