fr~m~

RECE~VEO

CLERK’S OFFICE

MAR 25

2004

BEFORE

THE

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL

BOAR)

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

Ronald Stuart and

)

Barbara Stuart

)

Complainants,

)

PCBO2-164

Vs.

)

Citizens Enforcement/Noise

Franklin Fisher and

)

Phyllis Fisher

)

Respondents

)

Dorothy Gunn

Bradley P.Halloran

David Harding

Bobby Petrungarro

Clerk ofthe IPCB

Hearing Officer

Lopez and Harding

Will County

100 W. Randolph

100 N. LaSalle

States Attorney Office

Ste

11-500

Ste

11-500

Ste

1107

14 W. Jeffereson

Chicago,

Il. 60601

Chicago, Ii.

60601

Chicago, 1160602

Joliet, Illinois 60432

NOTICE

OF FILING

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that wethe Complainants have on March 24, 2004, filed with the

Clerk, Dorothy Gunn ofthe Illinois Pollution Control Board a MOTION TO LEAVE TO

SUPPLEMENT THE

RECORD,

a copy ofwhich herewith served upon you.

The purpose for filing a MOTION TO LEAVE

SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD, is to give

the Board an opportunity to review informationwhich was not disposed at ourhearing dated

March 9, 2004.

We will give detailed information as to what we would like the Board to consider

to incorporated into our Hearing record, as well as a reason why we feel this is relevant.

Photographs taken ofFranidin Fishers home (two years ago)

but only developed in

February of 2004.

Authenticity ofdate offilm processing is

stamped on back offilm.

The originals will be placed in the safekeeping ofDorothy Gunn.

During the Hearing I

had intentions ofusing these photos as evidence showing Mr. Fisher dumps spoiled

produce on the front portion ofhis propertynear a ditch which leads to the Trim Creek

only

1/5

mile from his home. Whenquestioned he answered “no he doesn’t dump spoiled

produce on the front ofhis property. Unfortunately photos were mistakenly left at home

in our photo file.

These

are numbered 1,2,3,

and 4

RELEVANCE:

These photos will allow the Board to clearly see Mr. Fisher does indeed

have hundreds ofpounds ofspoiled melons, tomatoes, watermelon, corn, etc. dumped at the

front ofhis property, which is counter productive to protecting his crops from crows.

This

spoiled food attracts

CROWS, raccoon, fox and otheranimals that thrive on watermelons.

This

is like putting out appetizers for the pests he is trying to control.

Photographs ofour home.

At the time ofthe hearing the photographs were not on hand.

These photos are ofthe back portion ofourhome. Marked are bedrooms,

living rooms, and

the pool area..

There is a log sheet which is an “offer ofproof’ from the hearing, with

propane cannon sounds I measured.

The logsheet has the records ofparticular dates oftaking

sound measurements from the cannons, along with the weather.However, I did not state

where I was taking the readings. I was relying on my tapings from the camcorder, and

did

not put this information into the computer.

On the photos is a circle where I took most ofthe

cannon noise readings from the

Radio Shack meter supplied by Greg Zak.

For the record, I

always avoided areas where there could be reflective or echo sounds.

I also stayed away

from the house to take reading as recommended by Mr. Zak.

These readings were taken

about

100 feet from our western property line.

For as much as I tried to have the

8 mm tapes

ofrecords from the cam corder converted to

a VHS tape, it failed everytime.

We stated

during the time oftestimony, it was difficult to sleep in the bedrooms becausethey were so

close to the sound ofthe cannonnoise.

The living room area is an area where we must keep

the windows shut to avoid the noise ofthe cannons. These areas are marked with bright

orange tape.

This

Photo

number #5.

RELEVANCE:

I feel it would be to the advantage ofthe board to get a visual picture of

how ourhome is set up.

Where the readings ofthe cannon noise were actually taken from.

At one time my son Michael during testimony at the Hearing went into description ofwhere

the dogs were at (living room) when pacing and shivering from the cannon sounds.

He also

stated he could not sleep without a fan on to dub out the noise.

I myself was always waken

by the sounds through my bedroom window each and every morning at 5:30 by this noise.

