RALEIGH - The state Senate is quickly pushing legislation that would poke a hole in 1995 hog reforms that were designed to keep hogs, their smell and pollutants away from homes, schools and churches.

The bill would make it easier for hog farm operators to rebuild or find a new use for many existing hog structures without the permission of a neighboring property owner.

The bill's supporters say it's a minor change that makes it easier for hog farms to stay profitable with no adverse effects for the environment. Farmers would have to get the approval of the state's environmental regulatory agency to rebuild, expand or change the use of existing structures.

Opponents say the bill would weaken a law adopted in 1995 that required future farm structures to be a certain distance from adjoining property. Structures that were already built when that law passed were exempted from the setbacks and the only way hog farms could get an exception was with the written permission of the property owner.

Environmental advocates say the bill would rob people of their right to halt changes to hog operations that are already within setbacks required by the 1995 reforms. And the bill gives hog farms a perpetual exemption from the reforms, opponents said.

"This represents the first significant erosion of existing protections," said Molly Diggins, director of the state chapter of the Sierra Club.

"The industry would be getting a back door for new farms," said Joe Rudek, senior scientist of the Environmental Defense Fund.

The major changes in the bill apply to structures built before the legislature enacted the 1995 setback rules. Those structures were exempted from the law, which requires hog houses or waste lagoons to be 1,500 feet from homes and 2,500 feet from schools, hospitals, churches, parks or child care centers.

The bill would let farmers rebuild destroyed structures, expand them to make more room for pregnant sows or change the use of the structure as long as the farm gets approval from the state Department of Environment and Natural Resources. The farmers would no longer need permission of adjacent property owners.

Sen. Charlie Albertson, a Duplin County Democrat and key supporter of the bill, said the bill would not enable farm operations to grow because farmers could not add more animals.

"If I saw anything that I thought was going to be harmful to the environment, I would not be supporting this bill," Albertson said.

Hog farming has become more expensive because of higher feed, fuel and fertilizer costs, and the bill would give farmers a chance to run efficiently, said Don Butler, director of government relations for a subsidiary of Smithfield Foods, the largest hog farm operator in North Carolina. The company has pushed for the law, Albertson said.

"What's wrong with preserving a farmer's right to continue to farm?" Butler said.

Hog farmers typically keep pregnant or nursing sows and their piglets separate from maturing hogs. The bill would let a farmer convert a hog house built before 1995 from one for sows to the less expensive operation for maturing hogs, as long as the state's environmental regulators approve, Butler said.

Many of the farming operations were built before the law, Rudek said. Piglets, sows and hogs are different in the waste, smells and emissions they produce, he said. A neighbor might notice a big difference in the air if a farm converts a barn from sows to maturing hogs, Rudek said.

"Some people make that claim. I can tell you as a farmer myself, I don't believe that would be the case," Butler said.

Next page >