Intended to provide a balanced view of a contentious issue - but that isn't always easy
Stuart A. Smith, copyright 1998-2008. All rights reserved. Updated February 15, 2008

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.

• The U.S. EPA Final Rule on CAFOs can be obtained here, along with abundant information from the EPA NPDES. Some of the potential problems are scary.
• The State of Ohio, finally, in exasperation, acted to shut down Buckeye Egg Farm's facilities after nine years of trying to get them to manage flies, egg wash discharges to surface water streams, etc. See a summary of those actions. Buckeye's facilities have been purchased by Ohio Fresh Eggs, which pledged better performance, but again ran afoul of the state, mostly for legal reasons. Other links include in-force Ohio Dept. of Agriculture rules and guidance.
• Ohio Department of Agriculture (ODA) regulates and permits CAFF under OAC Title IX Section 901. (see LEPP home page (see links below).

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:

(1)   If you are an agricultural operation: Please be responsible and consider the potential impacts on the neighbors of your operation and treat your animals humanely – as many of you do (e.g., egg producers adhering to voluntary certification standards United Egg Producers). If you are making money, but environmental degradation occurs as a community price, or a legacy, is that just (legal or not)? Follow those manure management plans faithfully. Avoid application on vulnerable shallow-bedrock land or in ground water wellhead protection areas (even if legal). Find out how water can be contaminated in ways you do not expect. Communicate with the community. Take the stance of being a good neighbor and bend over (backwards that is) to act as such. This seems to be the key to acceptance. Do a good job with environmental studies and don't go through the motions or write mumbo-jumbo that fools the overwhelmed ODA reviewers but not real scientists.

(2)   If you are a concerned neighbor: It appears that the most valuable response to potential agricultural environmental impacts is to use solid, legally defensible information and a sense of shared community. Most "factory farm" operations are actually locally owned and operated - by family farmers. They drink the water, too. They are typically earnest, hard-working people. Be a neighbor in the Christian sense. If you are concerned, arm oneself with maps and data, and deal directly and respectfully with the operator.

• Work together with the operations (who - usually - won't go away) and one another. These operations have to follow fairly comprehensive regulations for manure storage and land application of manure. However, as an expert in the permitting process noted, "It is up them to perform." If necessary, bring available local political power and "people power" to bear, rather than relying on regulatory authority
• You will need to invest in your cause.  You need to gather information if you want to build a case for anything and that has costs in time, equipment, and analysis. Be prepared to expend some funds on this. Typically, the state folks can’t take a side in a dispute. They are also overwhelmed with the work loads they have and cannot help you much. Academic professionals and students can sometimes help, but typically only seasonally and for a time. You may need to hire a hydrogeologist, soil scientist or other expert. Funding is available for many purposes.
• Be responsible. Don't get caught up in somebody else's agenda. Avoid the shouting and unpleasant displays. Write your legislators, state governor, and key environmental officials (to be on record, if nothing else). Be factual. Know the regs. Be able to provide data.
• Be a moral voice: People will respond to the moral beacons they know. Even today, a bishop or a pastor wields influence. Don't be mean, hateful, ridiculing or otherwise unneighborly.
• Protect yourselves even if you have to bear the cost. You may need to move or reconstruct wells, or install point-of-entry or point-of-use water treatment to assure water safety. Test it.
• Make sure, if you find drinking water contaminated, that it is not due to another reason unrelated to the ag operation. Make sure the wells involved are constructed according to standards, protected and maintained, and there is no backflow or cross-connection cause. Make sure your own onsite wastewater system is working.

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 (just below). 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.

• Basically, 1) no one at the state checks these things out, 2) available Ohio guidance referenced by Land Application of Animal Waste rules (ORC 901:10-xx) do not provide adequate assurance for ground water contamination prevention (particularly microbiological), and 3) Ohio environmental regulatory oversight is so hopelessly fractured - if you were trying to design a structure to frustrate citizens, you could do no better - that hearings become numbing ordeals of addressing one permit item and not forums for addressing comprehensive plans.
• ODA revoked Buckeye Egg's permits for facilities that were then taken over by Ohio Fresh Eggs. Their permits were also revoked (overturned by the ERAC and now in appeal), so they continue operating. If shut down, it will be because of paper work issues, so this weakness in addressing ground water impacts of other facilities will probably remain unaddressed.