Yes even on Sundays.

Shutting the window did not help.

At the Hearing we were given a black and white copy ofpictures ofdamaged

watermelons (an exhibit) supposedly from the Fisher farm.

These photos may be from 2002,

2001, or 2000.

We were never told.

It is difficult forus to even examine the photographs.

There were no

crows around the melons. After the hearing I did a little research on

watermelon damage. Through an agricultural cooperative Extension program photos were

available showing the damage crows, raccoons, fox, and other animals can do.

As you know

Extension programs at many Universities throughout the U.S. are Federally and State funded.

Extension programs are nonpolitical, objective and based on FACTUAL information, not

Hearsay.

With thepermission ofthe Board I would like to submit items

labeled

(black

and white copies ofrespondents exhibit), along with the color photos taken by an Extension

Program depicting damage caused to watermelons from four footed animals this is

labeled

#7 They’re stapled together

RELEVANCE:

Since the black and white copies ofthe allegedly damaged watermelons are

a part ofevidence ofmoney lost from crops.

During the time ofDiscovery, Mr. Fisher

refused to answer #22 Interrogatory.

Mr. Halloran on May 29, 2003 sent a Hearing Officer

Order stating:

“by failing to

answer interrogatory number 22, the respondents will not be

permitted to argue or introduce evidence at hearing regarding loss ofincome due to birds.

Not being an attorney obviously, but wouldn’t a photo ofdamaged watermelons constitute a

“loss ofincome due to birds”?

Mr. Halloran was so patient with us during the hearing, and I

didn’t remember at the time ofthe hearing, he had ordered this.

So please know this is no

fault ofanyone’s.

Mr. Halloran cannot be expected to remember everything about this

complex case. The item labeled #7

shows how it’s difficult to distinguish if a crow or

Theanswers from Mr. Fisher to Interrogatories,

were never filed at the Hearing.

were going to submit them, but didn’tknow the proper time.

There was a lot of

confusion on ourpart regarding when to do this and that.

Mr. Harding did not make it

any easier because he was raising his voice and showing howfrustrated he was with me,

(Barbara Stuart) in particular.

The answers to our asked Interrogatories ofMr. Fisher are

labeled

#9.

RELEVANCE: I Think the Board should have this information on hand.

There are

questions that never were given answers. Special attention to number 3, 7, 8,

19, 22, and

25.

Mr. Fisher calls the cannons a “Priviledged Work Product”. A priviledge workproduct is

piece ofequipmentthat

is NORMALLY used farmers.

No one uses them out in our area.

Only Mr.

Fisher, and there are otherwatermelon growers in the area, Bultema is one I know

of.

I would like to comment, almost every year I travel to the state of Arkansas, home of

some of the largest farms of Watermelon.

Not once have I ever heard a propane cannon in

a field go off.

5.The “Map Board”, as I call it was labeled an exhibit. (This took an enormous amount of

work.) On the board was a brochure from Reed-Joseph to

show a picture ofwhat propane

cannons look like.

It also showed other devices available instead ofusing cannons.

recently discovered Reed-Joseph changed their advertising and put new information on their

website.

I discovered a printable form with the Scare a way 3 cannon.

This

marked #8

this form states the numberofdecibels it emits when it is fired.

A Scare away 3 is an older

version ofa cannon, but still made.

It’s a little old and outdated,

so it is not adjustable for

sound, or amount offirings. But it can be put on a timer.

RELEVANCE:

To provide for the Board important information concerning the cannons

Mr. Fisher used.

It gives the decibel levels,

very similar to Mr. Zak’s readings of

decibels in the

1979 case in Knox County.

It gives more updated solutions to using

cannons, which are

also listed on the form along with the price ofthese alternatives.

In order

to get a real affect ofwhat the cannon looks, and the size of it, you would fmd it on the

“Judge Mathes”tape submitted by Mr. Harding as an exhibit.

Mr. Halloran is examining the

tape to determine it’s

significance to this case.

We appreciate the board for reviewing all this information.

We really were not well prepared

to properly present our case.

Please know we did the best we could.

