Hogwashed: A Powerful Special Interest. Shameless Politicians. Failed Regulations. An In-Depth Look at Big Pork in North Carolina. | Special Investigation | Indy Week
Pin It

Hogwashed: A Powerful Special Interest. Shameless Politicians. Failed Regulations. An In-Depth Look at Big Pork in North Carolina. 

click to enlarge Young hogs are gathered in pens at Butler Farms in Lillington, NC - PHOTO BY ALEX BOERNER
  • Photo by Alex Boerner
  • Young hogs are gathered in pens at Butler Farms in Lillington, NC
On Wednesday, the INDY published the third and final installment of our investigative series into North Carolina’s hog-farming industry. The first story examined claims by lower-income African-American residents of eastern North Carolina that neighboring hog farms have polluted their properties and efforts by lawmakers to shield pork producers from litigation. The second looked at the environmental impacts hog farming has had over the last two decades, particularly on waterways such as the Neuse River. This final piece discusses ways to make the multibillion-dollar hog industry more sustainable, both for the environment and the state’s rural population, and the political and financial reasons those steps have not been taken.

Among the series’ revelations:
  • Cumulatively, House Republicans who supported HB 467, also known as the “hog-farm-protection-bill,” have received more than $272,000 in campaign contributions from the industry throughout their careers. The bill’s sponsor, Republican Representative Jimmy Dixon of Duplin, has received $115,000, including $36,250 from individuals associated with Murphy-Brown LLC and $9,500 from the N.C. Pork Council. House Speaker Tim Moore has garnered $44,650. Senator Brent Jackson, who sponsored the Senate companion bill to HB 467, has received more than $130,000 from industry associates.
  • Jimmy Dixon, the bill’s sponsor, is not concerned by studies that point to the public health and environmental hazards associated with hog farms because he believes those studies are biased. “A lot of these studies, a lot of them, begin with the end product in mind, and then they construct it for the outcome," he told the INDY.
  • No new hog farms have been constructed since the state legislature placed a moratorium on the construction of new hog farms in 1997. Because of that, the environmentally sustainable technologies identified in a multimillion-dollar study known as the Smithfield Agreement have gone largely unused in North Carolina.
  • According to the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality, only two of the state’s 2,217 hog farms are using environmentally sustainable technologies that meet all of the criteria set forth in the Smithfield Agreement.
  • The number of annual inspections of hog farms in North Carolina dropped from two to one in 2011 following a series of state budget cuts. A hog farmer told the INDY the inspections today consist of essentially a paper audit, a claim the N.C. Department of Environmentally Quality denies.
  • Of all state agencies, the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality would be responsible for collecting the age of a lagoon and the materials it is lined with. But, according to the DEQ, there is no central database containing that information. In an email, DEQ spokeswoman Marla Sink acknowledges that collecting "the age of the lagoon" falls under the DEQ's purview. But, she writes, “the age of the lagoons varies greatly and we do not have actual construction dates of most of these lagoons.”
  • Just ten of the state’s 2,217 hog farms have implemented the more environmentally sustainable anaerobic digester system, which converts the methane sequestered by covering swine lagoons into electricity. Of those, two belong to the state's largest pork producer, Murphy-Brown LLC, which, according to court records, owns hogs at up to two-thirds of the state's farms.

Speaking of...

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

INDY Week publishes all kinds of comments, but we don't publish everything.

  • Comments that are not contributing to the conversation will be removed.
  • Comments that include ad hominem attacks will also be removed.
  • Please do not copy and paste the full text of a press release.

Permitted HTML:
  • To create paragraphs in your comment, type <p> at the start of a paragraph and </p> at the end of each paragraph.
  • To create bold text, type <b>bolded text</b> (please note the closing tag, </b>).
  • To create italicized text, type <i>italicized text</i> (please note the closing tag, </i>).
  • Proper web addresses will automatically become links.

Latest in Special Investigation



Twitter Activity

Comments

I am an N.C. hog farmer. If you are deemed to be a part of a problem, then it makes …

by Tom Thomas Butler on Hogwashed, Part 3: Solutions Exist for the Hog Industry’s Waste-Management Problem. Why Aren’t They Being Used? (Special Investigation)

Most Read

No recently-read stories.

Visit the archives…

Most Recent Comments

I am an N.C. hog farmer. If you are deemed to be a part of a problem, then it makes …

by Tom Thomas Butler on Hogwashed, Part 3: Solutions Exist for the Hog Industry’s Waste-Management Problem. Why Aren’t They Being Used? (Special Investigation)

In the early to mid 1990's I came upon an investment opportunity in a process called Bio-Remediation which touted it's …

by Ray Ulansey on Hogwashed, Part 3: Solutions Exist for the Hog Industry’s Waste-Management Problem. Why Aren’t They Being Used? (Special Investigation)

PS: 11 pounds (a lot more than a gallon) of excreta per day
per 180 pound average pig is …

by Chris Tiffany on Hogwashed, Part 2: Environmental Advocates Say Hog Facilities’ Antiquated Waste-Disposal Systems Are Threatening the State’s Waterways (Special Investigation)

The Neuse river also passes through major municipalities like Raleigh, Goldsboro, Kinston and New Bern who are legally allowed to …

by William Shaw on Hogwashed, Part 2: Environmental Advocates Say Hog Facilities’ Antiquated Waste-Disposal Systems Are Threatening the State’s Waterways (Special Investigation)

© 2017 Indy Week • 320 E. Chapel Hill St., Suite 200, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation