Sorting fact, fiction in a pile of litter

Muskogee Phoenix 1/12/10


By M. Susan Savage
State view

The future of Oklahoma’s water quality is at stake in this landmark case, not politics.

The battle to protect Oklahoma’s water from pollution has, predictably, generated more than its share of misinformation.

For those unfamiliar with the details of the state of Oklahoma’s lawsuit against industrial poultry operations, it can be difficult to sort fact from fiction, particularly when the public relations campaigns kick into high gear.

As the former mayor of Tulsa, I am more than familiar with the degradation of water posed by poultry litter and the tactics used to defend the industry’s practices. When the city of Tulsa sued several poultry operators to protect its sources of drinking water in 2001, I learned firsthand that science often takes a backseat to hyperbole and misdirection when the spin control begins.

Such appears to be the case as the state of Oklahoma enters the final phases of its legal challenge to the poultry industry’s operations in the Illinois River watershed.

Let me offer some facts that are well documented and supported by science:

• Scientific studies unequivocally demonstrate and have for years, that Oklahoma’s scenic rivers and streams are impaired by phosphorous and bacteria, and their water quality continues to deteriorate.

• Scientific studies further show the primary source of phosphorous is land-applied poultry waste with effluent from municipal wastewater treatment plants as a secondary source.

• Over some 30 years of regulation, municipal wastewater treatment plants have significantly reduced phosphorous and bacteria levels while the poultry industry has done virtually nothing, instead pushing the responsibility for waste disposal to its contract growers. The result is the continued degradation of Oklahoma’s most precious natural resource — its rivers, lakes and streams.

When confronted with the facts, poultry industry supporters have again shifted the focus from the merits of water quality to an attack on Attorney General Drew Edmondson, whose constitutional duty it is to represent the state’s interest in this case.

As Gov. Brad Henry has made clear, this is the state of Oklahoma’s lawsuit, not Edmondson’s, and the Henry administration is in full support of the ongoing legal efforts to protect the state’s water quality. Poultry industry supporters are well aware of these facts.

The future of Oklahoma’s water quality is at stake in this landmark case, not politics, not hyperbole and not spin. The people of Oklahoma deserve to have the fate of their lakes, rivers and streams determined by scientific facts, not misinformation generated to defend the status quo.

Savage is the Oklahoma secretary of state.