And we are grateful

that there is a possibility that this

information could possibly be entered into the record.

knowand trust the Board will do what is right and fair.

This is the first time we have ever

been to a Hearing.

I wish I would have sat in on a Hearing to see the way one is conducted.

I felt so unprepared, even with all the months I put into this work.

Again thank you.

ALL FILING OF DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

~c~e

fr~m~

~-47

DEFENDANT’S

,..

Vegetable Home Page

Page

1 of 1

Vegetable Home

Soil & Water

Plant

Pathology

Horticulture

Science

Weed

Science

Page

ANIMAL PEsTs

Breeding &

Germ etics

Entomology

.d~

ø~

‘7

Rcc~nsiam~ige

Deer damag~

Crow damage

Beaver

damage

Back to

Watermelon Home

http://gcrec.ifas.ufl.edu/cabage20web/watermelon2oweb/animal2Opests.htm

3/23/2004

Typical raccoon damage to a watermelon fruit

Page

Typical raccoon damage to a

atermelon fruit

Back to Animal Pests Digital Lib~aiy

Back to Watermelon Home I~ge

ource:

Watennelons: Characteristics, Production

IMarketing.

ASHS Press, Alexandria, Va.

~rigina1

provided by Donald N. Maynard

http://gcrec.ifas.ufl.edu/cabage20web/watennelon2Oweb/raccoon2oc~mage.~~

3/12/2004

Reed-Joseph International Company

rage

M8 Multi-Bang

($365 each)

Produces random series of single,

double,

and triple-shot clusters.

Time between series may

adjusted from every

30 seconds

to every

minutes.

($310 each)

Produces single bangs which

can

regulated from one bang every

30 seconds to one bang every

minutes and utilizes piezo ignition.

Operating without batteries or

the

,~.)

Scare Away

Gas Caonons_

Home:Scare Away LP Gas Cannons

Protect your investment from bird

and wildlife infestation

automatically! Scare-Away LP gas cannons produce harmless

130 decibel bangs to disperse

bird and

wildlife from crops,

orchards, vineyards, campuses, golf courses, fish ponds,

parks,

airfields,

and landfills. Scare-Away cannons are

same five gallon LP gas cylinders

used for

outdoor grills. The cost forthis valuable

protection- pennies

day!

Scare Away

LP Gas Cannon Products

Click here

view accessories

($275 each)

Produces bangs identical to the

M4 and

utilizes flint ignition.

Each

flint produces

up to 1000 ignitions.

Showing Ito

3 of3 works.

111

//~

77~2~

(4,

http://www.reedjoseph.com/cgi-reedjoseph/RlEstore.cgi?useraction=ljst&category=scare...

3/23/2004

rage

Reed-Joseph International Company

Sight &

Motiou._

~ç~:

Sight and Motion

Sight and Motion Products

NEW! Scarey Man

This human-sized

inflatable

scarecrow combines sudden

movement as it inflates with

siren-like noise,

a bird

phobic

color,

and illumination

at night.

The surprising effects frighten

away birds,

deer,

and

other

animal pests as Scarey Man

inflates and

deflates on a

controlled time basis. Click here

to see a brief video of Scarey Man

in action!

Multiuse Unit ($700.00

each)

can be set to operate during

daylight, dark,

a 24

hour basis.

Preset TimerUnit ($800.00

•

each) has a digital clock fitted.

Set the times you desire Scarey

Man to activate

and deactivate.

Evil Eye Balloons

($9.50

each)

These 16 inch diameter heavy-

duty vinyl balloons discourage

birds from roosting

around

gardens, boats, marinas,

buildings, airplane hangars, fruit

and

berry crops,

livestock pens,

and

other problem areas.

NEW! Avian

Dissuader

($995

each)

Disperse birds without sound or

harm! Simply

point the hand-held

laser in the direction of targeted

birds. The 650nm wavelength

beam will startle, frighten, and

drive them away. Most effective in

low light conditions.

Range is

1500 feet. For technical

information, visit

AvianDissuader.com.

Showing

to3of5works.

2 1ll’4exil

http://www.reedjoseph.comlcgi-reedjosephlRiTstore.cgi?user_action=list&category=Sight...

