September 23, 2002 | Issue 39 | Volume 74
Hog Industry Insider, 9/23/02
BY MICHAEL HOWIE
Feedstuffs Managing Editor

 Matrix presented

 The master matrix being developed by a technical advisory
 committee in Iowa was presented to the Environmental Protection
 Commission (EPC) at a meeting last week in Clear Lake, Iowa.

 Through much difficulty and many meetings, committee reached
 consensus on most of the matrix but could not reach an agreement
 on two mitigating factors: non-therapeutic antibiotics and
 demonstrated community support within a radius equal to double
 the minimum separation distances to neighboring residents.

 In recommendations from the committee to the Department of
 Natural Resources (DNR), the committee said there was very strong
 support and opposition to the antibiotic issue, and without a
 consensus, it was not included in the final list presented to
 DNR.

 As for the second item, there was general committee support for
 its inclusion, but some members felt strongly that it should be
 included only if the demonstrated support represented 100% of
 those affected and that lesser demonstrations of support could be
 a deterrent to the community. Others felt strongly that something
 less than 100% support would still have a positive mitigation
 impact on the community. Since the issue couldn't be resolved, it
 was left off,too.


 The committee also discussed minimum thresholds for "passing" the
 matrix, but due to time constraints, the discussion was not
 adequate enough to reach a consensus.

 As a result, DNR made recommendations to EPC regarding minimum
 thresholds. DNR recommended that applicants obtain a minimum
 overall score of about 432 points of the current version, 50% of
 all points available. However, it also recommended minimum scores
 in air quality, water quality and community concern
 subcategories. To pass the matrix, an applicant must have 30% of
 available points in each of those categories. Robin Pruisner,
 coordinator of animal feeding operations with DNR, said, for
 example, if a proposed facility is remotely located, it may
 easily be able to achieve 432 total points, but meeting minimum
 air, water and community standards would still be necessary.

 That idea was supported by committee members Susan Heathcote,
 Iowa Environmental Council; Harlan Hanson, Iowa State Association
 of Counties; Aaron Heley Lehman, Iowa Farmers Union, and Mary
 Gilchrist, University of Iowa.

 Others did not agree with that approach. They included committee
 members Calvin Rozenboom, Iowa Farm Bureau Federation; John
 Korslund and Joe Lafoon, on behalf of the Iowa Cattlemen's Assn.,
 Iowa Dairy Products Assn., Iowa Pork Producers Assn., Iowa
 Poultry Assn. and Iowa Turkey Federation; Brent Halling, Iowa
 Department of Agriculture & Land Stewardship, and John Lawrence,
 Iowa State University.

 In a statement presented to DNR, those committee members said
 they believe a single score from the matrix should be used,
 because that is what was outlined in the legislation.

 Some commissioners said at the meeting, however, that they
 believe requiring points in all three categories is fair and a
 good way to get producers to think more about how their
 operations affect the surrounding area.

 Next step

 EPC, which went through the proposed matrix line by line, has a
 month to mull it over and will address the matrix at its October
 meeting. In the meantime, Pruisner said, DNR will continue to
 hone the document.

 Prior to the EPC meeting last week, she said, DNR took a sample
 of 15 existing sites and ran them through the matrix to see how
 they would come up. She said that helped to determine initial
 thresholds. She said DNR believes minimum thresholds on the
 matrix should be above what has been done in the past because the
 intent is to improve hog facilities -- to set a higher standard.

 To help hone the document, she said DNR will run as many existing
 sites through the matrix so "good" and "bad" sites can be
 identified and to help fine-tune minimum thresholds. In addition,
 some subcategories need to be further developed and better
 defined.

 Once EPC agrees to a final version of the matrix, it will publish
 the document for public comments. The matrix, according to the
 legislation, must be in place by March 1, 2003.

 Although some of the intent of the matrix is to take the politics
 out of the approval process for livestock operations, there has
 been plenty of politics to get to this point, and there will
 likely be more before the final rule is published and takes
 effect.

If producers feel the matrix is fair in the end, it would be a
 big help in negotiating the approval process. The interim matrix,
 approved earlier this year and already in use under an
 "emergency" rule, has made the process smoother for some proposed
 sites.

 Although county boards can still hold meetings and question
 operators, particularly on manure management plans, it does not
 have the final say on the proposal. Instead, DNR does -- although
 county boards can submit suggestions to DNR. Although this may
 frustrate county boards, it will also take the pressure off them.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For SC email list T-and-C, send: GET TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS.CURRENT
to [log in to unmask]