ELLSWORTH — The Pierce County Groundwater Advisory Committee heard a proposal regarding livestock facility siting regulations and ordinances from the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Production (DATCP) on Jan. 12.

With the back-and-forth regarding ordinances to require further planning and regulations for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) spreading to many of Pierce County’s townships, county staff has recently begun to wrestle with the issue.

Maiden Rock, Isabelle and Gilman have all passed similar ordinances that require CAFOs to maintain air pollution controls, an infectious disease plan, carcass disposal plan, biosecurity plan, road plan, water use plan, impact on property value analysis, fire response plan and financial bond in case of a factory closure, in addition to current state requirements.

DATCP’s Tim Jackson spoke to a different proposal, livestock facility siting regulations. Jackson said if the county approves the regulations, they would take effect on farms with about half the animal units of CAFOs (500 vs. 1,000 animal units), meaning more farms would fall under them. Townships would likely reserve the right to implement further regulations beyond what the county approves, but similarly to state regulations, they could not opt out for lesser regulations. Increasing regulations beyond the DATCP proposal in local ordinances does require all additions to be “scientifically defensible,” which Jackson said can be ambiguous.

“If the town adopted an ordinance with more stringent standards, just like any other town ordinance, they would be responsible for administering it, enforcing it and, in the case of a legal challenge, defending it,” Jackson said.

The livestock facility siting regulations include nutrient management, odor and air emissions, waste storage facilities, runoff management and the location of livestock structures. Each of the categories has specific sub-points, including odor scores to measure facilities up to a limit, setbacks from property lines and roads and more.

“There are some differences between standards in [the livestock facility siting] program and the CAFO program, but I would say we’re probably 80 or 90% similar in those big three I talked about: nutrient management, waste storage and runoff management,” Jackson said. “There are other types of ordinances that have been adopted throughout the state, but this is the most well-established… If you’re looking for the most well-tested option for regulating farms locally, this livestock facility siting law and these types of ordinances would be what we would certainly recommend.”

Jackson said one of the challenges they have faced comes during the review process, as they have struggled to have proposed updates approved by the state legislature. Counties and townships/municipalities can both go with the livestock facility siting regulations; however, Jackson said it is often easier at the county level because they have more of a means to enforce.

At the conclusion of the meeting, the committee mentioned they would like to bring in engineers who help design CAFOs and livestock facilities to hear their thoughts on where the county should go next in terms of regulations at a future meeting.

Later in the meeting, the committee looked over early results of a 349-well test conducted by UW-Stevens Point of Pierce County wells. The average nitrate level was about 5 mg/L with 147 wells over 5.1 mg/L. Wisconsin’s health standard is set at 10 mg/L or less.

After discussion from the committee on a pair of other items, they elected to explore both the creation of an Agricultural Emergency Disaster Plan as well as finding ways to get more farms to hold Nutrient Management Plans, including farms without livestock.

A potential Disaster Plan would explore what happens in the instance of a manure spill or something similar. While farmers have their own plans and regulations to follow, the county would focus more on notifying the public.