3/23/2004

Keed-Josepli International Lompany

rage

Home: Bird Gard

Bird Gard

Products

Showing ito 2 of 2 works.

Bird Gard

($550 each)

A cost effective tool in your bird

dispersal

arsenal,

the Bird Gard

system provides

a wide selection

of fully programable digital bird

distress cries and

predator

sounds.

Bird Gard

is powered

either 110 volt AC or 12 volt

battery.

For technical

information,

visit BirdGard.com.

Mobile Bird Gard

($580 each)

Target your bird dispersal

program more accurately with our

Mobile Bird Gard.

installation is a

snap! Simply plug the sound

generator into your vehicle’s

cigarette lighter and

place the

magnet-based speaker on the

roof.

‘~

~i~”~-ii1

girjGarg_.

http://www.reedjoseph.comlcgi-reedjoseph/RJlstore.cgi?user_action=list&category=Bird+...

3/23/2004

Reed-Joseph International Company

Page

1 of

: Scare Away

LP Gas Cannons

Protect your investment from

bird and

wildlife infestation

automatically! Scare-Away LP gas cannons produce harmless

130 decibel bangs to disperse

bird and

wildlife from crops,

orchards, vineyards,

campuses, golf courses, fish ponds,

parks,

airfields, and

landfills. Scare-Away cannons are

LP gas cylinders used

for

outdoor grills. The cost for this valuable

protection- pennies a

day!

Scare Away LP Gas Cannon Products

Click here

view accessories

M8 Multi-Bang

($365 each)

Produces

random series of single,

double,

and triple-shot clusters.

Timebetween

series may

adjusted from every

30 seconds

to every 20

minutes.

($310 each)

Produces single bangs which can

be regulated from one bang every

30 seconds to one

bang every 20

minutes and utilizes piezo

ignition.

Operating without batteries or

the piezo produces

1~1

~-iI

 ScareAwayLP Gas canNons_.

($275 each)

Produces bangs identical to the

M4 and

utilizes flint ignition.

Each

flint produces

up to 1000

ignitions.

Showing Ito

of3 works.

((1

http://www.reedjoseph.comlcgi-reedjoseph!RJlstore.cgi?useraction=list&category=Scare...

3/23/2004

Reed-Joseph International Company

Page

Sight and

Motion

Products

NEW! Scarey Man

This human-sized

inflatable

scarecrow combines sudden

movement as it inflates with a

siren-like noise,

a bird phobic

color,

and

illumination at night.

The surprising effects frighten

away

birds, deer,

and

other

animal pests

as Scarey

Man

inflates and deflates on

controlled time basis. Click here

to see

brief video of Scarey Man

in action!

Multiuse

Unit ($700.00 each)

can

be set to

operate during

daylight, dark, or

on a 24

hourbasis.

Preset TimerUnit ($800.00

each)

has

a digital

clockfitted.

Set the times you desire Scarey

Man

to activate

and deactivate.

Evil Eye Balloons

($9.50

each)

These

16 inch

diameter heavy-

duty vinyl balloons discourage

birds from

roosting around

gardens, boats, marinas,

buildings, airplane hangars, fruit

and berry crops, livestock pens,

and other problem areas.

NEW! Avian

Dissuader

($995

each)

Disperse birds without

sound or

harm! Simply point the hand-held

laser in the

direction of targeted

birds. The 650nm wavelength

beam will

startle, frighten, and

drive them

away. Most effective

low light conditions.

Range

1500 feet. For technical

information, visit

AvianDissuader.com.

Showing

1 to 3 of 5 works.

11112 ilNexti

Sight &

MotioL.

!~g~:

Sightand Motion

http://www.reedjoseph.comlcgi-reedjoseph/RJlstore.cgi?useraction=list&category=Sight...

3/23/2004

Reed-Joseph International Company

rage

I 01

Bird

Card_.

Home: Bird Gard

Bird Gard Products

Showing

2 of2 works.

Bird Gard

($550 each)

A cost effective tool

in your bird

dispersal arsenal,

the Bird

Gard

system provides

a wide selection

offully programable digital

bird

distress cries

and

predator

sounds. Bird Gard

is powered by

either 110 volt AC or 12 volt

battery.

