[USCC] Fwd: LA Times: Foul state of affairs found in feedlots

[Jim McNelly]

>
>
>----------
><http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-livestock17nov17,1,4917883.story?coll=la-headlines-nation>http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-livestock17nov17,1,4917883.story?coll=la-headlines-nation
>
>
>Foul state of affairs found in feedlots
>
>
>
>Factory farms are harmful to the public and the 
>environment, researchers report.
>By Marla Cone
>Times Staff Writer
>
>November 17, 2006
>
>Growing so large that they are now called 
>factory farms, livestock feedlots are poorly 
>regulated, pose health and ecological dangers 
>and are responsible for deteriorating quality of 
>life in America's and Europe's farm regions, 
>according to a series of scientific studies published this week.
>
>Feedlots are contaminating water supplies with 
>pathogens and chemicals, and polluting the air 
>with foul-smelling compounds that can cause 
>respiratory problems, but the health of their 
>neighbors goes largely unmonitored, the reports concluded.
>
>The international teams of environmental 
>scientists also warned that the livestock 
>operations were contributing to the rise of 
>antibiotic-resistant germs, and that the 
>proximity of poultry to hogs could hasten the spread of avian flu to humans.
>
>Feedlots are operations in which hundreds — 
>often thousands — of cattle, hogs or poultry are 
>confined, often in very close quarters. About 
>15,500 medium to large livestock feedlots 
>operate in the United States in what is an 
>approximately $80-billion-a-year industry.
>
>Although the reports focused largely on Iowa and 
>North Carolina hog and poultry operations, 
>California has more than 2,000 facilities with 
>at least 300 livestock animals each, half of 
>them with more than 1,000, according to a 2002 
>estimate by the U.S. Environmental Protection 
>Agency. Dairies, most of them in the San Joaquin 
>Valley, dominate the industry in California.
>
>Led by Peter Thorne, director of the University 
>of Iowa's Environmental Health Sciences Research 
>Center, the researchers outlined the need for 
>more stringent regulations and surveillance of water and air near feedlots.
>
>"There was general agreement among all [the 
>scientists] that the industrialization of 
>livestock production over the past three decades 
>has not been accompanied by commensurate 
>modernization of regulations to protect the 
>health of the public or natural, public-trust 
>resources, particularly in the U.S.," wrote 
>Thorne, a professor of toxicology and environmental engineering.
>
>The findings were from a consensus of experts 
>from the United States, Canada and northern 
>Europe who convened in Iowa two years ago for a 
>workshop funded by the federal government to 
>address environmental and health issues related 
>to large livestock operations. Six reports, 
>written by three dozen scientists mostly from 
>the American Midwest and Scandinavia, were 
>published this week in the online version of the 
>scientific journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
>
>Among their recommendations are limits on the 
>population density of animals and mandatory 
>extensive environmental reviews for new 
>feedlots. They also recommended a ban on the use 
>of antibiotics to promote animal growth, and 
>that the drugs be available to farmers only through prescriptions.
>
>In a new area of concern, the scientists said 
>they were worried about the danger of a flu 
>pandemic spread by feedlots with both hogs and 
>poultry, and recommended new regulations to set 
>minimum distances between the two.
>
>Farm industry representatives said they were not 
>familiar with the new reports and could not 
>address specific findings or recommendations. 
>But they said that many environmental 
>improvements had already been made, and that 
>some experts at universities had said the health risks were minor.
>
>"The livestock industry has been under very 
>intense scrutiny over the past 10 years, and as 
>a result, has gone to great lengths and very 
>high expense to try to improve their 
>environmental record, across the board," said 
>Don Parrish, the American Farm Bureau 
>Federation's senior director of regulatory relations.
>
>"We've definitely improved our game over the 
>past 10 years," Parrish said, and most livestock 
>owners "are being very sensitive to their 
>neighbors and doing the best job they can."
>
>Many of the risks come from the sheer volume of 
>manure. Livestock excrete 13 times more waste 
>than humans — 133 million tons per year in the 
>United States — and some individual feedlots 
>produce as much waste as entire cities.
>
>The American Farm Bureau Federation maintains 
>that almost every state regulates the amount of 
>manure applied to the land to protect water supplies.
>
>But the new reports criticized the current techniques.
>
>"Generally accepted livestock waste management 
>practices do not adequately or effectively 
>protect water resources from contamination with 
>excessive nutrients, microbial pathogens and 
>pharmaceuticals present in the waste," the scientists reported.
>
>The number of large livestock operations has 
>surged in the last two decades, and farms with 
>more than 500 hogs now account for 
>three-quarters of the U.S. inventory. In Iowa, 
>the average number of hogs per farm increased 
>from 250 to 1,430 between 1980 and 2000.
>
>California has more than 2,000 dairies, mostly 
>in Tulare and Merced counties, and many have 
>thousands of cows each. But the health risks to 
>the dairy workers and their neighbors have gone 
>unstudied, said Frank Mitloehner, director of 
>the UC Davis Agricultural Air Emissions Center, 
>who was not involved in the new reports.
>
>UC Davis is launching a five-year study, led by 
>Mitloehner, at dairies in Tulare and Merced 
>counties, to examine the threat from air 
>pollutants. Among the air pollutants from 
>feedlots are ammonia; fine particles of manure, 
>feed, soil and bacteria that can lodge in lungs; 
>and endotoxin, which can inflame respiratory 
>tissues and trigger asthma, bronchitis and allergies.
>
>"There is potential for health effects, but in 
>order to find out the intensity of them, we need 
>to conduct these studies," Mitloehner said.
>
>One of the new reports says a serious impact of 
>feedlots "is their disruption of quality of life 
>for neighboring residents," mostly in low-income and nonwhite communities.
>
>"More than an unpleasant odor, the smell can 
>have dramatic consequences for rural communities 
>whose lives are rooted in enjoying the 
>outdoors," says the report, compiled by 
>researchers in Iowa, Illinois and North 
>Carolina. "The highly cherished values of 
>freedom and independence associated with life 
>oriented toward the outdoors gives way to 
>feelings of violation and infringement
. Homes 
>become a barrier agaiinst the outdoors that must be escaped."
>
>In water supplies, the biggest problems are 
>nitrates and fecal bacteria, although experts 
>have also recently discovered animal antibiotics 
>and other drugs in waterways. The scientists 
>recommended that private wells, which largely 
>are unregulated, be monitored carefully near the factory farms.
>
>The EPA was sued in 1989 by an environmental 
>group, the Natural Resources Defense Council, 
>for failing to regulate feedlots under the Clean 
>Water Act. Fewer than 40% have permits for 
>discharging pollutants because of EPA exemptions 
>and lax federal and state enforcement, according 
>to a 2003 report by what was then the General Accounting Office.
>
>In June, the Bush administration proposed new 
>regulations that would require feedlots to 
>develop plans for controlling manure and obtain Clean Water Act permits.
>
>
>----------
><mailto:marla.cone at latimes.com>marla.cone at latimes.com