SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
The expanse of JBS pork processing plant sits at the northeast corner of Worthington, Minn., September 4, 2019. (Photo: Courtney Perry/For the Washington Post)
To Protect Nation's Waterways, New Lawsuit Challenges Trump Admin's Failure to Update Slaughterhouse Pollution Guidelines
"EPA is rewarding dirty slaughterhouses at the expense of the public."
Dec 17, 2019
The Trump administration's decision not to issue upgraded regulations pertaining to pollution discharge from slaughterhouses into waterways sparked a lawsuit Wednesday from a dozen advocacy groups who say the move puts ecosystems and water supplies at risk.
"By not updating these nationwide standards, EPA is rewarding dirty slaughterhouses at the expense of the public," said Sylvia Lam, attorney with the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP).
The lawsuit (pdf), filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, was brought by animal rights, conservation, and community groups including Cape Fear River Watch, Center for Biological Diversity, and The Humane Society of the United States.
At issue is the EPA's decision, published in the Federal Register in October, regarding "effluent guidelines." The federal agency said revisions were "not appropriate at this time."
The groups are challenging that assessment. The regulations for slaughterhouse emissions that go directly into waterways are in sore need of an upgrade, they said. It's also problematic, the groups added, that the emissions that first head to sewage treatment plants before being released into waterways have had no guidelines.
There's ample cause for concern.
The nation has thousands of slaughterhouses, many owned by deep-pocketed agriculture giants including Smithfield Foods and Cargill. The majority of these plants, about 4,700, can legally dump processed wastewater directly into waterways or into treatment plants.
An analysis out last year from EIP looked at nearly 100 large meat-processing plants and found that roughly three-quarters of them exceeded their permit limits for nitrogen, fecal bacteria, or other pollutants at least once in the time frame studied. The biggest culprit was the Beardstown, Illinois facility owned by JBS. That slaughterhouse dumped "1,850 pounds of nitrogen on average each day into a tributary of the Illinois River. That's the amount contained in raw sewage produced daily by a city with the population roughly the size of Evanston," the Chicago Tribune reported at the time.
Despite the breadth of the problem, federal guidelines haven't changed. The last regulations for the slaughterhouses that put emissions directly into waterways came 15 years ago, the groups said.
"Some of EPA's technological requirements for slaughterhouses date from the mid-1970s," said Earthjustice attorney Alexis Andiman. "Technology has changed a lot since then, and EPA needs to catch up."
Meat processing plants, as animal rights groups noted, have adverse impacts that extend beyond the environment.
"The pace and size of today's slaughterhouses create an extremely dangerous environment, in which animals suffer and toxic waste spews into our waterways," said Stephen Wells, executive director of the Animal Legal Defense Fund, which is part of the new lawsuit.
"This contaminates water for wildlife and surrounding communities at unprecedented rates," he said. "The government must do its job to protect people, animals, and the environment--and stop serving corporate interests at our expense."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
The Trump administration's decision not to issue upgraded regulations pertaining to pollution discharge from slaughterhouses into waterways sparked a lawsuit Wednesday from a dozen advocacy groups who say the move puts ecosystems and water supplies at risk.
"By not updating these nationwide standards, EPA is rewarding dirty slaughterhouses at the expense of the public," said Sylvia Lam, attorney with the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP).
The lawsuit (pdf), filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, was brought by animal rights, conservation, and community groups including Cape Fear River Watch, Center for Biological Diversity, and The Humane Society of the United States.
At issue is the EPA's decision, published in the Federal Register in October, regarding "effluent guidelines." The federal agency said revisions were "not appropriate at this time."
The groups are challenging that assessment. The regulations for slaughterhouse emissions that go directly into waterways are in sore need of an upgrade, they said. It's also problematic, the groups added, that the emissions that first head to sewage treatment plants before being released into waterways have had no guidelines.
There's ample cause for concern.
