Opportunities and the Long View

Credit: Lauren Carroll/Journal
Relish Magazine

I have known Ken Bridle's opinions on land management and the environment for a few years. Despite this I need reminders from him about the basic principles. He's very straight up and matter-of-fact - which can be a little intimidating to a bird like me. Thank goodness he's also good-humored and easy to coax to a laugh.

You've heard his voice from the bandstand at the annual Stokes Stomp where he's MC'd for at least a decade. You may know him through his exhaustive research in the Upper Dan River Basin or his work for the Piedmont Land Conservancy. He has been soldiering on behalf of the Earth we will leave our children's children for a long time and has seen many battles.

If there is a "Mr. Dan River" it is Ken. I think his perspective is uniquely worth a careful listen.

Thanks for the permission, Ken.
[Update 2012-06-21 :: Ken had an adaptation of this email printed in the Letters to the Editor section of the Stokes News]

---

from: Ken Bridle <kbridle@piedmontland.org>

to: Dale Swanson <dswanson@danriver.org>

cc: Palmer McIntyre <pmcintyre@piedmontland.org>

Kevin Redding <kredding@piedmontland.org>

date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 13:18:56 -0400

subject: RE: bioremediation/land farming in Stokes

Hello Dale,

Thanks for keeping in touch and sending the link to your blog. I appreciate the effort that you have put into understanding this issue and fitting into the context of Stokes County.

My personal input to all of this is the same as it was when I first came to Stokes County 30 years ago. At that time Stokes was being considered as a site of a regional low level nuclear waste depository, after that it was tire dumps and trash dumping because we had no greenboxes for county wide trash collection, next it was old mobile homes that other counties had banned and were being allowed in Stokes, then it was a chip mill, now bioremediation and fracking, and soon it will be something else. All of these are problematic in Stokes County because we don’t have a county wide land use plan that would address many questions raised by this kind of activity. Our political leaders are afraid that land use planning will be opposed by the public when in fact most landowners, business owners, residents and other stakeholders benefit from the effort of working out a plan that protects what needs protecting and gives guidance to those who wish to develop a business. Stokes County citizens and politicians have missed many opportunities in the past to channel this kind of public awareness and energy into the constructive development of a plan that would benefit everyone in the county. I work in all the counties of the north west piedmont of North Carolina and the ones that have plans: Land Use, Farm Preservation, Historic Preservation, Scenic, Economic Development… are the counties that have given thought to the future and have mapped out a way to get where they want to go. They also qualify for assistance of programs that require adopted plans. Stokes County has no plan and so we go through these episodes where it seems like we take two steps back for each one step forward.

PLC will take no position on this bioremediation issue, it is not what we do. We work with willing landowners to protect properties that have conservation value. I think the organizations view would be the same as my own: use the opportunity to develop a land use plan that gives the environmental, recreation, neighborhoods and the development concerns a framework to each get what they need.

Ken

---

Thank you for your honesty and wisdom. I hope we are able to find the will to provide a map for our legacy to grow and prosper while protecting our most valuable assets in the ground, air and water.

Post-Mortem on Stokes Zoning Amendment 227 (Land Farming)

[NOTE: For more information on Open Field Petroleum-Contaminated Soil Bioremediation, aka Land Farming, I suggest Googling. I will try to have a compendium of documentation and reading resources on this blog eventually - if you have found useful information please send for inclusion.
This post is something of a Post-Mortem on the decision of the County Commissioners to add "Land Farming" as a Special Use for land in Stokes County, North Carolina zoned Residential/Agricultural. Source material is limited to published records.]

Stokes County Zoning Text Amendment: “Dedicated Soil Treatment Facility – Land Farming/Bioremediation #227”

This text amendment was approved by the Stokes County Board of County Commissioners on February 7, 2012. See page 18 of the Minutes of that meeting; http://www.co.stokes.nc.us/bocc/minutes/2012/m020712.pdf

The Stokes County Planning Board, by a vote of 5 to 2, recommended against the text amendment on October 27, 2011:

“The Board expressed concerns about the environmental impacts that this type of land use might have as well as if a facility of this type would have any economic benefit for the county. The majority of the Board finally concluded the disadvantages outweigh the advantages of allowing this type of activity in the county.” (Minutes, Stokes County Board of County Commissioners, December 6, 2012, page 7, http://www.co.stokes.nc.us/bocc/minutes/2011/m120611.pdf)

The Board of County Commissioners first officially heard the request for the Text Amendment at the December, 6, 2011 meeting (at least as far as I have been able to discover). At that meeting a site visit was discussed and recommended.

“Commissioner Walker stated he would like some more information about the concept and more information regarding whether or not there are any environmental issues.”
[page 9, Minutes, December 6, 2011, http://www.co.stokes.nc.us/bocc/minutes/2011/m120611.pdf]

Vice Chairman Inman asserted his own need for education on the issue and the value of a site visit.
Commissioner Jones noted a personal knowledge of the practice and expressed enthusiasm for it.
Chairman Lankford expressed preference to gather more information and visit a site “to be able to explain the process to the public” [page 9, Minutes, December 6, 2011]
According to the Minutes of the February 7, 2012 meeting, the Board had not conducted a visit to any other “Land Farming” facilities. Planning Director Sudderth visited a facility in Chatham County and provided photographs to the County Commissioners. The following is copied from the minutes of that meeting.

“Chairman Lankford entertained a motion.

Commissioner Booth moved to approve the Zoning Text Amendment #227. Commissioner Jones seconded the motion.

Commissioner Walker questioned how many other sites are in the state and if there had been any issues with the site in Chatham County.

