State and Local Control
State and local governments sometimes attempt to regulate farming techniques in an effort to address food safety and other issues such as environmental concerns. Preemption can be a barrier to state and local governments acting in this manner. The federal laws discussed above may preempt states from enacting their own requirements and states have preempted local governments from addressing farming practices in their own communities. Three examples of state and local governments attempting to address animal production and farming practices are discussed in this section.
CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATION LAWS
The industrialization of farming in the 1970s led to the creation of Animal Feeding Operations (AFOs), which are production operations where animals are raised in confined spaces for 45 days or more in any 12-month period. In AFOs, animals do not graze but rather are fed and are kept in close proximity to other animals, to their urine and excrement, and to dead animals.[1] A Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) is a type of AFO that meets additional criteria created by the EPA based on the number of animals and the facility’s contribution of pollutants.[2] CAFOs tend to be industrial-scale productions. The EPA is the primary federal regulator of CAFOs and individual states have additional laws.
The National Association of Local Boards of Health issued a report noting that the increase in CAFOs has led to growing environmental problems in many communities.[3] A great many of these problems stem from the fact that CAFOs have difficulty storing or managing the excess manure, which can negatively affect ground and surface water quality and create air pollution. There are pathogens on animal manure and emissions from degrading manure and other processes produce air pollutants, including ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, methane, particulate matter, and greenhouse gases; these can negatively affect air quality in the surrounding communities and contribute to climate change. Due to health and safety concerns, many local governments have tried to regulate CAFOs. One barrier has been that all 50 states have some form of a “right-to-farm” law, which provides legal protections to farmers if they abide by certain basic requirements determined by each state. As a consequence, local governments have had mixed results in their ability to regulate CAFOs within their communities. For example, Missouri does not preempt local public health regulations so a Linn County, Missouri permitting scheme for CAFOs was not preempted.[4] However, a Fort Worth County, Iowa regulation that sought to address public health issues from CAFOs was found to be preempted by Iowa’s laws regulating land use for animal farms.[5] Some states have created stricter or looser right-to-farm regulations in the face of CAFOs. This is largely in response to ongoing debates regarding whether to categorize and regulate CAFOs as agricultural or industrial uses, and whether stricter rules are necessary to protect the surrounding community or whether those rules could hurt farmers.[6]
- [1] Environmental Protection Agency. What is a CAFO? http://www.epa.gov/rgytgrnj/water/cafo/index.htm
- [2] Environmental Protection Agency. Animal Feeding Operations Overview. http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/afo/index.cfm
- [3] Carrie Hribar. National Association of Local Boards of Health. Understanding ConcentratedAnimal Feeding Operations and Their Impact on Communities. 2010. Mark Schultz, Ed..
- [4] Borron v. Farrenkopf, 5 S.W.3d 618 (Court of Appeals of Missouri, Western District 1999).
- [5] Worth County Friends of Agriculture. v. Worth County, 688 N.W.2d 257 (Iowa 2004).
- [6] Tom Henry. Stricter rules for agriculture debated. Toledo Blade. August 31, 2014. http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2014/08/31/Stricter-rules-for-agriculture-debated.html
