Boardman

Table of Contents:Page

Thesis Statement........................................................................................................................................................ 2

Review of the Literature......................................................................................................................................... 3

Methodology.............................................................................................................................................................. 11

Introduction............................................................................................................................................................... 13

Body of the Project................................................................................................................................................. 14

Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................................. 23

Sources Cited and Consulted..............................................................................................................................24

Outline.......................................................................................................................................................................... 29

Appendices.............................................................................................................................................................. N.A.

1

Thesis Statement

America’s dependence on animals is greater than ever; it has caused epidemics, irreversible

changes to evolution, medicine and agriculture. The recent technological advances favor

stockholders interests rather than the consumers. Industrial farming uses modern

machinery and science to expedite the process of raising livestock indoors. The current

agriculture system has faults that need to be addressed before they can be improved. The

country must develop an alternative attitude toward farming or no positive change will

come.

2

Review of the Literature

1. Torres, Jenna, and Bob Torres. Vegan Freak: Being Vegan in a Non-Vegan World. 2nd ed.

Oakland: PM Press, 2010. 1-196. Print.

Tofu Hound Press an imprint of PM Press. Tofu Hound Press publishes books on

veganism and animal rights. Vegan Freak is a practical guide to being or becoming a vegan

in a non-vegan world, including tips and advice to live well. This book includes

understanding for the ethical reasons of going vegan. It is intended to help the individual

during social situations like eating at restaurants, stubborn meat eating friends and telling

your parents that you do not want to eat turkey at Thanksgiving; all without hurting the

recipient’s feelings. Bob Torres has a PhD in Development Sociology from Cornell

University. Bob Torres spent seven years teaching Sociology at Northeastern Universities.

He is also the author of Making a Killing: the Political Economy of Animal Rights. Jenna

Torres has a PhD from Cornell University in Spanish linguistics. She is co-founder of Tofu

Hound Press publishing. Torres teaches at a small liberal arts university in New York.

Together they hosts of the Vegan Freak Radio/Podcasts.

2. Davis, Brenda, and Vesanto Melina. Becoming Vegan. 1st ed. Summertown: Book

Publishing Company, 2000. Pg. 1-281. Print.

The Book Publishing Company prides itself on publishing books that educate,

inspire and empower from titles such as Tribal Childhood to Living in Harmony with

3

Animals. The audience for Becoming Vegan is generally those looking for advice on

nutrition and health. This book has information on eating a nutritious plant based diet

presented by vegetarian dietitians. It informs the reader how a vegan diet can protect

against cancer, heart disease and other chronic illnesses. Other topics presented in this

book include advice on getting your dietary needs, pregnancy and breast feeding tips and

achieving peak performance as a vegan athlete.

Brenda Davis, R.D. is past Chair of the Vegetarian Nutrition Dietetic Practice Group

of the American Dietetic Association. She worked as a clinical nutrition specialist and

consultant, a public health nutritionist and academic nutrition instructor. In June of 1982,

she received her Honors BASc (Applied Human Nutrition Major) from the University of

Guelph.

Vesanto Melina, MS, R.D. is a Registered Dietitian and Nutritionist. Melina’s

undergraduate training was at the University of London, England and the University of

Toronto, Ontario, Canada. She received her B.A. in Home Economics with specialization in

Nutrition. Her Master’s degree is in Nutrition from the University of Toronto, Ontario.

Melina had two years of graduate work in Adult Education at the University of British

Columbia. She has taught nutrition at the University of British Columbia and at Seattle's

Bastyr University. Some of her professional memberships include the American Dietetic

Association, Dietitians of Canada, Vegetarian Dietary Practice Group of the American Dietetic

Association.

4

3. Lappe, Frances Moore. Diet for a Small Planet. 4th ed. New York: Ballantine Books, 1991.

479. Print.

The publisher Ballantine Books, now a subdivision of Random House, is a

distinguished publisher in the United States including fiction, non-fiction and health and

wellness. First distributed in 1971, there are now editions printed 1975, 1982 and 1991.

With every new publication, interview or new book Frances Moore Lappe authors, the

audience for this book grows. Diet for a Small Planet has groundbreaking information to

changing yourself and the world around oneself by altering the way you eat. When first

published, this book was one of a kind. It includes social and ethical philosophy to

redevelop the way you think of food and yourself.

Lappe believes that modernization of the global food supply has ruined American’s

and is in desperate need of change. Lappe graduated from Earlham College in 1966 but

started research for this book in 1971 while she was a 26 year old graduate student

studying at Berkeley in California. She has co-founded many organizations including Food

First: The Institute for Food and Development Policy and the Center for Living Democracy. In

early 2000, Lappe started the Small Planet Institute with her daughter. The Small Planet

Institute is about living democracy and feeding hope through education and mutual

accountability. The mission statement by The Institute for Food and Development wishes

to eliminate the injustices that cause hunger.

