Animals on farms?? What on earth are the thinking!

(correction: 40 foot well)

Our group of concerned residents would appreciate an opportunity to speak with the Patch as well. I have sent the editor my contact information (dmd99@cox.net)
Thank you.

Yes animals are tasty but smelly.

Well, if they are letting animals on a land trust property, there should have strict disclosure and limits on how many of each type, etc... Hope that is the case.

I have problems at various levels with what litte I have be able to find out in terms of the amimal farming operation proposed. I understand there is the possiblilty of slaughtering of animals on this town owned open space. Hopefully, I will be able to get answers to my questions before it is a done deal but the process seems to be moving unusually fast which concerns me as I can only hope all of the issues have been thoroughly look into (e.g., impact on water quality)

I agree that this is farmland. There is no question about zoning. Agreed that it has been farmed (animals and vegetables) for centuries. However, THIS IS PUBLIC LAND purchased by EG residents. Our group of residents would like:

• To maintain the integrity of what the Land Trust is entrusted by the public to do, as stated on their website (http://www.eglandtrust.org)

• To support the efforts of the Rhode Island Department of Environment Management, in protecting the Scrabbletown Brook (runs down the middle of Boesch Farm), Hunt River Watershed, and ultimately Greenwich Bay from contaminants harmful to native wildlife, vegetation, and humans.
(www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/examples/path)

• Continue to support organic vegetable and fruit farming on the property by advertising among a wider spectrum of the farming community to find an experienced and viable candidate. Although we respect conscientious animal farming, we oppose the use of public open space for that purpose.

Is this too much to ask for? Any residents opposed to organic vegetable and fruit farming? Enjoying our own open space freely? Preserving a safe water supply for our selves and our neighbors?

Also...Does it concern any other EG residents that the EG Land Trust held 11 meetings in 2011 of which 5 were in executive session (i.e, closed door - not open to the public) and the remaining 6 ended in executive session - "Per the RI Secretary of State website" This is a land trust group - what can be so secretive that the taxpayers need to be keep in the dark?? So much for open & transparent govenment.

Richard Goulston
Great concern about water and soil contamination. Lots of recent studies regarding airborne and waterborne biohazards. Much more known now than 100 years ago.

Yes Richard we do know a lot more today about pollution and the impact on the environment. We the neighbors that abut Boesch Farms rely on our wells for our drinking water and to maintain quality of life (washing clothes, dishes, and our bodies). It would be a shame to not address these issues and 5 years later be told that we cannot use our water for these purposes. I think that your opinion would be different if you lived near the property and had no access to any other water supply. The town goes to great lengths when new homes are being built to ensure waste treatment is properly handled so wells are not impacted, we ask for the same consideration at this time with animal waste. When many of the abutters built homes in the area this land did not house animals nor slaughter animals for sale. This land was identified as an organic vegetable farm with walking trails that all could enjoy. The purpose seems to have changed.

EG Patch has attached a copy of the original Boesch Farm Management Plan.

A Historic and Environmental Treasure

On July 6th, 2001 after more than three years of negotiations and fundraising efforts, the East Greenwich Land Trust paid a $75,000 deposit toward the purchase by the town of the 90-acre Boesch Farm located on South Road, and anxiously looks forward to completing the purchase. Once acquired and available to the public, residents will find the Boesch farm to be among the most treasured natural, cultural and historical resources to be found within the community. The property will serve as the southern anchor of the town’s greenway system, an interconnected network of protected open spaces that preserve the town’s rural and scenic character, as well as the environmental quality of East Greenwich.

Regarding Mr. Clarke's comment: ("And with all the regulations and neighbor whining, it's beyond imagination that he wants to do it at all.)
I certainly hope people realize caring, concerned residents who speak out are not whining but simply looking out for the best interest of the community in which they live. In reference to Mr. McNiff not wanting to farm at all now because of the opposition, clearly this is not a personal attack toward this man. These are simply concerned residents making valid points about what happens to public land that serve many not about one person's private profit.

Please try to bear in mind that Pat McNiff is a very well-respected farmer with many years of experience and MANY supporters. The neighbors who are voicing their concerns pay lipservice to their desire to engage in productive discourse and state that this is not a "personal" attack, but their tactics have been unfair and inflammatory to say the least. Having concerns about changes to a property near your home is perfectly natural. Having the grace to listen and participate in meaningful discussions before creating such drama would be a welcome change!

