By SHELLY STRAUTZ-SPRINGBORN
Michigan Correspondent

LANSING, Mich. — Identical bills were recently introduced in Michigan’s House and Senate, calling for a five-year moratorium on new or expanding concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs).

Both Senate Bill 444, introduced by Sen. Ray Basham (D-Dist. 8), and House Bill 4667, introduced by Rep. Mark Meadows (D-Dist. 69), have been assigned to the Agriculture Committee in their respective chambers. Both committees received testimony on the bills this week.

State Rep. Judy Emmons (R-Dist. 70), attended the May 23 House Agriculture Committee meeting and said the testimony was “interesting.

“They have some strange ideas,” she said of comments made by a representative of the Sierra Club regarding the spreading of animal manure.

The legislation would establish several restrictions, including: Establish a five-year moratorium on new or expanded (by the number of animals) CAFOs in the state; confirm in statute that CAFOs with more than 1,000 animals must have a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit in order to operate; prohibit the transfer of existing CAFO permits to CAFO owners/operators who have been found to be in violation of the law; and require the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to submit a comprehensive report to the legislature detailing the status of CAFOs in Michigan.

Edmore-area Attorney Trent Hilding of Agricultural & Rural Advocates PLC, who represents a variety of agricultural clients, said of the proposed legislation, “No other industry is regulated like this. It’s ridiculous.”

The legislation “means the mid-sized producer can’t go in to update their facilities like they want to or need to. I think that by passing a law that says you can’t grow or expand will hurt the overall Michigan economy, by not allowing the job expansion and future employment opportunities in larger operations.”

Hilding said the legislation “does nothing more than single out farmers. Nobody ever mentions limiting municipalities. I think those are sufficient enough to regulate the industry without slapping the moratorium on,” he said.

Michigan Farm Bureau is lobbying for its position and issued a statement calling the legislation unreasonable.

“Imposing a moratorium – based on arbitrary and unscientific reasoning – on the growth and expansion of agriculture, Michigan’s second largest industry, is unreasonable, economically
irresponsible and unfair punishment to Michigan farmers who are complying with environmental laws,” the statement said.

“The effect of implementing a moratorium on Michigan’s $24 billion livestock industry is akin to prohibiting General Motors and Ford from building vehicles for the next five years until they perfect their efficiency for alternative fuels. It’s an overzealous action that is imprudent at a time when our state’s economy is in dire straits.

“The proposed legislation gives the state’s existing livestock farmers no incentive to continue doing business in Michigan, and it tells farm families who want to grow to allow the next generation to join the farm that they are not welcome in Michigan.

“Other sectors of Michigan’s $60 billion agriculture industry are interdependent on livestock, so this legislation threatens a long line of people and businesses, ranging from Michigan’s crop farmers to equipment dealers and the state’s growing ethanol industry,” the state’s largest farm organization added.

“In addition, the legislation arbitrarily paints all farms of a certain size as bad actors and prevents the DEQ from doing its job of sorting those farms in compliance with environmental laws from those farms which are not. The Michigan Farm Bureau supports effective and consistent enforcement of environmental laws by the DEQ against farmers who knowingly, willfully and/or negligently pollute. The DEQ has the ability to go after these bad actors, and the agency’s resources should be focused on this task. In other words, the state should go after legitimate violators, but not treat all large farms like criminals.”

“(Michigan already has) permits and restrictions on farms over 1,000 animals,” Emmons said. “To put a moratorium on it might indicate that they think the DEQ is not doing a good job of what they’re doing.

“Plus, you’re restricting one avenue of business in a state that has an economy that is faltering,” she added. “The two industries in this state that are Number Two and Number Three are tourism and agriculture. We had better think long and hard about promoting both of those businesses.

“Just putting a blanket moratorium on expansion or new CAFOs is just a knee-jerk reaction – it’s not addressing what a perceived issue is in a manner of due diligence,” Emmons said.

This farm news was published in the June 2, 2007 issue of Farm World, serving Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan and Tennessee.