Factory Farming
The Health and Environmental Risks
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
Current regulatory framework
Shortcomings
Federal CAFO regulations
IDEM proposed CAFO regulations
Indiana State Chemist proposed manure use
and distribution regulations
• HEC recommendations
• How to get involved
Definitions:
Industrial Scale Livestock Production
Confined Feeding Operation (CFO)
•
•
•
•
300 cattle
600 hogs or sheep
30,000 fowl
Any operation that causes a violation of water pollution laws or rules.
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO)
• 1000 cattle or equivalent
• 2500 hogs or sheep
• 100,000 fowl
(Source: Indiana Administrative Code 327 IAC 15 and 16; I.C. 13-18-10)
Performance standards
• A confined feeding operation shall be managed
to avoid an unpermitted discharge into waters
of the state.
• Minimize non-point source pollution
• Design, construct and manage waste
management systems to prevent discharge
• Stage and apply manure in a manner that does
not threaten the water supply
(Source: 327 IAC 16-3-1)
Enforcement
• CFO may opt-out of regulation by declaring no discharge
or proposal to discharge
• General or individual NPDES permits, must be renewed
every five years
• Nutrient (Manure) Management Plan, not an enforceable
part of the permit
• Soil & manure samples taken by operator
• Records kept on-farm (not public)
• Inspectors visit production areas but do not routinely visit
land application areas during or after manure spreading
Real problem is lack of funding
and political will
Pathways to Pollution
40 spills in 2008, 295 spills in the last 5 years
(IDEM)
-lagoon overflow
-pit overflow
-transportation
-manure stockpile or staging area
-improper land application (most spills occur during land
application)
-equipment breakage
-deliberate dumping
Report a Spill
• Enters waters of the state
• Crosses property boundaries
• Operation not managed in a manner that prevents a threat to
waters of the state
• Threatens to damage waters of the state
Shortcoming of Current Program
•
•
•
•
•
•
No consideration of air emissions and stormwater runoff.
Inspections focus primarily on production area
Fertilizer rates for nitrogen allows overloading of phosphorus
No consideration of pathogen content of manure
No consideration of existing pollution
Nutrient (Manure) Management Plan is NOT enforceable part of
the permit
• Manure management information is not available to the public –
treated as proprietary
Water Quality Standards for
E. coli
235 colony forming units/100 ml maximum
safe for recreational use
One study of dairy waste found:
• 110,000 cfu /100 ml in field tiles the same day
• 38,000 cfu/100 ml 6 days later.
Many Indiana waterways are polluted
Indiana’s biggest pollution problems
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
E. coli
Biotic communities
Dissolved oxygen
Nutrients
Phosphorus
Algae
Taste & odor
822 water bodies
505
140
98
50
20
12
Impacts of Industrial Livestock on
Rural Communities
•
•
•
•
Property values
Quality of life
Rivers and streams unsafe
Limited opportunities for other economic
development
• Reduced opportunity for tourism and
recreation
Impacts on Public Health
• Poor Air & Water Quality
• Neighbors get sick, suffer longer
• Workers may carry antibiotic resistant pathogens to
general population
• Many county health departments struggling with
MRSA (methicilllin resistant Staphlycoccus aureus)
Antibiotics as Growth Promoters
• 70% of all antibiotics used
in the U.S. are fed to
livestock at sub-therapeutic
doses
• Antibiotics increase growth
rate by 2-10%
New Federal Rules
• CAFO that discharges or proposes to discharge must apply for an
NPDES permit
• Unpermitted CAFOs must certify that they do not discharge or
propose to discharge
• Nutrient Management Plan must be submitted with application for
individual NPDES permit
• Authorities must review NMP and allow public notice and
comment
• CAFOs can substitute best management practices that will result in
no discharge rather than approved containment structures if it can
demonstrate that the system will comply with effluent limitations
• Water quality based effluent limitations may be required from land
application and production areas that are not exempted as
“agricultural stormwater”
• Best conventional technology must be used to control fecal
coliforms (E. Coli)
Indiana
•
•
•
•
IDEM developing new rules for CAFOs
(LSA Document #09-213)
Indiana Register, April 8, 2009
Office of the Indiana State Chemist (OISC)
developing rules to address the distribution and use
of manure as fertilizer
IDEM Rulemaking
•
•
•
•
•
Design Standards
Nutrient Management Plans
Facility Closure
Transitions
Public Notice and Comment
Design Standards
• Prohibit construction of manure lagoons over
mines
• Require additional protection for manure
storage facilities in karst terrain
HEC’s Choice
• Prohibit location of CFOs and CAFOs in karst
terrain and floodplains
• Use of groundwater monitoring device to ensure
that drinking water is not being contaminated
• Incorporate best management practices such as
setbacks from waterbodies and wetlands
Nutrient Management Plans
• Adds phosphorous as a limiting factor for
manure application rates
• Annual manure analysis for all manure types
HEC’s Choice
• Require water monitoring as part of NMP
• Control pathogens
• Incorporate Best Control Technology
limitations
Facility Closure
• IDEM intends to clarify guidelines
• Require a closure certificate
HEC’s Choice
• Comprehensive closure plan should be
required as part of the permit
• Operator should be required to provide
financial assurance for required closure
activities
Transitions
• CAFO owners who certify that they do not
discharge or propose to discharge can avoid the
need for an NPDES permit by transitioning from a
CAFO designation to a CFO designation
• All operations must have a general CFO permit.