Well said, EGmom.

"Under the dead of night" is exactly the kind of inflammatory comment I was referring to! Making a statement like that does not serve any purpose except to invent controversy. You are implying that decisions were made in an untoward fashion and from what I've read, that is simply not true. The process has played out publicly here on the Patch and Land Trust meetings are open to the public. Do you entertain the possibility that this farm may run well, as intended, with no detrimental effect on nearby homeowners?

I didn't know that I had to look to the Patch to get my information. Also you should check your facts and you will see that no minutes have been posted on the Land Trust (Town of EG website) for many months. How are we to know?

Has the DEM weighed in on the environmental impact of animal farming on the neighbors' water? It would be helpful if we had this information, either to reassure the neighbors or to support their concerns.

Let's see all of the angles before launching a protest.
You will likey find that there needs to be an appropriate Animal Waste Management Plan signed off by the RI DEM.
http://www.dem.ri.gov/programs/bnatres/agricult/pdf/barnyardbmp.pdf
That should address the concerns about the well water contamination fears.
That leaves the odiferousness in question.
How do the neighbors like/dislike the two horse farms on Tillinghast Rd. that house enough livestock to generate a generous amount of poop? What about the dozens of chickens that had been raised on Boesch Farm, did their "hen dust" go up anyone's nose?
Perhaps a EGHS Senior can create a waste-to-methane facility.
Let's give it a try for one year and then evaluate the sitation instead of saying no out of unfounded fears.

Yes - "inflammatory comments." You are certainly entitled to raise your concerns and to have them addressed (provided those concerns are actually relevant to farming at Boesch... not on the easement issue you mention in your previous comment). I believe that is what the public meeting scheduled for a week from Monday is intended to accommodate. What I take issue with is the manner in which your group has attempted to stir up controversy and then claim to be seeking only "productive discourse." It is unfair and does not represent your position well.

I understand that this area in the past was farm land. When I purchased my land the “farm” had been trusted to the town as open space and was operating as a small organic vegetable farm.

That being said, I feel that making the argument that an organic vegetable farm and an animal farm pose the same environmental impact on surrounding areas is disingenuous. That is like saying that a Hummer and a Prius emit the same level of emissions into the atmosphere because they're both cars and have tires.

The underlying fact is this: when I built and moved into my home, the land was comprised of open space, not an animal farm. Allowing this animal farm worries me, as a taxpaying citizen of South Road, for a myriad of reasons, including the potential impact on my drinking water, the quality of life concerns (i.e., odor), and the fact a moveable slaughter house (or two) will be placed on the premises.

All the concerned residents in this area are asking is a chance to be heard and learn more about the situation. Personally, closed door meetings (i.e., executive committee sessions) worry me; it doesn’t evoke a strong sense of “trust”. I thought transparency and open discourse was the cornerstone of American democracy?

EG Patch is glad to host a vigorous debate on this issue, but comments that defame individuals will be deleted. Thanks.

I also am leary of all the "Executive Session" meetings that the Land Trust has been holding regarding this matter. I would like honest and open discussion about what will be effecting our way of life.

A waste management plan would be a great first step. What type of waste storage center would be required? Does it currently exist on the property? If not, what's the plan to get one on the property? I thought construction and new permanent fixtures/structures were disallowed under the 2001 "Boesch Farm Management Plan" (p.10)?

It seems that the EPA has already done some research on agriculture's effect on our nation's streams and rivers. In a water quality assessment, agriculture was listed - far and away - as the leading source of river and stream impairment (i.e., pollution).

http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/cwa/305b/upload/2002_09_10_305b_2000report_chp2.pdf (Please refer to pp. 13-15).

maybe they should scrap the farm because it is upsetting too many people and put up about 150 affordale housing units!!

WWD - If 330 years of farming haven't polluted that well of yours, a half dozen cows aren't going to do it. That land was part of the Briggs property granted to Richard Briggs for service in the King Philip War. It was operated as a farm by John Briggs and probably 15 generations after that. There was no DEM. There was no EPA. There was no one telling the old farmers what they could and could not do. If you have good well water, then that answers to it. If that farm was still owned by the Boesch family and they wanted to have 6 cows and some chickens, you would have no say in the matter. It's a farm!