For technical

information,

visit BirdGard.com.

Mobile Bird Gard

($580 each)

Target your bird dispersal

program more accurately with our

Mobile Bird Gard.

installation is a

snap! Simply plug the sound

generator into your vehicle’s

cigarette lighter and place the

magnet-based speaker on the

roof.

http://www.reedjoseph.com/cgi-reedjoseph/Rilstore.cgi?user_actionlist&categoryBird+...

3/23/2004

BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

BARBARA STUART and RONALD

)

STUART.

)

Complainants,

)

No.

PCB 02-164

•

)

Citizen Enforcement

FRANKLIN FISHER,

)

Respondent.

)

To:

Barbara Stuart and Ronald Stuart

213 E.

Corning Rd.

•

Beecher,IJ.., 60401

ANSWERS

TO INTERROGATORLES

Franklin Fisher, being first duly sworn on oath, states that the following answers to

interrogatories propounded by complainants,—Rarbara Stuart and Ronald Stuart, are true:

State the name, address apd job title ofthe person answering these Interrogatories on

•

behalfofthe respondei~.

N~S~YER:

••

Franidin Fisher, Corning Roa4, R.R.

2, Beecher, IL 60401-9802

2. Please identify each and every propane• cannon at the respondents facility at 13 W.

Coming Rd. Beecher, Illinois. With regard to each said propane cannon, specifically sate:

make

b. model

serial number

d. date of manufacture

e. the location ofeach ofthe above referenced cannons on the plan view

including

relocation sites of cannons.

~(NSWER:

The information shown on the cannons is Scare-Away, Maden~Lgi~i*i~4er-R~ett-

Je~?phCo., Gree~ille,Mississippi.

No model number, se~jal-nuuiu~r

date ofmanufacture is

available.

No plan view was provided with the interrogatory.

3. Please provide the dimensions ofeach building

or structure located on the respondent’s

Beecher farm facility at

13 W.

Corning Rd.

Beecher, Illinois.

Include any resident/relative who

is within 50 feet ofyour home.

ANSWER:

Objection.

The interrogatory calls for information which is not relevant or material or

likely to lead to relevant or material evidence.

4. For each propane cannon at respondent’s Beecher facility (located at

Corning

Road,) please state the date of purchase ofthese cannons, the date ofinstallation and the name

and address of each person who installed said equipment,

ANSWER:

The cannons were purchased.

-and-required-no speciaLinsta1laiLQ~n~

Has anyone complained to you, in writing or orally, about the noise produced by the

equipment installed at you Beecher facility(~~7Corning

Rd.)?

If so, provide the name,

address and phone number ofeach such person, and provide the date(s) and contents ofthe

complaint(s).

‘

•

ANSWER:

•

••

Other than the complaints by these complainants, respondent did receive an unsigned

letter~a

few weeks after commencing

use

th~

~nnnns

7002, a copy ofwhich is attached..

o. Is respondent aware ofanyone complaining to any governmental ~eni,

in writing or

orally, about the noise produced

by the propane cannons used at you facility at

13 W. Coming

Rd. in Beecher, Ill?

Ifso provide the name, address and phone number ofeach such person, and

provide the date and contents ofthe complaint.

Please go back to 8-8-200 1

up until the present

time and date.

ANSWER:

Other thanthe present complainants, no.

7. Has the respondent been contacted by a local,

State, or Federal agency regarding the

complaints coming from the loud sounds ofthe propane cannons at your facility at

Corning Rd. Beecher, Ill. Ifso specifically date, what agency, the dates, and the contents ofthe

complaint.

Starting on 8-8-01 til present time.

ANSWER:

—

Other than in response to the continuing harassment by these complainants, no.

8. Identif~jwith particularity every federal,

state and local law,

ordinance orregulation

which you contend applies to or governs the noise produced at your Beecher facility at

13 W.

Coming Road.

ANSWER:

Objection.

Privileged work product.

9. Please state what contends is a reasonable amount ofnoise (in decibels or other

uniform measurement) for it to produce at it Beecher facility:

ANSWER:

Objection, the interrogatory is incomprehensible.

