Tech Article Library
Concentrated Animal Feeding Facilities...Resources for Environmental Responsibility
Intended to provide a balanced view of a contentious issue - but that isn't always easy.
Stuart A. Smith, copyright 1998-2012. All rights reserved.
The U.S. has seen a trend toward the introduction of large-scale animal feeding operations, including large chicken, hog and dairy operations near our locations here in western Ohio. It is also an international phenomenon, as the former Buckeye Egg Farms were owned by a German, and dairy farmers from the Netherlands are setting up in Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan, where they apparently can afford to operate. There is a similar trend elsewhere in the US, western Canada, Taiwan, and elsewhere.
The issue here in Ohio is a confusing mix of agriculture (1) attempting to respond to the market with economies of scale and at the same time, and (2) being on a steep (progressing?) learning curve to prevent adverse environmental impacts, with some notable practical setbacks. Mix that with regulatory and permitting processes that seem to have some glaring weaknesses in the attempt to deal with these operations and their impacts.
Such has been the case elsewhere, and both state and U.S. federal government has been swinging into operation.
There is also a moral dimension: And it is confusing. Greed: (How "cheep" can we keep poultry, pork or milk and how do we do that?) "Environmental" concerns can be used by people with social agendas. On the other hand, the regulatory response could be so heavy-handed that family farm corporations could be hindered. Plus, manure is not all bad. It can be (literally) valuable and arguably a more environmentally friendly way of adding soil nutrients than factory-produced fertilizer, improving soil carbon content and percolation rates. The phosphorus loading is often relatively high. If the available land application guidelines (assuming they are valid) are followed (and common sense rules), such manure can be a factor in more sustainable agriculture.
However - Federal and state laws governing water quality have some gaps, either in the letter of the law or its interpretation in regulation. Quoting from the League of Conservation Voters commentary on "factory farms":
"Federal and state environmental regulations are failing to keep up with the rapid growth of factory farms and their resulting pollution. Serious water pollution problems - such as contaminated drinking water, massive fish kills and large algae blooms - in at least 30 states have been linked to inadequate pollution control and lax enforcement of environmental regulations. For example, the rapidly growing poultry industry on the Eastern Shore of Delaware, Maryland and Virginia is one of the main sources of pollution in the Chesapeake Bay and other area waterways. In North Carolina, 'hogs now outnumber [the state's] citizens and produce more fecal waste than all the people in California,' according to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., chief prosecuting attorney for the Hudson Riverkeeper and senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council."
Among these failings is the issue of nonpoint-source contamination of ground water. The U.S. Clean Water Act has provisions that can be applied to ground water, but the NPS program typically focuses on surface waters. This is the case at both the federal and state levels. Ohio surface water programs, for example, appear to be focused on upgrading small-system wastewater treatment plants. The Eastern Shore ag operations can hardly avoid impacting ground water - the whole Eastern Shore is a big sandbox and the impacts in North Carolina post-Hurricane Floyd (1999) should be a "wake up" call. Agricultural NPS guidelines focus on preventing runoff and give cursory attention to ground water-contaminating infiltration. ODA here in Ohio has complete faith in the calculation and enforcement of manure application rates and will not cooperate in helping ground water users to monitor ground water around land application sites. There is certainly still room for innovation, invention, willingness to at least check things out, and better planning.
Specific Action Suggestions:
AgBiz: This page is not intended to be a swipe at "agribusiness" (we have agribusiness clients) and does not imply that appropriate economies of scale in agriculture are not compatible with environmental responsibility and humane treatment of animals and people. If we can replace a lot of chemical fertilizer with manure, improve soil, avoid ground water contamination, and keep money in the local economy, great. ODA makes the valid point that their worst problems are with small unregulated operations. Considered here are some observations from somewhat differing ag-biz examples 1) the former Buckeye Egg Farms and 2) the developing Ohio-Indiana-Michigan tristate megadairies. We focus on ground water as their other problems are well-recorded and discussed by others.
Permits issued to Buckeye Egg Farms in October 1998 and transferred to Ohio Fresh Eggs LLC addressed many concerns by commenters in the revised plan, however, our concern (addressed with a really lame response to our comments on the Buckeye Egg Farms Wyandot County, Ohio, sites) that there are shallow-bedrock areas marked for land application of manure and these are vulnerable to runoff and ground water contamination were never addressed.
