Public meeting on proposed CAFOs slated for Thursday in Pierce City
PIERCE CITY, Mo. — The Missouri Department of Natural Resources will hold a public meeting from 4:30-6:30 p.m. Thursday at the Pierce City High School gymnasium, 300 N. Myrtle St., Pierce City, to hear public comments on eight proposed concentrated animal feeding operations that could be built in Newton and Lawrence counties around this area.
For those who are unable to attend the meeting in person, DNR is also accepting written comments through Friday, May 30, sent to cafo@dnr.mo.gov.
This in-person public comment meeting is to discuss and provide a permitting regulatory framework for the draft permits on five facilities to be built in Newton County near Wentworth and Pierce City and four in Lawrence County near Verona or Monett.
The Missouri Coalition for the Environment, a grassroots group raising awareness of concentrated animal feeding operations, or CAFOs, said it's trying to spread awareness of this meeting to make sure the public knows about the kind of farming operations coming close to their homes.
'This opportunity for public comment comes in the wake of the 2025 Missouri legislative session, in which the Senate Agriculture committee chair Sen. Jason Bean, Republican from Southeast Missouri, refused to schedule a hearing for a key bill that would have given local county commissions more leeway in regulating CAFOs,' the Coalition for the Environment said in a news release. 'This bill, SB 400, was introduced by Senator Tracy McCreery, Democrat from St. Louis County, and would have reinstated the authority of local health boards and county commissions to pass ordinances that impact agriculture. Missouri Legislators revoked this local control in 2019 with the passage of SB 391, which stated that county commissions cannot 'impose standards or requirements on an agriculture operation' more stringent than statewide regulations. Since then, there has been an expansion of CAFOs in the state.'
The coalition said hosting an in-person hearing for multiple CAFOs at once is an unusual move by the DNR.
The MCE said not all agricultural operations are equal and CAFOs create undue burdens for the surrounding community. Environmental health costs include excess nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus running off into surrounding waterways, contributing to toxic algal blooms and aquatic dead zones.
'It is unjust for communities to bear the health and property costs of CAFOs without an avenue for recourse,' said Melissa Vatterott, the MCE's director of policy and strategy. 'Communities should have the chance to work with their local government to put practical parameters in place as to where and how these facilities can operate.'
More information is available at https://dnr.mo.gov/water/business-industry-other-entities/sites-interest/southwest-mo-concentrated-animal-feeding-operation-cafo-facilities.
Documents concerning the CAFOs that will be subject of this meeting can be read at https://dnr.mo.gov/document/southwest-missouri-concentrated-animal-feeding-operation-cafo-facilities-public-hearing-agenda-may-29-2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What we know about Trump's latest travel ban
Donald Trump has signed a ban on travel to the US from 12 countries citing national security risks, according to the White House. The US president said the list could be revised if "material improvements" were made and additional countries could also be added as "threats emerge around the world". This is the second time he has ordered a ban on travel from certain countries. He signed a similar order in 2017, during his first term in office. Trump has signed a proclamation banning travel to the US from nationals of 12 countries: Afghanistan Myanmar Chad Republic of the Congo Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Haiti Iran Libya Somalia Sudan Yemen There are an additional seven countries whose nationals face partial travel restrictions: Burundi Cuba Laos Sierra Leone Togo Turkmenistan Venezuela The ban takes effect on Monday at 12:01 a.m. (05:00 BST), a cushion that avoids the chaos that unfolded at airports nationwide when a similar measure took effect with virtually no notice eight years ago. The White House said these "common sense restrictions" would "protect Americans from dangerous foreign actors". In a video posted to his Truth Social website, Trump said the recent alleged terror attack in Boulder, Colorado "underscored the extreme dangers" posed by foreign nationals who had not been "properly vetted". Twelve people were injured in Colorado on Sunday when a man attacked a group gathering in support of Israeli hostages, throwing two incendiary devices and using a makeshift flamethrower. The man accused of carrying out the attack has been identified as an Egyptian national. Trump's latest order, which is expected to face legal challenges, drew a swift response, at home and abroad. Somalia promised to work with the United States to address any security issues. In a statement, Somali