Assuming that the interrogatory is

directed to a contention by respondent, respondent assumes that he is bound by the law ofthe

State ofillinois.

10. With regard to the propane cannons you use at your facility at

13 W. Coming road, in

Beecher including equipment intended to

minimize or mitigate the noise impact state:

a. Available alternative equipment at the time of your Purchase ofthe propane cannons,

ie: nets, lanterns etc.

b. the identity ofthe person or business you purchased each propane cannon from,

including address and phone number

b. The identity ofevery personresponsible forthe selection and purchase ofeach propane.

cannon.

ANSWER:

a. Alternative equipment suggested is

ineffective, and light producing or reflective

equipment actually attracts crows.

b. Bob Van Der Griend, Sr., 2812 Glenwood-Lansing Rd., Chicago Heights, IL 60411;

(708) 418-1820.

b. Franklin Fisher.

—

11. With regard to all truck traffic on respondent’s premises, please state the following:

c. the annual amount ofproduce/crops transported in and out of respondents facility, in

tons,

forthe years

1993 through 2002.

d. The percentage oflight (less than 8,000 lbs GVW) and heavy trucks (more than

8,000lbs GVW)

ANSWER:

Objection.

The information sought is not relevant or material or designed to leadto

material or relevant information.

Notwithstanding the objection, the data is has not been

gathered or maintained.

12.)Please state all equipment used by respondent to take noise measurements at

respondent’s Beecher facility (located at

13 W. Corning Rd.) by make, model, serial number, and

the date oflast calibration traceable to the National Institute ofStandards and Technology

(NIST).

ANSWER:

None.

13. Ifyou have retained, employed or subpoenaed any

expert witnesses

who may be

expeCted to render an opinion at trial, then as to each expert, state:

e. His name, address, telephone number and employer or

other business affiliation.

f. The subject matter on which the expert is

expected to

testify;

g. His conclusions and opinions;

h. The basis for each conclusion or opinion;

i. His qualifications;

Whether the expert has prepared any written

reports,

communications,

correspondence, or documents of any kind, and a descriptionof each such document, and

attach a copy ofthe reports or documents to these intenogatories;

k. The date each said expert was retained-:

1. Whether said expert has been retained by you or your attorney on prior occasions;

ANSWER:

No expert has been retained to date.

—

••

14. Has any expert, or anyone at

said expert’s direction, prepared any field report, field

notes, hand written notes, memorandum, correspondence, records oftelephone conversations,

diagrams, drawings, blueprints, photographs,

statements orany other written, printed,

electronically or photographically recorded materials in preparing, investigating, researching,

evaluation, or forming any opinions on the issues involved in this case. If so, please provide a

copy ofthe same.

ANSWER:

No.

15.

Please state every regulation, statute, law or guideline on which such expert will rely.

ANSWER:

None.

16. State each and every article, book, report or other writing upon which each expert

relies in reaching the forgoing opinions.

ANSWER:

None.

17. Has respondent, its agents or anyone on its behalf ever made any repairs, adjustments,

modifications, replacement ofparts, or any othertype ofchange to respondent’s propane

•

cannons in

order to muffle the noise which is created by such cannons. Ifso, state the following:

a. specifically what repairs, adjustments, modifications and for replacement ofparts were

made;

b. date ofsaid change, repair, adjustment, modification, replacement ofparts

c. name and address ofthe party making such change, repair adjustment, modification,

replacement ofparts etc.;

d. the cost of any and all changes, repairs, adjustments or modification to the propane

cannons.

ANSWER:

No.

18. Has respondent, its attorneys or anyone acting on its behalfhad the propane cannons

tested examined and / or inspected? If so state:

A. The date upon which it was tested, examined or inspected;

B. The name and

last known address, title and employee ofeach person who conducted

or was present during such testing, examination or inspection.

C. The type oftest, examination or inspection conducted.

D. Ifan oral report was done, give name and last known address of all personsgiving and

receiving such report or record, and the substance thereof and

E. Ifwritten the date thereofthe number ofpages thereof, each addressee thereofthe

name and last known address ofeach person having possession ofeach suchreport or

record.

