Running head: BEHIND “BARN” DOORS 1

Behind “Barn” Doors: A Legal Analysis of Concentrated Animal Farming Operations

Angelle M Laboard

Legal Studies Academy

First Colonial High School

BEHIND BARN DOORS 2

Abstract

In this paper goes into detail about the impact of Concentrated Animal feeding operations and

the negative impact it has on the environment. I will start with the background and history of

concentrated animal feeding operations. Then i speak about the specific aspects of the impact of

CAFOs, such as health, the environment, the treatment of animals and workers. Then I talk about

the “benefits/positives” that the business sector and the CAFOs owners try and push. Then I talk

about the legal aspects of CAFOs and the laws that are currently set in place, which is followed

by the history of all the previous laws. Then I finish with the solutions to this issue.

Keywords:​ CAFOS, COncentrated Animal Feeding Operations, Factory farms, Discharge,

Pollution
BEHIND BARN DOORS 3

Behind “Barn” Doors: A Legal Analysis of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations

The United States is estimated to have hit an all time high of producing beef, at a

staggering 27.43 billion pounds by the end of the year, and the US is estimated to throw away

around twenty percent of that. This is due to the fact that the United States generally

overproduces food tremendously, and there should be no surprise. A number of people never

investigate thoroughly where the food they eat comes from and the process by which is created.

In fact it might be a little impermissible to ever think of such questions. The popular belief

within the citizens is that the government would not allow any harm to their citizens and properly

and humanely create the United States main proteins. That belief in fact is quite the opposite of

reality. The process by which meats are realistically being produced is sickening and disturbing.

Although there are some small local farms which allow animals to be raised correctly, there are

hundreds of concentrated animal feeding operations which mass produce animals like a China

shoe factory. The discharge of concentrated animal farms is creating an almost irreversible

damage to the environment by it limited regulations and lack of consideration of the environment

and the surrounding citizens.

Background

The EPA’s defines concentrated animal feeding operations(CAFOs) as follows,” an

agricultural enterprises where animals are kept and raised in confined situations”(citation). This

essentially means that they factory produce animals. They concentrate the animals into a giant

room, the ground is cement, they are separated to prevent them from killing each other because

of the hostile empty environment. They are in cages or stalls or just squished in the big room

where the animals do all their bodily functions like eating, using the bathroom, and dying. They
BEHIND BARN DOORS 4

mass produce animals for the pure purpose of trying to use the less money and they get the most

profit. There are about 450,000 farms with the United States where this “farming” method is

practice. (citation) There is no exact date when CAFOS were created, but they began to be

regulated in the 1970s. Beginning with the Clean Water Act created in 1972, in section 502 it

identifies CAFOs as point sources. That is when they began to be regulated by the National

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES), which is a permit program that was made to

set the regulations and baselines for CAFOS. From then on they are regulated by the NPDES or

an equivalent. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) then goes on to define CAFOs, to

assist the NPDES’s baselines. The definition and rules stayed stagnant for over twenty five years

but as times began to change and technology began to change, so did the rules to regulate it. In

2003, a law was passed that required all CAFOs to have a permit to release any type of

excretion.(citation)

Impact of Factory Farms

Although some aspects of CAFOs have several regulations, not all of the issues are

eliminated. There are several health problems that remain associated with CAFOs and several

pollutants affect the local residents and overall consumers. There are various impacts that

CAFOs have on the environment and on the economy.

Health Aspects

Even the smallest release of pollutants can build up much like a pipe begins trickle and

then it bursts. This means that everything remains normal to the eye for a while, but once the side

effects start to appear, the effects are hard-hitting and very detrimental. Air emissions from
BEHIND BARN DOORS 5

normal factories, for example, decreases the quality of air, affects the respiratory systems of local

residents, and can ultimately end up depleting the ozone layer if enough is released

There are elements that are included in the emissions within the air that could have a

positive connotations like phosphorus, nitrogen, ammonia. Those elements are included in cycles

that actually help or improve aspects of the environment and air quality, but the amount of these

elements being produced is abundant for the cycles. So then the elements become detrimental

and toxic for the air and local resident, which does not include the pathogens and other

interruptive pollutants being released.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention( date) , has said that ​these contaminants

are possibly connected to disrupt human health and can motivate and build up detrimental

organisms.

