national survey on concentrated animal feeding …...some large industrial cattle, swine or poultry...

National Survey on Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs)Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future

December 10, 2019

Methodology

On behalf of the Johns Hopkins Center For a Livable Future, an academic center based at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, GQR conducted a nationwide survey among1,000 registered voters. The survey was conducted by live telephone interviewers among both landline and cell phone respondents between October 6 and 13, 2019.

The data are subject to a margin of error of +/- 3.1 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence interval; margin of error is higher among subgroups.

1

ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN AGRICULTURAL POLICY

2

31

49

27 14

33 23

10 23

39

21

54

40

79

19

49 44

32

62 60

36

0

20

40

60

80

100

Moregovernment

Lessgovernment

Moregovernment

Lessgovernment

Moregovernment

Lessgovernment

Moregovernment

Lessgovernment

Moregovernment

Lessgovernment

More government, much closer More government, somewhat closer

Less government, much closer Less government, somewhat closer

Please tell me which statement comes closer to your own view, even if neither is exactly right.

+14

Total

A majority of voters say government should help solve problems

Democrat Independent Republican

+60 +5 -30

Government should do more to solve problems and help meet the needs of people.

Government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals.

+24

2018 Total 3

78 87

72 75

16 10 21 20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Help farmers Not helpfarmers




Currently, the federal government works with farmers to make sure they earn an income from their products by helping them with things like marketing, insurance, and providing farming data and statistics.

In your view, is helping farmers in this way something the government should be doing or should not be doing?

Total

Voters also think the government should provide help to farmers


+55 +62 +77 +51

4

23

28

39

35

36

50

52

50

51

60

64

65

76

78

Strongly approve Somewhat approve

Next, I will read you some information about areas of food policy in which the federal government may be involved in. Based on what you know, please tell me whether you approve or disapprove of the government's job in that area.

Keeping food safe in the US

Keeping consumers safe from foodborne illnesses

Ensuring food is produced in a sustainable way that secures availability of food in the future

Making sure the prices of staple foods do not dramatically change from month to month

Ensuring people with low or modest incomes have enough money for basic food necessities

Making sure people in all neighborhoods have access to healthy food

Protecting farmers from big changes in crop prices

Government gets good marks on handling of Ag/Food policies

5

VIEWS OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY

6

10

21

53

46

0

20

40

60

Familiar Not Familiar

Very familiar Somewhat familiarNot at all familiar Not that familiar

+7

Most voters claim familiarity with the farming industry

% Familiar

Liberals 59

Under 50 59

Urbanity: Rural 55

Millennial women

50

How familiar are you with industrial animal farming, or farming that produces large quantities of meat for commercial sale?

7

58 51

57 66

86

8

83

10

84

9

90

5

0

20

40

60

80

100

Important Not important Important Not important Important Not important Important Not important

Very important Somewhat important

Not at all important Just a little important

+78

Total Democrat Independent Republican

+73 +75 +85

From what you know or have heard, how important is industrial animal farming and the meat industry to the national economy?

Industrial farming recognized as very important to the nation’s economy

8

58 73

60 54

86

8

92

3

92

6

83

10

0

20

40

60

80

100




+78

Total

Even those not directly tied to the industry

Very dependent Somewhat dependent

Not dependent at all

+89 +86 +73

From what you know or have heard, how important is industrial animal farming and the meat industry to the national economy?

Household income dependent on farming

9

6 11

23 25

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

CAFOs Factory Farms

Unfavorable

Favorable

ID: 39

Despite perceived importance to the economy, CAFOs and factory farms receive negative ratings

NET: -17 -14

51 CAFOs Factory Farms

Fav-Unfav (Net) Fav-Unfav (Net)

Total 6-23 (-17) 11-25 (-14)

Democrat 3-26 (-23) 9-27 (-18)

Independent 6-22 (-16) 11-29 (-18)

Republican 8-18 (-10) 14-20 (-6)

10

46 38

27 14

22 17 12 12

-50

-30

-10

10

30

50

Tyson Perdue Smithfield Beyond Meat

Unfavorable

Favorable

ID: 91

But specific industrial farming-related companies viewed favorably

+21

76 41

+2 +15

58

NET: +24

11

38

53

37

23

6 5 6 7

57

35

73

22

56

37 40

50

0

20

40

60

80

More oversight Less oversight More oversight Less oversight More oversight Less oversight More oversight Less oversight

A lot more oversight A little more oversight

Less oversight Same level of oversight

+22

Total

Voters want more oversight for industrial animal farms: more than one third express desire for a lot more oversight


+51 +19 -10

From what you know, do you think that there should be more oversight of industrial animal farms, less oversight, or should the level of oversight stay the same as it is now?