You want organic farming for good natural stuff to eat? Where do you think they get fertilizer for their gardens? Hint: more than likely it's not Archer Daniel Midlands, it's from the back end of a cow, horse, or zebra.

Those lawn chemicals probably do more to hurt the rivers and streams than any old cow poop. When I was growing up here 60 years ago, the rivers, streams, lakes and ponds were not thick with grass as they are now. 300+ years they were clear and now, with all these houses and lawns, they are clogged up with grass. Now why is that, do you suppose? There's few things more useless than a lawn.

Alan - I'm just going by information/facts I can access via the Internet. At this point, it's my only resort. I (a taxpayer living in the area) have not been provided, by the town or it's officials, with information on the potential impact this farm could have on the area, the structure of the transaction, and/or the new tenant's intentions for the open space. I guess I will wait until August 22, 2011 so I can be provided with some answers to the many questions I still have about the farm. That's all I'm asking for ... have my questions answered. Until that point, I will continue researching (via the Internet) the impact that this potential undertaking may have on the health of my family.

Unbelievable - most of the South Rd area is zoned for farming - which means you can have just about any farm animal you want. I guess its ok if you build houses on that farm property but heaven forbid that you actually farm it.

So if your private neighbors decide to have large animal farming this would be a mute point I guess. Part of the decision by the Land Trust I would hope is based on how organic farming helps all the town including those who do not live in a farm area to enjoy some of the benefits of organic farming.

It apparently doesn't bother people enough that the chemicals that they and their neighbors put on their lawns also find their way into the wells. Or that the road runoff also affects wells. Or that people actually use their wells to water their lawns instead of protecting the water table for all who draw on it. Remember the well you use is actually runs under just about everyones house in a half a mile area but I have never heard any one complain about the chemical fertilizers etc...

Finally I have not heard about how many animals are going to be kept. The size of the area is such I doubt any huge factory farm is moving in. What size offends you? 2 cows and a couple pigs or goats or how about chickens and their roosters who crow in the early morning? The comment about the slaughterhouse amazes me. Where do people think their meat comes from?

I live near a small farm and yes I drink the water. I also on occasion smell the lovely smells of farm life. My point is why move to an area that was historically farmed and then complain about it. You have the right to complain so go at it - I am interested in your justifications.

These articles may be of interest:

http://www.ecori.org/farms/pats-pastured.html

http://www.jamestownpress.com/news/2010-09-09/Front_Page/Pats_Pastured_adopts_old_world_methods_for_modern_.html

So I see in another article that Mr McNiff plans for up to 6 dairy cows and chickens, turkeys and pigs. Plus 1 acre of vegetable growing. This is a typical small scale farm along new england traditional lines. I support Mr. McNiff and his efforts and wish him all the luck. It will be an asset for East Greenwich. One cannot support organic food but not the farms that supply them.

This article discusses the environmental impact of the type of farming which has been proposed for the property:

http://www.eatwild.com/environment.html

I take it that you don't abut the farm so your porperty value and quality of life are not going to be impacted in a negative way. Also, you must be fortunate enought to have town water and sewer. Those of us that live near the farm have no alternative but to have wells and septic systems.
Concerned Neighbor

It would have been nice to see this kind of outrage every time Zarella built another McMansion on South Rd. The water drainage patterns are altered every time another house goes up. A few years ago they built the million dollar homes across the street from the farm and no one said a thing. (I know, I know, it was privately owned). The fact is that far more damage was done to the land than by the new housing developments (on 3 sides of the farm property) than will be done by this farm.

Listen, folks, I don't eat meat for a number of reasons; the environment is one of those reasons. Sadly, many people have got to have their meat. I know that Pat is raising meat the best way that meat can be raised and is doing less damage than a bunch of house lots would be doing.

While I agree that it would have been nice for the Land Trust to have solicited more proposals and found a vegetable farming operation, I don't think the environmental argument against Pat holds water (no pun intended).

Ledge Ends had a hundred chickens on the farm and no one said word. They also had several mountains of horse manure sitting around the farm most of the time. They were certified organic but that doesn't mean they weren't adding materials to the land that were getting into the groundwater also. How do you save a tomato crop from tomato blight? Copper, and lots of it.

That being said, I may not agree with what you have to say, but it's a free country so go ahead and say it!

