THE TOP TEN QUOTES SO FAR FROM OKLAHOMA’S POULTRY LAWSUIT
As taken from the Tulsa World, the AP, the Arkansas Democrat Gazette and other sources
By Ed Brocksmith, STIR, Inc.
NUMBER TEN
"Even if you don't like what the court did, don't contort your face.”- Judge Frizzell to attorneys. Sept. 24, 2009. Earlier, Frizzell had abruptly stopped talking and stared for several seconds at attorneys after he noticed some of them grimacing.
NUMBER NINE
“This case has never been about money. The case is about protecting the watershed from pollution."- Oklahoma Attorney General’s office after Judge Frizzell ruled damages could not be collected from poultry companies named in Oklahoma’s lawsuit. July 2009.
NUMBER EIGHT
"I don't see why the AG should not be able to hire good lawyers,” Otherwise, the state would "get their tails whipped by attorneys like Mr. (Jay) Jorgensen," – Judge Frizzell, referring to an attorney for Tyson Foods. Sept. 17, 2009.
NUMBER SEVEN-TIE
"There has been a lot of scientific work done in the past few years that shows high levels of phosphorus in rivers, streams and lakes causes an increase in algae growth which can adversely affect water quality and recreational use,"- Monty Henderson, the former president of George’s Inc., 2005 memo in newsletter to growers. It (memo) advised that excess litter — or the droppings, feathers and bedding of the birds — should be hauled out of the concentrated areas where poultry is raised, and insisted the problem needed to be solved very soon.
NUMBER SEVEN-TIE
Timothy Maupin, vice president of agricultural operations for Cargill Turkey Production LLC, also said in court that his company developed a pilot program in 2002 to haul excess chicken waste from a sensitive watershed shared by Oklahoma and Arkansas to Kansas. The company abandoned those plans after just two years, he said, in part because it wasn't turning a profit. Nov. 12, 2009.
NUMBER SIX
There's no question "that there has been an over-application of litter on some or many farms. That's not an issue in our book.”- Patrick Ryan, defense attorney, 2008 preliminary hearing before Federal Judge Gregory Frizzell. (Motion by 12 poultry companies to bar Ryan’s statement, Aug. 2009.)
NUMBER FIVE
“Was it shaken or stirred?”-Thomas Green, a Tyson Foods attorney, on what technique was used to test the amount of poultry litter in water (glass jars of pollution testimony). Nov. 22, 2009
NUMBER FOUR
“It’s been a good two days for the polluters and a bad two days for the watershed,” –Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson, who filed Oklahoma’s lawsuit in 2005, said the loss of the federal claim was “serious.” Judge Frizzell on Tuesday dismissed one of Oklahoma’s key claims against Arkansas poultry companies, ruling that bird manure isn’t “solid waste” under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. Frizzell ruled on Monday that Oklahoma’s claim that bacteria is harming the watershed will no longer be considered. Dec. 16, 2009.
NUMBER THREE
"We're a gnat on Tyson's behind…No," (Mark) Simmons replied when asked whether he believes that poultry litter is responsible for degrading the watershed. Nov. 2009
NUMBER TWO
“We’ve beaten this chicken to death.”- Judge Frizzell to attorneys. Oct. 2009
AND…
THE NUMBER ONE POULTRY TRIAL QUOTE SO FAR IN 43 DAYS OF TESTIMONY
"The question is not who owns the water…the question is who owns the pollution."- Diane Hammons, Cherokee Nation Attorney General said during the hearing. Hammons said the state and the tribe answer the latter question the same way: the poultry companies. Sept. 16, 2009.
OTHER INTERESTING COMMENTS AND MILESTONES IN OKLHOMA’S POULTRY SUIT INCLUDE:
“It’s significant for the state to acknowledge the Cherokee Nation’s governmental rights, and it’s a good sign that both governments can work together on this case,”- Principal Chief Chad Smith said. “Neither the state nor the Nation wanted the delay or additional expense that the addition of another party to the case would mean at this point in the litigation.” (The State of Oklahoma and the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma agree on procedure in poultry suit, May 22, 2009, Tahlequah Daily Press)
U.S. District Judge Gregory Frizzell ruled that poultry litter, a mixture of poultry waste and bedding material, may be considered a solid waste if it is applied in excessive amounts on fields as fertilizer (later Frizzell reversed himself on this statement). Aug. 2008
U.S. District Judge Gregory Frizzell denied the poultry companies' motion to hear the whole case from the bench. The companies wanted Frizzell to hear the entire case from the bench, claiming that a series of pretrial victories for their side eliminated the need for a jury. The most significant of those victories was when Frizzell stripped more than $611 million in monetary damages Oklahoma was seeking from the companies because the state failed to include the Cherokee Nation — whose lands lie within the watershed. Aug. 27, 2009
While the Cherokee Nation never wished to have its water rights litigated in this water quality case, those rights have become so enmeshed in the case that the Nation feels it has no option but to intervene," Cherokee Nation Attorney General Diane Hammons said in a statement. Sept. 4, 2009
You wouldn't do this to a jury…You do this to a judge" said U.S. District Judge Gregory K. Frizzell, who accused the attorneys of trying to have the documents admitted in order to prepare the case for an appeal. Nov., 2009
In turning back the tribe, District Judge Gregory Frizzell said he would have “been pleased” to grant its request had it been timely. “Unfortunately, it is not,”- Judge Frizzell following a morning hearing. Sept. 15, 2009
"The problem is the Cherokee Nation continues to contend they own all the water" in the Illinois River watershed. -Judge Frizzell. Sept. 24, 2009. Frizzell previously ruled in favor of a poultry industry request to bar the state from seeking damages totaling more than $600 million because the Cherokee Nation was not a proper party in the case.
“This is a two-state problem, and litigation was the only way to get a binding outcome,”-Miles Tolbert, former Oklahoma Secretary of Environment, the State’s first witness. Sept. 30, 2009. Under cross-examination, he conceded that he was unaware of any significant violations to state Department of Agriculture regulations that dealt with the use of poultry waste as fertilizer.
The research methods used by one state expert witness, geochemist Roger Olsen, were "subjective" and that his conclusions were "unreliable."- Judge Gregory Frizzell on not allowing expert witness Roger Olsen. Frizzell also excluded testimony from Valerie Harwood; a University of South Florida microbiologist who Edmondson claimed had isolated a biological fingerprint for the bacteria that would track to poultry. The rulings …were in line with Frizzell’s 2008 decision to reject the state's request for a preliminary injunction to ban the use of poultry waste as fertilizer in the watershed.
“A frog strangler your honor is….” Ed Fite, Oklahoma Scenic Rivers Commission, amused Judge Frizzell with a definition of a storm event. Fite said he approached several poultry company representatives between 1997 and 2002. He said he talked with the companies about ways to help export poultry litter out of the watershed instead of continuing its use as a fertilizer to grow grass for cattle. Oct. 1, 2009.
"Obviously, if we're viewed as pursuing the right thing, we'd be better perceived,"- Preston Keller, director of environmental agriculture for Tyson Food until 2005. Nov. 2009. Louis Bullock, an attorney for the state, showed a PowerPoint presentation developed in-house by Tyson, which emphasized that the most important concern for the company was maintaining a positive image.
He (John Connolly) said poultry litter that is applied to pastures and crop farms produces only a fraction of the phosphorus that creates algae. - John Connolly, poultry industry witness. January 2010.