2) 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.

• ODA is convinced that manure management plans controlling N and P loading on soils prevents ground water contamination by these constituents and that manure storage and application methods limit bacterial contamination. They claim (emphatically, impatiently) that there is no ground water contamination linked to properly permitted and operating CAFF.
• When we get reference to publications that provide the monitoring data (with good QA/QC) to back that up, we will reference it here.
• Manure management appears to be the key: Research at the Ohio State University and elsewhere has shown that composting and how the manure is applied reduces nutrient runoff and related problems. Certain amendments, such as water treatment plant residuals that bind up phosphorus, also help.
• Meanwhile - "geologic exploration" studies that are supposed to accompany permit applications are (in our - informed - opinion) woefully inadequate and heavy on paper study. In LEPPWorld, Geology is to be supervised by an engineer - which may or may not be a good thing. In any case, hydrogeology that we have reviewd is inadequate and at time manipulated to avoid triggering difficult siting requirements. We are sorry to note that some credentialed hydrogeologists cooperate in this approach, which has the appearance of manipulation to fool ODA (engineer) reviewers. Responses to comments on draft permits indicate that ODA swallows these stories hook line and big ole lead sinker. We point out that certified hydrogeologists (CGWP or CPG) have a code of ethics that they are supposed to follow (see our discussion of hydrogeology ethics elsewhere in the articles selection).

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.

Information Resources

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 (link at left). 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 opertaion 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:

• USGS finds tetracycline resistance genes in shallow ground water.
  
• So do academic studies, for example, University of Illinois researchers R.I. Mackie et al. This paper was published in Applied and Environmental Microbiology (Vol 73 no. 15 2007). Genes are transferred "like batons" through the environment as native microflora pick up the genes and pass them on.
  
• Paper from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) effort in Emerging Infectious Diseases on multi-drug antimicrobial resistance (MDR) in Salmonella enterica serover Typhimurium DT104 in human and cattle populations in the USA Northwest. They cite other papers. This strain has apparently become widely distributed (it is also widespread in the U.K. and has shown up elsewhere. It may have started in Asia.)
• Account of another MDR Salmonella strain found in Greece, and possibly associated with a food source.
• Antibiotics in the aquatic environment. (Abstract of conference paper, 1999). This is one of a number of papers on this and related subjects at the 1999 conference. This may seem long ago, but seems to be news on the practical level.
  

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 "cheep" food?

• How do we treat people in food processing?
• Is it nothing that our livestock is confined as they were never intended to be?
• Factory Farming (Humane Farming Assn.) These chickens, hogs, etc. are God's creatures, and while they are given to us for food, surely we should treat them with respect.
• What kind of large scale microbial evolution experiment are we running anyway?

Here are some moral voices (naturally not neutral):

• National Catholic Rural Life Conference – Has thoughts about the ethical and moral dimensions of agricultural methods and food. "The Book of Leviticus reminds us that the Earth is the Lord’s, and we are but strangers and guests. Isaiah (5:8) warns us, 'Woe to those who join house to house, who add field to field.' Such is the state of agriculture today as farmland is consolidated in the hands of a few and rural communities continue to dwindle. Urban sprawl makes farmland that much more threatened and contributes to greater intensity of production in increasingly confined areas."
• RuralMinistry.com – Center for Theology and Land (University of Dubuque and Wartburg Seminaries with links to other resources). Not heavily devoted to the CAFO issue, but deals with ecological justice.
• The Web of Creation – Some other spiritually motivated sustainability sources.
• Then, there is scripture. The Holy Bible itself (The American Bible Society has a scripture keyword search tool), in which God is quoted as having a lot to say about land and justice (150+ passages found in search = "justice") and humane treatment of farm animals ("don't muzzle the ox when treading out the grain" applies to oxen as well as figuratively to working folk).  God’s intention (as expressed from the prophets to Revelation) is to draw all things to himself and renew creation. The Holy Qur'an and associated writings repeatedly make plain that God expects people to treat animals in a merciful and compassionate (“humane”) manner.

Agricultural environmental, academic, health and regulatory sources of information in this topic are linked from this site’s links page (follow the button from the home 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.

Return to Ground Water Science homepage -- Has information on ground water and many links to other water sources.