Actually Dirt Farmer we did have concern when Mr Zarella's cul de sac was proposed. We went to the planning board with concerns of well water sustainability/health, the size of the lots(less than an acre..in a 1 acre minimum zoned area of town)and surprise, surprise...the planning board at the time had no idea that the residents on the west side of Rt. 2 had only well water and no option of town water or sewer! Not funny. They should know. The neighbors did voice concern then as now. I hope this time our concerns will be heard and considered.

For those concerned about the water quality I suggest that you go to this link to see what the RI Dept of Health, Private Well Program suggests be tested for and how often those tests should be performed. Otherwise, you have no idea what you are drinking. http://www.health.ri.gov/drinkingwaterquality/for/privatewellowners/

Let’s look at what the EPA says about Animal Waste!
According to the EPA’s “Animal Waste: What’s the Problem?”:
http://www.veganoutreach.org/whyvegan/environment.html

[T]he growing scale and concentration of AFOs [animal feeding operations] has contributed to negative environmental and human health impacts. Pollution associated with AFOs degrades the quality of waters, threatens drinking water sources, and may harm air quality.
By definition, AFOs produce large amounts of waste in small areas. For example, a single dairy cow produces approximately 120 pounds of wet manure per day. Estimates equate the waste produced per day by one dairy cow to that of 20–40 humans per day.…
Manure, and wastewater containing manure, can severely harm river and stream ecosystems. Manure contains ammonia which is highly toxic to fish at low levels. Increased amounts of nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorus, from AFOs can cause algal blooms which block waterways and deplete oxygen as they decompose. This can kill fish and other aquatic organisms, devastating the entire aquatic food chain.

This is how Towns change. A few years back we wouldn't have all this nonsense. The people who "grew up here" would not be bickering over this. There would be farms and there would be open spaces, even neighborhoods. Well today this is why EG has become Yuppie capitol of the state.

I have visited Pat's current farm a couple times and each time I've been impressed with how clean and free of odors and piles of waste it is, even a couple hours after slaughtering poultry. (Only poultry is slaughtered on site--mammals are taken to a local, small, family-owned operation in state.) On one of my visits they were setting up for a wedding reception which was going to be held on the farm in one of the fields. Pat's farm is like the bucolic ideal we were shown as kids, *not* the industrial nightmare so much of animal farming has become in this country.

It's worth noting that Pat apprenticed under Joel Salatin. You might recognize that name from Michael Pollan's "The Omnivore's Dilemma" in which he describes in great detail both Mr. Salatin and his farm. Pat's farm is a smaller version of Salatin's Polyface Farm, and employs the same techniques and adheres to the same philosophy. One of the tenets of that philosophy is (excerpted from Salatin's website):
STAY WITHIN THE ECOLOGICAL CARRYING CAPACITY
...one of the distinguishing characteristics of an environmentally friendly farm compared to one that doesn’t care about the environment is how it handles the waste stream. In Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) the waste stream overpowers the surrounding ecology. That’s why they stink to high heavens.
Now you see why the industrial-sized have been kicked out of the village and banished to highly rural, out-of-sight areas. We’ve carefully defined the ecological carrying capacity. This forces us to decentralize, stay divested across the landscape, and remain aesthetically and aromatically attractive. Redesigning the business to fit into the local ecology takes innovation, but we’re not destroying groundwater, giving someone food borne illness, or stinking up the neighborhood. Appreciating our landscape and ecology and staying within those parameters is foundational to being a good citizen.

I have visited Pat's farm 3 or 4 times and have never noticed any smell. I would challenge anyone in the area who is unhappy to visit the farm he has now before you talk about falling property values and issues of sanitation, pollution, contamination, etc... As soon as you visit you will realize there is nothing to worry about. When I heard that Pat was moving I tried to find land close to me for him to use - I would be thrilled to have him and his farm in my neighborhood. I find it sad that people are fearful of having a small family farm in their neighborhood. I grew up on one and I think that people in that area should be thrilled that their children can have a neighborhood farm to visit and learn about animals and our food chain.

This whole issue borders on unbelievable. I am forced to get my oxygen tank grab my walker and go to this meeting. Save me a seat next Monday Alan

I'll gladly stand up so you can have my seat, Judy. I'll save it fer ye.

