Time to revisit CAFO rules

It’s time to revisit the conversation.
Jay County has been dealing with the issues of confined feeding operations — the changing nature of farming, manure application policies, zoning setbacks, environmental concerns, and private property rights — for some time.
And it’s time to talk about them again.
The latest spark for discussion is a proposal by an entrepreneurial young farmer to establish a large hog operation not far from the doorstep of Bearcreek Farms, a longstanding business and significant regional tourist destination.
But the conversation could just as well have been sparked by a large-scale dairy operation that was being considered not far from the headwaters of the Wabash River.
Or it could have been started by simply wondering aloud when enough is enough. How many CAFOs are one too many?
The point is, it’s time for county planning officials to go back to the table and work through things again.
Over the past few years, because of the growth in the number of CAFOs, the size and scope of the issue have changed. What may have seemed like a good idea 10 years ago might not look so good today.
It’s not going to be a simple discussion, but it ought to be a civil one.
At its heart is the age-old question of where one person’s rights impinge upon another person’s rights.
Are current setbacks sufficient?
Should there be different setbacks required when businesses or churches or clusters of rural housing are involved?
How are the rights of farmers balance against the rights of other property owners?
As we said, it’s not a simple discussion.
But it’s time for it to resume. — J.R.[[In-content Ad]]