Environmental Aspects

Despite some common belief that CAFOs are regulated to the point where they are not

allowed to release a substantial amount of pollutants and/or do not release pollutants, they still

do. CAFOs in the past were required to have a permit to release anything, but that law has since

been overruled. Due to certain state governments viewing these laws, there are overly expensive

and unnecessary enacted. Mainly due to the fact that the farms hold thousands of animals, a

portion of the emissions are from the burning and holding of biodegradable materials. The type

of biodegradable product that is produced is animal manure and CAFOs ​create an overwhelming

amount of animal manure.

Majority of this manure remains sitting at a standstill and it becomes an immense odor

pollution and land pollution because it is too much to burn to create energy. The ​Sierra Club in
BEHIND BARN DOORS 6

fact is opposing the use of biodegradable energy by CAFOs because of that pollution that is

released by burning biodegradable products. They opposed this production because as mentioned

previous because of runoff that is being discharged into nearby waterways and surrounding

land,along with the hormones and antibiotics that are used in excess. (citation)

While growth hormones, antibiotics are added into it, manure does have its benefits to the

farm industry. However ,the amount that is produced from CAFOs has become detrimental. Due

to the fact that these CAFOs use cheap “feed” and the animals food is no longer naturally

produced the manure no longer has any reuse.

Treatment of Animals and Workers

Where the knowledge of factory farms begin for most people is social media. Although

they might know to properly identify CAFOs/ Factory farms, they have most likely been exposed

to the treatment the animals go through. This has most likely has been shown to them through

some type of IGTV video or Facebook video where it shows the brutal abuse of the animals with

farms. In an uneducated point of view while watching these videos is that they blame the

workers. The underlying idea that is not being conveyed within these horrifying videos is that

someone trained them to do such things or the complete opposite, they were not trained to handle

animals at all.

There are not many laws in place for treatment and training of workers. By law, farm

workers are not allowed to receive less than the minimum federally required wage unless there

are written exemption. This applies to whether the employer pays by the hour or by a piece rate.

Also all workers must be provided with documentation of total income and any
BEHIND BARN DOORS 7

subtractions/deductions from pay. In addition to written documentation of total income and

working conditions, it has to be in a language that the worker can understand(citation).

Deconstructing the “Positives” of CAFOs

The main reasoning behind lack of movement behind shutting down on CAFOs is the

business side of it. One thing that is known globally about the United States is the fact that

business comes first. Business in modern day society, has come before human rights,

environmental rights, and many other rights all in the name of the economy. So with big money

comes big money views with a blind spot in the name of maintaining. It specifically blocks the

inconvenient views of things, like making sure employees are trained correctly, so of course they

would also be blind the mistreatment of animals.

Some of the claims might include that the animals are actually treated better than they

were in the past. In their eyes, the animals residing inside year round with heat, and AC is a

benefit. They are privileged to not having to be in extreme heat and/or the freezing cold, and the

animals in the past were subject to such abuse. This is a fact in the sense that none of the other

surrounding circumstances are considered. Every mammal in the world can benefit from a

balancing creation such as insulated air. Not mentioned within those claims is the fact that the

animals are subject to sleeping on concrete slabs and in some cases inside a small stall or cage.

Another claim is that the water quality is improved by the animals being restrained in a

building rather than out in a pasture. The opposing sides believes that pasture farming creates

more water pollution, which would be correct if the factory farms correctly disposed of the

collected animals’ waste in a timely manner and quite frankly it is too much to use. This is
BEHIND BARN DOORS 8

proven to be incorrect in a different section where my research has shown that the overwhelming

amount that is being disposed is in fact very detrimental to the environment.

The opposing point of view has the idea of “odor pollution” as being a concept developed

by “city slickers” who have no idea what farms are supposed to smell like. If this is not

mentioned enough, manure even in small portions are unbearable. The opposing side completely

forgets that because there is way more animals being concentrated within a small animals. That

the amount of odor pollution is multiplied, to the point where the scent would be detected from a

very substantial distance away from the farm.