I was a huge supporter of the earlier farm. I was sad to see it go. The Land Trust has done due diligence. There will be controls in place because it is town-owned land. I believe the proposed farm by the well-respected McNiff will be an asset to the community. Let us be welcoming to local farmers. His business plan deserves a chance. I am not an immediate neighbor, but that means I do not get the immediate benefit of a much-threatened way of life and historical and valid use of the land can be my next door neighbor. We have lost a growing season already. You can have your public comments and ask questions, but let us not micro-manage the transparent and accountable decisions of our representatives. You know the Land Trust and this farmer will be amenable to correcting any problems down the road.

I think it is sad that some people say they want to ask questions but just make statements about farming practices being bad for the environment etc... & then quotes the EPA incorrectly. There is a HUGE difference between small scale farming with rotational grazing & large scale factory farms.

As a librarian nothing makes me more frustrated than people that do not do their research. If you have questions go to your local library & look up information on small scale farming. Not factory farming or industrial farming - there is a difference. You can also look for information online. The University of Vermont has conducted a study called The Rotational Grazing Project. http://www.uvm.edu/~grazing/

A section of this report reads:

Numerous researchers have reported that well-managed grazing is one of the best ways to protect water quality in mainstream agriculture. A University of Wisconsin study found that well-managed pastures are the best way to reduce phosphorus and sediment runoff from agricultural land. Researchers in Minnesota and Wisconsin have found that fecal coliform and turbidity were reduced with the use of rotational grazing practices and that well-managed pastures acted as very large riparian buffers to protect water quality.

Please, don't close your mind to small scale farmers like Pat - do your research, look into it, I honestly 100% believe that once you know what his farm is like you will see it as a benefit to the community.

I would think this is exactly what eg needs. A large piece of property that won't send kids to schools or strain services. Your other options are to let the land and house degrade ( having no caretaker) and become an eysore or just sell it to developers, that ought to help your property
values....

If the Land Trust didn't have a format for the meeting, some people would speak multiple times , others would make extremely lengthy statements, and some would never have a chance to speak at all. A hearing, by definition, requires listening on both sides..

I understand that there are many strong feelings on either side of this debate. I am strongly in support of Pat's Pastured moving to the Boesch Farm, and I also respect neighbors and EG citizen's rights to learn more about the practices he will utilize to protect the land and water on and surrounding the farm. It is unfortunate that there have been a number of incorrect statements made about the type of farming proposed--I, too, hope that concerned residents will visit the existing Pat's Pastured and also learn more about sustainable farming practices--which are an entirely different species from most current farming (or garden/lawn care) practices.

However, I have a different point to make. I would assume many, if not most, of the people posting are meat eaters. I think that as a town, EG residents have a wonderful opportunity to support sustainable farming IN THEIR BACKYARD. It is easy to eat meat and not think much about where it truly comes from and the impact poor farming methods have on the communities it comes from. I encourage everyone to take the opportunity to worry less about property values and more about valuing the earth, and to support local and sustainable farming. If it is in your backyard, and your partake in it and help govern it, you are part of supporting positive change in your community and world. Pat's Pastured at Boesch Farm is an opportunity--not a loss.

Unlike many people posting here, I actually am an abutting neighbor of the Briggs-Boesch farm property. I had been a member of the Ledge Ends CSA and although I was initially disappointed that another organic vegetable operations wasn't selected, I'm still pretty excited that Pat's Pastured is moving onto the land.

If you've read books like "Omnivore's Dilemma" you will learn that the type of farming operation Pat's Pastured advocates has little to none of the negative consequences presented in a lot of the ill-informed posts above. Still, I can see why people are concerned since there's been very little educational information coming down the line. I think the Land Trust should at the very least be taken to task for the poor and secretive way they've managed this whole process.

Attended the land trust meeting tonight and very few questions were answered. My take away was the land trust members were not only unable to provide answers to the participant’s questions, but apparently never asked them when selecting Mr. McNiff.

How can a committee award a proposal without knowing pertinent information (i.e., numbers and types of animals)? What will happen on this land (i.e., slaughtering of chickens and turkeys).

I believe that this should have been part of the application process; not part of negotiations.

i am curious if anyone complaining about the farm has been to pat's farm in jamestown? it's beautiful and clean. also wondering if the abutting neighbors buy conventional meat, eggs, and dairy from the grocery store and know that by purchasing them they are supporting the very operations they oppose so vigorously (which pat's pastured is NOT one of).