Farmers concerned over new regulations for brooder houses
Building to hold and raise chickens for buyers.
The first draft of an ordinance setting rules for poultry houses in the county was discussed at the Hancock County Fiscal Court Meeting on Monday evening, July 24th. Local farmers attended to voice their concerns and ideas.
The goal of the fiscal court with the eventual passing of Ordinance 2023-03, after listening to farmers and making any changes, is to “protect the citizens & environment from dangers and potential dangers.”
Regulations would apply to all operations in the county consisting of 500 poultry or more, and storage sites of poultry litter & outdoor stockpiling, as well as recommendations for new poultry farmers, with the aim of best management practices being used for controlling odor & dust, etc.
Judge-Executive Johnny Roberts said he felt there was some “misinformation” circulating about the details in the ordinance. “This court doesn’t want to step on somebody’s farm operation,” he said. “We’re not trying to be restrictive. We’re just trying to protect some areas of our county.”
Local farmers in attendance and fiscal court members each had a copy of the ordinance, and Roberts read through the items on the list. “The first item I want to look at is the field staging & storage – the [part where it says] ‘shall not be stored on premises for more than 90 days.’ We’re going to remove that completely.”
Roberts said he and County Attorney Paul Madden, Jr. had a conversation with Jamie Guffey, of the KY Poultry Federation, and since the state already has guidelines in place for staging, that they are removing that language from the ordinance.
District 4 Magistrate Gary Baker (HC Conservation Technician for over 20 years) stated, “It can only be stored for up to 90 days, if it’s outside, without it covered. Those are state & federal guidelines under the Agricultural Water Quality Act. We can’t change that. That’s set in stone.”
The Water Quality Act Amendment requires that the temporary storage of manure (litter) up to 90 days, should be stored in a manner which prevents water from coming in contact with the storage, Baker added. Anything that’s 90 days plus, has to be covered.
Roberts said, “My understanding was that we couldn’t allow the 90 days because if it’s stored on the field outside it still has to be covered, even for 30 days; even if you’re not producing it and just putting it on your field.”
Discussion continued over the litter distance from dwellings, as well as other setback restrictions included in the ordinance, such as all new poultry barns being within 1,000 ft. (changed after discussion to 500 ft.) of a dwelling not owned by a poultry producer, and other “minimum number of feet” requirements away from: lakes, rivers, blue line streams, springs, sink holes, active churches, public schools, public parks, property lines, primary & secondary roadways and incorporated city limits.
Roberts reiterated that on some of the items they will defer back to the state’s guidelines, and asked the farmers, “Can you put the litter in the fields? I’ll speak for me now. I don’t have any concern about you all doing that. But, I’m putting my own feelings aside. We’re trying to protect certain areas.
For the first time in this county, we have an opportunity for tourism. We’re trying to protect some of the areas. We’re not trying to say you can’t build chicken farms and raise chickens. That’s not it at all. That’s not my intention.
For instance, the Non-GMO is becoming a big thing. In the farming industry a lot of folks want to use this, so we’re not restricting it. We’re just saying we can’t supersede, with an ordinance, something that the state tells you to do.”
A local farmer said the ordinance, without more changes, would affect 2nd generation farming, especially with a regulation imposing that any poultry production facility should be located on at least 100 acres.
District 3 Magistrate John Mark Gray answered, “We don’t want to affect 2nd generation farmers, or first, and impose that. We talked about setting that back to 45-50 acres.”
Roberts said they’ve looked at the state guidelines for acreage and those will be deferred to, which are: 15 acres per poultry house and 5 acres for each additional one after that.
“We’ve got 280 acres, and if you have to go back 1,000 feet from the property line, we couldn’t do it,” a farmer stated. “You can’t always build right in the center.”
Roberts answered, “The state guideline says you can be within 75 feet of a property owner. I think that’s too close. 75 feet of farm can be within 75 feet of a property line.”
“Can you figure out how to do that on 40 acres?” another farmer asked. “That’s mathematically impossible the way it’s set up. If you want to build a poultry facility, they’re going to be approx. 700 ft. and say 400 ft. wide. How many acres is that? And, that is if you’re putting it in the center of your property, in order to manage the 75 feet limit.”
“What do you think is appropriate?” Roberts asked.
He answered, “I think keep it the way the state has it. And, if people don’t like that, then they should stay in the city, or they should move (the amount of feet) off the property line so they don’t have to worry about it.”
“75 feet from a property line is not necessarily 75 feet from the dwelling,” Dan Emmick said. “The state regulation is 500 feet from a dwelling (of someone other than a producer).”
Roberts said, “We’re not saying to anybody, ‘You’re going to do this, or you’re going to do that.’ But, down the road, there are certain areas in the county that have potential for growth, and we’re trying to protect those areas. This ordinance is not for like somebody in this room. A lot of you all are saying you wouldn’t build one [within the allotted feet from a dwelling]. I take you at your word. We’re just trying to protect certain areas.”
Next, was a discussion about the number of poultry that can be housed in each barn. Older barns can have 51,000 and new ones 60-65,000, according to state guidelines, it was stated. Then, Roberts asked for ideas from everyone, concerning the minimum amount of miles outside of city limits. Most agreed that poultry houses should be at least a mile from the cities.
Madden said, “It’s not unreasonable to ask to protect our neighbors, our schools and our parks. The county puts a lot of money into the park system and most of our kids have enjoyed and had the benefit of that. I want them to keep having that.”
“I’m kind of disturbed that there aren’t residents here from Lewisport, Hawesville, Pellville, etc. Or, the mayors. I’m disturbed that there isn’t someone from these cities here,” Dan Emmick said. “I don’t know that anybody in here lives in the city. I would’ve liked to have had some insight on what their thoughts on some of this stuff would be.”
Some of the local farmers who attended this meeting were: Brad & Jack Sheran, Randy & Tanner Stroupe, Dan & Shelby Emmick, David Winchell, Gene Boswell, Joe Hagman, Wes Poole, Kent Recker, Marcus Allen and Justin Obenchain.
The final draft of the ordinance will be printed in the Hancock Clarion.
By Jennifer Wimmer