ambassador to the US, Dahir Hassan Abdi, said his country "values its longstanding relationship" with America. Venezuela's Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello warned that "being in the United States is a great risk for anyone, not just for Venezuelans". Democrats were quick to condemn the move. "This ban, expanded from Trump's Muslim ban in his first term, will only further isolate us on the world stage," Pramila Jayapal, a Democrat congresswoman from Washington, says in a social media post. Another Democrat, congressman Don Beyer, says Trump "betrayed" the ideals of the US' founders. Trump ordered his original travel ban during his first term in the White House in 2017. It featured some of the same countries as his latest order, including Iran, Libya and Somalia. Critics called it a "Muslim ban" as the seven countries initially listed were Muslim majority. The White House revised the policy, ultimately adding two non-Muslim majority countries, North Korea and Venezuela. It was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018. President Joe Biden, who succeeded Trump, repealed the ban in 2021, calling it "a stain on our national conscience." Trump signs ban on travel to US by nationals from 12 countries
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Judge largely declines to block Florida law restricting ballot-initiative drives
A federal judge on Wednesday largely denied a request from petition groups to block parts of a Florida law that changes how citizen-led amendments make it to the ballot. In passing the law earlier this year, Gov. Ron DeSantis and the bill's Republican sponsors said the petition process needed reform because it is riddled with fraud. But groups like Florida Decides Healthcare, which is trying to get an amendment that will expand Medicaid access on 2026 ballots, quickly sued, saying the new law stifles people's ability to use the petition process. Other groups, including the recreational marijuana campaign Smart & Safe Florida, joined the lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Mark Walker largely denied the plaintiffs' request to block three sections of the new law. Plaintiffs had asked Walker to temporarily block a requirement that campaigns turn in all petitions within 10 days to county elections offices. They also contested changes that increased fines for organizations that turn in petitions late and that added new criminal penalties for filling in missing voter information. The plaintiffs argued that the law violates the First Amendment right to engage in political speech. But Walker, who was nominated to the bench by former President Barack Obama, said court precedent makes clear that the initiative process doesn't have to be the most user-friendly version possible. Walker said the challenging groups hadn't yet proven they were 'severely burdened' by the new law's requirement to turn petitions in within 10 days and the increased late fines. Instead, he said, 'the record shows that these provisions simply make the process of getting their proposed initiatives on the ballot more expensive and less efficient for Plaintiffs.' The marijuana and Medicaid expansion campaigns have said they've been affected by slowed petition collection and discouraged volunteers since the law took effect in early May. The groups hoping to qualify for the 2026 ballot need about 900,000 verified petitions by early next year. Out of all the groups' asks, Walker granted only one plaintiff an injunction on one point. Jordan Simmons, a project director for the Medicaid expansion group, challenged part of the law that includes election code violations for petition fraud in the racketeering statute. Walker sided with Simmons' argument that the racketeering law change was too vague. Despite Walker rejecting most of the Medicaid expansion groups' asks, Mitch Emerson, a spokesperson for Florida Decides Healthcare, called the ruling a 'major victory.' 'While the Court did not grant every part of our motion for preliminary relief, this is far from the final word,' Emerson said in a statement. 'This ruling was an early, extraordinary step in the legal process—and we are optimistic about what comes next, both for the remaining parts of HB 1205 that we're challenging and for the future of citizen-led democracy in Florida.' Groups have for years used Florida's ballot initiative process as a way to pass changes to the state constitution that lawmakers have refused to put forward. Through petition collection, groups have gotten voters to approve things like medical marijuana, felon voter restoration and a $15 minimum wage. Last year, DeSantis used the power of his administration to successfully oppose two amendments put on the ballot through the petition process: the recreational pot amendment and one that would have protected abortion access. Months after both those measures failed, DeSantis' office suggested a draft bill that would have made petition collection virtually impossible. During the injunction hearing in May, Glenn Burhans, an attorney for Smart & Safe Florida — which sponsored a failed 2024 ballot initiative to legalize recreational marijuana and is hoping to get a similar amendment on 2026 ballots — said that he thought lawmakers passed the petition change bill because the marijuana measure 'is very popular.' The challenge to the new law is ongoing, and the amendment groups are seeking to block other provisions of the law in another request for a temporary injunction.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration ramps up attack on Harvard, Columbia