Tri-state's Megadairies: Big potential (and occasionally actual) problems but no outright outrageous abuse as in Anton Pohlmann's time with Buckeye Egg. Dairy just isn't what it used to be. Big herds were 150 head of Holsteins and our children's' books still show quaint pictures typical of my grandparents' farm with a few cows milked by hand.
Yes, how quaint. Our pastoral Eastern-Midwestern dairy scene has been whacked like a good back kick from old 588 by western megadairies driving down milk producer commodity costs through economies of scale (prices of milk remain strong at the retail outlet). Likewise, dairy farmers in the Netherlands have been faced with astronomical land and operating costs in their crowded, environmentally active country. Our immigration laws force them to be willing to make huge investments to immigrate, just about forcing them to plan huge operations here (write your Senator or representative to change that if you want).
Enter Vreba-Hoff Dairy Development LLC, which assists European and Canadian dairy farmers in establishing operations in the tri-state region. This company is an outgrowth of Vreba-Hoff Dairy LLC, Hudson, Michigan, established by U.S. and Dutch dairy families in 1997 to be a "financially sound, environmentally conscious dairy enterprise" milking well over 2000 cows. At least in theory, Vreba-Hoff bears little resemblance to Buckeye Egg, planning ahead on manure management and taking the approach that they live on their farms and with their neighbors. Vreba-Hoff helps them get started but when they are in operation, the owners are responsible.
Despite this official commitment by this particular company, they have struggles on their home properties according to reports and official findings resulting from State of Michigan legal action against Vreba-Hoff Dairies. An individual cow puts out 30 times the manure produced by an individual human. Thus a 699-cow dairy operation built in Hardin or Putnam counties is equivalent in potential impact to Findlay moving in - without sewers. The Michigan problems illustrate the weakness of current systems in dealing with even mild weather stress on manure handling and the technical challenges of treating cattle manure. However, if it ever is handled properly, this manure can be a valuable resource (see links below), and some row-crop land in critical watershed areas can be converted to ensilage and hay farming to support dairies. More forage acreage reduces watershed nonpoint source runoff, improves recharge, and enhances or restores soil.
What we hope to see is agriculture, earth science people such as us, public health people, and the public working together to solve problems and let agriculture prosper in our area without using up the environmental capital our descendents will be counting on to sustain them.
On our site’s extensive links page, we provide links to informative sources you may wish to consider. Please send any recommendations for others you would like to see here (or concerns about information they provide) to us using the contact form. NOTE: Don't bother with the PETA or vegan stuff. We’re big fans of chicken, pork, eggs, milk, leather and fur... hunters… and farmers and a vital rural economy, too.
The scariest issue of all: Antibiotic-resistant common bacteria due to disease-prevention dosing of antibiotics in CAFOs: U.S. Geological Survey and academic studies published since the late 1990s (before current Ohio large animal operation rules were implemented, indicate that antibiotics are present in waste generated at confined animal feeding operations and indeed are available for transport into surface and ground water and I have been found in ground water downgradient from leaking lagoons. See the following papers:
These are not people who could be characterized as antifarm, Luddite ecofreaks, so paying attention to their analysis seems prudent.
The moral dimension: At what price do we obtain "cheap" food?
Here are some moral voices (naturally not neutral):
Agricultural environmental, academic, health and regulatory sources of information in this topic are linked from this site’s links page.
Ground Water Science provides consulting and training in ground water resources testing, protection, and management, including courses for interested lay people to learn more about how to obtain data and protect their water resources.
Again, note that numerous large-scale animal operations are managed in a humane and environmentally responsible manner. Their managers, workers and facilities should be treated with respect.
Willshire has established a new ground-water supply system in western Van Wert County to replace an existing degraded and antiquated quarry supply and water plant. The new plant includes two wells feeding the first PWS iron filtration-nanofiltration treatment system in Ohio, brought online in November 1998. Wells were supervised and tested and the WHPA delineation was completed on a fast track and endorsed and a source water protection plan submitted.
Effective control of the recharge area helps to assure that harmful contaminants do not enter the well, especially for wellfields with little protection from surface contamination.