FACING SOUTH - Online Magazine of the Institute for Southern Studies
Boss Hog's attempted regulatory coup in North Carolina
For the past two years, the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission has been crafting new rules to require water monitoring at factory hog farms, a significant source of pollution in the state.
But last week, even with concerns growing over the environmental impacts of hog farms, the North Carolina Senate unanimously passed a bill that puts the rules process on hold until 2011 -- a display of the mighty political power Boss Hog holds in the state.
The measure now moves to the N.C. House, where its fate is unclear.
The bill's sponsor was state Sen. Charlie Albertson (in photo), the Democratic Caucus secretary who represents eastern North Carolina's Duplin, Sampson and Lenoir counties, an agricultural center where many of the state's more than 10 million hogs are raised. In a recent interview with WUNC public radio reporter Laura Leslie, Albertson -- a member and former chair of the state Senate Agriculture, Environment and Natural Resources Committee -- accused the EMC of unfairly picking on hog farmers:
Water quality problems, again, are not caused by swine farmers ... It's just not happening.
Unfortunately, that's not true. Agricultural operations, including confined animal feeding operations or CAFOs, are a source of water pollution nationwide, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Hogs produce enormous amounts of fecal waste -- three times as much as humans -- that's stored in giant open-air holding ponds known as "lagoons," which are vulnerable to leaking. The waste is eventually sprayed onto fields, where the nitrogen converts to nitrates, chemicals that move readily into nearby streams and groundwater. Nitrates have been linked to a blood disorder called methemoglobinemia, which is especially harmful to babies.
In its report released in April, the Pew Commission noted that "one of the most serious unintended consequences of industrial food animal production is the growing public health threat of these types of facilities."
Overruling the rulemakers
North Carolina, the nation's second-largest hog producer after Iowa, is among the states that have suffered serious environmental problems from industrial livestock operations, one of several significant sources of nutrient pollution along with municipal wastewater and urban runoff. Contamination from the state's factory farms has been linked to outbreaks of Pfiesteria piscicida, a microbe believed to be responsible for fish-killing algal blooms as well as skin irritation and cognitive problems in exposed humans.
In 2007, with concerns mounting over animal waste pollution, North Carolina's Riverkeepers filed a petition for rulemaking asking the state to consider whether it needed to impose monitoring rules for industrial livestock farms. Current law requires the facilities to undergo two inspections a year, but these are strictly visual checks that involve no environmental sampling.
In May of this year, following a process in which all stakeholders got a chance to be heard through comments and hearings, the EMC proposed rules requiring animal waste management facilities to sample water quality three times a year at three sampling sites to be determined by the state Division of Water Quality.
But that didn't sit well with Albertson, who sought to kill the rules. He turned to an existing piece of legislation that aimed to nix state regulation of toxic air emissions in certain cases. That bill was changed to prohibit the EMC from adopting any permanent rules at all until 2011 except in a few limited cases, such as an unforeseen public health crisis. There were as many as 10 rules under consideration at the EMC that would have been affected by this version of the bill.
It was that broad rule moratorium that Albertson got approved by the Senate Agriculture and Environment committee -- a body that has a history of being sympathetic to agribusiness interests. The committee was once chaired by Wendell Murphy, a hog farmer whose Murphy Family Farms are now part of Smithfield Foods of Virginia, the world's largest pork producer and processor. During his time in the legislature, Murphy sponsored and helped pass bills that exempted hog farms from local zoning laws and lawsuits and that gave the industry subsidies and tax exemptions. When Murphy retired from the Senate in 1992, he was replaced by Albertson, then a state representative.
When Albertson's bill was taken up on the Senate floor, several lawmakers with a record of advocating for the environment spoke against the measure. They included state Sen. Dan Clodfelter of Charlotte, who expressed concerns about the bill's impact on rules the EMC was creating to help his city deal with a serious air quality problem. Clodfelter asked Albertson for a narrowing amendment, which Albertson agreed to provide.
Senate insiders say it's customary that when a colleague does what you ask as Albertson did, you in turn support his legislation. That's why even those lawmakers with strong environmental records voted yes on the bill -- even though not all of them wanted to kill the hog farm rules.
At Boss Hog's trough
But other North Carolina senators spoke in praise of Albertson's bill, with some even accusing the EMC of harboring a "vendetta" against hog farmers.
That lawmakers are so sympathetic to a polluting industry is not altogether surprising considering the enormous clout the corporate agriculture lobby has in North Carolina -- influence that's apparent in Albertson's record of campaign contributions.
Since 2000 alone, Albertson has received $10,200 from the N.C. Farm Bureau, $8,000 from Smithfield Foods, another $7,250 from the N.C. Pork Council, and $5,000 from the N.C. Poultry Federation, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics. He's also received tens of thousands of dollars in contributions from individual hog and poultry farmers, include E. Marvin Johnson, owner of the House of Raeford turkey farms, hog farmer William H. Prestage of Prestage Farms and Murphy, his Senate predecessor.
Albertson's hardly alone among North Carolina lawmakers in benefiting from industrial agriculture's largesse: According to a recent report [pdf] from campaign finance group Democracy North Carolina, the N.C. Farm Bureau contributed a total of $222,150 to state candidates and political parties in the last election alone, and the N.C. Pork Council -- which gets funding for its policy advocacy work from a mandatory fee on pork producers -- chipping in another $187,000.
Legislative insiders say there's now an effort underway to keep Albertson's bill from coming up in the House. However, the industry's considerable influence with lawmakers suggests environmental advocates could face a tough battle ahead.
"Hopefully, Albertson's bill will be seen for what it is when it reaches the House, and the EMC will not be bullied by the swine industry and its surrogates," says Rick Dove of the Waterkeeper Alliance.
Industrial WaterWorld Serving the Process and Waste Water Industry www.industrialww.com May/June 2009/Volume 9/No. 3 Page 13
Air toxics or odors leaving your facility and entering your neighbor’s air space may now subject you to property devaluation claims.
