April 2, 1998

C. Dewey Botts

Background

 My name is Dewey Botts and I live in Raleigh, North Carolina, where I have been Director of the Division of Soil and Water Conservation in the Department of Environment and Natural Resources for four (4) years.  Prior to that, I took an early-out retirement from USDA's Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) after 31 years, where I was serving as Director of Underwriting for 14 states from North Carolina to Maine.

 I was raised on a small family farm and dairy in south Alabama and financed my way through a degree in Agriculture at Auburn University by working at the two university dairies.  My father farmed and worked part-time with USDA's ASCS, SCS and FCIC.  My grandfather farmed with a mule ‘til lightning hit the barn and killed his mule.  He then went to his knee leggings and short handled hoe up almost to his death at 94.

 I most recently served on the National Environmental Dialogue on Port Productionand currently serve on the Keystone Group's Trends in Agriculture Dialogue.

 Our Division of Soil and Water Conservation is the lead agency responsible for agricultural non-point source pollution management.  We have a $8.4 million recurring state agriculture cost share program that includes $2 million cost-shared 50/50 with county government for technical assistance and $6.4 million cost-shared 75/25 with farmers for water quality Best Management Practices (BMPs).  Our Division and the counties (Districts) work in close partnership with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to provide cost-share for BMPs and free technical assistance for installation.  We are completing a
five-year initiative to bring some 3,000 older animal operations up to NRCS and state standards.  This has cost North Carolina close to $27 million in BMP cost-share and farmers close to $10 million out-of-pocket or in-kind.

North Carolina Animal Operations - Before and After

 To set the stage for what happened in North Carolina, visualize our state currently with the 7.2 million people and add 45 million more (10 million hogs at 4.5 times the waste of one person) plus poultry waste, all in the southeastern third of our state -- where the soils are sandy, water tables are high, rivers spread out and slow down, shallow wells number in the thousands and tourism and fisheries bring in over five billion dollars.  We're number one in meat production (number one in turkey production, number two in hogs and number four in broilers).  That's a lot of waste in a small area; and, the Perdues, Tysons, Murphys, Carrolls, et al. aren't ultimately responsible ...  WE ARE!  YOU ARE!  I AM!  We are the policy makers.

 The swine expansion came to North Carolina not just because of limited regulations but because of the feed plants we had for poultry, the transportation, the land, the labor and the climate.  Prior to February 1, 1993 animal waste treatment systems were deemed permitted by rule as nondischarge facilities as long as they did not discharge to surface waters.  Enforcement was on a complaint driven basis.

 Rapid growth brought on the ".0200" rules effective February 1, 1993 with additional conditions to be deemed permitted.  Conditions included:

       Facilities with more than the following number of animals were required to register with the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) prior to December 31, 1993.

  Swine          250
  Cattle          100
  Poultry (with liquid systems)  30,000
  Sheep       1,000
  Horses           75

  These facilities were also required to have an approved waste management plan prior to December 31, 1997.

  New or expanded animal waste storage and treatment facilities must be at least 100' from perennial waters.

  A vegetative buffer of at least 25' is required between the land application area and perennial waters.

  The Director of DWQ may require an individual nondischarge permit.

The 1995 General Assembly enacted the Swine Farm Siting Act (SB 1080) after eight lagoon breaks released 40 million gallons of animal waste, disrupting summer activities and causing massive fish kills.  After October 1, 1995 new requirements for buffers included:

       At least 1,500' from new swine houses or lagoons to the nearest occupied residence.

  At least 2,500' from new swine houses or lagoons to a school, hospital, or church.

  At least 100' from new swine houses or lagoons to a residential property boundary.

  At least 50' from the land application area to a residential property line.

 
Increasing the buffer between the land application area and a perennial stream or river from 25' to 50'.

SB 974 required swine facilities with 250 or more swine to have a certified operator by January 1, 1997.  The Blue Ribbon Commission on Agricultural Waste was created and directed to bring recommendations for needed changes to the 1996 General Assembly.

The 1996 General Assembly enacted recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission in SB 1217 that included:

       All registered facilities must obtain a general permit and pay an annual fee of $50- $200.

  Beginning January 1, 1997 DWQ was to conduct annual inspections of all registered facilities.

  Beginning January 1, 1997 the Division of Soil and Water Conservation was to conduct annual operations reviews of all registered facilities.

  Cattle facilities and poultry systems under the .0200 rules were added to swine to have a certified operator by January 1, 1997.