5

4. Safran-Foer, Jonathan. Eating Animals. 1st. New York: Back Bay Books, 2010. Pg 1-314.

Print.

The publisher Little, Brown and Company is dedicated to publishing the highest

quality non-fiction available. The audience for Eating Animals is as diverse from Oprah’s

book list subscribers to The Huffington Post. In this book, Jonathan Safran-Foer provides

detailed information from his own research and experiences about the industrialization of

farming. Prior to publishing, he hired two professionals to fact-check the material included.

He includes stories from his past and why food matters as a social cause to real and

personal encounters from slaughterhouses.

Safran-Foer graduated Princeton University with a degree in Philosophy. He has

three fiction novels Everything is Illuminated (2002), Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

(2005) and Tree of Codes (2010). Eating Animals is one of the most controversial topics for

discussion.

5. Durham, Sharon. United States. “Free-Range" Chicken—No Guarantee It's Free of

Salmonella. 2002. Web. <http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2004/040920.htm>.

6

Sharon Durham is the public affairs specialist from the Agricultural Research

Service (ARS). Durham’s duties include answering requests for information by the media,

and assisting scientists on public activities. ARS is one of four agencies in USDA's Research,

Education and Economics (REE)mission area. The mission of the ARS is to provide current

information for specific laboratories for the goal of writing, press releases, magazine or

specialized materials for newspapers, magazines, the ARS news service and other

publications. The ARS produces newsletters entitled Healthy Animals, Food and Nutrition

Research Briefs, Science for Kids, and Agricultural Research magazine.

6. Centner, T. "Limitations on the Confinement of Food Animals in the United States.”

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23.5 (2010): 469. ABI/INFORM

Global, ProQuest. Web. 12 Oct. 2011.

Terence J. Centner is a Professor of Agricultural and Applied Economics at the

University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. He leads a

research program with at least 85 published findings that investigate agriculture and the

environment using scientific theory and investigation of policy issues. In 2004, Professor

Centner wrote the book Empty Pastures, published by the University of Illinois Press. He is

a current member of the American Agricultural Law Association performing duties of the

Secretary, Treasurer and President during the years of 1992-1993.

Qualifications:

LL.M., Law School, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA

J.D., State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA

7

B.S. with Distinction, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

7. Shiva, Vandana. "Violence is a threat to the survival of animals and humans. " Peace

Research 34.1 (2002): 107. ProQuest Military Collection, ProQuest. Web. 12 October

2011

Information for the publisher is as follows, Peace Research with Menno Simons

College, Winnipeg, R3C 0G2, Canada. Shiva won the 2011 Calgary Peace Prize. She helped

found the organization Navdanya (Nine Seeds/Crops) based in New Delhi that supports

growing with natural fertilizer and without artificial chemicals. In 1982, she founded the

Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology. Shiva is the author of many

books including Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development 2010, Manifestos on the

Future of Food and Seed 2007, Earth Democracy: Justice, Sustainability, and Peace 2005 and

several more. Shiva is a world renowned environmental and feminist activist and author to

many books and over 300 journal and scientific papers. Shiva is the adviser to the Women's

Environment & Development Organization and the Third World Network. She is one of the

leaders of the International Forum on Globalization. In 1993, Shiva was the recipient of the

Alternative Nobel Peace Prize. She holds a master’s degree in the philosophy of science and

a Ph.D. in particle physics.

8. United States Environmental Protection Agency

8

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides this report with detailed

information on Animal Feeding Operations in the form of tables, websites containing

definitions, reports and studies. All of the information by the EPA is available from the

Internet at <http://www.epa.gov>. The EPA is a division of United States government,

established December 1970, to enforce environmental protection in the means of federal

research, monitoring and setting standards. The current mission of the EPA is to protect

human health and the environment. One method used to accomplish their mission is

developing, writing and enforcing regulations set by Congress. The EPA creates national

standards and assists states with upholding them. Environmental issues are constantly

under study in EPA’s laboratories throughout the United States. Information that they

gather and have found is reported in numerous EPA publications and newsletters.

