Hog Confinement Controversy Let's Weigh In By: Brandon Vogt

The Driving Forces of Change Economics Huge variation in costs Purchasing pigs on open market Price of corn/feed Market price at packing plant New Concepts/Technology All In/All Out, Split Sex or Phase Feeding Controlled Climate Liquid manure = Fertilizer = Liquid Gold

The Driving Forces of Change Marketing Agreements/Contract Production Stable supply of consistent quality hogs Standardized nutrition Standardized health programs Streamlined transportation Management resources Set income Integrator assessed gains or losses

The Driving Forces of Change Values of Society Demand for more sustainable environmental system from animal agriculture Consumer Demands Customers want a more consistent, top quality end-product that is competitively priced

Effects of Change Pork packers now control over 50% of the total industry marketing contract volume. Smithfield Foods is the largest pork packer Smaller producers leaving the industry 1980 – 670,000 farms produced hogs 1994 – 236,000 farms produced hogs

Effects of Change Expansion & Industrialization led to Hog Confinements/Factory Farms Change in Community & Neighbor perception Loss of trust/accountability Concerns over potential health impacts Water Quality – surface and groundwater contamination Complaints regarding odor Anticipation of lower property values

Effects of Change Increased County revenue New job opportunities High capital investment – high property tax Expanded customer base – increased sales tax revenues New job opportunities Stricter rules and regulations

Balancing Act – Finding the Ecotone Begin with the End in Mind Quality of Life has different meanings to different people Neighbors have the right to outdoor activities without dealing with offensive odors Producers have the right to grow their operations in order to sustain their livelihood

Balancing Act – Finding the Ecotone Begin with the End in Mind Consult professionals – design new facilities based on engineers recommendations Increased separation distances – respect the residential neighborhood Communication – Attend community events, planning and zoning commission meetings, County supervisor meetings

Balancing Act – Finding the Ecotone Begin with the End in Mind Improved Technology Biocover/Biofilter – reduce odor and emisions Manure Injection – reduce run-off and odor Nutrient Management Plans Phosphorus Index Assesses potential for Phosphorus run-off Reduces soil erosion

Voices of Change Listen to the Voices! Society Demands Attention Asking for safe, clean water supply Asking for safe, clean air supply Consumers Demand Attention Asking for top-quality pork products at competitive prices Asking for safe food supply

Voices of Change Listen to the Voices! Agriculture is answering the call Following Best Management Practices Following DNR approved NMP’s (P-Index) Injecting manure Soil sampling Reduced tillage Following DNR rules for mortality handling (24 hrs) Implementing odor control methods

Voices of Change Listen to the Voices! Agriculture is answering the call Attending training programs Pork Quality Assurance Plus Transport Quality Assurance Certified Manure Applicator Training Animal Welfare Training HACCP (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point) training for packers/employees

Summary Voices to be heard involve 3 very different pitches Proponents of Ag/Animal Production Opponents of Ag/Animal Production Customers/Consumers If emotion is removed the goal becomes clear for all

Summary Common Goal/Mission Statement: To produce a safe, consistent, top quality pork product at competitive prices that can be added to the choices for our global food supply. This goal will be achieved by ethical, humane treatment of animals and laborers and will be accomplished through the use of new technologies and improved techniques that will have little or no significant impacts on our environment or quality of life.

Summary Change is Inevitable – (No one said it would be easy!) Communication is KEY Think Proactive, not Reactive Coexistence of diverse groups likely means compromise on all sides – (Compromise is not a bad thing!)

Questions - ??? Thank you.

Works Cited Durrenberger, E. Paul and Thu, Kendall M. “The Expansion of Large Scale Hog Farming in Iowa: The Applicability of Goldschmidt’s Findings Fifty Years Later.” Human Organization 55.4 (1996): 409-415. Web. 15 Sept. 2011 http://sfaa.metapress.com.proxy.lib.iastate.edu:2048/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,3,16;journal,60,278;linkingpublicationresults,1:113218,1 Hayenga, M., J. Lawrence, and T. Schroeder. "Churning out the links: vertical integration in the beef and pork industries." Choices (Ames, Iowa) Choices : the magazine of food, farm and resource issues 16.4 (2001): 19-23. Agricola. EBSCO. Web. 15 Sept. 2011. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.iastate.edu:2048/ehost/detail?vid=6&hid=13&sid=99f8a749-b70d-4b73-8146-f108e4faf1cc%40sessionmgr13&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=agr&AN=IND23270180 Hogberg, M. G., S. L. Fales, F. L. Kirschenmann, M. S. Honeyman, J. A. Miranowski, and P. Lasley. "Interrelationships of Animal Agriculture, the Environment, and Rural Communities." Journal of Animal Science. Web. 15 Sept. 2011. http://jas.fass.org/content/83/13_suppl/E13 Hurt, C. "Industrialization in the pork industry." Choices (Ames, Iowa) Choices : the magazine of food, farm and resource issues 9.4 (1994): 9-13. Agricola. EBSCO. Web. 13 Sept. 2011. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.iastate.edu:2048/ehost/detail?vid=10&hid=25&sid=941414ea-d5cd-4e79-a824-012053bc7494%40sessionmgr13&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=agr&AN=IND20491439 Tonsor, Glynn “Economic Impacts of Hog Operations.” Animal Agriculture and the Environment: Web. 19 Sept. 2011 http://www.animalagteam.msu.edu/uploads/files/20/Economic.pdf