Groundwater in the Great Lakes Basin

118
feed has increased to upwards of 20 fold to 200 ppm
(Richmond, 2007). Unfortunately many animals are
provided with more than the recommended levels. In
one study animals were found to have been given 25%
higher levels of antibiotics in their feed. More than 40%
of the antibiotics administered in the U.S. are given to
animals (Richmond, 2007). Antibiotics given to animals
include bacitracin, chlortetracycline, ery-thromycin,
tylosin, neomycin, thromycin, lincomycin, oxytetracycline,
lenicilin, streptomycin and virginiamycin
(Richmond, 2007). It is postulated that the release of
large amounts of antibiotics to the environment could
result in antibiotic-resistant pathogens (CDC, 2004).
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
has shown that chemicals and infections compounds in
animal wastes are able to travel through soil and water
near CAFOs (CDC, 2004). In 2000, contaminated groundwater
resulted in the tragic E. coli outbreak in Walkerton,
Ontario, which resulted in seven deaths and more than
2,000 illnesses. The source of E. coli was identified as a
nearby cattle farm (Howard, 2004). It has been found that
Ontarians living in rural areas with high cattle density
are at an elevated risk of E. coli infections (ECO, 2000).
The U S. EPA reported that source waters from which
drinking water is obtained for up to 43% of the United
States comes from waters that are impaired by pathogenic
contamination from CAFO operations (U.S. EPA, 2004).
REGULATIONS
As of April 14, 2003, new regulations and guidelines
were put into effect in the U.S. designating the proper
management for CAFOs (U.S. EPA, 2003a). The new
regulations are a revision of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and the
Effluent Limitation Guidelines in response to the Clean
Water Act which designates CAFOs as point sources
of pollution (U.S. EPA, 2003a). The rule mandates that
all CAFOs are required to apply an NPDES permit and
implement a nutrient management plan (NMP) (U.S.
EPA, 2003b). The guidelines outline appropriate storage
and land application methods for animal wastes and
identify site-specific actions to be taken by CAFOs to
ensure proper and effective manure and wastewater
management, including compliance with the Effluent
Limitation Guidelines (U.S. EPA, 2003a). This regulatory
program also is designed to support voluntary and
other programs implemented by the USDA, the U.S.
EPA and the states that help smaller animal feeding
operations not addressed by this rule (U.S. EPA, 2003a).
Province-wide standards came into effect in Ontario
in 2003 with the Nutrient Management Act, 2002
(NMA). Previously, as noted in a 2000 report by the
ECO, there were no legally binding standards for
constructing manure storage facilities or for the application
of manure, no monitoring mechanisms to ensure
that farmers use best practices for managing manure,
and the Ontario environmental legislation specifically
exempted some aspects of manure management since the
Environmental Protection Act did not apply to animal
waste (ECO, 2000). The NMA also restricts the Farming
and Food Production Protection Act, 1998 (FFPPA). The
FFPPA was implemented to disallow municipal bylaws
from restricting normal farm practices. This law was
used in 1998 to overturn a municipal bylaw attempting
to control intensive farming operations in order to
protect local wells in the township of Biddulph, Ontario
(ECO, 2000). In 2002, the FFPPA was amended to state
that a practice that is inconsistent with a regulation
made under the NMA is not a normal farm practice.
The NMA was put in place “to provide for the management
of materials containing nutrients in ways that
will enhance protection of the natural environment
and provide a sustainable future for agricultural operations
and rural development.” The regulation is aimed
at reducing the risk of nutrients entering surface or
groundwater and wells (ECO, 2004). The regulation
has nine classifications for agricultural operations,
which are determined based on the nature of the
operation and the amount of nutrients generated and
received (McRobert, 2004). Large-scale operations,
such as CAFOs, must meet more stringent regulations
than small farms. The NMA regulates various aspects
including storage facilities, application of materials
containing nutrients (such as manure and biosolids),
NMPs and Nutrient Management Strategies (NMSs)
(ECO, 2006; McRobert, 2004).
Since coming into force in 2003 the NMA has undergone
significant changes. The original NMA required
new livestock farms producing more than 5 nutrient
units (NU) and existing livestock farms expanding
to 300 NU or greater to complete an NMS and NMP
(ECO, 2006; 2004). The NMA was changed by O.
Reg. 551/05, and after December 31, 2005, livestock
operations that generated fewer than 300 NU annually
no longer required NMSs or NMPs unless they were
captured through another scenario outlined within
the NMA (ECO, 2006). Other changes include that
livestock operations generating 300 NU or more only
require OMAFRA approval of their first NMS and
only if the operation is located within 100 metres of
a municipal well (ECO, 2006). O. Reg. 551/05 implemented
the added requirement that NMSs and NMPs
must be reviewed and updated annually and records of
the review and update must be kept (ECO, 2006).
The majority of the estimated 53,000 livestock operations
in Ontario will not be covered under the NMA.
Instead, operations that are expanding but remain