Shoreham farmer tells committee manure pit overflow and AgriMark discharge raised PFAS and contamination concerns

Erica Langston, co-owner of Merriweather Meadows Farm in Shoreham, told a legislative committee that repeated manure from a neighboring dairy has flowed onto her property, and she warned that wastewater from an AgriMark processing facility, discharged into the neighbor’s manure pit, raises concerns about PFAS and long-term contamination.

Langston described finding "puddles of manure in low spots of our land filled with foam and, shiny, glistening water," and said the neighbor had spread manure within about 60 feet of her well and that manure from a pit roughly 600 feet from the center of a field had reached her land. "We have spoken to the farmer about this at different times," she said, and when state investigators first visited they found "no freeboard left in that manure pit" but ultimately determined there were no violations in a complicated year.

Langston said she sought help from the Department of Agriculture this year and was referred back to the Department of Natural Resources, which opened a new investigation that remains ongoing. She said the neighbor's manure pit is permitted to receive wastewater from an AgriMark facility in Middlebury — "whey, spoiled milk, discharged from their aeration system," she said — and that the county may include more than 100 farms permitted to receive such discharge. The presence of processed‑food wastewater prompted Langston to raise concerns about PFAS exposure: "While I'm not certain that there's PFAS in our soil yet, the thought that there might be is quite horrifying," she said.

Langston said testing for PFAS is expensive: the private lab quote she cited was about $1,200 to test both soil and well water. She said she had not yet found state funding to help with testing or filtration assistance and that local agency channels have left her family uncertain about enforcement and remediation.

On the bill under consideration, S.45, Langston said she worries that removing or limiting access to litigation would reduce neighbors’ leverage to resolve disputes: "Our faith in the bureaucratic channels that are available to us is really dampened at this point," she said. "I do think that preserving the right to litigation is somewhat of a deterrence and somewhat of a motivation for both parties to mediate." She told the committee she preferred mediation but wants the option of civil suit if state enforcement fails.

Committee members and agency staff told Langston they would follow up; a committee member noted investigations and inspection schedules for farms vary by size under existing RAPs (Required Agricultural Practices) and that the state inspects larger farms more frequently. Langston said the current investigation remains open and that she has filed a public records request for the earlier investigation's findings.

Why this matters: Langston framed her testimony as both a neighbor‑to‑neighbor dispute over manure containment and a potential public‑health concern if processed‑food wastewater sent to agricultural sites includes PFAS or other contaminants. She called on the committee to preserve private legal remedies and to consider funding for testing and remediation in cases where public enforcement has not resolved contamination concerns.