ANSWER:

state the approximate date the respondent first became aware the operation of

its propane cannons were interfering with the complainants’ use and enjoyment oftheirproperty,

along with the health and welfare oftheir son Michael age

13, who has a sensor neuro hearing

loss.

Michael their son has been advised by a specialist in the field hearing to avoid being

outdoors because the blasts ofthe cannon cause him pain in his

left ear along with a ringing

sensation which could cause further damage.

ANSWER:

Objection.

Argumentative.

Notwithstanding the objection, respondent states that

complainants never mentioned their son until after they failed in their quest to hold respondent

egally

responsible for the loss ofa dog.

20.

With regard to each and every propane cannon at the respondents Beecher facility (13

Corning •Rd.) Please state the time of day the cannons are operated, the days ofthe week and

the months during the year.

ANSWER:

From around sun up to around sun down from late

July to

early November.

Occasional

days can be skipped.

Only rarely are they used on

Sundays.

21. Please state whether respondenthas ever contacted the noise Division ofthe Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency, either in writing or orally, in order to determine whether the

respondent is

in viOlation ofany applicable Illinois Environmental Protect Agency regulations

regarding noise pollution. Ifso please state:

a. The person(s) who respondent spoke to

at the IEPA;,

and

•

b. The dates of said conversations.

ANSWER:

•

No.

22. What is tue annual income forthe respondent for fanningpurposes at his facility

Aocated at 13 W.

Coming Road, please give income from

1994 up to present date.

ANSWER:

Objection.

This rwncee4~g

should not b~

used asan excuse for complainant to delye into

private matters.

Notwfthstanding the objecti6n, respondent ansWers tnat the farm

is usually

oper~t~d

at a pro.fit, but incurred a loss, due

the cron damage inflicted by crow& in 2000.

23. Has the respondent ever had to-claim a crop damage/loss during the .past 8 years? If

so please state the following:

•

A. The year ofclaims

B. The type ofcrop

C. Reasons for crop loss/damage

ANSWER:

Yes, but not insured, during the year 2000, damage to melons, crows.

24. The respondent states he is a third generation farmer. What methods did the

respondent use during his past farming years to deter crows/birds away from his farming of

melon crops?

ANSWER:

Objection.

Argumentative.

Notwithstanding the objection, 2000 was the first year we

grew melons because it became (we thought), for a variety of reasons, including prices,

profitable to do

sq,.

No particular problem ~~ithcrows. was encountered before 2000.

25.

Does the respondent know ofanyone within a 25 mile radius who is a produce grower

who uses a propane cannon forfarming purposes? Ifso state that persons name and address.

ANSWER:

Other than the person identified in answer to Interrogatory

10, respondent knows ofno

such person, but also knows ofno person within that radius who ~

26. Is the respondent knowledable ofthe adverse effects loud impulsive sounds have the

health and welfare ofboth adults and children? The EPA has set standards and limits on noise

this is factual not fiction.

ANSWER:

•

Objection.

Argumentative.

27. Does the respondent feel he does not need to do anything about the cannon noise

because he is a farmer, and he has the freedom to do as he wants regardless ofthe health

hazards?

ANSWER:

Objection.

Argumentative.

Notwithstanding the objection, respondent states that he

believes himself to be bound by the law ofthe

State ofIllinois.

I have read the foregoing answers to interrogatories, and I know the answers to be true and

correct.

Franklin Fisher

Subscribed and sworn to before me this

~~day

ofOctober, 2002.

SEAL~1

DAVID G.

HARDJNG

David G. Harding

Lopez & Harding

Attorneys for Respondent

Suite 2204,

134 N. LaSalle St.

Chicago, IL

60602-1121

(312)782-3039

PROOF OF

SERVICE BYMAIL

I, David G. Harding, the attorney, certify that I served the foregoing answers to

interrogatories by mailing a copy to each person to whom directed and depositing the

same in the

U.S.

mail at

134 North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois at or before 4:00 p.m. on OctoberL~../C,

2002, with proper postage pre-paid.

