BY ROBERT J. SMITH

Posted on Saturday, February 4, 2006

Arkansas Attorney General Mike Beebe filed paperwork Friday with the U. S. Supreme Court, saying Oklahoma “mischaracterizes” its dispute with the poultry industry.

Matt DeCample, a spokesman for the attorney general’s office, described Friday’s filing as “a chance to re-emphasize key points.”

Beebe is asking the Supreme Court to halt Oklahoma’s federal lawsuit against poultry companies in Arkansas and take its complaints about river pollution to the Arkansas-Oklahoma Arkansas River Compact Commission.

“The lawsuit by Oklahoma doesn’t just affect the poultry companies,” DeCample said. “It affects potentially the farmers throughout the region, and it has become a state sovereignty issue.”

Friday’s filing is the latest step in Beebe’s bid to get the high court involved in the dispute that Beebe believes is between the states.

Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson disagrees. His state is taking on the poultry companies, he has said, and it doesn’t need to involve the state of Arkansas.

“We still believe our arguments are valid and expect the court to dismiss the Arkansas motion,” said Charlie Price, an Edmondson spokesman.

In June, Edmondson sued eight companies in U. S. District Court at Tulsa. They are Car- gill Inc. of Minneapolis ; Cobb-Vantress Inc. and Simmons Foods Inc., both of Siloam Springs ; George’s Inc. of Springdale ; Peterson Farms Inc. of Decatur ; Tyson Foods Inc. of Springdale ; Willow Brook Foods of Springfield, Mo. ; and Cal-Maine Foods Inc. of Jackson, Miss.

Edmondson blames the companies for allowing poultry litter to pollute the Illinois River watershed. The river flows from Northwest Arkansas into Oklahoma.

In November, Beebe asked that the Supreme Court order Oklahoma to send the dispute to the Arkansas-Oklahoma Arkansas River Compact Commission.

In court papers, Beebe said the commission, which was created by Congress in 1973, is the proper place to address water-quality and water-quantity issues.

“Oklahoma ignores the equitable and obvious mechanism to address its interstate pollutionrelated grievances,” Beebe wrote.

Most cases considered by the Supreme Court are ones previously considered in state and federal courts. But an exception spelled out in the U. S. Constitution allows two-state disputes to be taken up by the high court. Those are called “original jurisdiction” cases.

The Supreme Court has no deadline to decide whether it will get involved.