12

Support strongest among Democrats, women, and younger voters

% A lot more oversight

Total 38

Democrat 53

Independent 37

Republican 23

Men 34

Women 43

Under 50 43

50 and Over 34

Non-college men 33

College men 35

Non-college women 41

College women 47

13

NATIONAL CAFO MORATORIUM

14

27

39

26

13 21

14

24 28

43

38

57

29

41 40

30

49

0

20

40

60

Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose

Strongly favor Somewhat favorStrongly oppose Somewhat oppose

+5

Total

At the outset, a plurality of voters favor a national moratorium on CAFOs; nearly one fifth are uncertain


+18 +1 -19

Some large industrial cattle, swine or poultry operations that have thousands of animals in one confined location are also called Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, or CAFOs. From what you may know, do you favor or oppose a national moratorium or ban on the creation of new CAFOs?

15

Women, African-Americans, younger voters, and college-educated voters are more supportive of a ban initially

Total Favor Total Oppose Net

Total 43 38 +5

Men 39 42 -3

Women 47 35 +12

Northeast 44 38 +6

Central 44 39 +5

South 39 39 -

West 50 37 +13

Under 50 47 36 +11

50 and Over 40 40 -

Non-college grad 41 38 +3

College grad 47 41 +6

White 43 39 +4

African-American 46 29 +17

Hispanic/Latino 43 41 +2

16

27 21 23 29

21

32 22 19

43 38 39

48

36 40

47

36

0

20

40

60



+5

Total Very dependent Somewhat dependent

Not dependent at all

-9 -4 +11

Household income dependent on farming


Less support for a moratorium among those with some farming-related income

17

Moratorium support arguments

(SPLIT) (SUPPORT ENVIRO HEALTH) Some/Other people say CAFOs pose severe threats to public health. CAFOs produce hazardous animal waste that contaminates our drinking water and air with chemicals proven to cause long term disease, birth defects, respiratory problems, and cancer. One in four workers in CAFOs have bronchitis, while some have died from falling into ponds of animal waste, being overcome by toxic gases, and drowning. They also use 80 percent of all antibiotics in the US on animals, many of which are not sick. This causes an increase in antibiotic resistant microbes, which are already linked to causing 23,000 deaths a year. We need a national moratorium or ban that stops the creation of new CAFOs to protect the public health of our families and communities.

(SPLIT) (SUPPORT OVERSIGHT) Some/Other people say CAFOs are mismanaged agricultural facilities where large companies do not have to abide by basic safety rules for workers, animals, or consumers. CAFOs release hundreds of millions of tons of untreated animal waste that ends up in streams and rivers. Large agricultural companies spend millions to lobby for lower environmental, occupational and health standards. We need a national moratorium or ban on new CAFOs to protect workers, animals and consumers from unsafe business practices.

Text of moratorium arguments

Moratorium oppose argument

(OPPOSE) Some/Other people say CAFOs are an important part of America's food production system. CAFOs produce over 90 percent of all meat consumed in the US, employ thousands of people, and contribute 7 billion dollars from beef exports alone to the US economy. They are an efficient use of resources and keep food costs low. Plus, CAFOs have dramatically cut their land and water usage, and now use less energy with a smaller carbon footprint than in the past. Rural environments, where CAFOs are located, are cleaner than urban environments. CAFOs also reuse animal waste as fertilizer for US crops. We do not need a national CAFO moratorium or ban, which would prevent these businesses from growing, impact the US food supply and jeopardize hundreds of thousands of jobs.

18

27 31

35

28 21 23 22 24

43

38

49

42

51

40

47 44

0

20

40

60


Strongly favor Somewhat favor

Strongly oppose Somewhat oppose

Overall

Environmental health arguments produce a greater shift toward support for national CAFO moratorium

“Environmental Health”

“Oversight”

+5 +11 +3

Re-ask

+7

Initial

19

59

61

62

65

66

69

70

79

81

84

82

84

84

85

Very concerning Somewhat concerning

(ANTIBIOTICS) Farm animals are given antibiotics, contributes to resistance to antibiotics, which cause 23,000 deaths a year.