From: Ronald Stuart and

March 23,

2004

Barbara Stuart

To:

The Illinois Pollution Control Board

Dorothy Gunn, Bradley Halloran

Re:

PCB 02-164

Citizen EnforcementJNoise:

Ronald and Barbara Stuart (Complainants) v. Frank and Phyllis Fisher (Respondents)

CC:

David Harding

Harding and Lopez

Attorney for Frank Fisher and Phyllis

CC:

Bobby

Petrungarro

Will county States Attorney Office

AFFIDAVIT

Barbara Stuart and Barbara Stuart

213 E.

Corning Rd.

Beecher, Illinois 60401

708-946-9546

We, Ronald Stuart, and Barbara Stuart, being first duly sworn on oath, depose and state as

follows:

That we live at 213

E. Corning Road,

Beecher, Illinois 60401

That at the time of ourHearing on March 9, 2004 we were unable to offer this

information

to the Hearing Officer, Bradley Halloran, regarding PCB 02-164

That the Photos enclosed were taken by Barbara Stuart, complainant in the Case 02-164

Thatthe areamarked on photo

with a circle is indeed a location where Barbara Stuart,

myselftook readings with a Radio Shack meter on multiple occasions which is listed on

the log as a offer ofproof.

Thatthe copies from the Reed Joseph bird control company were obtained from their

website.

That

copies ofWatermelon Damage was obtained from an Extension Program.

That the copy ofthe “Answers to Interrogatories” ofFrankFisher, was sent to me by

David Harding.

That no copies, or photos have been altered.

That all

comments mentioned in the MOTION

TO LEAVE TO

SUPPLEMENT THE

RECORD were honest and truthful.

THIS-AFFIANT,

TH, FURTHERNOT

Ronald Stuart

Barbara Stuart

ME, this

(23

day of March 2004

SEAL

ALL DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED ON RECYCLED PAPER

From: Ronald Stuart and

March 23, 2004

Barbara Stuart

To:

The Illinois Pollution Control Board

Dorothy Gunn, Bradley Halloran

Re:

PCB 02-164

Citizen Enforcement/Noise:

Ronald and Barbara Stuart (Complainants) v. Frank and Phyllis Fisher (Respondents)

CC:

David Harding

Harding and Lopez

Attorney for Frank Fisher and Phyllis

CC:

Bobby

Petrungarro

Will county States Attorney Office

AFFIDAVJT

Barbara Stuart and Barbara Stuart

213

B. Corning Rd.

Beecher, Illinois 60401

708-946-9546

We, Ronald Stuart, and Barbara Stuart, being first duly sworn on oath, depose and state as

follows:

That we live at 213 E. Corning Road, Beecher, Illinois

60401

That at the time of ourHearing

on March 9, 2004 we were unable to offer this

information

to the Hearing Officer, Bradley Halloran, regarding PCB 02-164

That the Photos enclosed were taken by Barbara Stuart, complainant in the Case 02-164

Thatthe area marked on photo

with a circle is indeed a location where Barbara Stuart,

myselftook readings with a Radio Shack meter on multiple occasions which is listed on

the log as a offer ofproof.

That the copies from the Reed Joseph bird control company were obtained from their

website.

That

copies ofWatermelon Damage was obtained from an Extension Program.

That the copy ofthe “Answers to Interrogatories” ofFrank Fisher, was sent to me by

David Harding.

That no copies, or photos have been altered.

That all comments mentioned in the MOTION TO LEAVE TO SUPPLEMENT

THE

RECORD were honest and truthful.

THIS.AFFIAN~A~ETH,

FURTHER NOT

-~-~

j~~_~_

-~~1-r—

Barbara Stuart

ME, this ________day ofMarch 2004

OFF~CLAL

SEAL

rOE

OT-~Y

PUB~

‘~

LLIN~)~~

i()M

~7’l

Ronald Stuart

SEAL

ALL DOCUMENTS

WERE

PREPARED ON RECYCLED PAPER

THIS--AFFIANT,

SA~ETH,

FURTHER NOT

•

•.

Ronald Stuart

Barbara Stuart

ME, this

(23

day ofMarch 2004

SEAL