Directory Sudderth responded that he only knew of two other sites in the state and he know of no issues with the site in Chatham County

The motion carried unanimously.”

At this time [Monday, June 11, 2012] I have not discussed this decision with any County Commissioners although that is my plan for later this week.

Further research:

Davie County's “Land Farming” regulations. I have sent an email to Davie County Planning Director, Andrew Meadwell (andrew.meadwell@co.davie.nc.us) requesting information on the process that county underwent in preparation for adding “Land Farming” as an approved Special Use. Davie County "land farming" ordinance: www.daviecountync.gov/DocumentView.aspx?DID=123 

Personal Thoughts:

I am known to the County Commissioners as a reasonable and non-fanatical advocate for water and soil protection. I am known as a supporter of economic development. It is frustrating to me that I failed to keep myself abreast of the Commissioners' Agenda – though I will endeavor to be more proactive in the future. 

That aside, it is astounding to me that the Board of County Commissioners neither visited an operating open field contaminated soil bioremediation facility nor investigated the regulatory directions taken by other North Carolina counties which have considered adding “Land Farming” as an allowable Special Use.

The rush to approve the text amendment was, in my opinion, poorly managed. In light of the recommendation of the Planning Board against the Text Amendment it would have been appropriate for the Board to explicitly call for and publicize a public hearing on the issue. As it stands this has the appearance of a back-room deal – whether or not that is the actual case.

Redemption is available however. The Board could table all decisions regarding Land Farming applications until a working group is able to review special regulatory considerations appropriate for allowing this activity here in the unique geography, hydrology and community of Stokes County. Davie County provides a model for raising the bar above the generic regulations of the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources.

Stokes is a “headwaters” county with direct potential impact on municipal water systems for millions downstream. Stokes is also emerging as an important outdoor and agricultural tourism destination. For these reasons it is critical that activity of this type be sited with extreme care as the county appropriately assumes responsibility for processing some of the waste of our modern civilization. That responsibility, however, should not be used as an excuse to turn over responsibility for our water, soil and air to Raleigh or Washington, DC.

Frye Road Land Farm

[NOTE: This essay originally appeared on my Facebook page on June 2, 2012. The topic regards a proposed open field petroleum contaminated soil bioremediation facility (aka, Land Farm) on Frye Road in northern Stokes County, North Carolina.]

Mill Rapid on Big Creek - class IV
Only runnable after at least 1/2 inch rain.

I do not like conflict. It makes me uncomfortable. I think most people are uncomfortable when conflict pops up. And people deal with conflict in different ways. My own instinct is to simply withdraw. When the stakes are meaningful to me, however, I will be firm. But it's a challenge to make the leap from withdrawing to being firm - at least it is for me. I'm prone to get carried away in the process and start losing my perspective. And I don't think I'm the only one who is susceptible to that.

So, I really want to be open to the objectives of a property owner wanting to make a living on their own land. Which is - very beautiful agricultural land.

I recognize that land farming is a good and necessary practice since we must deal with our waste. Land farming is really pretty reasonable and efficient with the right location and management practices. But, the evaporation of toxic compounds in petroleum in concentrations like a land farm will be a hazard anywhere and we can only limit - not eliminate - long term exposure injury. And while we can't eliminate the threat of hurricanes and severe flooding of a land farm anywhere - it's a lot more likely in a place like the banks of Big Creek downstream of the Fry Rd. bridge.

Susie slipping off Loop De Loop
at the bottom of Mill Rapid
on Big Creek
(2007-Oct; credit: Delane Heath)

read trip reports

And yet it breaks my heart to stand against a neighbor who just wants to make a living in a way that seems fit for their situation. I've been on the side of trying and failing to get a special use permit. It is very frustrating. But when the neighbors speak, the neighbors speak. And I respect that. I don't always like it. But good relations are more important to me than always getting my way.

 So - and again, I don't think I'm the only one - I pray that an alternative appears that achieves financial and familial objectives while giving a wide berth around Big Creek. Fish counts have been down up there in recent years and it would be best - I think - to keep as many additional stressers off it's banks as possible.

Brad whoopin' and hollerin' after
flipping on Loop De Loop at Mill Rapid
(2007-Oct; credit: Delane Heath)

I also have a personal and perhaps selfish affection for Big Creek. I've never been there on a typical summer day like many - splashing in the swimming hole at the old mill site. But when the creek is running at a good clip after a good rain - usually in the spring, I've had the good fortune to run it a few times. And here must express my thanks and appreciation to Kent Fulp for tolerating me and a few local boaters accessing the creek across his property on Forrest Rd. It is a very special section of whitewater to me ... tho I sorta like that it's not easy to access. It keeps it mysterious. And it should be. Because it's also dangerous.

Of special concern is the fact that Big Creek can only be floated after at least 1/2 inch of rain within 12 hours - making it even more rare to experience the challenge with clear water; the Big Creek basin terribly afflicted by muddy runoff. How much runoff will there be from the contaminated soil of a land farm? Will it ever again be safe to run Big Creek at whitewater levels?

Delane Heath, whose family goes back a couple generations in these parts, has documented two trips on Big Creek. For novice whitewater kayakers and canoeists in the area it is a "locals only" test. The intimidating Mill Rapid is the only significant rapid between Frye and Lynchburg roads - and therefore not worthy of a trip from Raleigh, Charlotte or points beyond. But for intermediate boaters fortunate to have a local connection here, running Big Creek is a rare and remarkable milestone.

Please take a moment to watch Delane's video of an outing there with me, my daughter, Susie, and other friends several years ago. This video provides a flavor of what a first descent of Big Creek means to those few Stokes County natives and residents afflicted with the whitewater bug.