A federal judge has ruled the presence of an air toxic in your neighbor's air, despite being undetectable by odor to humans, can constitute a physical injury to property for purposes of a common law claim for property damage.
Air toxics are regulated by Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rules governing National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) under the Clean Air Act and may present direct opportunities for VOC, SVOC and/ or odor reduction or indirect opportunities in related wastewater treatment. MCAT rules are federal, but states have to at least match them.
In Gates v. Rohm and Haas Co. [No. 06-CV-01743 (E.D. Pa. July 30, 2008)], plaintiffs in this asserted class action sued on behalf of residents of the Village of McCollum Lake, IL, alleging not only statutory violations but also nuisance, trespass and negligence under common law of Pennsylvania and Illinois.
As part of property damage claims, the plaintiffs alleged a "diminution in property value" due to the stigma resulting from vinyl chloride contamination in groundwater and air on their properties. According to the court, "[W]here the invading substance is a hazardous chemical, to demonstrate interference with the use and enjoyment of the property, a plaintiff must show either a physical invasion or an invasion by something otherwise perceptible, but not necessarily physical, like noises or vibrations.”
Because plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence to suggest vinyl chloride is hazardous to human health, the court concluded they “need only show that vinyl chloride was and continues to be physically present on their properties" to sustain a claim for reduced property value. Moreover, it concluded, "the exposure level need not necessarily present a health risk to make out a property damage claim.”
With this decision, any facility that has air toxics emissions may be at risk, regard less of the need for an air permit.
--- About the Author: Jay Collert is a nationally recognized environmental trainer and consultant with the Aarcher Institute of Environmental Training LLC, based in Houston, TX. Since 1994, he has focused on helping companies understand and comply with the complexities of environmental regulations. Contact: 281-256-9044, jcollert@aarcherinstitute.com or www.aarcherinstitute.com
Kim Snell-Zarcone, Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future (PennFuture), (717) 214-7930
Meredith Niles, Center for Food Safety, (202) 547-9359
Groups Challenge Bush Administration’s Factory Farm Exemption
Midnight rule leaves communities dangerously unaware about emissions from animal waste
Washington, DC – In a lawsuit filed today against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, a coalition of groups challenged a last minute Bush Administration rule that exempts factory farms from federal laws requiring them to alert government officials when they release unsafe levels of toxic emissions into the surrounding community.
The environmental law firm Earthjustice filed the suit on behalf of the groups, arguing that the exemption will harm people living and working near factory farms. Earthjustice is representing the Waterkeeper Alliance, Sierra Club, Environmental Integrity Project, The Humane Society of the United States, Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future and Center for Food Safety.
Factory farms, formally known as Confined Animal Feeding Operations or CAFOs, are large-scale livestock facilities that confine large numbers of animals in relatively small spaces. A large factory farm may contain upwards of 1,000 cattle, 2,500 hogs or 125,000 chickens. Such facilities generate a massive amount of urine and feces, which is commonly liquefied and either stored under the facility or nearby in open air lagoons. This waste is known to release high levels of toxic pollutants into the air such as ammonia and hydrogen sulfide.
“These massive animal confinement facilities operate in complete disregard for the welfare of animals and the environment, and should be doing more, not less, to inform local citizens of the dangers they create for our communities,” said Jonathan R. Lovvorn of The Humane Society of the United States.
Like other industrial facilities, federal law has long required factory farms to notify government officials when toxic pollution levels exceed public safety thresholds. The Bush Administration’s last-minute rulemaking now exempts factory farms from filing these reports. Not surprisingly, the rule change was sought by the industry following successful litigation against factory farms that held them accountable for their widespread failure to comply with environmental laws.
“We are challenging the Clean Water Act CAFO rule released in November, and we are now challenging this rule. In the past few months, the agencies have tried to swamp us with inappropriate rules, but we will not be intimidated into acceptance.” said Hannah Connor of the Waterkeeper Alliance.
“Factory farms commonly release unsafe levels of toxic air pollution that can be dangerous for workers and nearby residents,” said Earthjustice attorney Keri Powell. “The Bush Administration’s parting gift to factory farms is to help them guard that dirty secret.”
An increasing body of scientific evidence shows that ammonia, hydrogen sulfide and other factory farm emissions pose serious threats to human health and the environment. Among other problems, exposure to factory farm air pollution can cause respiratory illness, lung inflammation and increased vulnerability to asthma.
“These corporate agricultural operations have the know-how to comply with the simple reporting rules that EPA is trying to repeal and ought to be required to do so,” said Eric Schaeffer, executive director of the Environmental Integrity Project.
The rise of CAFOs has been a primary factor in the decline of small family farms. The number of family farms declined by 39 percent between 1969 and 2002. By 2002, only 25 percent of all farms in the nation were family farms. Meanwhile, the number of factory farms has jumped from about 3,600 factory farms decades ago to almost 12,000.
“Protecting people's health from toxic air pollution is more important than shielding factory farms from right-to-know laws,” said Ed Hopkins of the Sierra Club.
The reporting data is crucial for communities struggling with pollution from factory farms.
In one high-profile instance, EPA relied on emissions data reported by Ohio’s largest egg producer to address dangerously high concentrations of hazardous air pollutants released into a neighboring community, securing a $1.4 million settlement for local air pollution controls.
“Factory farm pollution is destroying the economic viability of rural communities,” said Kim Snell-Zarcone, staff attorney for PennFuture. “In areas with uncontrolled pollution, local families and businesses leave, and no new investors move in. If we are ever to revive our economy, we must have a clean environment.”
“Wastes from factory farming significantly contribute to global warming and create dangerous food pathogens,” said Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director of the Center for Food Safety. “As shown by the recent passage of Proposition 2 in California, the public wants more regulation on these cruel and unsustainable operations, not the blank check recently given by the outgoing Bush Administration.”
While the exemptions apply specifically to factory farm air emissions, such emissions pollute the land and the water as well. For example, ammonia emitted into the air by a factory farm quickly combines with atmospheric water and falls back to earth as acid rain, poisoning water resources and killing vegetation.
