Mulching debate

Western county residents gather for a public hearing May 19 on whether mulching should be allowed on land under agricultural preservation easement. (Staff photo by Amanda Yeager / May 20, 2014)

Residents of rural western Howard County packed the County Council’s chambers Monday night for more than three hours of testimony focused on whether large-scale mulching, firewood processing and soil processing operations are appropriate on land under agricultural preservation easement. 

Wearing buttons that read “No Industry! Keep It Farm” – the “dust” in industry jumping out in bold, red letters – members of the Dayton Rural Preservation Society, formed earlier this year to fight what they see as dangerous changes to their community if these operations are allowed, offered impassioned speeches, often followed by standing ovations and cheers from the crowd.

The community group includes local farmers and non-farmers, who cite concerns about heavy truck traffic, noise and health and environmental impacts should mulching take root. 

Equally impassioned were a group of farmers, many whose families have farmed for several generations, who argued against a rollback of the new regulations, which they say give them the flexibility they need to make a living. Though smaller in number – there were about two dozen visibly opposed to changing the regulations – their supporters included leaders of some local agricultural organizations. 

Bob Orndorff, whose conditional use requests for mulching facilities in Sykesville and Dayton sparked the current controversy, accused DRPS members of “smear tactics” and “inflaming the public,” and asked the council for “fundamental fairness.”

“There’s no doubt our proposal has fueled emotion and bitter debate, but I want to make it clear we followed the law,” he said.

The two bills before the council would revise new regulations, added during last summer’s comprehensive zoning process, that allow sawmills, bulk firewood, mulch manufacture, composting facilities and soil processing as conditional uses on land under agricultural preservation, a program by which the state or county buys development rights from a farm’s owner to keep the land rural in perpetuity.

The regulations also allowed farm wineries on preserved land for the first time, but that addition has not been controversial.

One of the bills was introduced by Council member Greg Fox, a Republican who represents the west county, and would largely change the agricultural preservation regulations back to the way they were pre-comprehensive zoning. “Natural wood waste recycling” facilities – defined as a commercial facility that processes stumps, branches, leaves and the like into raw material or product – would be allowed as a conditional use, but capped at a maximum of 2 percent of the property or 1 acre.

Council members Courtney Watson and Mary Kay Sigaty have co-sponsored Fox’s bill.

The other bill, introduced by the DRPS, is similar to Fox’s but would remove natural wood waste recycling as a conditional use altogether.

Both bills would allow natural wood waste recycling as a permitted use in the light manufacturing zoning district and would permit composting facilities as a matter of right in heavy manufacturing zones with a solid waste overlay.

DRPS members and some other residents said mulching was an industrial-scale process that didn’t belong in a rural setting.

“We advocate for legitimate farming,” DRPS President John Tegeris said. “What we strongly oppose is natural wood waste recycling of any kind on ag pres or RC land. This belongs in [an industrial zone]. It does not belong in our agricultural or rural neighborhoods.”

Many residents cited potential health risks of mulching as a main concern.

Victor Velculescu, an oncologist at Johns Hopkins, said the medical literature he had reviewed showed increased exposure to fungi and carcinogenic wood dust particles in areas near industrial-level wood processing facilities.

“These are not theoretical risks,” he told the council. A mulching facility, he added, “would make Dayton a petri dish for health experimentation.”

Leslie Long, who lives in Woodbine near an existing mulching facility, said she and her husband had developed sinusitis since mulching operations began. Her horses, she said, had other health problems, such as nasal tumors and conjunctivitis.

“My neighbors say, ‘I just want it to stop, they’re killing me,’” she said.

Kristin Robertson, a Dayton resident and PTA president at Dayton Oaks Elementary School, said she was concerned for the safety of children waiting for school buses along country roads. With increased truck traffic, she said, an accident “is just a matter of time.”