Legal Aspect of CAFOs

The law within the general meat industry is one of the main things that change with the

views of the government in the United States. The Democatic lawmakers tend to want to

preserve the environment while briefly mentioned in the previous section, Republicans tend to

want to preserve the economy at all costs. To be specific, there was a lot of Obama era

environmental laws were reversed by the Trump Administration. Laws that would have allowed

the environment to refrain from declining.

The definition of agriculture is “harvesting of any staple crops and/or any raising of

living animals or insects by any means and other practices, done by a farmer or on a farm in

connection to any farming operations, including prep for storage or delivery”(cite).Anything else

that does not have to do with farming operation is not part of agriculture.

History of All Current and Previous Laws

​In 2011 there was a law created referred to as “ag gag.” These laws did not allow

anyone to record during and within agricultural production. For a specific example in Idaho,
BEHIND BARN DOORS 9

when there was a video released from a dairy farm exposing the treatment of the animals, Idaho

created a law which made recording without the farms permission illegal and a felony crime if

caught. The Animal Legal Defense Fund disputed this law, saying that this law was against

multiple constitutional aspects, including the First Amendment which insures freedom of speech

and the Fourteenth Amendment which insures equal protection.

The court ruled in favor of the ALDF, for the reason that the idaho law did in fact violate

those protections. In more detail, these Ag Gag laws prevent any type of media publication of

animal treatment within farms. It stops advocates from exposing the cruelty of animals, food

safety problems, and unstable conditions of the workers and the environment in factory farms. It

was ”meant” to target the bystanders of animal abuse but really targets people who are trying to

end it. The “ag gag” law punishes people who take photos or videos of agriculture without

permission, applying for an agricultural job under false pretenses, and failing to report animal

abuse(cite).

Another law that used to regulate CAFOs is a permit issued by the NPDES was called a

Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans. The goal of CNMP’s was to reduce the amount of

discharge that of organic products and manure that is being released by CAFOs and requires

them to follow certain operations to lessen soil erosion. To observe whether these farms follow

the Natural Resources Conservation Service FOTG Section III quality criteria for Water Quality

& Soil Erosion in relation to releasing products. That if the farms are able to decrease unneeded

emptying of products, into the air that would negatively impact the air quality. Those things

which would ensue all over the city to federal laws, but consecutively satisfy the needs of the
BEHIND BARN DOORS 10

operators production goals (cite). This law was vacated by Waterkeepers Alliance versus the

EPA.

Waterkeepers Alliance versus EPA

The only regulations set for CAFOs were in the mid 1970s and with the constant

advancement of technology, standards are required to change at some point. Due to the fact that

without regulations, especially in the business sector the lack of such will cause the resources to

be exploited. This caused the EPA to create new laws in April 2003, and set to be a requirement

of the programs by February 2005 and the standards for the state to be created. This was needed

within the farming agriculture because the were really outdated and even did not match. The new

laws raised a lot of oppositions, from both sides., The anti-cafos like the Waterkeeper Alliance,

Sierra club were concerned for lack of restraint that they had created for the laws regarding the

CAFOs, while the CAFO industry was trying to cause these new laws to be reviewed for both

their sides.

This is where the Waterkeeper Alliance versus EPA case comes in. So on February 28,

2005, the decision was issued by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Many different

aspects of the new standards were overruled while a few were upheld. The decisions upheld

were, the EPA’s definition of agricultural stormwater. Which allowed the NPDES permits to

continue to be a thing. They denied the idea that the EPA chose the technology that the

guidelines are based off.

Popularity Of CAFOs
BEHIND BARN DOORS 11

Beginning in the 1970s when CAFOs were identified, is when the popularity of the

farming practice increased. This idea became widespread and seen as more convenient, less time

consuming, and increases profit. Due to the fact that popular culture increases most times

without any knowledge or research. Which is the way it is possible to discover a lot of practices

and products that cause severe damage quickly. So, it is much like general popular culture

because it increased, disregarding all the negative aspects of this practice.

Plant-Based Eating

Among the popularity rising about concern for the environment, a sub topic being

discussed is vegetarianism and veganism’s impact on the farming industry. The common

hypothesis is that by consuming less meat there would eventually be less meat for the meat

industry to farm. Due to the fact that agriculture culture for fruits and vegetables releases a lot

less pollution and uses only about two percent of land (citation), while animal farming takes up

to 26 percent (citation).