NEW BERN SUN JOURNAL Letters to the Editor 8/10/2008
STATE OF TRENT IS STILL A CONCERN by Larry Baldwin, Lower Neuse Riverkeeper
and
FISH KILL NOT NATURAL by Rick Dove, Neuse Riverkeeper Emeritus
For those of you who lived along the Trent between 1993 to 1995, you will surely remember an issue on the Trent River that was cause for great concern.
During the summers of those years, an aquatic plantknown as “coontail” (ceratophyllum demersum), so named because the plant structure looks like the tail of a raccoon, covered large areas of the Trent River from shore to shore.
Many of the tributaries and parts of the mainstream of the Trent were totally matted with this aquatic plant.The concentration of this plant was so heavy that many boats could not be launched or used for fear of clogging and overheating their engines. Many outboard motors were actually destroyed. People who lived along the waters of the Trent River were literally raking this aquatic weed out of the water with garden racks, loading it onto wheelbarrows and taking it to shore for disposal. This event basically brought water activities on much of the Trent River to a complete halt.
A public hearing followed in the summer of 1995. It was attended by nearly 1,000 (very upset) local residents. As a result, the state promised reforms.
The cause of this explosive vegetative growth was no mystery. The Trent River is home to an extremely high number of industrial swine facilities. Their manure, loaded with nutrients that promote plant growth, was being discharged to the Trent over the ground as runoff and through the air as ammonia gas (a nutrient). The problem was so bad that more than 70 miles of the Trent was designated by the state as impaired due to industrial swine production.
Relief first came in 1996, as Hurricanes Bertha and Fran helped flush the system. Then, in 1999, Hurricane Floyd produced a one in 500 year flood event that sent the filthy mess out to the ocean.
Since 1999, mostly drought conditions have prevailed in our area and the river has remained clear of this unnatural vegetative growth . But that is not true for the wetlands and swamps. Since Floyd, we have watched as they have once again filled with excessive vegetative growth. And now, the Trent is again showing the same symptoms as witnessed in the early 1990s.
In a very recent tour of the Trent River and its tributaries, Rick Dove (Riverkeeper during that the 1990s) and I witnessed coontail growing out of control once again. Calls of concern and complaints from people who live on and/or use the water are now increasing at an alarming rate. This particular plant is a fast-growing, river bottom species which thrives on nitrogen, indicating that levels of that nutrients have substantially increased.
So the question needs to be asked…is the Trent River in trouble again? Unless another hurricane soon flushes the system, the answer is yes.
The Trent River has been on the federal impaired waters list known as the 303(d) list for good reason. It needs to remain on that list. The state must be required to stop the cause of this degradation, which is the swine lagoons and sprayfields. The state should not only study the swine impacts to the Trent River, but put into place real measures to start the process of returning its waters to acceptable standards. Technologies to replace lagoons and sprayfields have been developed. The time has come to implement those technologies.
The swine industry says they can’t afford to do it. We say, the River can’t afford for them not to do it.
How long will it take for the state of North Carolina to wake up? When will we wake up? The Trent Rive belongs to us. It is our property and we have the duty and responsibility to take care of it. The state is our agent. A portion of our taxes is supposed to be used to restore and protect these waters. Why isn’t this being effectively done? Is it because our voices are not being heard?
The time has come to speak out. I hope you will join me in the effort.
Larry Baldwin Lower Neuse Riverkeeper Neuse River Foundation
FISH KILL NOT NATURAL
Blame it on “Mother Nature”--shamefully, they do it every time. On Tuesday nearly one million fish perished in the Neuse River. That was twice the number reported by state officials. Larry Baldwin, our Neuse Riverkeeper covered the fish kill with Phil Bowie, a member of Doctor Burkholder’s water quality testing team. What they saw was not a natural occurrence. A dark brown, shoe polish looking foam covered the water’s surface. It was as ugly as I have ever seen, according to Phil Bowie; “it looked evil.” All around the pitch brown water, dead fish of different species covered the surface. Many more dead fish littered the bottom but they could not be counted.
It was probably the wind, a salt wedge, warm water, or some other natural event that caused the kill, said the state. That is their canned response. Their message is intended to calm fears. If they reported the truth they would be obligated to do something to fix the problem.
I have researched the history of fish kills on the Neuse and Trent Rivers dating back to the 1700s. Small fish kills did occur but there is nothing in the record that reports fish kills like those we have witnessed over the past twenty years. Since 1991, well over a billion fish have unnecessarily died. Most of them had open, bleeding lesions covering their bodies. What killed them wasn’t lighting, rough water, or some other so-called natural event, it was pollution. Yes, warm water, salt wedges and algae all play a role. They deplete oxygen and promote fish killers, like Pfiesteria. What the state fails to talk about is the role pollution plays in these large fish kill events.
Tuesday’s fish kill was not natural. It was man made. For years the state has known that the river is polluted with excess nutrients. We have made progress in fixing one source of those nutrients. Over eleven existing and planned wastewater discharge pipes have been eliminated.The Neuse River Foundation and its Riverkeeper played a key role in that effort. Unfortunately, the contribution from industrial swine facilities continues to pollute our rivers with excessive nutrients. The impact these facilities have on the Trent and Neuse Rivers is enormous. More than 50% of the nitrogen from these swine operations, a very problematic nutrient, is discharged to the environment. Far too much of it is ending up in our rivers. As this nutrient and others make their way to the water, fish die in large numbers. There is nothing natural about that.
I have closely watched the Trent and Neuse Rivers for nearly thirty-five years.I have witnessed the changes caused by pollution. They are ugly and costly. We paid a heavy price for the Rivers’ poor health in the 1990s. Are we prepared to do it again? We certainly will if we buy into the state’s propaganda campaign of all’s well on the River.
Rick Dove Neuse Riverkeeper Emeritus New Bern, NC
WINSTON SALEM EDITORIAL STAFF
Published: July 14, 2008
Like a malignant tumor that returns after years in remission, the political clout of North Carolina's hog farms has returned. Let's hope that the state House administers a strong enough dose of environmental protection to kill this cancer right away (emphasis added) .
