Supreme Court favors mega farms in river dispute
BY SAMMY FRETWELL
sfretwell@thestate.com
COLUMBIA, SC The S.C. Supreme Court sided with big agricultural interests Wednesday in turning back a challenge to a law allowing farms to siphon billions of gallons from rivers with limited state oversight of the withdrawals.
In a split decision, the Supreme Court said people living downstream from farms had not shown that the big water-siphoning operations are hurting rivers in South Carolina. The case challenging the legality of South Carolina’s surface water law sought to throw out exemptions that critics said favor farmers over others.
Residents of Bamberg, Greenville and Darlington counties said the law deprived them of downstream water rights. They claimed that exemptions for agriculture allow big farms to take huge amounts of water, with little opportunity for the state to limit those withdrawals.
But in Wednesday’s opinion, the Supreme Court said downstream users had not proven their case that they were being hurt or that the law had limited their rights to challenge upstream withdrawals.
“We find the act does not support the plaintiffs’ allegations of injury,’’ the decision said, noting that law still protects rivers in South Carolina for the public. The ruling said people could still sue upstream farmers if they think withdrawals are hurting them.
The decision upholds a lower court ruling that sided with farm interests.
Water withdrawals by mega farms are a big issue in South Carolina.
The state’s surface water law, which took effect less than a decade ago, allows farms to pump large amounts of river water for irrigation without telling the public and while undergoing only a limited review by the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control. Industries and others that want to siphon large amounts of water must get DHEC permits, provide public notice and undergo a more rigorous review.
Since a mega potato farm opened about three years ago in eastern Aiken County, many rural residents have complained that big crop farms are taking so much water that rivers could one day be depleted.
Criticism of the law resurfaced this year after The State newspaper’s series on mega farms highlighted weaknesses in South Carolina’s surface water law. Out-of-state farm corporations have acquired some 10,000 acres near the South Fork of the Edisto River between Columbia and Aiken during the past four years.
Records reviewed by the newspaper show that the farms have withdrawn billions of gallons of river water, as well as groundwater, to irrigate thirsty crops. Farmers and their supporters say exemptions in the law make it easier for crop farms to grow food for the public.
The Supreme Court’s decision Wednesday was not unanimous in all of its conclusions.
Justice Kaye Hearn called the law “flawed,’’ saying it is not flexible enough. She noted that the law allows farms to withdraw water, “even if it is harmful to the health of the waterway and DHEC has no authority to curtail those withdrawals so long as the user’’ doesn’t try to increase the amount being withdrawn.
Attorneys for the S.C. Environmental Law Project, which handled the case challenging the law, were not immediately available for comment Wednesday.
Bookmarks