It started out so promising.
In January, Iowa Rep. Mark Kuhn, D-Charles City, predicted that this
year the new Democratic-controlled Legislature would take a look at
Iowa’s livestock confinement operations laws and put in place more
stringent environmental controls.
Then about two weeks ago we
were happy to report that Kuhn had sponsored a bill that would increase
the separation distances for new confinement buildings from homes,
public use resources, water sources, businesses, schools and churches.
And the plan would reduce by half — from 2,500 hogs to 1,250 — the size
of an operation that is required to have a state construction permit.
The
bill was backed by major environmental groups and passed the House
Environmental Protection Committee. But it is now under consideration
by the House Agriculture Committee and facing a much more hostile
audience. Kuhn said that by his count, four out of five members on that
committee are against new livestock regulations.
Nathaniel Baer,
a lobbyist and advocate for Environment Iowa, said Democrats campaigned
last year on a promise of addressing Iowa air and water quality, and
livestock regulations have to be a part of that.
But, “we just
don’t see urgency from the subcommittee to tackle this,” Baer said,
sharing his disappointment in what looks like a committee assignment
designed to kill the bill.
“We were optimistic that a bill to
really improve state standards for air and water quality would have the
support of both leadership and rank-and-file members,” Baer said.
Opponents
to changing the law argue that it would restrict where livestock
facilities can be located. Well, yeah. Isn’t that the idea — to stop
facilities from being built in places where a manure spill or other
problem runs too high a risk of contaminating nearby surface or
groundwater or other important resources?
The fact is that there
are still plenty of places in Iowa where confinement operations can be
built safely and profitably. For example, just last week the Cerro
Gordo County Board of Supervisors recommended to the state that it
approve permits for a new hog confinement facility 3½ miles northwest
of Thornton.
Tom Drzycimski, county administrative officer, told
the supervisors the proposed 10-acre, 6,240-pig finishing operation by
Christensen Farms Midwest LLC meets the state master matrix on air,
water and community impact and that the overall score was above the
minimum requirement.
But other places are less appropriate for
livestock operations. Kuhn’s law would extend new protections to
cities, tourist destinations, planned housing developments and
farrowing operations. Under the proposal, confinements could not be
built within one mile of a tourist destination, or within two miles of
“high quality water resource” tourist destinations such as Clear Lake.
Just
because Iowa is a “farm state” doesn’t mean that every farmer has a
right to plop down a livestock operation wherever he or she wants,
regardless of the potential impact on the environment and the neighbors.
Iowa
Democrats should stay true to their promise and at least give this
reasonable approach to livestock siting a chance for a full debate on
the House floor where each representative’s vote can be recorded for
public scrutiny. To kill it off in committee is the chicken’s way out.