Last week the state Senate passed legislation that undermines a key part of the 1995 hog-farm reform law. The bill, which still needs House approval and Gov. Mike Easley's signature, would make it easier for hog farms to expand without the approval of their neighbors. In effect, it returns to hog farmers the license they had, previous to 1995, to destroy the quality of life for all around them.
Make no mistake about it. Hog farming has been good in some ways for North Carolina. There are counties in this state that saw unprecedented job growth and prosperity starting in the late 1980s when the hog industry moved here in a big way.
The General Assembly, in fashioning restrictions on the industry in the 1990s, was careful not to kill the hog that "laid the golden egg." The taxpayers of this state have generously helped underwrite research into both better farming methods and more environmentally friendly ways to dispose of hog waste. And while that research has been conducted, North Carolina has allowed hog farmers to continue to use dangerous hog lagoons for the disposal of hog waste.
Those hog lagoons are an environmental disaster waiting to happen to the state. But for neighbors of the farms, they are disasters already. They pollute the air with an odor that makes life miserable.
Part of the 1995 reforms was a restriction on new construction on hog farms. For some kinds of projects, a farmer would have to get the approval of his neighbors. Buffers were also applied.
That's not too much to ask of an operation that has the potential to ruin a neighbor's quality of life and health and to drive down local property values. But the Senate came along and tried to create the new loophole anyhow.
Environmentalists and advocates for non-farmers living in the state's hog belt are rightfully concerned. What the bill's supporters call a minor change is, in fact, an opportunity to leave the barn door wide open to all kinds of back-channel expansions of hog farming.
Over the past 13 years, North Carolina has developed a reasonable balance between hog farmers and the public. While the smelly farms have not gone away, research may soon help make their presence less offensive to neighbors and less dangerous to our water resources and tourism.
The House should kill this bill this week. We don't need the cancer of unchecked hog-farm expansion returning to North Carolina.
Charlotte Observer July 2008
N.C. legislators show how not to make sausage Senate action on hog farms was hasty, secretive and arrogant.
If you're looking for a good example of how not to go about the people's work in the final days of the N.C. legislative session, the Senate's handling of House Bill 822 would be hard to beat.
The House unanimously passed the original bill to tidy up some earlier legislation and sent it to the Senate in May of 2007. The Senate didn't act until Tuesday. That's when the Senate Agriculture, Environment and Natural Resources Committee tossed out the technical corrections and substituted something entirely unrelated. The new bill would, for example, reverse an important restriction on the siting of hog farm facilities, allowing farmers to rebuild hog houses without their neighbors' consent. That's going to cause trouble. The legislature applied the restriction in 1995 because a huge buildup of hog farms in Eastern North Carolina resulted in noxious odors that many residents said ruined their quality of life. Scientists say hog odor and emissions also affect health, including childhood respiratory problems. The proposed change would allow farmers to rebuild facilities that burned down, or were otherwise destroyed by acts of God, without getting neighbors' permission, as the old law required. It also allows farmers to convert hog houses with cramped stalls to gestation pens in order to give sows more room to move about. That's a more humane environment for the sows, but how about for humans who live nearby? That kind of question that did not get adequate consideration in the Senate's rush to act. In fact, the Senate committee declined to allow a lot of N.C. citizens to address the panel and relay their concerns about the bill. While there may be good reasons to consider the bill – or alternative ways to provide sows more space – the Senate appears to be rushing it through without adequate debate. That's wrong. For one thing, it prolongs the old style of hog farming that allowed hog barns too close to neighbors, open lagoons to store hog feces and urine, and spraying of that waste on nearby fields. The legislature ought to be encouraging the transition to new ways of handling hog waste, including recycling waste into energy or making useful byproducts.
The way this bill was pushed through the Senate brings to mind the abuses of power that put some ex-legislators in prison in recent years. It smacks of arrogance, contempt for the public interest and devotion to the bogus theory that legislators always know best. The Senate should send the bill back to committee and invite real public discussion of its costs and benefits.
Five reasons that you should care about what's going on with Smithfield Foods
One of the more impressive acts of a state political party chairman in North Carolina history took place recently. It occurred when Jerry Meek of the North Carolina Democratic Party told a giant multinational meatpacking corporation known as Smithfield Foods to keep its money when the company tried to make a contribution to the party.
Meek's rejection of the contribution apparently prompted a rather heated response from a lobbyist for Smithfield who told Meek that she would get back at him by telling other corporate executives around the state about his supposed treachery. The lobbyist's promise spurred Meek to pen, to his everlasting credit, a follow-up letter that included the following statements:
"The North Carolina Democratic Party recognizes the importance of businesses, large and small, to creating economic opportunities for all….We do not believe that a company must violate worker rights, or flaunt the law, in order to prosper. And I refuse to believe that the corporate executives you have threatened to speak with about this matter could condone the flagrant disregard for worker rights, worker safety, and the environment. Law abiding corporations are at a competitive disadvantage when others fail to respect the law or to uphold basic human rights….The record of Smithfield Foods is all too clear."
Meek then went on to recount some of the lowlights from Smithfield's sordid record over the years:
"The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has fined Smithfield Foods for over 7000 violations of the Clean Water Act. The U.S. Department of Labor has repeatedly cited Smithfield Foods for violating the nation's child labor laws. OSHA has cited Smithfield Foods for repeated workplace safety violations, including the exposure of workers to corrosive chemicals, the use of unguarded blades on cutting equipment, and blocked exits. And the National Labor Relations Board has found that Smithfield Foods engaged in intimidation, threats, and retaliatory practices in response to workers' efforts to improve their conditions.
In 2000, Smithfield Foods became the only meatpacking plant in the United States with its own armed police force. In the ensuing years, this force was found to use violence, intimidation, and threats against the company's own workers.
It is noteworthy when the internationally respected organization, Human Rights Watch, calls a company to task for violating human rights. I doubt that many of the executives you have threatened to discuss this matter with manage companies that face such scrutiny."