  Waste management training of 10 hours was required in 1997.

  The distance from a swine house or lagoon to the boundary on which an occupied residence is located was increased from 100' to 500' effective October 1, 1996.

  Beginning June 21, 1996, any person wishing to construct a new or expanded swine farm must notify all adjoining property owners.

  Poultry operations with dry litter systems were required to develop their own waste management plan by January 1, 1998 (changed to the Year 2000 by the 1997 General Assembly.)

The 1997 General Assembly ratified an even more comprehensive "Clean Water Responsibility (bill)", HB 515.  It addressed ALL 17 river basins in some ways and included provisions on golf courses, education and swine.  (This bill was driven by construction for a new swine facility in Moore County, home of Pinehurst Golf community and future site of the US Golf Open and home of the powerful House Rules Chairman).  Swine provisions in HB 515 include:

       The strictest standards for a two-years and three months moratorium in Moore County.

  A two-year moratorium on new and expanding swine farms (250 swine), with few exceptions.

 
Authorized counties to adopt zoning regulations for swine farms with 600,000 steady state live pounds or more.

  Directed the DWQ to adopt standards to control odors by March 1, 1999.

  Added certain public and private facilities to the 2,500' siting for swine houses or lagoons.

  Increased the distance from any well for public water to 500'.

  Increased the buffer between land application and perennial streams and rivers (a third time) from 50' to 75'.

  Restricted waste management systems, except land application, from 100 year flood plains.

  Required the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to make recommendations on Integrator Liability.

  Required the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to develop a plan for the General Assembly by May 1 of this year to phase out anaerobic swine lagoons and sprayfields.

  Plus various other point and non-point source pollution provisions.

Lessons Learned and Solutions

 Farmers should be allowed to make a fair living and chose how they do it, but their systems should be sustainable to society and our natural resources.  That responsibility is as far reaching as the Scripture and as simple as consideration of a neighbor down-stream or
down-wind.

 Issues surround life and quality of life.  They include:

       Animal waste and it's threats to water quality,

  disease, and

  odor.
 

 After various yearly changes since 1993, North Carolina took some bold steps in 1997.  Our Legislators:

       Called a "time-out" for two years to stop new and expanding swine facilities until we (policy makers) get our house in order.

  Allowed for local zoning of large swine facilities.

  Called for the phase-out of waste management technology that posed too great a threat to our air and water quality.

  Called for a plan that would draw integrators into the management of animal waste, and the policing of that waste management, and liability for both.

 This should say something to other states and national policy makers.  It should say something that at least one third of our states are currently grappling with these same issues.  And it should say something that all four of the largest exporting nations are currently grappling with these same issues.
 
  Density must be considered.  This would address threats to water quality, disease and odor.  Maximum loadings are part of the Clean Water Act and could be used for water, land and air.  This should be done on a system approach (i.e., whole farm/watershed/basin.)

  Large lagoon and sprayfield technology is not acceptable for North Carolina ... and I don't think it is for Utah.

  Atmospheric deposition of nitrogen from the ammonia coming from the houses, lagoons and sprayfields must be taken into consideration.

  Operator training is essential.  Discharges to our waters have typically been from mismanagement of the waste.

  Bad actors should be hit hard! (This is a message from the growers.)

  Government should not pay the total cost of regulation, enforcement and technology.  Innovators should be encouraged.  We should seek to go beyond compliance.

  Stop changing the rules.  Farmers deserve to know what will be acceptable; so, it is imperative that policy makers have vision and take bold steps.

  If we (government) change the rules, we should provide assistance.  Farmers can not pass their cost on to the consumer.  Cost-share is a consumer subsidy.

  Integrator liability is important to help police compliance.

  Local zoning is equity.  The public should have involvement throughout the process.

  Input should be sought from the Center for Disease Control.

  Until we do get some more national resolution of this issue, we should have a "time-out" on new and expanded operations.

 It is our, YOUR and MY, responsibility to be safe rather than sorry.  People are more important than a commodity.  We can have both, but we need to make some changes to be sustainable.  We've all heard about this land only being borrowed by us for a short while.  I'm reminded of what my grandfather told me ... "Sonny boy, when you borrow something you should give it back in as good ‘ah shape or better as when you borrowed it."  We as a society must recognize that real limits to growth, production, and consumption exists on lands and waters under our stewardship and act accordingly.

 I would like to acknowledge the work that Senator Harkin has put forth on this effort and want to thank the Committee very much for the opportunity to present these comments. Thank you.