Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘victim’

I don’t know about you but I feel my civil liberties are being infringed upon and am furious and disgusted with government and various institutions that promulgate their biosolid propaganda. Some townships and municipalities are valiantly trying to prevent this ongoing assault on the land that is meant to sustain life. It doesn’t seem as though there is much reason for optimism. It is vitally important to stand up and fight for a cause that is so fundamental to our daily lives.  There are issues in the forefront of the public’s perception and unfortunately this is not one of them. In part I think because there is such a determined effort to deceive and overpower any opposition. There are websites, blogs and biosolid co-operative agencies whose sole mission is to put forward the agenda of the supposed Biosolid benefit.

From Pottsville, PA Republican-Herald, 5-15-08.

Packer Township, PA OKs Biosolids Ordinance.   Before about 50 residents, the Packer Township Board of Supervisors in Carbon County unanimously approved advertisement of its intent to adopt a biosolids ordinance.  The ordinance – The Packer Township Local Control, Sewage Sludge and Chemical Trespass Ordinance – not only prohibits the land application of biosolids sewage sludge within the township, but asserts the constitutional right to refuse “chemical bodily trespass” by corporations that would attempt to dump biosolids on township land.

The board also unanimously approved a resolution proclaiming solidarity with East Brunswick Township in its legal defense of its biosolids ordinance. East Brunswick’s ordinance banning biosolids dumping is being challenged by the state in court.  Other anti-biosolids ordinances are in effect in Tamaqua Borough, Rush Township and Mahanoy Township.

OTHER COUNTIES IN THE U.S. HAVE NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN THE WAR OVER THE APPLICATION OF SLUDGE

U.S. District Court Judge Gary Allen Feess in Los Angeles on August 10 granted the request for final judgment by the City of Los Angeles and other Southern California agencies, businesses and farmers to overturn Kern County’s ban of biosolids and maintain the land application of biosolids on farmland.

The fifty-five page order granted the request by the City and plaintiffs for the entry of final judgment against Kern County. Judge Feess ruled that Measure E “demonstrated irreparable harm” as the ordinance violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution by discriminating against biosolids from metropolitan Los Angeles and preempted the California Integrated Waste Management Act by conflicting with a statewide policy of recycling solid waste, which by statute includes biosolids. Judge Feess summarized that “government agencies cannot decide to stop producing biosolids and instead must find ways to manage those that are produced” and the court found “that land application constitutes a ‘beneficial use’ of biosolids, and indeed the EPA explains that it adopted the term ‘biosolids’ so as ‘to emphasize the beneficial nature of this valuable, recyclable resource.'”

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Falsification of data to spread sludge- Court Case

Farmer wins Judgement after hundreds of cows die

Illustrating the point that many levels of government collude to deceive its citizenry over the safety of biosolid application. This is not news to some; however there are many just waking up to the reality of Sewage Sludge.

From Athens, GA Banner-Herald, 5-19-08. University of GA Faces Claim Over Sewage Sludge Research. Data allegedly ‘fudged’ Months after a federal judge said the city of Augusta used “fudged” data to show that spreading sewage sludge on dairy pastures is safe, the University of Georgia faces a separate lawsuit in Athens over the safety of the sludge applications.  Former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency scientist David Lewis, along with two Augusta area dairy farmers, say UGA scientists used false data in research that showed applying sludge should not pose a threat to the farmers’ dairy cow herds. Lewis is suing EPA officials as well as UGA scientists and the UGA Research Foundation.  UGA could be forced to return EPA grants and pay civil penalties if a federal jury agrees with Lewis’ claims, according to Lewis’ lawyer, Edwin Hallman of Atlanta.

To view a copy of the lawsuit filed on March 29, 2006 by David Lewis, visit: http://www.onlineathens.com/multimedia/pdfs/051908_sludge_suit.pdf.

The UGA research was part of an orchestrated campaign by EPA administrators who wanted to justify a federal policy that allowed sewage sludge to be spread on farm fields and to discredit farmers’ claims that the sludge was poisoning their cows, according to Lewis.  The campaign also discredited Lewis’ own research into the safety of sewage sludge, the semi-solid material left over after wastewater is treated in municipal wastewater treatment plants, he said.  Lewis says he was forced out of the EPA and denied a chance to be hired at UGA when his research suggested EPA safety standards for sludge might not be strict enough to prevent human health problems.  “It’s just left a cloud over my reputation,” he said.

In the Augusta lawsuit, a dairy farming family claimed that hundreds of their cows died after sludge from an Augusta wastewater treatment plant was spread on their land in a program promoted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The sludge contained high levels of heavy metals and other dangerous pollutants, they claimed.  In February, U.S. Southern District of Georgia Judge Anthony Alaimo ruled in favor of the dairy farmers, a family named McElmurray that maintained the sludge contained dangerous pollutants like chlordane and metals such as thallium and arsenic.  Alaimo said sludge application records from the city of Augusta were accepted by the USDA and EPA even though they were “unreliable, incomplete and in some cases fudged,” and that when the dairy farmers showed federal officials evidence their land was contaminated, the evidence was ignored.  Alaimo also wrote in his February ruling that “senior EPA officials took extraordinary steps to quash scientific dissent and any questioning of the EPA’s biosolids program.”

Lewis, in his separate lawsuit in Athens’ Middle District federal court, claims some UGA researchers became part of those extraordinary steps to quash dissent.  Julia Gaskin and three other UGA scientists used the flawed Augusta data to show the city’s land application complied with federal law and was safe, according to the lawsuit.  The EPA funded UGA scientists’ research – after the dairy farmers filed earlier lawsuits – in order to generate data that would justify an EPA policy that said sludge application is safe, according to legal documents filed by Lewis.  Gaskin has stood by her research, and lawyers for the defendants have denied wrongdoing.

However, in September, federal Judge Clay Land denied a motion to dismiss the case against the UGA scientists and EPA administrators. Land agreed to dismiss the University System of Georgia Board of Regents as a defendant, however.  Land has not yet ruled on a later motion to dismiss the UGA Research Foundation and former UGA Vice President for Research Joe Key as defendants.

Read Full Post »