9. United States Department of Agriculture

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) provides this report with

information in the form of newsletters, websites containing definitions, action plans and

fact sheets. All of the information by the USDA is available from the Internet at

<http://www.usda.gov>. In 1862, Abraham Lincoln signed the papers needed to create the

USDA. The mission statement is to provide leadership on food, agriculture, natural

resources and related issues. The USDA aims to provide program delivery for an ever-

changing food and agricultural system. This is defined in their strategic plan, which

includes developing economic support to expand agricultural markets, creating alternative

markets for agriculture, reduce the amount of foodborne hazards from farm to table,

9

improving nutrition and managing America’s public and private lands. The USDA takes

pride in providing and assisting a safe and ample food supply. In 1983, the USDA

envisioned a side project that would be titled USDA’s National Animal Health Monitoring

System (NAHMS). In 1990, the NAHMS performed the first national study of the swine

industry that monitored changes and trends in health and management. The report Swine

2006, Part I: Reference of Swine Health and Management Practices in the United States is the

fourth national study of the swine industry.

10. World Health Organization

The World Health Organization (WHO) provides this report with information in the

form of detailed reports, data sheets and public documents. All of the information by the

WHO is available from the Internet at <http://www.who.org>. World Health Day started

April 7, 1948 when the WHO’s constitution was signed by diplomats from the United

Nations. The WHO is responsible for providing leadership on global health issues, research

agenda, setting norms and standards, creating evidence-based policy options and assessing

health trends. The WHO develops projects, activities, initiatives and partnerships on a vast

majority of health topics. The WHO generates reports of their data for publications and

journals developed in all different sectors. For example, the publication Tackling Antibiotic

Resistance From a Food Safety Perspective in Europe, clearly states it is “primarily intended

for policy-makers and authorities working in the public health, agriculture, food production

and veterinary sectors, and offers them ways to take a holistic, intersectoral, multifaceted

approach to this growing problem”. The document Avian Influenza: Assessing the Pandemic

10

Threat implies “all reasonable precautions have been taken by the WHO to verify the

information contained in this publication,” it continues stating the WHO shall not be liable

for any damages arising from issue.

11

Methodology

The topic I selected is Factory Farming, this is of interest to me because it is a

controversial topic that no one wants to admit is happening. Every time someone picks up

90/10-ground meat at the grocery store, puts milk in cereal or orders chicken nuggets at

the drive through, they are contributing to the decline in localization, sustainable resources

and animal rights. Narrowing the scope of this in-depth field was a challenge. I could have

just focused on how antibiotic resistance is causing the public health to fail or the abuse

animal’s encounter. Instead, I chose the topic why it is bad, how is this negatively affecting

us? I wanted to provide general information for the public about factory farming. It is

important that society knows where and how it gets food. The majority of Americans do

not give it a second thought; they assume it is safe and healthy to eat the amount of mass-

produced and marketed food that they do. The system has evolved to support industrial

scale production and distribution instead of taste or nutrition.

The time in the classroom and at home was spent looking though EBSCO Host and

ProQuest to find documents that related to industrial farming. It was important to focus on

scholarly journals and not opinion pieces from newspapers. I bought and checked out

books from the public library that relate to the subject matter. Some of the books were read

in full for complete understanding, while others needed only to be skimmed for special

topics. The review of the literature was critical for this report since I did not want to obtain

information that was not well researched or backed by credible organizations. I wanted to

present findings that are accurate, for many people disregard issues around farming and

believe they can be overlooked.

12

I wanted to obtain as many primary sources as possible. When using the Internet I

aimed to find websites with a nonbiased approach in presenting information and sources.

Those Webpages included government sites, organization sites and educational institution

sites. Critical reading was required to judge the credibility of the text and the author’s

intentions. In order to obtain accurate conclusions it was important to stray away from

biased and stereotyped writing. As the reader and researcher, if I analyzed the material as I

was reading, it was easier to consider the text and author’s possible bias, to help decipher

fact from opinion and how much the document could be trusted.

13

Introduction

America’s dependence on animals is greater than ever; it has caused epidemics,

irreversible changes to evolution, medicine and agriculture. Farming was once a way of life

in America. In 1862, about half of the population in America lived on farms ("USDA

Celebrates 150 Years"). Since 1960, milk production has doubled, meat has tripled and eggs

quadrupled. It currently takes a chicken seven weeks to reach five pounds, whereas in

1920, a chicken needed sixteen weeks to reach 2.2 pounds (“Welfare of Animals in the

Chicken Industry” 1). This increase not a natural occurrence, the animals are selectively

bred for rapid growth and muscle mass. As seen with chickens and turkeys, this causes an

uneven distribution of the weight rendering them unable to walk (2).