Full messages in the appendix

(RIVERS) Hog, chicken and cattle waste has contaminated 35,000 miles of rivers in 22 states.

(WORKERS) Workers and people who live near CAFOs experience unsafe levels of toxic gases, leading to respiratory problems.

(WASTE DEFINITION) A CAFO is any Animal Feeding Operation, animals are confined for 45 days or more, waste into waterways.

(ALGAE) Nitrates from animal waste can run off farms and cause bright-green algae blooms in waterways.

(AIR QUALITY) CAFO waste emits gasses that can carry disease-causing bacteria and fungus, which can cause death.

(NITRATES) Nitrates from animal waste can contaminate drinking water, which can cause birth defects and cancer.

Health arguments also resonate strongly on their own

20

30

40

41

48

49

53

54

64

67

72

68

78

Very concerning Somewhat concerning

(SUBSIDIZED) All CAFOs are subsidized by taxpayer money. They receive billions of dollars a year.

Full messages in the appendix

(LOCATION) CAFOs are disproportionately located near low-income communities and communities of color.

(ENERGY USE) Food produced in CAFOs uses nearly 12 times the energy it takes to produce food outside of CAFOs.

(SIZE DEFINITION) A CAFO contains more than 1,000 animal units. That is the equivalent of 1,000 heads of cattle, 700 dairy cows, 2,500 swine, or 125,000 chickens.

(FREQUENCY) There are nearly 20,000 CAFOs across the US.

(SLAUGHTER) Over 9 billion animals are raised and slaughtered in the US annually.

Statements focused on size of CAFOs are less impactful

21

MERGERS

22

38 37

16 12

41 43

0

20

40

60

Too littlecompetition

Too muchcompetition

Enough competition Too littlecompetition

Too muchcompetition

Enough competition

+22 +25

Competition in the Economy Competition in Industrial Ag

Generally, in the American economy, do you think there is enough competition between companies, too much competition, or too little competition?

When it comes to the companies that sell meats like chicken, beef, and pork, do you think there is enough competition between companies, too much competition, or too little competition?

Voters are not hugely concerned about a lack of competition in the American marketplace

23

29 34 33

21 21 17 20

27

49

40

55

35

54

36 39

52

0

20

40

60



+9


+20 +18 -13

From time to time two companies will merge together to become one company. The amount of power the companies have in the industry increases when they merge. Some have proposed banning large agricultural companies from merging together.

In general, do you favor or oppose a moratorium or ban on large agricultural companies merging together?

However, a plurality of voters favors banningmergers among large agricultural companies

24


Total 49 40 +9

Men 49 41 +8

Women 49 39 +10

Northeast 46 40 +6

Central 57 32 +15

South 45 46 -1

West 53 40 +13

Under 50 51 38 +13

50 and Over 48 43 +5

Non-college grad 49 40 +9

College grad 51 40 +11

White 50 41 +9

African-American 45 41 +4

Hispanic/Latino 55 34 +21

Women, college graduates, and younger voters all support banning mergers

25

Merger oppose argument

(OPPOSE MERGE) Some/other people say large agricultural companies merging together has led to just a handful of corporations controlling most of the agricultural markets: for example, four beef companies control 85 percent of the beef market. These corporations are able to increase their profits at the expense of everyone else. Farmers now take home just 15 percent of the profit on their goods. Consumers face fewer options and higher prices. Current laws are not strong enough. We need a moratorium or ban on large agricultural companies merging together so our markets can become more competitive, which will help small farmers make a living and help consumers pay less at the grocery store.

Text of merger arguments

Merger support argument

(SUPPORT MERGE) Some/other people say we already have laws on the books that deal with too few companies having too much power. A moratorium or ban on large agricultural companies merging would decrease the ability of the US agricultural industry to be competitive worldwide. It would cost the US economy hundreds of millions of dollars each year, and would stifle innovation. Plus, hundreds of thousands of jobs would be at risk. We do not need a moratorium or ban on large agricultural companies merging when we already have rules that apply and when it would threaten our food supply.

26

29

39

21 20

49

40

58

38

0

20

40

60

Favor Oppose Favor Oppose



Initial Merger Vote Informed Merger Vote

+9 +20

A debate on mergers produces movement toward banning agricultural mergers

27

Fear of consolidating power among a handful of companies drives concerns about mergers

18

28

40 A handful of corporations have too much power in

agricultural markets.