The nation has thousands of slaughterhouses, many owned by deep-pocketed agriculture giants including Smithfield Foods and Cargill. The majority of these plants, about 4,700, can legally dump processed wastewater directly into waterways or into treatment plants.
An analysis out last year from EIP looked at nearly 100 large meat-processing plants and found that roughly three-quarters of them exceeded their permit limits for nitrogen, fecal bacteria, or other pollutants at least once in the time frame studied. The biggest culprit was the Beardstown, Illinois facility owned by JBS. That slaughterhouse dumped "1,850 pounds of nitrogen on average each day into a tributary of the Illinois River. That's the amount contained in raw sewage produced daily by a city with the population roughly the size of Evanston," the Chicago Tribune reported at the time.
Despite the breadth of the problem, federal guidelines haven't changed. The last regulations for the slaughterhouses that put emissions directly into waterways came 15 years ago, the groups said.
"Some of EPA's technological requirements for slaughterhouses date from the mid-1970s," said Earthjustice attorney Alexis Andiman. "Technology has changed a lot since then, and EPA needs to catch up."
Meat processing plants, as animal rights groups noted, have adverse impacts that extend beyond the environment.
"The pace and size of today's slaughterhouses create an extremely dangerous environment, in which animals suffer and toxic waste spews into our waterways," said Stephen Wells, executive director of the Animal Legal Defense Fund, which is part of the new lawsuit.
"This contaminates water for wildlife and surrounding communities at unprecedented rates," he said. "The government must do its job to protect people, animals, and the environment--and stop serving corporate interests at our expense."
The Trump administration's decision not to issue upgraded regulations pertaining to pollution discharge from slaughterhouses into waterways sparked a lawsuit Wednesday from a dozen advocacy groups who say the move puts ecosystems and water supplies at risk.
"By not updating these nationwide standards, EPA is rewarding dirty slaughterhouses at the expense of the public," said Sylvia Lam, attorney with the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP).
The lawsuit (pdf), filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, was brought by animal rights, conservation, and community groups including Cape Fear River Watch, Center for Biological Diversity, and The Humane Society of the United States.
At issue is the EPA's decision, published in the Federal Register in October, regarding "effluent guidelines." The federal agency said revisions were "not appropriate at this time."
The groups are challenging that assessment. The regulations for slaughterhouse emissions that go directly into waterways are in sore need of an upgrade, they said. It's also problematic, the groups added, that the emissions that first head to sewage treatment plants before being released into waterways have had no guidelines.
There's ample cause for concern.
The nation has thousands of slaughterhouses, many owned by deep-pocketed agriculture giants including Smithfield Foods and Cargill. The majority of these plants, about 4,700, can legally dump processed wastewater directly into waterways or into treatment plants.
An analysis out last year from EIP looked at nearly 100 large meat-processing plants and found that roughly three-quarters of them exceeded their permit limits for nitrogen, fecal bacteria, or other pollutants at least once in the time frame studied. The biggest culprit was the Beardstown, Illinois facility owned by JBS. That slaughterhouse dumped "1,850 pounds of nitrogen on average each day into a tributary of the Illinois River. That's the amount contained in raw sewage produced daily by a city with the population roughly the size of Evanston," the Chicago Tribune reported at the time.
Despite the breadth of the problem, federal guidelines haven't changed. The last regulations for the slaughterhouses that put emissions directly into waterways came 15 years ago, the groups said.
"Some of EPA's technological requirements for slaughterhouses date from the mid-1970s," said Earthjustice attorney Alexis Andiman. "Technology has changed a lot since then, and EPA needs to catch up."
Meat processing plants, as animal rights groups noted, have adverse impacts that extend beyond the environment.
"The pace and size of today's slaughterhouses create an extremely dangerous environment, in which animals suffer and toxic waste spews into our waterways," said Stephen Wells, executive director of the Animal Legal Defense Fund, which is part of the new lawsuit.
"This contaminates water for wildlife and surrounding communities at unprecedented rates," he said. "The government must do its job to protect people, animals, and the environment--and stop serving corporate interests at our expense."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.