
A new threat to Lake Winnipeg — from North Dakota
Opinion
Massive dairy concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) being permitted and proposed in North Dakota are a threat to our waterways, including Lake Winnipeg and the groundwater which many people rely upon to drink.
More than half of the phosphorus load, the cause of algal blooms in Lake Winnipeg, enters Manitoba's waterways from upstream jurisdictions. Two-thirds of this is from the Red River alone.
The International Joint Commission (IJC), under The Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, established joint nutrient loading targets in October 2022. The Red River nutrient target recommendation for phosphorus was set at 1,400 tonnes per year. But Manitoba's recent report on nutrient levels through 2023 shows that an average 2,500 tonnes of phosphorus per year is coming from the U.S. through the Red River. That is nearly double the phosphorus loading targets set by the IJC.
The Canadian Press
Netley Creek and the Red River enter Lake Winnipeg just north of Winnipeg. The Red River and Lake Winnipeg are facing new pollution threats from huge new North Dakota corporate dairy operations.
Since the 1930s, North Dakota had one of the most progressive anti-corporate farming laws in the U.S., intended to keep North Dakota lands in the hands of working family farmers. This legislation had been gradually weakened over the years.
In 2023, then-governor Douglas Burgum, now Trump's secretary of the interior, encouraged changing the law to allow for corporations to become partners in animal agriculture operations.
This has opened the door for corporate investment in North Dakota and, in particular, eastern North Dakota within the Red River Valley, now identified as a prime area of interest for the establishment of CAFOs.
Riverview LLP, a large dairy/cattle agribusiness based out of Minnesota, is in the process of expanding into North Dakota with two new CAFOs.
The Abercrombie Dairy received permits from North Dakota to start construction of a 12,500-head milking cow operation near Wahpeton in January 2025. The Dakota Resource Council and nearby residents filed an appeal of the state permit in February, citing concerns about water quality, but unfortunately the appeal was dismissed on technical grounds.
The Herberg Dairy is another proposed 25,000-head milking operation near Hillsboro, N.D., which is in the initial regulatory/permitting stage. Public comments are being accepted until June 2. No permitting decisions regarding Herberg Dairy have yet been made.
The size of these massive dairy operations is concerning. Just two new CAFOs will add 37,500 more cows.
To put the size of these operations in perspective, at present Manitoba has around 45,000 milk cows, supporting about 240 farms in the entire province. North Dakota currently has around 8,900 milk cows supporting about 24 dairy farms across the state. These two CAFOs will more than quadruple the number of milking cows in North Dakota, and add nearly as many milking cows in the Red River watershed as there are in all of Manitoba.
They will also produce massive amounts of animal excrement, comparable to a city with a population of 1.5 million people. To deal with all this manure, these CAFOs will store the manure and wastewater in lagoons the size of 62 American football fields (52 Canadian football fields). Once a year, they pour this manure slurry on agricultural fields as fertilizer.
These dairies are within 1.5 miles from the Red River or one of its tributaries. The Red River valley south of the border floods, just like here.
Heavy rains, storms in CAFO rich areas like Iowa and North Carolina have caused serious manure releases into neighboring water bodies.
Wednesdays
A weekly dispatch from the head of the Free Press newsroom.
Sound familiar? This is how Manitoba's intensive hog industry manages their waste, and we know where the nutrient hot spots are located within southeastern Manitoba, a.k.a. Hog Alley.
What could possibly go wrong? Dr. John Ikerd, professor emeritus of agricultural economics and author of numerous books on sustainable agriculture, said it best: 'piling up too much stuff in one place, causes problems.'
Too much manure on the same parcels of land year after year after year leads to the accumulation of nutrients and other contaminants (such as phosphorus, nitrogen, antibiotics, viruses, bacteria, hormones and heavy metals). In sandy to loamy soils, this waste escapes downward to the aquifer, contaminating the groundwater. In clayey soils — a good part of the Red River valley — the excess contaminants run off during wet periods contaminating waterways and contributing to algal blooms in Lake Winnipeg.
These huge dairy farms need to be stopped. Canada should refer the issue of these new CAFOs to the IJC to provide recommendations to resolve this transboundary water issue. Governments need to support regenerative agriculture, and phase out industrial factory farming production systems. Small farms that use straw rather than manure slurry pits are better for people, animals, and the planet.
James Beddome is the executive director of the Manitoba Eco-Network and was raised on a mixed livestock family farm in the Little Saskatchewan river valley in western Manitoba. Dr. Madeline Luke is a volunteer with the Dakota Resource Council. She is a retired internal medicine doctor from Valley City, North Dakota. Glen Koroluk is the former executive director of the Manitoba Eco-Network, and former spokesperson for Beyond Factory Farming.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Toronto Star
38 minutes ago
- Toronto Star
Judge says government must release Columbia University protester Mahmoud Khalil
A federal judge has ruled that the government must release Mahmoud Khalil, the former Columbia University graduate student whom the Trump administration is trying to deport over his participation in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Khalil, a legal U.S. resident, was detained by federal immigration agents on March 8 in the lobby of his university-owned apartment, the first arrest under President Donald Trump's crackdown on students who joined campus protests against the war in Gaza.


Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Trump's plan to begin ‘phasing out' FEMA after hurricane season burdens states, experts warn
SAN DIEGO (AP) — President Donald Trump's plan to begin 'phasing out' the federal agency that responds to disasters after the 2025 hurricane season is likely to put more responsibilities on states to provide services following increasingly frequent and expensive climate disasters, experts said. 'We want to wean off of FEMA and we want to bring it down to the state level,' Trump said Tuesday in an Oval Office appearance with administration officials about preparations for summer wildfires. Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem have repeatedly signaled their desire to overhaul, if not completely eliminate, the 46-year-old Federal Emergency Management Agency. While there has been bipartisan support for reforming the agency, experts say dismantling it completely would leave gaps in crucial services and funding. 'It just causes more concern on how states should be planning for the future if the federal government's not going to be there for them,' said Michael Coen, FEMA chief of staff during the Obama and Biden administrations. Disaster response is already locally led and state-managed, but FEMA supports by coordinating resources from federal agencies, providing direct assistance programs for households and moving money to states for repairing public infrastructure. Trump said Tuesday he wants to 'give out less money,' and to 'give it out directly,' sidestepping FEMA programs. He said he did not know who would distribute the funds, saying they could come 'from the president's office' or DHS. 'I was left with the impression that he doesn't really understand the scale of what FEMA manages on a yearly basis with a budget of over $30 billion,' said Coen. Dismantling FEMA, or even changing how much of the costs it shares with states in the event of a major disaster declaration, would require action from Congress, including amending the 1988 Stafford Act, which outlines FEMA's roles and responsibilities and the cost share between the feds and the states. Declaring fewer major disasters or giving less federal support could put an untenable financial burden on states, said Sara McTarnaghan, principal research associate at the Urban Institute. 'Very few of them would have had enough funds set aside to anticipate the federal government stepping back from its historic role in disaster recovery for major events,' McTarnaghan said. A recent Urban Institute analysis found that between 2008-2024, quadrupling the economic threshold of when major disasters are declared would have shifted $41 billion in public assistance costs alone to state and local governments. 'I think the trade off for states and communities is going to be, do we accept a less full recovery or do states draw on other resources to meet these goals and needs, perhaps at the cost of investments in other kinds of social programs or functions of the state,' said McTarnaghan. Not all states will be able to generate much more revenue, she added. 'The confluence of states that have really high disaster exposure and states that have relatively limited fiscal capacity are overlapping in many ways,' she said. 'That's the case for a lot of states along the Gulf Coast that we're concerned about going into hurricane season but also the case for some Midwestern states that face issues with severe convective storms.' Trump dismissed the idea that states can't handle the bulk of disasters on their own. 'The governor should be able to handle it and frankly if they can't handle the aftermath, then maybe they shouldn't be governor,' he said. He suggested that some of the gaps could be filled by more collaboration among states. Noem said FEMA is building communication and mutual aid agreements among states 'to respond to each other so that they can stand on their own two feet.' A national mutual-aid structure called the Emergency Management Assistance Compact already exists, but its operations are typically reimbursed by the federal government, said Coen. 'There's already robust communication between states. The confusion is what they can expect from the federal government.' Regarding the current hurricane season, which began June 1, Noem said FEMA 'stands prepared.' But there have already been changes to how the agency operates. It suspended its door-to-door canvassing program that helped enroll survivors for assistance. More than 2,000 FEMA staff, around one-third of the full-time workforce, have left or been fired since January. After severe weather this spring, some states waited as long as eight weeks for their disaster declaration requests, and several requests are still pending. Trump has not approved any requests for hazard mitigation assistance since February, a typical add-on to individual and public assistance that helps states build back in more resilient ways. A FEMA review council established by Trump and co-chaired by Noem and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth will submit suggestions for reforms in the next few months, according to Noem. In its first meeting in May, Noem told the group of governors, emergency managers, and other officials primarily from Republican states that Trump is seeking drastic change. 'I don't want you to go into this thinking we're going to make a little tweak here,' she said. 'No, FEMA should no longer exist as it is.' ___


Toronto Star
an hour ago
- Toronto Star
Trump is playing the strongman in response to ICE protests. But who's the real patriot?
Here's a thought experiment. Imagine a United States Marine. A member of that elite fighting force who spearheaded so many of that empire's most dangerous military maneuvers. Imagine being a member of the same brave fellowship who ducked Nazi gunfire on the D-Day beaches, or who triumphantly raised the Stars and Stripes after the Battle of Iwo Jima. And then imagine being dispatched, by Presidential decree, to quell a rowdy mariachi band on Olvera Street in Los Angeles. An inane image, perhaps. But it's one befitting the Trump administration's truly absurd response to anti-ICE protests in L.A., and across the United States. Over the past week, the Trump administration has been sending federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers to round-up undocumented immigrants living in the United States. It was a key plank of Trump's reelection platform: that the border had been overrun by criminals and crooks and people from (in his words) 'insane asylums,' and that his administration would work to swiftly remove these so-called 'illegals' at a record rate. And while a majority of Americans certainly did vote in favour of this expedited deportation program, recent polling suggests that many (including the Trump faithful) are troubled by its implementation.