In the US, the amount of waste produced by livestock in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), also known as factory farms, is tremendous. Livestock manure, unlike human waste, is not treated before it is disposed of. The untreated manure emits airborne chemicals and fumes, and when runoff occurs, dangerous pollutants enter our waterways. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the authority to regulate CAFO waste, but has yielded to pressure from the meat industry and largely shifted its regulating responsibility to the states.

The Problem of Animal Waste

In 2012, livestock and poultry on the largest concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) produced 369 million tons of manure: this was almost 13 times more waste than that of the entire US population of 312 million. 5

Untreated waste at CAFOs also pollutes the air with odors and creates health problems, markedly decreasing the quality of life of workers, people nearby and neighboring communities and property values. Two significant pollutants are potent greenhouse gases methane and nitrous oxide, along with ammonia, hydrogen sulfide and other noisome chemicals. CAFOs release large amounts of particulates; in especially dry regions where manure turns easily into dust, the particulate matter is rapidly dispersed. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that nearly three quarters of the country’s ammonia pollution comes from livestock facilities, and studies have found high levels of antibiotics and antibiotic-resistant genes in air samples downwind of feedlots.

Federal Regulations and Waste Management

Under the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA has the authority to regulate pollution from CAFOs. In practice, the process has been slow and complicated, chiefly due to constant pressure from the livestock industry, which fights stronger laws and the implementation of existing regulations at every turn. 10 The NPDES permit limits what can be discharged, sets an acceptable level for pollutants (e.g., set the permitted level for bacteria) and specifies monitoring and reporting requirements. 16 Participating CAFOs paid a civil penalty of up to $100,000, and the EPA agreed not to sue participants for past violations of the Clean Air Act, CERCLA or EPCRA. Data from the study was released in 2011, but the EPA continued to point to its ongoing interpretation of the data before it could develop air quality regulations. Despite the ongoing analysis, in 2009, the EPA also released a rule exempting CAFOs from the emissions reporting requirements of CERCLA and EPCRA. 32

Policymakers, instead of using taxpayer dollars to prop up factory farms, should be implementing and enforcing environmental and public health regulations for them, and supporting sustainable, pasture-based alternatives.

What You Can Do

  • Support pasture-raised farms with your food dollars: it is one real way to demonstrate demand for a different kind of agricultural system.
    • Pasture-based farms do not have the same problems as waste management: they raise an appropriate number of animals that can be supported by the land; the amount of manure is proportional to the amount of soil and is an effective fertilizer, not a contaminant.
    • Check out our Labels Guide for more information on the best animal products to choose.
  • Learn about the state laws and regulations on animal waste in your state (usually developed and enforced by the state environmental agency). If you live in a rural state that is trying to attract more CAFO development, pay attention to how those rules may be changing — and get involved with efforts to maintain existing regulations. These are generally driven by corporate interests and big farm groups — these interests claim to speak for all farmers, but you will often find organizations of independent family farmers fighting these bills, partnered with environmental, public health and other groups.

Previous page photo by Budimir Jevtic/Adobe Stock.