Going into further detail about the impact of plant based eating on CAFOs, is that in

every economic sector, the wealth of it is based on the demand for it. So by decreasing the

demand for meat the less meat that will be produced. Which of course would come with negative

effects, such as causing smaller farms to fail because of their ethical ways of creating their

products cost a lot more than what the CAFOs pay. Which is spoken about in an earlier section

of the paper.

Solutions

The solutions to this problem comes as follows. Plant based eating, which is more

attainable than what the common belief is. There are so many healthy non-meat options within
BEHIND BARN DOORS 12

every food market and food place. There is just this common belief that makes money seem like

a requirement to live by this lifestyle. When in fact it is a lifestyle is all over, internationally, and

it is not limited to the wealthier countries. By practicing this lifestyle, it will slowly increase and

the effects will be shown in the environment.

If it is possible we can create stricter laws to regulate cafos because there are several

loopholes the current CAFOs have. It would also be very helpful by advertising local farms, to

raise awareness of the local aspect and let them receive more profit so the larger CAFOs go out

of business. and also regulate the laws within CAFOs if they are evitable to exist. So that if does

not further damage the environment.

Conclusion

References

Anderson, P. (2016, March 3). CAFO alternatives and solutions. ​Duluth Reader.​ Retrieved from

http://duluthreader.com/articles/2016/03/03/6816_cafo_alternatives_and_solutions

Animal feeding operations (AFO) and concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO. (n.d.).

Natural Resources Conservation Service​ . Retrieved from

https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/about/

Cook, R. (2019, December 1). U.S. beef production by year. Retrieved from

https://beef2live.com/story-beef-production-year-0-107550

Dalton, J. (2019, July 29). Thousands of chickens die in heatwave at farm supplying major UK

supermarkets. ​Independent​. Retrieved from

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/chicken-uk-heatwave-farm-deaths-li

ncolnshire-tesco-sainsbury-a9025516.html
BEHIND BARN DOORS 13

Food waste in america: From slaughterhouse to landfill. (n.d.). Retrieved from Compassion Over

Killing website: https://cok.net/food-waste-america/

Hooiveld, M., Smit, L. A. M., Femke van, d. S., Wouters, I. M., van Dijk, C.,E., Spreeuwenberg,

P., . . . C, J. Y. (2016). Doctor-diagnosed health problems in a region with a high density

of concentrated animal feeding operations: A cross-sectional study. ​Environmental

Health,​ ​15​ doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12940-016-0123-2

Hribar, C. (2010). ​Understanding concentrated animal feeding operations and their impact on

communities​. Retrieved from National Association of Local Boards of Health website:

https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/ehs/docs/understanding_cafos_nalboh.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3DK7

qlkmPsTg6D8CGoDnrLQfjOvvkekIP34AHQvD47ugqTR9RvwDOmqpU

Ikerd, J. (n.d.). ​Going public with concerns about cafos.​ Retrieved from

http://web.missouri.edu/ikerdj/papers/PA%20-%20York%20-Going%20Public%20CAF

Os.htm

Ikerd, J. (2009, October). ​The economics of cafos & sustainable alternatives.​ Retrieved from

http://web.missouri.edu/ikerdj/papers/Fairfield%20IA%20-%20Economics%20of%20CA

FOs.htm

Langwith, J. (Ed.). (2009). ​Opposing Viewpoints: Renewable Energy​. Retrieved from Gale In

Context: Opposing Viewpoints database.

Oink; Midwest diary; Dressing like an astronaut to visit a pig farm. (2007, November 13).

Global Agenda​. Retrieved from Gale In Context: Global Issues database.

Regulating large animal farms. (2007, Feb 02). ​Journal Gazette​ Retrieved from

https://explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2265600245?accountid=3785
BEHIND BARN DOORS 14

Waite, R. (2019, January 24). 2018 will see high meat Consumption in the U.S., but the american

diet is shifting. ​World Research Institute​. Retrieved from

https://www.wri.org/blog/2018/01/2018-will-see-high-meat-consumption-us-american-di

et-shifting