Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 2 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
County considers hiring feedlot officer
Published Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Photo by The Daily Journal
Robert Block
Otter Tail County could soon be taking a step to support agriculture and future development.
The Otter Tail County Board of Commiss-ioners is considering establishing the position of feedlot officer, a new position that would implement state regulations, conduct feedlot inspections and provide assistance to feedlot owners.
Most counties in Minnesota that have over 500 feedlots employ feedlot officers, county officials said. Otter Tail County has over 600 feedlots.
Matching fund grants are available for a feedlot officer program to help with the annual costs that would be borne by county residents.
“If the county board approves this position, it would be positive for agriculture and positive for development,” said Cynthia Johnson, a member of the county agriculture advisory board. Johnson made a presentation Tuesday to county commissioners along with fellow ag board member Charles Erickson.
“Even though many of us, myself included, don’t want more government, we have to protect the future,” Johnson said.
Erickson said it’s time that Otter Tail County assume overview of feedlots rather than the current policy of oversight from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
On Tuesday the county board directed the ag committee to draft a resolution to be discussed at a future board meeting. Commissioner Robert Block urged fellow board members to consider blending feedlot officer duties into a current job responsibility.
Erickson said uniformity would be a key advantage in having feedlot jurisdiction under the county, directed by an officer. This, he said, would preclude different standards from the 62 townships in Otter Tail County.
He said that too often, as noted by other counties in Minnesota, local units of government wait until a land use issue becomes, in his words, “a boiling controversy,” before action is taken. Those quick decisions, Erickson said, oftentimes are ineffective or have unintended negative results.
Comments
The Daily Journal is happy to host community conversations about news and life in Fergus Falls and the surrounding area. As hosts, we expect guests will show respect for each other. That means we don't threaten or defame each other, and we keep conversations free of personal attacks. Witty is great. Abusive is not. If you think a post violates these standards, don't escalate the situation. Instead, flag the comment to alert us. We'll take action if necessary. It's not hard. This should be a place where people want to read and contribute -- a place for spirited exchanges of opinion. So those who persist with racist, defamatory or abusive postings risk losing the privilege to post at all.Posted by prowler (anonymous) on May 21, 2008 at 2:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Why not tax the feedlots in an amount that would cover the expenses of this new county employee and office? The feedlots created this issue, let them and not the taxpayer fund the resultant expenses.
Posted by Blitzen (anonymous) on May 21, 2008 at 2:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I not so sure the feedlots created this issue. It seemes more likely that the demand for pork and beef created this issue. There would be no feedlots if there was not a demand for the end product.
I think that Commissioner Block is on the right track with blending this job into an existing one.
Ditch inspector and weed inspector come to mind.....
I am curious as to when a barnyard becomes a feedlot. If there are 600 feedlots in the county, that seems to me to include most small farms. I wonder what kind of regulation the county has in mind here? If they start messing with the small time farmer, the potential to hurt small communities and township economies is very real.
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)