HEC’s Choice
• Concern over ability of CAFO to self regulate
• IDEM should require NPDES permits for all
CAFOs
Public Notice & Comment
• Forty (40) day comment period for adjacent
landowners
HEC’s Choice
• Public, not just adjacent landowners, should
be provided with an opportunity to comment
on permits
OISC Rulemaking
Must comply with more stringent rule when there is
overlap between IDEM and OISC
-HEC believes that jurisdiction must be better defined
-Which agency will be responsible for inspections and enforcement
-OISC should acknowledge the best fertilizer regulation practices employed in
29 Indiana counties by adopting a more stringent standard or providing a
waiver to counties who have more stringent ordinances
OISC-Recordkeeping
Requires OISC to maintain records for two years
-Permits are renewed every five years; therefore, OISC
should maintain records for five years
-Records should be made public
-Rule should include specific parameters for the type of
information that will be maintained
OISC-Restrictions on Use &
Distribution
• Staging (temporary storage) 72 hours if not
covered
• 90 days if covered
• Incorporates Setbacks currently in IDEM
rule
HEC’s Choice
• Supports shorter staging time frames
• Supports larger setbacks
• Surrounding states have much more stringent
setbacks
• Many Indiana counties have ordinances requiring
more stringent setbacks
• Include setbacks for land application
• Proximity can be easily altered at the least expense
Remaining Concerns
•
•
•
•
•
Air emissions
Rural economic development
Antibiotics
Algae blooms
Costs to the taxpayers
What You Can Do
•
•
•
•
Change your consumer habits
Become a HEC Water Warrior
Inform HEC staff of local developments
Educate others, including decision makers
What You Can Do
Support laws that hold industrial agriculture
accountable:
-provide comments to IDEM and OISC
-advocate for setbacks
-support industry financial assurance
-support a ban on the use of antibiotics in livestock solely to
increase feed efficiency and promote growth
-Urge your Congressmen to support PAMTA
Questions and Discussion
Citizen’s Guide to Lobbying
A Few Good Points
• Now (before the session) is great time to talk
• Less frantic, more casual pace – more quality
interaction
• In person meetings in the district are the most
effective type of contact
• Legislators want to hear from constituents
Making Contact
• You have the chance to meet in a relaxed
atmosphere in your local area—a big bonus!
• Remember: every visit has an impact!
Be effective
• Your credibility is important: only present accurate
information!
• Provide compelling information; your job is to
persuade
• You may not be an expert, but you can provide
valuable information to legislators
• Local perspective important
Be informed
• Who are your legislators?
• Know the facts about your legislator: political party,
occupation, leadership positions, legislative
committee assignments
• Copies of bills
• Find it all at Indiana General Assembly Web site
www.in.gov/legislative
Setting Up a Meeting in
Your District
• Call your legislator at local office or home;
ask to meet in convenient location
Or
• Approach him/her after community event
At the Meeting
• Bring an extra copy of the bill you will
discuss or informative materials about the
issue to support your position
• Be on time!
Follow-up
• Email or letter to legislator with thank you
• Report on meeting to HEC staff
How to Contact Your Legislator
By phone:
• Indiana State Senate317.232.9400 or 800.382.9467
• Indiana House of Representatives- 317.232.9600 or
800.382.9841
How to Contact Your Legislator
If you must leave a message, be sure to include:
• Your name
• Your address & city
• Please (support/oppose) issue or bill number X
How to Contact Your Legislator
If by written message:
• An e-mail will be most timely
• Find legislator’s e-mail addresses at
www.in.gov/legislative
• A written letter must be sent promptly as the
legislative session moves quickly
How to Contact Your Legislator
Written letter:
The Honorable ____
Indiana Senate / Indiana House of Representatives
200 W. Washington Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Questions and Discussion
Find us on
Facebook.com/hecweb
twitter.com/hec_ed
and at hecweb.org
Thank you!