Hogs, strongEconomicsstrong, and strongRuralstrong Communities1.pdfVIP

1 Hogs, Economics, and Rural Communities John Ikerd2 Nearly ten years ago I was asked by a group of farmers in north Missouri to evaluate the potential impacts of large-scale, confinement hog feeding operations on rural communities. Since then, I have worked on this issue with grassroots community groups all across the U.S. and Canada. Every community is a bit different, but the fundamental issues are always the same. Some people in these communities expect to benefit economically by adopting an industrial model of livestock production, while others expect to suffer the inherently negative consequences of agricultural industrialization. Perhaps no public issue has so split the social fabric of rural communities, as when those who benefit economically confront those whose quality of life is diminished and the rest of the community is asked to choose sides. The basic arguments are quite straightforward. Large-scale, commercial hog producers, most operating under corporate contracts, feel compelled to adopt a factory model of production, involving concentrated confinement housing, cesspool-like lagoon storage of hog feces and urine, and the spreading or spraying of manure on open fields. These producers claim that such operations represent a natural evolution of hog production and essentially are the same as any other family farming operation. Factory farming supporters argue that irrational and fanatical opponents are trying to deny their inherent “right to farm” and their right to pursue their economic interests in a free enterprise economy. They argue that without compelling scientific proof of extraordinary risks to the environment or to human health, there is no reason to treat these factory livestock operations any differently than any other fa