Meek's actions amounted to something that's been in short supply in North Carolina politics in recent years - an actual example of a political leader leading. While many, perhaps most, North Carolinians are at least vaguely aware that there is some controversy that surrounds Smithfield Foods, probably only a few dedicated activists are that well-versed in who and what Smithfield is and/or the details of its numerous transgressions. It would have been safe and easy for Meek to quietly accept Smithfield's check and move on - especially since long-time Democratic powerbroker and former state Senator Wendell Murphy sits on the company's board.
Instead, however, he decided to take a stand and buck one of the most powerful political forces in the state. Rather than quietly playing the "go along, get along" game that is the standard modus operandi for most fundraisers in North Carolina politics, Meek used his position to help an important cause.
What's the deal with Smithfield Foods?
While not widely understood yet in the general public, the reasons for Meek's strong action ought to be. Smithfield Foods is, by any fair assessment, something akin to a caricature of a large, ruthless, and rapacious multi-national corporation. From its abysmal health and safety record and union busting tactics to the blitzkrieg it has waged on the environment throughout the U.S. and abroad to its current effort to squelch the free speech rights of those who would criticize it, Smithfield is the classic example of modern capitalism at its unfettered worst.
Here are five reasons that average North Carolinians of all political perspectives ought to take into account in assessing Smithfield's place in our state:
1. Smithfield is a corporate behemoth - Some North Carolinians confuse Smithfield Foods with the popular eastern North Carolina barbecue and fried chicken restaurant chain. They are not related. The "Smithfield" in Smithfield Foods refers to a town in Virginia where the company got its start. Smithfield is a conglomerate of more than 20 companies with dozens of well-known brands like Gwaltney, Farmland and Butterball and is the largest pork producer in the world. In fiscal year 2007, it had more than $12 billion in sales worldwide. On the ground, the corporation has an enormous footprint. It employs more than 52,000 people in more than 30 states and 11 foreign countries. Here in North Carolina, the corporation maintains several facilities, but the one that has received the most attention is in the tiny Bladen County town of Tar Heel where it employs more than 5,000 people.
2. Smithfield and the environment - While many are familiar with North Carolina's nagging problem with hog waste lagoons, less attention has been given to the direct impacts of industrial hog packing. At Tar Heel, workers kill 8 million hogs per year. The average slaughter weight hog weighs 50% more than an average person and produces three times the excrement. Even if Smithfield were acting with the highest degree of environmental responsibility (something that it has not managed to pull off) the negative impact on southeastern North Carolina of such staggering numbers would still be monumental. This 2006 article provides a real feel for the scale of Smithfield's environmental impact (Caution: it contains stomach turning images and descriptions).
3. Smithfield and safety - As the recent series in the Charlotte Observer on the terrible conditions in the state's poultry industry reminded us, slaughtering and cutting up huge numbers of animals is dirty, dangerous, and painful business. Smithfield's experience is no different and it has a long record of OSHA violations and maimed and injured workers. This is particularly true in Tar Heel where Smithfield continues to do everything it can prevent the workforce from unionizing. Unionized shops generally have lower injury rates.
4. Smithfield and its workforce - While many North Carolina-based corporations have a long anti-union tradition, there is a special level of intensity and malevolence in Smithfield's anti-union, anti-employee activity. From its employment of a private, armed police force to its long history of threatening and firing workers to the way it has transformed the eastern North Carolina landscape for the contract farmers it has captured, controlled and displaced, Smithfield acts like, well, a giant bully.
Throughout its rapid ascent over the past few decades from a mid-sized regional company to a giant multi-national, Smithfield has unrepentantly squeezed its workers for every last penny it can extract. In this respect, Smithfield has been on the cutting edge of a national movement to slash worker pay and benefits in the meat packing industry. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics (as reported in the Triangle Business Journal), over the last three decades, average pay for production workers in animal slaughtering and production fell from 4% below the average manufacturing production wage to more than 30% below.
5. Smithfield and American freedoms - Smithfield's most recent outrage involves a giant and harassing lawsuit that it has slapped on those with the temerity (principally union organizers at the United Food and Commercial Workers Union) to expose and protest its behavior. As is explained in a February New York Times article, Smithfield accuses unions of mafia-like "racketeering" when they urged local governments around the country to pass resolutions condemning the company. As the author of the article put it: "What [Smithfield's lawyer] calls extortion sounds quite a bit like free speech." The lawsuit even seeks damages from the union for its action in convincing Oprah Winfrey not to take Smithfield advertising.
The outlook in North Carolina
In light of its abysmal record, it comes as no surprise that Smithfield's lobbyist attempted to play the part of political bully. That's obviously right out of the company playbook. What has come as a surprise, though, was the willingness of the Democratic Party leader to stand up to such a powerful and politically connected bully. Let's hope that in the weeks and months ahead, more North Carolinians of all political stripes follow Jerry Meek's lead and help shame the bully into becoming a responsible corporate citizen.
UCS CALLS FOR POLICIES THAT REDUCE CAFO SUBSIDIES AND
ENCOURAGE MODERN, SUSTAINABLE MEAT, MILK AND EGG PRODUCTION
Misguided federal farm policies have encouraged the growth of massive confined animal feeding operations, or CAFOs, by shifting billions of dollars in environmental, health and economic costs to taxpayers and communities, according to a report released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). As a result, CAFOs now produce most of the nation's beef, pork, chicken, dairy and eggs, even though there are more sophisticated and efficient farms in operation.
"CAFOs aren't the natural result of agricultural progress, nor are they the result of rational planning or market forces," said Doug Gurian-Sherman, a senior scientist in UCS's Food and Environment Program and author of the report. "Ill-advised policies created them, and it will take new policies to replace them with more sustainable, environmentally friendly production methods."
The report also details how other federal policies give CAFOs hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to address their pollution problems, which stem from the manure generated by thousands, if not tens of thousands, of animals confined in a small area. The report estimates that CAFOs have received $100 million in annual pollution prevention payments in recent years through the federal Environmental Quality Incentives Program, which was established by the 2002 Farm Bill.