Industrial animal operations, not farms, are currently the type of farming that

supplies grocers and consumers with its meat. Industrial farming is commonly

characterized as unhealthy for the earth, humans, economy, cows, pigs, fish and animals

alike. There are municipal waters unsafe to drink and humans that cannot accept

antibiotics because of the food they eat. Agriculture development causes local businesses

and farms to close (Lappe 62-65). Modern farms are rewarded for use of new technologies

allowing reduced costs, which results in greater profit margins and less land utilized

(“Industrial Animal Farm Production”). The recent technological advances embrace the

stockholders interest rather than the consumers. Industrial farming uses modern

machinery and science to expedite the process of raising livestock indoors. An issue

American’s have advanced with ease, but cannot continue to flourish without negative

effects.

One of the main objectives I wish to accomplish from this research is factual

14

knowledge; by this, I am referring to using data and evidence to support my claim, instead

of viewpoints or stereotypical ideals. I wanted to research what actually happens to

animals that are slaughtered for food. I have watched videos and read books on the subject;

but I wanted to know the truth whether it is positive or negative.

Body of the Project

Animal feeding operations support and supply America with their meat, eggs and

dairy. Common topics that surround factory farming include livestock death and

mistreatment, antibiotic resistance and bacteria poisoning such as Salmonella and

Escherichia coli. Industrialization of farming has caused a local and global impact on the

environment and economic hardships on small farmers. While this report will not

encompass all concerns generated by industrial farming, it will convey prevalent topics

associated with health and safety.

As defined by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) factory farms, also

known as Animal Feeding Operations (AFOs), occur when animals are kept and raised in

confined situations. Operations of industrial farm animal production encompass breeding,

feeding, holding of livestock and product management for human consumption. Facilities

need to demonstrate they are capable of disposal of manure, urine and dead animals. An

operation is an AFO if animals are fed or maintained forty-five or more days during a

twelve month period. During the normal growing season no grass, “crops, vegetation,

forage growth, or post-harvest resides are sustained … on any portion of the lot or facility”

(“National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System”). Feeding operations are not allowed to

grow food, or anything, for the animals they are harvesting. Animal’s feedstuffs are

transported to them rather than grazing or eating feed in pastures, fields or on rangeland.

15

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) separate into categories based on

the amount of animals kept and waste produced. The size threshold ranges for small,

medium and large CAFOs are stated in Table 1. A Small CAFO produces a significant amount

of pollutants. A Medium CAFO includes a manmade pipe or ditch carrying manure and

wastewater to surface water. Surface water passes through confined living areas of CAFOs.

A Medium CAFO also contributes significant amount of pollutants (“Regulatory Definitions

of CAFOs”). Large CAFOs use the least amount of land available and are the number one

source for livestock and surplus nutrients. The transportation of large CAFO manure

requires an off-site location, which is largely unregulated (“CAFO Responsiveness

Summary”).

Table 1

Animal Division Size Thresholds

Small CAFO Medium CAFO Large CAFOHorses Less than 150 150-499 500 or more

Mature dairy cows Less than 200 200-699 700 or moreCattle or cow/calf pairs and

veal calvesLess than 300 300-999 1,000 or more

Swine Less than 750 750-9,999 10,000 or moreDucks Less than 1,500 1,500-29,999 30,000 or more

Sheep or lambs Less than 3,000 3,000-9,999 10,000 or moreLaying hens or broilers Less than 9,000 9,000-81,999 82,000 or more

Turkeys Less than 16,500 16,500-54,999 55,000 or moreChickens other than laying

hensLess than 37,500 37,500-124,999 125,000 or more

Livestock are no longer considered family pets. Farm workers injure the livestock,

sometimes to make their job easier or to protect the animals from natural behaviors. While

16

selected chickens, sows and cattle are kept in cages, others may be free range with no

definitive measures. Out of date practices require animals to get their beaks and tails cut off

without anesthetics. It is difficult to imagine the pain these animals endure. The increase of

commerce by commercial farms would be widely accepted if animal welfare improved.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has defined free range, as

“producers must demonstrate to the Agency that the poultry has been allowed access to the

outside” (“Meat and Poultry Labeling Terms”). The USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection

Service has no other limits for this. They do not require additional information such as

length of time outside, feed, the size of outdoor access or quality. This definition applies for

partial poultry production, not laying hens and egg production. Free range broiler chickens,

birds raised for meat, provide no guarantee to be free from Salmonella, nor are organic or

conventional produced poultry. Free range birds make up one percent of the chicken

produced in the United States (Durham).

The USDA can certify organic eggs. It requires that poultry be given organic feed,

which means an all-vegetarian diet without antibiotics or pesticides. The hens cannot be

raised in cages inside barns or warehouses, and are required to access the outdoors, but

the duration, length of time spent outside and quality of outdoor access fails to be

controlled (“Egg Carton Labels”). Cage free egg labels are similar because laying hens are

able to walk and lay their eggs in nests; however, they live in large flocks and are not

required to access the outdoors (“Cage free vs. Battery-Cage Eggs”).