Hide References

  1. Food and Water Watch. “Factory Farm Map: What’s Wrong With Factory Farms?” FWW, (n.d.). Retrieved December 6, 2016, from https://www.factoryfarmmap.org/problems/
  2. Vanac, Mary. “Big demand driving up prices for farmland.” The Columbus Dispatch, February 10, 2010. Retrieved December 10, 2016, from https://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/business/2013/02/10/big-demand-driving-up-prices-for-farmland.html
  3. NNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “2015 Gulf of Mexico dead zone ‘above average.’” US Department of Commerce, August 4, 2015. Retrieved April 15, 2019, from https://www.noaa.gov/media-release/2015-gulf-of-mexico-dead-zone-above-average
  4. Rodriguez-Eugenio, Natalia et al. “Soil Pollution: A Hidden Reality.” Food and Agriculture Organization, 2018. Retrieved April 15, 2019, from https://www.fao.org/3/I9183EN/i9183en.pdf
  5. Li Y, et al. “A survey of selected heavy metal concentrations in Wisconsin dairy feeds.”  Journal of Dairy Science, 88(8):2911-22 (August 2005). Retrieved April 15, 2019, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16027206
  6. Harris et al. “Ammonia Emission Factors from Swine Finishing Operations.” US Environmental Protection Agency, April 30, 2001. Retrieved May 31, 2018 from https://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/conference/ei10/ammonia/harris.pdf
  7. Nadimpalli, Maya. “Persistence of livestock-associated antibiotic-resistant Staphylococcus aureus among industrial hog operation workers in North Carolina over 14 days.” Occupational & Environmental Medicine, 72(2) (September 8, 2014). Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://oem.bmj.com/content/early/2014/09/05/oemed-2014-102095.info
  8. Food & Water Watch. “Factory Farm Nation: 2015 Edition.” FWW, May 27, 2015. Retrieved September 7, 2017, from https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/insight/factory-farm-nation-2015-edition
  9. US Environmental Protection Agency. “Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations Final Rulemaking – Fact Sheet.” EPA Office of Wastewater Management, October 2008. Retrieved August 29, 2017, from https://www3.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/cafo_final_rule2008_fs.pdf
  10. US Environmental Protection Agency. “Revised Compliance Dates for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Regulation and Effluent Limitation Guidelines for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations in Response to Waterkeeper Decision; Proposed Rule.” 71 Federal Register, 37, 744–87 (June 30, 2006)
  11. US Environmental Protection Agency. “National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).” EPA, (n.d.). Retrieved May 31, 2018 from https://www.epa.gov/npdes/npdes-permit-basics
  12. US Environmental Protection Agency. “Basic Information about Nonpoint Source (NPS) Pollution. EPA, (n.d.). Retrieved May 31, 2018 from https://www.epa.gov/nps/basic-information-about-nonpoint-source-nps-pollution
  13. US Environmental Protection Agency. “Agriculture and Air Quality.” EPA, (n.d.). Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/agriculture/agriculture-agriculture-and-air-quality
  14. US Environmental Protection Agency. “Summary of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (Superfund): 42 U.S.C. §9601 et seq.” EPA, 1980. Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-comprehensive-environmental-response-compensation-and-liability-act
  15. US Environmental Protection Agency. “Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA).” EPA, 1986. Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/epcra
  16. US Environmental Protection Agency. “National Air Emissions Monitoring Study.” EPA, (n.d.) Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/afos-air/national-air-emissions-monitoring-study#afo-compliance-agreement
  17. US Environmental Protection Agency. “Better Approach to Reporting Hazardous Substances from Farm Animal Waste.” EPA, December 12, 2008. Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/6236c34a042f55378525751d00722e6a!OpenDocument
  18. US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. “Waterkeeper Alliance et al. v. EPA.” Retrieved September 25, 2017, from https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/2E91F70B0AF28BBE852580FF004E33FF/$file/09-1017-1670473.pdf
  19. US Environmental Protection Agency. “National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): NPDES State Program Information.” EPA, (n.d.). Retrieved April 15, 2019, from https://www.epa.gov/npdes/npdes-state-program-information
  20. Iowa Department of Natural Resources. “EPA/DNR Workplan Materials: Work Plan Agreement, Materials, and Reports.” Iowa.gov, August 2017. Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://www.iowadnr.gov/Environmental-Protection/Land-Quality/Animal-Feeding-Operations/EPA-DNR-Workplan-Materials
  21. Colorado Air Quality Control Commission. “Department of Public Health and Environment, Air Quality Control commission: Regulation Number 2, Odor Emission, 5 CCR 1001-4.” Colorado.gov, June 19, 2008. Retrieved September 7, 2017, from https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/Regulation-Num-2-Part-B-Odor-Emissions.pdf
  22. Office for State, Tribal, Local and Territorial Support. “Public Health Law: Menu of State Laws Regarding Odors Produced by Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, (n.d.). Retrieved September 7, 2017, from https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/Regulation-Num-2-Part-B-Odor-Emissions.pdf
  23. Office of the Revisor of Statutes. “2018 Minnesota Statutes: 116.0713 Livestock Odor.” Minnesota Legislature, 2018. Retrieved September 7, 2017, from https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=116.0713
  24. McAllister, Tim. “Evaluation of the Ability of Seaweed Extract (Tasco-14) to Reduce the Duration and Intensity of Fecal Shedding of Escherichia coli 0157:H7 and Total E.coli by Cattle.” USDA National Agricultural Library, 2004.. Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://fsrio.nal.usda.gov/fsrio/research-projects/evaluation-ability-seaweed-extract-tasco-14-reduce-duration-and-intensity-fecal-shedding
  25. Becker, Hand. ““Carbonating Cow Manure, The Latest Strategy in Fighting E.coli and other Microbes.” USDA Agricultural Research Service, February 9, 2000. Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://www.ars.usda.gov/news-events/news/research-news/2000/carbonating-cow-manure-stunts-e-coli-growth/
  26. US Environmental Protection Agency. “Biogas Opportunities Roadmap Report.” EPA, August 2014. Retrieved September 7, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/agstar/biogas-opportunities-roadmap-report
  27. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin. “Integrated Anaerobic Digester System Program: Request for Proposals & Application Template.” Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection; Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, January 3, 2017. Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://psc.wi.gov/Documents/OEI/RFP/RFPErrata.pdf
  28. Food & Water Watch. “No, Manure is Not a Renewable Energy Source.” FWW, September 26, 2017. Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/insight/no-manure-not-renewable-energy-source
  29. Food & Water Watch. “Hard to Digest: Greenwashing Manure into Renewable Energy.” FWW, November 2016. Retrieved September 7, 2017, from https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/sites/default/files/ib_1611_manure-digesters-web.pdf
  30. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. “Environmental Quality Incentives Program.” USDA, (n.d.). Retrieved May 31, 2018, from https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/financial/eqip/
  31. Starmer, Elanor. “Industrial Livestock at the Taxpayer Trough: How Large Hog and Dairy Operations are Subsidized by the Environmental Quality Incentives Program.” Campaign for Family Farms and the Environment, December 2008. Retrieved September 7, 2017, from https://www.inmotionmagazine.com/ra08/EQIP_report_1208.pdf
  32. Communication with Missouri Rural Crisis Center (MRCC): As a result of MRCC members being on the Natural Resources Conservation Service State Technical Committee, it has implemented a rule mandating that no new or expanding CAFOs in Missouri are eligible for EQIP dollars. As a result, more than 50 CAFOs were denied EQIP funding to build and/or expand and EQIP funding going to “animal waste” projects on existing CAFOs dropped significantly.