Technically Speaking

Is My Ranch a CAFO?

By Duane Gangwish

In some specific cases the answer is yes, but it depends! It will take some explaining and you may not be aware of how your marketing decisions may have impacted the answer and created a very significant financial liability.

First, however, I want to make a point in an attempt to stir you to action. It is unfortunate that the environmental rules resulting from numerous lawsuits and crafted to please the most ardent environmentalist intent on making it tough on the “mega factory farm” have the potential to inflict the highest financial and emotional burden on the “small” producer.

In 1998, the Legislature embarked on a very significant re-write of the Livestock Waste Management Act in LB 1209. One objective of this campaign was to have all livestock operations request an inspection to determine if a Livestock Waste Control Facility would be required. The bill attempted to incentivize livestock operators to request inspection by providing a two-year “grace” period (until Jan. 1, 2000) where the “request for inspection” amounted to filling out a one-page form and paying a $50 fee. Following the grace period, the Legislature stated that the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) shall access a “late fee” of between $50 and $500 per month with each month being a separate offense.

During the two-year grace period, ranchers would have correctly interpreted that LB 1209 did not apply to them because Section 1, sub-paragraph (7) said, “Livestock operation means the feeding or holding of beef cattle, horses, swine, sheep, poultry and other livestock in buildings, lots or pens which normally are not used for the growing of crops or vegetation but does not include the holding of cattle in calving operations for less than 90 days per year.”

Six years later, after EPA promulgated the 2003 Federal CAFO rule and, with the enactment of LB 916 in July of 2004, the terminology changed from Livestock Operation to Animal Feeding Operation (a location where beef cattle, dairy cattle, horses, swine, sheep, poultry or other livestock have been, are or will be stabled or confined and fed or maintained for a total of 45 days or more in any 12-month period and crops, vegetation, forage growth or post-harvest residues are not sustained in the normal growing season over any portion of the location).

The other change resulting from LB 916 was that the categorization changed from Classes (I, II, III, IV & V) to Small (0-299), Medium (300-999) and Large (1,000 and larger).

Because of the new terminology, many ranches and all feeders were “newly defined” Animal Feeding Operations (AFOs). And, if when you gather and hold 300 or more cattle for 45 days or more where there is no permanent vegetation or crop residue present, you were then obligated to file the form, pay the fee and request DEQ to inspect your operation.

Drought and various commerce-related issues have increased the number of ranchers who now qualify as AFOs. At this juncture, those most impacted by the current late-fee language are the smaller family feeders and many, if not most, ranchers.

NC is working to advance a legislative solution to this dilemma. The message is, stay tuned and be informed.   Y  Duane Gangwish is NC’s vice president of Technical Services.