Air and Water Quality are the 1,000 lb. Economic Gorillas

In Our Opinion, Counties Need More Controls The Joplin Globe, Friday April 20, 2007 came out and said it,
1. State legislators should do whatever they can to give counties greater control over where large livestock and fowl operations can locate.
2. Counties should have the power to be restrictive if CAFOs threaten the quality of water, air and, under many circumstances, rural lifestyle.
3. All counties should have health ordinances on their books to protect their constituencies.
4. Many farmers and rural residents see factory farms as potential spoilers of water and air quality and of quality of life.
5. Air and water quality promise to be the 1,000-pound economic gorillas of the future.
6. The Joplin region needs a large water impoundment to guarantee enough water for this growing area. What it doesn’t need are gagging odors permeating the air and animal wastes jeopardizing rivers and creeks. Only local control can guarantee that.

Let's get behind The Joplin Globe's bold challenge. The Jasper County commissioners have expressed little interest in developing local CAFO rules. In a related article, The Joplin Globe quotes Commissioner Honey as saying that the county does not have the expertise or the money for workers to enforce CAFO rules, which would have to be adopted as part of a health ordinance because the county does not have zoning and planning. Hello Jasper County Commissioners Jim Honey, Darieus Adams and John Bartosh. Maybe it is time to start talking about County Zoning and County Health Ordinances. Japer County needs zoning and health ordinances. This issue needs to be moved up on the priority list. This time let's be proactive, before the next CAFO or landfill files for an application. How many more Jasper County streams have to be declared unfit and dangerous before we take the initiative to take control?

MO Senate Bill 534

Missouri Senate Bill 534, proposed by southwest Missouri Sen. Gary Nodler, would target persistent offenders who violate air and water pollution regulations. This legislation would apply to CAFOs as well as recycling companies that process animal parts.

Recent headlines:
Substitute CAFO legislation draws critics The Joplin Globe, April 9, 2007

Modifies the law relating to concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and the penalties for offenses perpetrated by these operations

Political hot potato heats up for CAFO bill The Joplin Globe, March 24, 2007

Committee on Legislative Research Oversight Division Fiscal Note

The Facts about CAFOs, Local Control,

The Facts about CAFOs, Local Control, and Health Ordinances Missouri Rural Crisis Center, Columbia, Missouri provides an excellent portrait of the CAFO crisis. They conclude that current Missouri standards are NOT sufficient for industrial livestock operations, after reviewing health risks, economic development, property rights and defining what it means to be a good neighbor.

Zoning Issue for 4,800 hog farm (Barton County)

The Joplin Globe, Saturday, March 30, 2007, reported that the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) received an application from Francis Forst, Kenoma LLC, for a 4,800 hog farm on 11 acres in Richland Township, Barton County, MO. Initially the application was for 4,800, but after Darrick Steen, Agriculture Chief for MDNR's water protection program, explained that the proposed number of animals would subject the operation to strict regulatory oversight, the application was amended to 2,400 sows.

The concern of neighbors is the combination of the proposed operation -and- the existing 4,500 head cattle operation of Kevin van der Poel, Focal Dairy, in Richland Township and Vernon County. The operations would be in close proximity to Pettis Creek, a tributary of the North Fork of the Spring River.

John Stocksdale, Doylesport Township, Barton County, passed zoning and planning eight years ago. He suppported the proposition because citizens were concerned about the impact of concentrated animal feeding operations, or CAFOs, on land and property values. He said there hasn’t been any controversy with the proposition since it passed and the board just makes sure everyone in the township understands the rules. The result, Stockdale said, is safety for everyone in the township. “Instead of taking away people’s rights, it protects them,” Stockdale said.

Election Results:
Richland Township Zoning
Yes . . 167. . . . . . . .
No . . . 39. . . . . . . .
The Lamar Democrat, Wednesday, April 4, 2007