Battery Cages are the alternative to cage free and organic eggs. Battery Cages are

sixty-seven square inches, less than the size of this paper, given to one egg-laying hen

during her lifetime. The hen is unable to spread her wings or other natural behaviors such

17

as nesting, perching and dust bathing (“Egg Carton Labels”). Birds of cage free and battery

cages are subjected to a process called de-beaking where their beaks are pressed against a

hot metal blade, often causing injury to the tongue. If the chicken is injured during de-

beaking, it may die of starvation (Shiva). Poultry are not the only creatures whom are

treated with disrespect.

The practice of tail docking occurs with cattle and swine. Tail docking removes a

portion of the animal’s tail by a rubber ring, hot iron or clean sharp knife. The banding

method entails “amputation of the tail by applying a thick rubber band or elastrator ring to

the tail, which restricts blood flow to the tail causing tissue death” (Phillips 2). Tail docking

began as a practice to improve health standards such as diseases carried by cattle to the

workers. However, tail docking became irrelevant when workers improved hand hygiene.

Another reason for tail docking is cow cleanliness and udder health. It is believed that feces

can transfer from the cow’s tails to the cow’s udders and bodies. In numerous studies

analyzed by the Animal Welfare Program, it was found that “cleanliness measures, somatic

cell counts (a measure of udder health), or cases of mastitis as diagnosed by a veterinarian”

(Weary) had no difference between those animals that had their tails docked and those that

did not. Tail docking reduces the ability to ward off flies, causes pain and diminishes social

behaviors.

Cows take pleasure in problem solving and forming friendships; this is deprived

when animals are taken away from natural environments and used for human benefit

(“Study Proves Cows are as Clever as Sheep are Social”). Heifer, a female cow under three

years of age and has not had a calf of her own; can feed outside. Once a heifer is forced

pregnancy, she stays pregnant to produce milk for humans. Once her milk supply has run

18

dry, (average four years) she is useless and sent for slaughter (Forks Over Knives). Male

calves are of no use to the dairy industry. Calves are taken from their mothers and put in

small cages to decrease muscle mass production, becoming what humans refer as veal

(Torres 16-17). Offspring and their mothers are not treated kindly in this business.

Four out of five times a sow will spend sixteen weeks of her pregnancy confined in a

gestation crate, similar to a battery cage, as she will not be able to move properly.

According to a report by the USDA on swine, 87 percent of sows in gestation crates are kept

in concrete slats, eleven percent has metal flooring and two percent are kept in plastic sites

with slatted flooring. Of those pigs kept in cages, a mere four percent contain nature

enhancing dirt (Reference of Swine Health and Management Practices in the United States).

The nature of a sow is to create a nest to give birth, but the sow will not receive bedding.

She cannot move around to fulfill the foraging instinct and often develops sores from

chafing in the crate (Safran-Foer 159). The sores are often left untreated, adding to the

undesirable health of farm animals and use of antibiotics.

There are three types of influenza viruses A, B and C. Influenza type A viruses are of

the most concern because of the ability to quickly mutate, transmit hosts, create deadly

health complications and cause pandemics. The symptoms caused by influenza are

commonly treated with antibiotics, but strains of bacteria are gaining resistance to the

drugs used. Resistance started occurring when alarming levels of antibiotics became

standard practice to the prevention of illness in farm animals. Antibiotics exist in consumer

grade meat, manure, soil and water.

Influenza viruses can occur in meat, particularly if the animal is diseased at the time

of slaughter. The myth that H1N1 virus is spread through ingested pig meat or other

19

products from pigs has not been established. Consuming pork or other swine meat should

not be the source for contamination; heat treatments used in cooking meat will inactivate

any potential virus present in raw meat products, along with good hygiene. However,

transmission between pigs and humans occurs through direct or indirect contact with

respiratory secretions. At risk groups include farm workers, owners and families,

slaughterhouse workers, farrowers, veterinarians and pig processing factory workers

(“Human-Animal Interface Aspects of Influenza A/H1N1” 4). The airborne virus is then

transmissible between humans. Swine herds operate as a viral mixing vessel creating a

super virus that was never seen before. Swine are susceptible to influenzas and infections

from humans and avian (“Infection of Farmed Animals with the Pandemic Virus”). Another

strain of swine virus isolated in North America shows triple reassortment of human, swine

and avian origin (Greenbaum et al.).

Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza has demonstrated transmissibility among

humans (“Human-Animal Interface Aspects of Influenza A/H1N1” 4). Humans and swine

can serve as mixing vessels for the exchange of avian viral genetics (“Avian Influenza:

Assessing the Pandemic Threat” 11). As of October 2011, 565 confirmed cases of avian

influenza were reported to the World Health Organization. Of these total cases, 331 died.

Investigations noted only limited human to human transmission. People can be exposed to

the virus “through contact with infected poultry or contaminated environments”

(“Influenza at the human-animal interface” 2). It is possible to become infected by eating

poultry or visiting a farm where an outbreak has occurred.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is an opportunistic pathogen

that lives in the skin and nasal passages of humans and animals. MRSA contains the mecA

20

gene, which is responsible for resistance to beta-lactam compounds including methicillin,

penicillin, oxacillin and amoxicillin; it can also show resistance to ciprofloxacin,

clindamycin, gentamicin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (Brown et al. 1). This strain

of Staphylococcus aureus can cause enterotoxins, gastroenteritis, severe skin and tissue

infections and threatening pneumonia (2). MRSA can transfer from livestock to farmers (4).

During 2008, there were hospitalizations and treatment for those in the United States “who

had no recent contact with live animals” (4). MRSA can transfer from one human to

another. Retail meat contamination is frequent and provides the ability to resist multiple

antimicrobials.

The large amounts of antimicrobials used in agriculture are causing the same

resistant build up as seen in humans. During the year 2000, an outbreak caused by

Salmonella typhimurium, a bacterium that is resistant to seven types of antibiotics, many

people were ill and two died. The outbreak was traced to a herd of swine infected with the

same strain of bacteria. It was discovered that the patients bought pork from groceries

supplied by a single slaughterhouse. The slaughterhouse, farms and grocer were all

identified to carry the resistant strain (“Hogging It!: Estimates of Antimicrobial Abuse in

Livestock” 4). During the same year, a twelve year old Nebraska child became ill from

multidrug-resistant Salmonella, identical to strains isolated from cattle. “Resistance in the

foodborne zoonotic bacteria Salmonella and Campylobacter is clearly linked to antibiotic

use in food animals, and foodborne diseases caused by such resistant bacteria are well

documented in people” (Tackling Antibiotic Resistance From a Food Safety Perspective in

Europe 15). Zoonotic bacterium means it can be transmitted to humans from animals. The

World Health Organization urges farmers to stop using antimicrobials essential for human

21

medicine in animals as a method of growth promoters, husbandry, disease prevention and

treatment.

Multiple health problems associated with large farms are traced to manure. The

amount of manure produced by CAFOs in one year can range between 2,800 tons and 1.6

million tons (Understanding Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations and Their Impact on

Communities 9). Manure contains plant nutrients, pathogens, growth hormones and

antibiotics, chemicals added to manure or cleaning equipment, animal blood and other

chemicals. The sewage treatment plants required for human waste has no equivalent for

livestock waste. The manure produced cannot be recycled to fertilize crops or feed for

livestock because animal feeding operations are not allowed to produce vegetation.

Manure can be stored in deep pits under buildings housing livestock, clay or

concrete pits, lagoons or holding ponds. “Other manure management strategies include

pumping liquefied manure onto spray fields, trucking it off site, or storing it until it can be

used or treated” (10). The problem with some of these methods defers back to the amount

of manure produced, the deep pits can get nutrient overload, which overwhelms the

absorbency of the soil, causing run off or leached into groundwater. Rainwater can cause

holding lagoons to overflow affecting the quality of surface water (10). When manure is

stored in pits or lagoons, of any kind, the anaerobic reaction (breakdown without oxygen)

produces methane (14).

The gases released by decomposing manure and livestock affect air quality in

surrounding communities. All gas emissions are under investigation for the relation to

greenhouse gases contributing to climate change. The EPA characteristics manure

management as the fourth prominent cause of nitrous oxide emissions and the fifth

22

prominent cause of methane emissions (“Animal Feeding Operations”). Recurrent

pollutants found in air surrounding AFOs are ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, methane and

particulate matter. Ammonia poses health risks such as respiratory irritant, burns to the

respiratory tract, skin and eyes, severe cough and chronic lung disease. Hydrogen sulfide

causes inflammation of membranes of the eye and respiratory tract, olfactory neuron loss

(sense of smell) and death. Particulate matter can cause chronic bronchitis, chronic

respiratory symptoms, decline in lung function, and dust toxic syndrome (Understanding

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations and Their Impact on Communities 6).

