Agriculture board defers to Legislature on setbacks for poultry industry

Listen to this article

OKLAHOMA CITY – In the face of public feedback calling for tighter controls, the Oklahoma Board of Agriculture opted to leave the final decision on new poultry operation setbacks to state legislators Tuesday.

The board declined to either approve or reject emergency rules requiring large poultry operations to be at least one-quarter mile from occupied homes and one-half mile from public schools or city limits, in addition to distance requirements related to public highways, property lines, streams and water wells.

In response, Agriculture Secretary Jim Reese proposed a motion to at least keep a moratorium on new licenses in place until the lawmakers can deal with the issue directly. Board member Jay Franklin of Vinita amended Reese’s motion to require that such legislation be passed by May 31 in order to not impede ag industry growth in the state. The amended motion passed with 4-1 approval, although Reese did not support the May 31 deadline.

Residents in northeastern Oklahoma, where numerous companies raise chickens for consumption, say the proposed rules were not strong enough to protect water sources from pollution. Pam Kingfisher of Spring Creek Guardians, a citizens group that collected signatures to demand a moratorium on new operations, said before Tuesday’s meeting that the proposed rules left her nearly speechless for their ineffectiveness – for example, setting a poultry operation boundary at couple of hundred feet from a well opening would do little to protect against rainwater seepage, she said.

After the meeting, Kingfisher said she was pleased that at least the deferral action means the suspension held, otherwise the rules would have allowed approval of applications that were caught up in the issue without requiring new setbacks. The Green Country Guardians – a new name for the original group – posted on its group Facebook page that members were cautiously ecstatic at the outcome.

Reese expected the rules to be punted to state lawmakers, Deputy Secretary Betty Thompson said; based on earlier feedback, he prepared statements for the meeting. He reminded the board of how much effort had already been put into the research and public feedback process and why it should have been handled at their level, one way or another.

Out of 191 public comments, 182 opposed the proposed rules, he said, rules which were initially designed to be temporary with presumptive legislative oversight anyway.

“I have attended eight hours of public comment, six hours of discussion with Poultry Coordinating Council, four tours of the interested areas,” Reese said. “The entire board listened to two hours of public comment and toured the areas. In addition, we have had numerous discussions with producers and concerned citizens alike. We posted our proposed rules and received 191 comments. Each member of the board, and at least five ODAFF employees read every single comment in addition to several hours of phone calls.”

“The intentions of this board was to take a pause, determine the best way forward, and move on,” Reese said. “I am disappointed we were unable arrive at a consensus. It is a very important, yet highly contentious issue that we worked very hard to address. … We will happily implement whatever legislation is passed and signed by the governor at some time in the future.”