In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Chapter 4 The Contested Terrain of Swine Production Deregulation and Reregulation of Corporate Farming Laws in Missouri Douglas H. Constance, Anna M. Kleine~ and J. Sanford Rikoon The U.S. hog industry is being transformed from an agricultural to an industrial model (Ikerd 1998; Rhodes 1995; Welsh 1996; Zering 1998), while at the same time becoming integrated into the global economy (DiPietre and Watson 1994; USDA FAS 1998; Plain 1997). This process is characterized by the decline of a production system based on family farms and the emergence of a system based on corporate controlled concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) growing thousands of hogs in a small geographic area (Marbery 1994b; Rhodes 1995; Stout 1996; Welsh 1996). From Minnesota to Texas and North Carolina to Utah, states across the U.S. are embroiled in the industrialization of the pork industry (Cecelski and Kerr 1992; McMahon et al. 1998; Thompson 1998). CAFOs have become so controversial that as part of the Clean Water Action Plan the USDA and EPA launched a national strategy to regulate the negative impacts (USDA/U.S. EPA 1999). The number of hog farms in the U.S. peaked in 1940 at almost 4 million, dropping to 2 million in 1964,330,000 in 1982, and 110,000 in 1997 (U.S. Census ofAgriculture 1997a). Since the 1950s the number of hog farms with fewer than 1,000 hogs per year of production has decreased. At the same time, those producing over 1,000 head per year have steadily increased (Rhodes 1995). The fastest growth is coming from the "super" hog farms (50,000-500,000 hogs/yr) and the "mega" hog farms (greater than 500,000 hogs/yr). Rhodes (1995) also reports a steady increase in hogs produced under vertical integration. In Missouri, over the period 1964 to 1997, the number of hog farms declined from 62,000 to 5,400, while the number of hogs sold increased from about 6.2 million to 8.5 million (U.S. Census of Agriculture 1969, 1987, 1997b). 76 Douglas H. Constance, Anna M. Kleiner, and J. sanford Rlkoon For some people in rural areas, large scale hog production is seen as a desirable form of socioeconomic development that complements the historical agricultural activities of the area and provides needed jobs. For others, hog CAFOs are an illegitimate model of development in which the negative impacts outweigh the benefits (see Heffernan 1999b; Schiffman 1998; Thu 1996b). The negative impacts include corporate vs. family farm ownership, odor problems, water quality and health concerns, depressed property values, and community disruption . Rural communities across the u.S. are struggling with these issues as a new part of the global food system comes to their areas. DeLind (1995) was the first to document the socioeconomic impacts and controversies related to hog CAFOs in her study of Parma, Michigan . Since then other researchers have reported similar scenarios in Iowa (Durrenberger and Thu 1996; Holtcamp et al. 1994; Padgett et al. 1998; Thu 1996a), Missouri (Hendrickson and Pigg 1998; Kleiner and Constance 1998a; Seipel et al. 1998), Nebraska (Allen et al. 1998), North Carolina (McMillan and Schulman 1998; Thu and Durrenberger 1994; Wing and Wolf 1999), Texas (Bonanno and Constance 2000; Constance and Bonanno 1999a); and Utah (Kleiner and Constance 1998a). The hog CAFO issue is so contentious that corporate farming laws have been changed in several states to deal with the public uproar (Dummermuth 1997; McMahon et al. 1998). In 1998 alone, legislation to further regulate CAFOs was enacted in Colorado, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, New York, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Virginia, and Pennsylvania (National Conference of State Legislatures 1999). The CAFO-based hog industry has migrated west from North Carolina and nearby areas to the midwest and Great Plains and brought the controversy with it. The cover of the June 1998 National Hog Farmer magazine declared, "An Industry Swirling in Controversy" superimposed over the picture ofa CAFO (National Hog Farmer 1998). This contest between advocates of CAFOs as a rural development strategy and their opponents is largely carried out within the arena of the state. It is the state that balances the needs ofcapital accumulation with societal legitimation (Bonanno and Constance 1996; Friedland 1991b; O'Connor 1974). For our analysis, we focus on the local state, Missouri, and on its counties and townships as loci of struggle. We use the concept "contested terrain" to examine the creation and implementation of laws aimed to restrict corporate farming that accompanied the introduction...

Share