Farmers will take home less profit on their goods.

Consumers will pay more at the grocery store.

Regardless of your view on agricultural companies merging together, which of the following reasons is the best reason to OPPOSE agricultural companies merging together?

28

IOWA

29

Methodology

On behalf of the Center For a Livable Future, an academic center based at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, GQR conducted a statewide survey among 417 registered voters in Iowa. The survey was conducted by live telephone interviewers among both landline and cell phone respondents between October 6 and 13, 2019.


30

INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURE IN IOWA

31

20 11

65

34

0

20

40

60

80

Familiar Not Familiar

Very familiar Somewhat familiar

Not at all familiar Not that familiar+31


Two thirds of Iowa voters claim familiarity with the farming industry

32

63 58 65 68

83

11

76

16

87

6

88

7

0

20

40

60

80

100

Important Notimportant






+72


+60 +81 +81

From what you know or have heard, how important is industrial animal farming and the meat industry to the Iowa economy?

Vast majority recognize industrial ag as very important to Iowa’s economy

33

30

37

72

76

Very Well Well

Create jobs and are an important part of the local economy.

Full messages in the appendix.

Produce mass quantities of food and keep the cost of food down.

Now I am going to read you a list of phrases that people might use to describe industrial hog and swine farms in Iowa. For each phrase, please tell me whether it describes industrial hog and swine farms in Iowa very well, well, not too well, or not well at all.

Most see econ benefits of industrial ag, while half also see pollution effects

17

26

30

31

35

49

51

56

Very Well WellNegative

Positive

Contribute a significant amount to water pollution in the area.

Contribute a significant amount to air pollution in nearby communities.

Have a negative impact on the health of people in Iowa.

Care more about profits than regular people.

34

IOWA CAFO MORATORIUM

35

22

36

20

11

26

14

26

38

41 45

50

34

44 42

30

59

0

20

40

60



-4


+16 +2 -29


Support in Iowa for a national ban on CAFOs is mixed, split along party lines

36

3 9

87

0

20

40

60

80

100

Yes, a great deal Yes, some No

Have you seen, read or heard anything recently about a proposed moratorium or ban on the construction of new or expanding existing CAFOs in Iowa?

The vast majority of Iowans have not heard any information on a CAFO ban

37

29

52

25

13 22

7

22 35

53

42

77

20

49

42 35

63

0

20

40

60

80



+11


+57 +7 -28

As you may know, Iowa has many large, industrial hog or swine operations, often called Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, or CAFOs. The state is also home to 23 million hogs. Last year, a proposal was put forward in the Iowa legislature to increase oversight of these CAFOs and to place a moratorium or ban on the construction of new CAFOs and the expansion of existing CAFOs.

More voters favor a statewide moratorium on CAFOs

38


Total 53 42 +11

Men 44 51 -7

Women 61 34 +27

DBQ IC Water 58 36 +22

CDR OTT 56 42 +14

DSM 42 47 -5

Ames Ex DSM 62 36 +26

SC CB 45 51 -6

Under 50 47 46 +1

50 and Over 58 39 +19

Women, older voters, and urban residents are more supportive of a ban initially

39

29

45

24 20 22

8

23 33

63

34

81

17

60

36

51 46

0

20

40

60

80

Important Not Important Important Not Important Important Not Important Important Not Important


Not at all important A little important

+29


+64 +24 +5

How important is it that this moratorium or ban on the construction of new CAFOs and the expansion of existing CAFOs is passed in the Iowa legislature: very important, somewhat important, a little important, or not at all important?

Voters agree on the importance of a statewide ban on CAFOs

40

29 35

59

29 22 19

5

19 31

63

34

59

35

83

13

54

38 44

52

0

20

40

60

80

Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose



+24


+70 +16 -8

Now that you have heard more information, would you favor or oppose a proposal in the Iowa legislature to increase oversight of these CAFOs and to place a moratorium or ban on the construction of new or expansion of existing CAFOs?

Support for a moratorium grows with more information

Re-ask

41

Initial

National Overall Revote: 49-42

+29

WATER MATRIX

42

54

69 57

38

10 6 5 19

75

19

84

11

73

19

69

28

0

20

40

60

80




+56


+73 +54 +41

Industrial agricultural companies in Iowa must pass a 44-question environmental impact test in order to build new CAFOs. The test measures the impact of a CAFO on water quality, air quality, and the surrounding community. Currently, a passing score is 50 percent. Do you favor or oppose requiring a passing score of 66 percent?

Increasing the passing score for new CAFOs is popular

43

56

77

55

40

13 6

14 17

75

21

90

9

72

22

64

22

0

20

40

60

80

100




+54


+81 +50 +42

CAFOs built before 2002 do not need to pass this test in order to expand. Do you favor or oppose implementing tougher environmental impact standards that apply to all CAFOs, including ones built before 2002?

Support for eliminating exemptions for pre-2002 CAFOs

44

Widespread support for tougher standards shrinks only slightly among demographics when extended to pre-existing CAFOs

Tougher standards for CAFOs support

Tougher standards for CAFOs prior to 2002 support

Favor Oppose Net Favor Oppose Net

Total 75 19 +56 75 21 +54

Men 67 26 +41 68 27 +41

Women 82 13 +69 81 16 +65

Dubuque/Iowa City/Water 74 17 +57 81 13 +68

Cedar Rapids/Ottumwa 71 25 +46 69 28 +41

Des Moines 76 21 +55 73 24 +49

Ames excluding Des Moines 77 18 +59 78 18 +60

Sioux City/Council Bluffs 76 17 +59 70 26 +44

Under 50 71 20 +51 72 23 +49

50 and Over 78 19 +59 76 21 +55

45

NORTH CAROLINA

46

Methodology

On behalf of the Center For a Livable Future, an academic center based at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, GQR conducted a statewide survey among 418 registered voters in North Carolina. The survey was conducted by live telephone interviewers among both landline and cell phone respondents between October 6 and 13, 2019.


47

INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURE IN NORTH CAROLINA

48

9 11 8 8

23 22 13

32

48 51

48 51

59

41 37

63

0

20

40

60

Familiar Not Familiar Familiar Not Familiar Familiar Not Familiar Familiar Not Familiar

Very familiar Somewhat familiar

Not at all familiar Not that familiar

-3


-3 +18 -26


North Carolina voters are not very familiar with the farming industry

49

67 65 66 70

89

4

84

7

92

1

90

4

0

20

40

60

80

100




+85


+77 +91 +86

From what you know or have heard, how important is industrial animal farming and the meat industry to the Iowa economy?

But industrial ag recognized as very important to North Carolina’s economy

50

27

32

66

69

Very Well Well

Create jobs and are an important part of the local economy.

Full messages in the appendix.

Produce mass quantities of food and keep the cost of food down.

Now I am going to read you a list of phrases that people might use to describe industrial hog and swine farms in Iowa. For each phrase, please tell me whether it describes industrial hog and swine farms in Iowa very well, well, not too well, or not well at all.

Economic benefits are clear, more see water pollution than air pollution

15

20

29

28

33

45

51

54

Very Well WellNegative

Positive

Contribute a significant amount to water pollution in the area.

Contribute a significant amount to air pollution in nearby communities.

Have a negative impact on the health of people in North Carolina.

Care more about profits than regular people.

51

CAFO MORATORIUM

52

31 40

30 23

12 9 11 15

57

27

65

19

59

30

48

32

0

20

40

60



+30


+46 +29 +16

As you may know, North Carolina implemented a moratorium or ban on new Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, or CAFOs in 2007. From what you may know, do you favor or oppose this moratorium or ban?

2007 moratorium is overwhelmingly supported across party lines

53

31

42

28 24

17 13 21 17

50

40

60

32

48

41 41

47

0

20

40

60



+10


+28 +7 -6

The 2007 North Carolina moratorium or ban on CAFOs only affected new CAFOs and did not impact existing CAFOs. Would you support or oppose limiting the expansion of existing CAFOs in North Carolina, meaning existing CAFOs in the state would not be allowed to grow?