"If CAFOs were forced to pay for the ripple effects of harm they have caused, they wouldn't be dominating the U.S. meat industry like they are today," said Margaret Mellon, director of UCS's Food and Environment Program. "The good news is that we can institute new policies that support animal production methods that benefit society rather than harm it."
Instead of favoring CAFOs, the report recommends that government policies provide incentives for modern production methods that benefit the environment, public health and rural communities. The report also shows that several smart alternative production methods can offer meat and dairy at costs comparable to CAFO products.
For example, some livestock producers move beef and dairy cattle frequently to different areas of a pasture, enabling them to spread out manure, prevent overgrazing, and take advantage of grass as a cost-effective source of animal feed. Meanwhile, some hog farmers have built hog hoop barns -- open-ended structures with curved roofs -- as an alternative to confining the animals in cramped buildings.
"Many farmers are succeeding when they work with nature instead of against it," said Gurian-Sherman. "These savvy producers are proving that hog hoop barns, smart pasture operations, and other alternative methods can compete with the massive CAFOs. And that's despite the fact that the cards are stacked against them."
In addition to steering taxpayer dollars away from CAFOs, the report also urges Congress to enforce laws that encourage competition so alternative producers can get their meat and dairy to consumers as easily as CAFOs. Making CAFOs, rather than taxpayers, pay to prevent or clean up the pollution they create is also critical, Gurian-Sherman said.
Mellon noted that next week the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production is expected to issue its final report that documents the effects of intensive animal production on humans, animals, and the environment. "When taken together," she said, "the two reports paint a grim picture of CAFOs and make strong, practical recommendations for new policies that can take us in a new, more efficient direction that will not fleece the American public."
###
The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit organization working for a healthy environment and a safer world. Founded in 1969, UCS is headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and has offices in Berkeley, California, and Washington, D.C. For more information, go to www.ucsusa.org.
1825 K Street NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20006-1232
EDITORIAL NY TIMES 9/18/07
Antibiotic Runoff
One of the persistent problems of industrial agriculture is the inappropriate use of antibiotics. It’s one thing to give antibiotics to individual animals, case by case, the way we treat humans. But it’s a common practice in the confinement hog industry to give antibiotics to the whole herd, to enhance growth and to fight off the risk of disease, which is increased by keeping so many animals in such close quarters. This is an ideal way to create organisms resistant to the drugs. That poses a risk to us all.
A recent study by the University of Illinois makes the risk even more apparent. Studying the groundwater around two confinement hog farms, scientists have identified the presence of several transferable genes that confer antibiotic resistance, specifically to tetracycline. There is the very real chance that in such a rich bacterial soup these genes might move from organism to organism, carrying the ability to resist tetracycline with them. And because the resistant genes were found in groundwater, they are already at large in the environment.
There are two interdependent solutions to this problem, and hog producers should embrace them both. The first solution — the least likely to be acceptable in the hog industry — is to ban the wholesale, herdwide use of antibiotics. The second solution is to continue to tighten the regulations and the monitoring of manure containment systems. The trouble, of course, is that there is no such thing as perfect containment.
The consumer has the choice to buy pork that doesn’t come from factory farms. The justification for that kind of farming has always been efficiency, and yet, as so often happens in agriculture, the argument breaks down once you look at all the side effects. The trouble with factory farms is that they are raising more than pigs. They are raising drug-resistant bugs as well.
It's time N.C. started phasing out hog waste cesspools
For this week's pop quiz, who said the following?” (1) "My comprehensive clean water plan starts with the obvious point that the anaerobic swine waste lagoon and spray field system has proved to be too risky. It must go."(2) “How about this? "As governor, I will lead a broad, consistent effort to address the environmental degradation caused by large-scale, factory hog farming."(3) “How about: "Completion of phase-out and total elimination of the lagoon system no later than year five, and substantially sooner if the independent scientists determine that faster implementation is possible." Yep. That's what Governor Easley promised. Leadership has been in short supply on hog waste since the 2000 election. Now is a good time for Gov. Easley, Senate President Pro Tem Marc Basnight and Speaker Joe Hackney to rekindle legislative interest in cleaning up this outdated and harmful way of handling animal wastes -- and make good on an overdue promise.”FOR FULL STORY GO TO: www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/16725773.htm
February 15, 2007
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE MEMBERS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ASSEMBLY
For more than 20 years the swine industry has been polluting North Carolina’s air and water by disposing of its untreated animal waste through the use of lagoons and sprayfields. This fact is supported by many research publications. The lagoon system, operated under the pretext of growing crops, is prone to massive failures even under the best of conditions. As rainfall exceeds average, as it frequently does in Eastern North Carolina, these failures often become catastrophic. Undoubtedly, you have followed the thousands of news stories that have regularly reported this industry’s environmental abuses, including the contamination of our air and water.
Now, there is mounting evidence of this industry’s adverse impacts on public health. Gases, including hydrogen sulfide and ammonia, accompany the putrid odor that permeates and stresses surrounding communities. One recent study conducted under the auspices of the NC Department of Health and Human Services showed that hog facility neighbors reported more headaches, runny noses, sore throats, coughing, diarrhea, and burning eyes than people who do not live near hog facilities. Other research supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences described odors and asthma symptoms of students in NC middle schools located near these facilities.
Ten long years ago, in reaction to these serious problems, the North Carolina General Assembly imposed a moratorium on construction of new lagoons and sprayfields. Simultaneously, research was conducted to find alternative technologies that would satisfactorily replace the failed lagoon system. In that regard, Dr. Mike Williams of North CarolinaStateUniversity has recently reported alternative systems proven to be effective. Unfortunately, the industry has rejected the implementation of any of these new technologies, insisting that they are not economically feasible. This rejection is unreasonable; cost wise, nothing will ever favorably compare with an “outhouse” waste disposal system.