During 2008, the Center for Disease Control found that 1,300 persons became ill

from Salmonella typhimurium infecting community water (“Surveillance for Waterborne

Disease Outbreaks” 4). A total 122 persons were hospitalized and one death from

untreated ground water in Colorado (60). The source of this outbreak was found to be from

animal manure contamination by a storage tank that was cracked in multiple areas

including entry points. Tap water and clinical specimens tested positive for Salmonella

typhimurium found in the storage tank. The outbreak required local, regional, state, federal

emergency assistance and backing by the National Guard (73). The EPA’s National Water

Quality Inventory reported 29 states identified AFOs to be the source of contamination for

water quality (Copeland 4). AFOs impact on local communities are numerous and therefore

legalized by state government instead of individual federal regulations. AFOs maintain the

federal guidelines and adhere to local laws.

Maintenance of AFOs is possible; however, each state has different regulations and a

third party often performs audits. Permits providing confirmation about animal waste

management are required by the EPA, but not always obtained. “Nationwide, only 30

23

percent of the estimated 6,600 operations meeting CAFO size requirements have been

issued” ("Animal Feeding Operations Compliance and Enforcement" 4). Waste management

as controlled by the government, is failing to assemble acceptable regulations by 70

percent. On October 14, 2011, the EPA updated the facility specific National Pollutant

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) reporting rule for CAFOs in the United States. The

last regulation for pollutant discharge passed during the 1970s ("Proposed NPDES CAFO

Reporting Rule").

Conclusion

The focus of farming has shifted throughout the years. Farming has the opportunity

to positively change one’s way of life, by eating healthier foods, becoming familiar with the

land and gain an understanding of where food comes from. Unfortunately, with the rise of

population and government’s control of regulating the food we eat, people become

unattached to their food. It comes as no surprise that information about factory farming is

hidden from the public. In a media driven world, no one wants to discuss the food they just

ate as a problem.

The problem fabricates with overuse of antibiotics, excessive manure polluting

water and soil, unusual treatment of livestock and improper regulation of Animal Feeding

Operations. Industrialization of food eminently has advantages and disappointments; with

one improper action, another correction follows. Amendments may be in the form of

greater fines for violations, stricter auditing policies and supplementary information

available to the public. It would be in the industries best interest to fix broken and faulty

equipment. America has established usage of industrial farming and the first consequential

task to execute is equipping oneself with knowledge.

24

Sources Cited and Consulted

"A Brief Guide to Labels and Animal Welfare." The Humane Society of the United States. 8

October 2010. 11 October 2011.

<http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/confinement_farm/facts/guide_egg_labels.

html>.

"Animal Feeding Operations." Envirionmental Protection Agency National Pollutant

Discharge Elimination System. 4 January 2011. October 2011.

<http://cfpub.epa.gov/ npdes/home.cfm?program_id=7>.

"Animal Feeding Operations Compliance and Enforcement." Environmental Protection

Agency. 6 October 2011. October 2011.

<http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/anafocom.html>.

"Avian Influenza: Assessing the Pandemic Threat." World Health Organization, 2005.

October 2011.

Brown et al. "Antimicrobial Susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus from Retail Ground

Meats." Journal of Food Protection 74.10 (2011): 1625-1629.

Centner, T. "Limitations on the Confinement of Food Animals in the United States.” Journal

of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23.5 (2010): 469. ABI/INFORM Global,

ProQuest. Web. 12 Oct. 2011.

"Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations." Illionios Environmental Protection Agency.

2011. 11 November 2011. <http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/cafo/>.

"Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation Responsiveness Summary." Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. 11 November 2011.

25

<http://www.epa.state.il.us/public-notices/2003/cafo-general-permit/

responsiveness-summary.pdf>.

"Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) - What is a CAFO?" Environmental

Protection Agency. 15 April 2011. 12 October 2011.

<http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sector_table.pdf>.

Copeland, Claudia. "Animal Waste and Water Quality: EPA Regulation of Concentrated

Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs)." The National Agricultural Law Center. 16

February 2010. 5 November 2011.

<http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL31851.pdf>.

"Cumulative Number of Confirmed Human Cases of Avian Influenza A(H5N1) Reported to

WHO." World Health Organization. 3 October 2011. November 2011.

<http://www.who.int/influenza/human_animal_interface/avian_influenza/

Influenza_Summary_IRA_HA_interface.pdf>.

Davis, Brenda, and Vesanto Melina. Becoming Vegan. 1st ed. Summertown: Book Publishing

Company, 2000. Pg. 1-281. Print.

Durham, Sharon. "Free-Range" Chicken—No Guarantee It's Free of Salmonella. 2002.

October 2011. <http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2004/040920.htm>.

