Editorial in today's NY Times

[Guest guest]

This is the lead editorial in today¹s times. You can read it at their site

if you¹re a member (free).

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/30/opinion/30FRI1.html

 

 

The Curse of Factory Farms

 

Factory farms have become the dominant method of raising meat in America.

Agribusiness loves the apparent efficiency that comes with raising thousands

of animals in a single large building where they are permanently confined in

stalls or pens. Most of the human labor can be automated. It takes less

land, because the animals live cheek by jowl their entire lives. And it

allows the concentration of enormous stocks of animals in the hands of a few

corporations whose goal is usually complete vertical integration ‹ the

control of production from birth through butchering and packaging.

 

These plants, called confined animal feeding operations, or CAFO's, now

exist in 44 states. The question is how to minimize their harmful

environmental effects and prevent them from putting a final squeeze on

smaller farmers, especially those who raise animals in more traditional,

grass-based ways.

 

Factory farms have taken root mainly where zoning laws were lax or

nonexistent, or in states where citizens were prevented from filing suits

against agricultural operations. The inevitable byproduct of huge

concentrations of animals is huge concentrations of manure, which is stored

in open lagoons and eventually sprayed on farmland, though there is usually

far more manure than local fields can absorb. In such quantities, manure

becomes a toxic substance. Spills are always a risk, as is groundwater

contamination. The bigger danger is airborne contamination of water from

ammonia, which rises from the lagoons and falls into low-lying rivers and

estuaries.

 

A new report from the Sierra Club, titled " The Rapsheet on Animal

Factories, " draws a vivid portrait of the environmental violations caused by

factory farms, many of which are owned by some of America's largest

agricultural corporations, including ConAgra, Tyson Foods, Cargill and

Smithfield Farms. What brought these factory farms to the Sierra Club's

attention was a pattern of violations that resulted in criminal charges and

fines, most often caused by toxic spills.

 

The federal government should at minimum serve as a neutral umpire in the

fight between big and small farmers. In the case of factory farms it should

try to control their threat to the environment through broader, more

vigorous application of the Clean Water Act, typically invoked only in the

most egregious cases. And it should never use taxpayer money to encourage a

method of farming that works against the public's desire for open space,

biodiversity and clean, non-malodorous air.

 

Unfortunately, the government has been putting its weight behind big

business. The Environmental Protection Agency has issued basically toothless

rules under which the states give permits to any factory farm that comes up

with a plan for handling manure, mainly by building larger lagoons to hold

it. The new farm bill that President Bush signed in May adds further insult

by paying farmers up to $450,000 apiece to help them comply with regulations

that don't mean much to begin with.

 

The regressive farm bill also continues the government's policy of throwing

its weight behind the already hefty industrial farms and helping to drive

smaller farmers out of business. In Iowa, for instance, the number of hog

farms has dropped from 64,500 in 1980 to 10,500 in 2000, though the number

of hogs, about 15 million, remains the same. The public's money, in this

fight, is going in the opposite direction of the public interest.

 

The concentration typical of factory farms extends to the genetic level as

well. The poultry and pork industries depend on just a handful of different

types of turkeys, chickens and pigs, and the beef industry is headed in that

direction too. There has been a precarious narrowing of the genetic

resources that supply most of America's meat.

 

The danger is that of an inverted pyramid, an enormous number of animals all

resting on the same narrow genetic base, exposing them to the risk of

catastrophic disease and requiring an inappropriate use of antibiotics to

ensure their health. Genetic diversity is no less important in domesticated

animals, like hogs and chickens, than it is in wild animals. The best way to

guarantee it is to guarantee a diversity of farmers.