Most all of the swine produced in North Carolina, belong to one company, Smithfield Foods. This same company owns many of the facilities where swine are grown. They also own the world’s largest slaughterhouse located in BladenCounty. Last year, Smithfield Foods’ net profit was nearly 200 million dollars. In the past five years, their net profits totaled approximately 1 billion dollars. Premium Standard Farms, the nation’s second largest hog producer, also accounts for a significant portion of the hogs raised in North Carolina.PSF enjoyed a profit of $14.8 million in the first three quarters of this fiscal year – profits that were diminished by the costs associated with its proposed merger with Smithfield, which will create a behemoth company controlling much of the American pork market.While North Carolina has shared in some of the financial benefit associated with hog production, it has also suffered a significant financial loss due to this industry’s pollution practices, related health issues and the resulting negative public perception.
We are respectfully requesting the following:
(1) Ending the moratorium by replacing it with a permanent ban on the construction of new lagoons and sprayfields.
(2) Setting of a date certain for eliminating the use of existing lagoons and sprayfields
(3) Immediate implementation of a phase-out program for existing lagoon and sprayfield system with approved alternative technologies.
The attached publications, including North Carolina Public Health (UNC Magazine Winter 2006), Rolling Stone Magazine (December 14, 2006 issue) and Environmental Science and Technology regarding toxic Pfiesteria—an example of harmful microbes that can be stimulated by wastes from industrialized swine feed operations-- are relevant to this discussion. They are attached for your review.
Respectfully submitted by the following organizations and individual:
ALLIANCE FOR A RESPONSIBLE SWINE INDUSTRY
CONCERNED CITIZENS OF TILLERY
CAPE FEAR COASTKEEPER
CAPE FEAR RIVER WATCH
CAPE HATTERAS COASTKEEPER
CAPE LOOKOUT COASTKEEPER
CONSERVATION COUNCIL OF NORTH CAROLINA
DUPLIN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AWARENESS PROJECT
LOWER NEUSE RIVERKEEPER
NEUSE RIVER FOUNDATION
NEW RIVER FOUNDATION
NEW RIVERKEEPER
NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL FEDERATION
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE NETWORK
OPEN MINDED SENIORS
PAMLICO-TAR RIVER FOUNDATION
PAMLICO-TAR RIVERKEEPER
RURAL EMPOWERMENT ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY HELP
SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAWCENTER
UPPER NEUSE RIVERKEEPER
WATERKEEPER ALLIANCE
INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPANT:FRED STANBACK
Hand-delivered for the group by:
Rick Dove
President, NeuseRiver Foundation
PO Box 15451, New Bern, NC28560 (252 447 5821
In its December issue, Rolling Stone Magazine reports on the many problems associated with the industrial production of hogs.
Boss Hog
photo by doveimaging.com
America's top pork producer churns out a sea of waste that has destroyed rivers, killed millions of fish and generated one of the largest fines in EPA history. Welcome to the dark side of the other white meat. JEFF TIETZ
The complete text of this highly acclaimed article can be viewed at:
Hog industry, environmentalists await report August 18,2005 BARRY SMITH FREEDOM NEWS SERVICE Freedom Raleigh Bureau RALEIGH - Environmentalists and pork producers alike anxiously await the final phase of a report on new technologies to handle waste coming from hog farms, primarily in eastern North Carolina. That report, which will come from N.C. State University around the end of the year, will determine whether new technologies handling the waste are economically feasible. "Researchers have shown that it can be done; there are safer alternatives to hog lagoons," said Dan Whittle, senior attorney for Environmental Defense. "Now the question is how to put them on the ground. We're eager to know whether they will find at least one technology that meets economic standards as well." Julie Woodson, a spokeswoman for the N.C. Pork Council, said pork producers are eager to see the report's findings. "The pork industry in North Carolina certainly would consider alternatives to waste management that are scientifically based and cost-effective for the farmers," Woodson said. The study, being conducted by Mike Williams at N.C. State University, is part of an agreement reached five years ago between environmental groups and pork producers to find economical alternatives to hog lagoons. Under the lagoon system, waste from hogs is pumped initially into a closely regulated pond. Farmers at times spray some of the waste on nearby fields. In years past, breaches in lagoons have occurred - allowing waste to contaminate nearby waters. A decade ago, more than 20 million gallons of waste escaped from Oceanview Farms near Richlands and seeped into the New River. Heavy rains during Hurricane Floyd in 1999 also caused waste to spill out of some lagoons. Woodson said fewer complaints from hog lagoons are occurring now because producers are working with state regulators to anticipate and head off potential problems. We are operating within the regulations," she said. "The producers are doing well." Whittle, however, said some problems remain. Even if farmers comply with their permit, there are still serious pollution problems," he said. Among the problems, Whittle mentions ammonia nitrogen evaporating from lagoons being carried downwind and falling back to the ground when it rains, odor problems and some pollutants seeping through the clay lagoon liners down into the groundwater. Whittle said some of the communities near hog farms have people experiencing high levels of health problems, such as asthma and bronchial problems. One form of technology being considered could allow farmers to capture methane from the waste, which could be used to generate electricity. Another would separate waste solids from the liquids, with the solids being converted to fertilizer. "The idea is to create markets," Whittle said. Whether markets can be created could be a key to whether the new technologies are affordable. "That all goes back to once you have those products, what do you do with them?" Woodson asked. "Is there a market?" Woodson said that the hog industry in North Carolina brings in $8 billion to the state's economy. About 46,000 people are employed full time by the hog industry, she said. She also noted that there are 2,300 hog farms in North Carolina, primarily in the eastern part of the state.
Alternatives to smelly, unsightly 'lagoons' used to get rid of hog wastes could cost slightly more, but they would be worth it
North Carolina's goal should be to discontinue use of the giant pits filled with hog waste that dot its eastern counties. Advances in the search for alternatives to the so-called lagoons now offer encouragement that the goal is attainable.
That surely is welcome news to folks who live near the lagoons and who are all too aware of the odors they emit, along with the possibility that the wastes could find their way into the water table and foul drinking wells.
