Peak & Prairie
Rocky
Mountain Chapter's
Online Newsletter
April / May 1998
Capitol Report
by Sandra Eid, Legislative Coordinator
The Changing Face of Livestock Production
If the measure of a bill's importance is determined by the number of concerned citizens
appearing to testify, then SB 98-88 is unquestionably the most important environmental
bill of the current legislative session. When it was heard on February 5, Eastern Plains
farmers and ranchers filled to overflowing the largest Senate committee room in the
Capitol. When the hearing was moved to another building to better accommodate the crowd,
it was still standing room only.
SB 98-88, Environmental Regulations for Swine Feedlots, sponsored by Sen. Joan Johnson
(D-Adams County) and Rep. Lewis Entz (R-Hooper), addresses a new type of livestock
production that is sweeping the nation--large-scale, confined production that is more akin
to factories than to traditional farms. The animals are moved along an assembly line to
market, with all the factors in their environment carefully controlled. But it is the size
of these operations that is most astounding. National Hog Farms in Weld County covers
27,000 acres and produces 320,000 pigs a year. A facility proposed for southern Utah would
produce one million pigs annually.
The waste generated on a daily basis by such an operation (more than one million gallons)
is equivalent to the waste generated by a city of several hundred thousand people. Manure
and process wastewater (the water used to clean the animals and flush the facility) is
usually collected in a holding tank or open pit (lagoon) and then applied to surrounding
crop land, supposedly to enhance production. According to GOVERNING magazine (February
1998) the Environmental Protection Agency "estimates that livestock manure causes as
much as 25 percent of surface water pollution nationwide."
In semi-arid Eastern Colorado the pollution of surface water is less threatening than the
pollution of groundwater, the sole source of drinking and irrigation water in that part of
the state. Two years ago citizens in Kit Carson County, faced with the arrival of Midwest
Hog Farms, petitioned the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission for classification of
their groundwater as domestic and agricultural-use quality and for the adoption of anti-
degradation standards. The commission made the requested classification but declined to
address the issue of degradation. Many of these same citizens were at the Capitol in
February to express their support for SB 98-88.
As introduced, the bill would require the permitting of large-scale factory hog farms by
the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. (Colorado is the only state in
the region that does not have a permit program for concentrated animal feeding operations
(CAFOs).) Permitted facilities would be required to comply with the following regulations:
submission of a swine waste management plan, financial assurance to cover the cost of
cleanup, reporting of spills and contamination, monitoring of the nitrogen and phosphorus
content of applied waste and the plants and soil to which it is applied and quarterly
reporting of the monitoring data. SB 98-88 would require process wastewater vessels and
lagoons to be covered to prevent emission of odorous gases and would establish a
rebuttable presumption that nitrogen or phosphorus would contaminate groundwater if
applied in a way that exceeded agronomic rates by more that 25 % in any quarter. The
Sierra Club strongly supports SB 98-88.
Not surprisingly, a quite different feedlot bill was introduced at the request of the
Colorado Cattle Feeders Association to ward off any meaningful regulation of CAFOs. HB
98-1308, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, sponsored by Rep. Matt Smith (R-Grand
Junction) and Sen. Don Ament (R-Iliff), calls for a "voluntary" partial permit
system--a regimen whereby CAFOs could self-select whether they would like to become
permitted facilities or continue to operate without permits. The Division of Water Quality
would have to prove the selection "wrong." The bill does not authorize any
permit fees. The Sierra Club strongly opposes HB 98-1308. We believe that all CAFOs should
be required to get permits, comply with the regulations attached to those permits and pay
the fees necessary to support a program that ensures compliance.
As of this writing, the fate of these two bills was undecided. However, we can expect many
citizens of Eastern Colorado to continue to demand action when the probability of a
polluted environment is so high. The Sierra Club should be ready to lend assistance in
this important effort.