Less support for applying 2007 ban to existing CAFOs

54

2007 Moratorium Support Limit Expansion Support

Favor Oppose Net Favor Oppose Net

Total 57 27 +30 50 40 +10

Men 53 31 +22 47 43 +4

Women 60 23 +37 52 37 +15

East 56 26 +30 48 42 +6

Research Triangle 55 38 +17 48 43 +5

Greensville/Winston-Salem 52 18 +34 52 30 +22

Charlotte/Mecklenburg 54 30 +24 39 49 -10

Mountain 73 15 +58 70 25 +45

Under 50 60 25 +35 58 34 +24

50 and Over 54 29 +25 43 43 -

White 59 26 +34 51 38 +13

African-American 51 29 +22 47 41 +6

All demographics have some drop off when asked about limiting expansion

55

23 30

23 16 19

13 22 23

41 38

52

29

39

46

31

43

0

20

40

60



+3


+23 -7 -12


Low support in North Carolina for a national ban, voters uncertain

56

23 29

44

24 19 20 10

28 22

41 38

50

41

68

25

42

54

39

47

0

20

40

60

80

Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose


+9


+43 -12 -8

After hearing more information, let me ask again, do you favor or oppose a national moratorium or ban on the creation of new CAFOs?

Support for a national moratorium grows with more information

Re-ask

57

Initial

+3

34 42

31 26

20 16 28

14

57

36

64

32

50

42

56

34

0

20

40

60



+21


+32 +8 +22

The 2007 North Carolina moratorium or ban on CAFOs only affected new CAFOs and did not impact existing CAFOs. Instead of opening new CAFOs, industrial agriculture companies have expanded in size. In 2007, North Carolina had 93 million animals. That number has grown to more than 102 million animals on just 2,500 CAFOs.

Knowing that, would you support or oppose limiting the expansion of existing CAFOs in North Carolina?

With more info, support for ban on CAFO expansion increases

58

350-1 1st Canadian Place Toronto Board of Trade Tower Toronto, ON M5X 1C1

+1 647 526 6754

World Headquarters Canada United Kingdom

1101 15th Street NW. Suite 900 Washington, DC 20005

+1 202 478 8300

www.gqrr.com

2 Eastbourne Terrace London, UK W2 6LG

+44 20 3740 9029

59

APPENDIX

60

CAFO Description Text

(ANTIBIOTICS) Nearly all farm animals are given antibiotics, even if they are not sick; 80 percent of all antibiotics used in the US are used in agriculture. This contributes to the rising number of diseases that are resistant to antibiotics, which cause 23,000 deaths each year.

(RIVERS) Hog, chicken and cattle waste has contaminated 35,000 miles of rivers in 22 states.

(SPLIT) (WORKERS) Workers and people who live near CAFOs experience unsafe levels of toxic gases and dusts containing pathogens, and face recurring respiratory problems. One in four livestock workers suffer from bronchitis.

(SPLIT) (WASTE DEFINITION) A CAFO is any Animal Feeding Operation where animals are confined for 45 days or more and their manure and wastewater is often discharged into nearby ditches, streams or other waterways.

(SPLIT) (ALGAE) Animal waste contains nitrates and can be used to fertilize crops. Nitrates from animal waste can run off farms during rain and cause bright-green algae blooms in ditches, streams, and lakes, which is dangerous for swimming, drinking, and fish and wild animals that rely on the water.

(SPLIT) (AIR QUALITY) CAFO waste emits more than 168 different kinds of gasses, including ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, and methane. These gasses, as well as airborne particulate matter, can carry disease-causing bacteria and fungus to nearby communities, and if breathed in by workers they can cause death.

Appendix: text of CAFO descriptions

61

CAFO Description Text

(SPLIT) (NITRATES) Animal waste contains nitrates and can be used to fertilize crops. Nitrates from animal waste can run off farms when it rains and contaminate drinking water, which can cause birth defects and certain types of cancer. CAFOs produce half of all animal waste.

(SUBSIDIZED) All CAFOs are subsidized by taxpayer money. In total CAFOs receive billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies each year.

(LOCATION) CAFOs are disproportionately located near low-income communities and communities of color.

(ENERGY USE) Food produced in CAFOs uses nearly 12 times the energy it takes to produce food outside of CAFOs.

(SPLIT) (SIZE DEFINITION) A CAFO is a Large Animal Feeding Operation that contains more than one thousand animal units, which is the equivalent of 1,000 heads of cattle, 700 dairy cows, 2,500 swine, or 125,000 chickens.

(FREQUENCY) There are nearly 20,000 CAFOs across the US.

(SLAUGHTER) Over 9 billion animals are raised and slaughtered in the U.S. annually.

Appendix: text of CAFO descriptions

62

national survey on concentrated animal feeding …...some large industrial cattle, swine or poultry...

Documents