State policymakers meanwhile can't afford to forget the millions of gallons that have poured from overflowing or ruptured lagoons into creeks and streams, and eventually coastal waters, after hurricanes and even heavy rainfalls. The potential for more such devastating pollution events makes closing the lagoons an urgent matter. Ammonia emissions also are a problem.
The hard work of identifying suitable alternatives is centered at N.C. State University, where researchers now say they have identified five "environmentally superior" alternatives to the lagoon system.
Under that system, farmers flush hog waste into the open-air ponds. Solids sink to the bottom, where they undergo a form of treatment due to bacterial action. The liquid that remains (diluted by rainwater) is sprayed onto fields. It's the preferred treatment and disposal method because it's cheap.
Any alternative method must not only be more environmentally friendly than lagoons and sprayfields, but also "economically feasible" for hog producers. Those sensible parameters were set out in an agreement five years ago between the state attorney general's office and two giant hog-producing companies, Smithfield Foods and Premium Standard Farms, which agreed to finance the research. The cost standard gives the hog industry, critical to job-challenged eastern North Carolina, a decent chance at survival. And it protects the state's small-farm heritage. Smaller operators could be forced to close out or sell out to conglomerates if the alternatives are too costly.
The N.C. State researchers, under Prof. Mike Williams, will determine by the end of the year how the five new methods stack up financially, and that shouldn't mean they have to match lagoons in a dollar-for-dollar comparison. It will be hard, or impossible, to find alternatives cheaper than digging a hole for hog waste and running pipes to and from it.
Big hog producers should be willing to absorb somewhat higher costs for better methods of disposing of their industrial waste. And North Carolina policymakers shouldn't settle for less. Industries that potentially can harm the environment share the land, air and water with the rest of us, and ought to be prepared to protect it -- for their long-term self interest as well as because it's the right thing to do.
Small farmers must be held to the same high environmental standard, but they may need help financially depending on the final cost of effective alternatives. There already has been talk of state grant or loan programs that would help small operations install new methods. Farm-county lawmakers ought to put a few proposals on the table, to get serious discussions under way.
While they are at it, legislators would send the helpful signal if they passed the Clean Hog Farms Act, sponsored by Republican Rep. Carolyn Justice of Pender County. The act sets a deadline for phasing out the lagoons once and for all -- a deadline that would well serve the state.
AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION URGES MORATORIUM ON NEW FACTORY FARMS
There is, obviously, a tacit acknowledgment that cesspools and spray fields are not cutting-edge, after all. And if tacit admissions won't suffice, the head of N.C. State University's livestock-waste center stated it baldly: "The current system is not sustainable."
It's imperative that state researchers and the hog industry move with dispatch to find alternatives to lagoons and spray fields for storing and disposing of wastes. Studies are under way, but proceeding slowly. Meanwhile, the ecology of the state's waterways continues to be threatened.
From September 20, 2003 New York Times An Ill Wind From Factory Farms By ROBERT F. KENNEDY Jr. and ERIC SCHAEFFER
Congress will hold hearings soon on the nomination of Gov. Michael Leavitt of Utah to lead the Environmental Protection Agency. He's bound to be asked about his efforts to eliminate protections for wilderness areas in his state and his close ties to the mining and timber industries. But he should also be asked about another issue that has received far less attention: the threat to the environment posed by the huge factory farms that dominate meat production in the United States today. These farms emit an enormous amount of pollutants that taint air, land and water. Their noxious gases, studies suggest, contribute to respiratory problems, gastrointestinal diseases, eye infections, depression and other ailments. Department of Agriculture research has shown that antibiotic-resistant bacteria are carried daily across property lines from corporate hog farms into homes and small farms. The thousands of animals crowded together on each giant feedlot produce waste that pollutes waterways and contaminates drinking water. For decades, the agribusiness lobby in Washington has invoked the small family farmer in its campaign to expand subsidies and fend off regulation, but it's mainly big producers that benefit. In 1998, the top four producers marketed 57 percent of all hogs in the country, and large corporations have cornered the market for chickens, cattle and dairy products as well. Much of this production is handled through contract farms whose corporate owners dictate how animals will be raised, housed and fed while disclaiming any environmental responsibility — and living far away from the consequences. These operations pollute the air with the gases released from huge barns and waste lagoons and by processes that "air out" manure before it is applied to fields. Under the Clinton administration, the E.P.A. began ordering farms to measure emissions and apply for Clean Air Act permits just as factories do. Early results showed that Buckeye Egg Farm, an egg-laying operation in Ohio, released hundreds of tons of particulate matter every year. But the Bush administration ordered such enforcement investigations stopped two years ago. The Department of Agriculture studies on bacteria were suppressed at industry's request, prompting the resignation of the study's author, James Zahn. Earlier proposals to make corporate owners responsible for wastewater discharges at contract farms were shelved. Now the E.P.A. is considering a request from the pig and poultry conglomerates to be shielded from Clean Air Act enforcement for a few more years while industry begins to measure its own emissions. The amnesty agreement would not require a corporate farm to clean up air pollution even if the agency found that pollution was at dangerously high levels. And no agreement should be signed that does not require companies to clean up their operations when their emissions are too high. A coalition of environmental groups and farm families have petitioned the E.P.A. to end its moratorium on enforcement, and exercise its authority to order air monitoring at some of the most notorious factory farms. We hope the E.P.A. will remember its mission to protect public health and act on this simple request. Governor Leavitt should know something about this problem. Nine workers were hospitalized in 1998 after they were overcome by fumes working at a giant hog operation in Utah, and a more recent state study found high levels of respiratory illness among nearby residents. But Utah has made it much harder for people to sue such operations and for officials to regulate them. Perhaps Congress should ask Governor Leavitt how long the victims of pollution from factory farming will have to wait before they can breathe clean air again. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is president of Waterkeeper Alliance. Eric Schaeffer, director of the Environmental Protection Agency's office of regulatory enforcement from 1997 to 2002, is director of the Environmental Integrity Project.
For the past two years, the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission has been crafting new rules to require water monitoring at factory hog farms, a significant source of pollution in the state.
At Boss Hog's trough