“Forks Over Knives.” Dir. Lee Fulkerson. Monica Beach Media, 2011. DVD.

Greenbaum, B, et al. "The Origin of the Recent Swine Influenza A(H1N1) Virus Infecting

Humans." Rapid Communications 14.17 (2009).

"Hogging It!: Estimates of Antimicrobial Abuse in Livestock (2001)." Union of Concerned

Scientists. 07 April 2004. 15 October 2011.

26

<http://ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/science_and_impacts/impacts_industrial_

agriculture/hogging-it-estimates-of.html>.

"Human-Animal Interface Aspects of Influenza A/H1N1." World Health Organization. 2009.

October 2011.

"Infection of Farmed Animals with the Pandemic Virus." World Health Organization.

Pandemic H1N1 briefing note. 2009. October 2011.

Lappe, Frances Moore. Diet for a Small Planet. 4th ed. New York: Ballantine Books, 1991.

479. Print.

"Meat and Poultry Labeling Terms." United States Department of Agriculture. 12 April

2011. 11 October 2011.

<http://www.fsis.usda.gov/factsheets/meat_&_poultry_labeling_terms/index.asp>.

"National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System." Environmental Protection Agency. 23

March 2004. 11 October 2011. <http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/glossary.cfm>.

Phillips,  C., J. Wojciechowska, J. Meng, and N. Cross. "Perceptions of the Importance of

Different Welfare Issues in Livestock Production." Animal: an International Journal

of Animal Bioscience 3.8 (2009): 1152-1166.

"Proposed NPDES CAFO Reporting Rule." Environmental Protection Agency. October 2011.

5 November 2011. <http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/docs.cfm?

program_id=7&view=allprog&sort=name>.

"Putting Meat on the Table: Industrial Farm Animal Production in America." PEW

Commision on Industrial Animal Farm Production. 2009. 5 November 2011.

<http://www.ncifap.org/bin/e/j/PCIFAPFin.pdf>.

Safran-Foer, Jonathan. Eating Animals. Vol. 1st. New York: Back Bay Books, 2010.

27

Shiva, Vandana. "Violence is a threat to the survival of animals and humans. " Peace

Research 34.1 (2002): 107. ProQuest Military Collection, ProQuest. Web. 12 October

2011.

"Study Proves Cows are as Clever as Sheep are Social." Courier Mail (2005): 10.

"Surveillance Summaries." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Morbidity and

Mortality Weekly Report 60.12 (2011): 58-63.

"Swine 2006, Part I: Reference of Swine Health and Management Practices in the United

States." United States Department of Agriculture. 2007. 2 November 2011.

<http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/nahms/swine/downloads/swine2006

/Swine2006_dr_PartI.pdf>.

"Tackling Antibiotic Resistance From a Food Safety Perspective in Europe." World Health

Organization. Ed. Hilde Kruse and Francesca Racioppi. 2011. 5 November 2011.

<http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/136454/e94889.pdf>.

Torres, Jenna, and Bob Torres. Vegan Freak: Being Vegan in a Non-Vegan World. 2nd ed.

Oakland: PM Press, 2010. 1-196. Print.

"Understanding Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations and Their Impact on

Communities." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Ed. Mark Schultz. 2010.

15 November 2011.

<http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/ehs/Docs/Understanding_CAFOs_NALBOH.pdf>.

"USDA Celebrates 150 Years". United States Department of Agriculture. 2011. November

2011. <http://usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?navid=USDA150>.

28

Weary, C. B. Tucker and D. M. "Tail Docking in Dairy Cattle." Faculty of Agricultural Sciences

and Centre for Applied Ethics. Vers. 11. 2011. 1 November 2011.

<http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/newsletters/v11n3/11n3tuck.htm>.

“Welfare of Animals in the Chicken Industry.” Humane Society of the United States. 2007.

November 2011.

<http://www.humanesociety.org/assets/pdfs/farm/welfare_broiler.pdf>

29

Factory Farming

I. Introduction

II. What is factory farming?

a. Common media topics relevant to farming

b. Definition

c. Size thresholds for feeding operations

III. Animal Welfare

a. Free range poultry

b. Organic eggs

c. Cage free eggs

d. Battery cages and de-beaking

e. Tail docking in cattle and swine

f. Veal and behavior

g. Gestation crates

IV. Diseases Humans Caught from Animal Consumption

a. Swine Influenza

b. Avian Influenza

V. Antibiotic Resistance

a. MRSA

b. Zoonotic bacteria in food

VI. Manure

a. Amount produced

b. Storage

c. Gases released by manure

d. Water contamination by manure

VII. Conclusion

a. Problems with farming

30