President Donald Trump ramped up his campaign against top US universities Wednesday, banning visas for all foreign students coming to attend Harvard and threatening to strip Columbia of its academic accreditation. Trump is seeking to bring the universities to heel with claims their international students pose a national security threat, and that they ignored anti-Semitism on campus, and perpetuate liberal bias. A proclamation issued by the White House late Wednesday declared that the entrance of international students to begin a course at Harvard would be "suspended and limited" for six months, and that existing overseas enrollees could have their visas terminated. "Harvard's conduct has rendered it an unsuitable destination for foreign students and researchers," said the order. "I'm trembling. This is outrageous," Karl Molden, a Harvard government and classics student from Austria, told AFP. "He is abusing his executive power to harm Harvard as much as he can." "My god!" said another international student at Harvard, who declined to be named for fear of retribution, on learning of the executive order. "This is such a disgrace." - 'Retaliatory' - The announcement came after the Trump administration's earlier efforts to terminate Harvard's right to enroll and host foreign students were stalled by a judge. The government already cut around $3.2 billion of federal grants and contracts benefiting Harvard and pledged to exclude the Cambridge, Massachusetts institution from any future federal funding. Harvard has been at the forefront of Trump's campaign against top universities after it defied his calls to submit to oversight of its curriculum, staffing, student recruitment and "viewpoint diversity." Trump has also singled out international students at Harvard, who in the 2024-2025 academic year accounted for 27 percent of total enrollment, and a major source of income. "This is yet another illegal retaliatory step taken by the Administration in violation of Harvard's First Amendment rights," a university spokesman said. "Harvard will continue to protect its international students." The latest sweeping action against Harvard came as Trump's education secretary threatened Wednesday to strip Columbia University of its accreditation. The Republican has targeted the New York Ivy League institution for allegedly ignoring harassment of Jewish students, throwing all of its federal funding into doubt. Unlike Harvard, several top institutions -- including Columbia -- have already bowed to far-reaching demands from the Trump administration, which claims that the educational elite is too left-wing. - 'Combating anti-Semitism' - But Wednesday's official action suggested it was not enough for Trump. "Columbia University looked the other way as Jewish students faced harassment," US Education Secretary Linda McMahon said on X. She accused the school of breaking rules prohibiting recipients of federal funding from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin. "After Hamas' October 7, 2023, terror attack on Israel, Columbia University's leadership acted with deliberate indifference towards the harassment of Jewish students on its campus," McMahon said in a statement. "This is not only immoral, but also unlawful." In the statement, the US Education Department said its civil rights office had contacted Columbia's accreditation body about the alleged violation. Withdrawing Columbia's accreditation would see it lose access to all federal funding -- a very significant proportion of the university's income. Students attending the university would also not be able to receive federal grants and loans towards tuition. Critics accuse the Trump administration of using allegations of anti-Semitism to target educational elites and bring universities to their knees. The administration has already put $400 million of Columbia's funding under review, prompting the university in March to announce a package of concessions to the government around defining anti-Semitism, policing protests and conducting oversight for specific academic departments. Following Wednesday's announcement, a Columbia spokesperson said the university "aware of the concerns" raised by the government with its accreditation body. "We have addressed those concerns directly with Middle States," the spokesperson said, adding that "Columbia is deeply committed to combating anti-Semitism on our campus." "We take this issue seriously and are continuing to work with the federal government to address it." bur-gw/st
