In North Dakota, 2025 could be another year when the state puts out the welcome mat for the livestock industry.

Following task force recommendations, the Legislature will consider updating how much local governments can restrict feedlot operations. The panel was specifically looking at distances allowed between larger livestock sites and homes, businesses and schools.

Doug Goehring, North Dakota's agriculture commissioner, took part in the discussions and argued while the rules would be more relaxed, they are still tougher than those in other states. He said exemptions could be carved out -- moving feedlots back a bit -- by the use of an "odor modeling tool"

"It looks at prevailing winds and information that's collected from different data points, weather stations," Goehring explained. "Counties can actually look at it and determine if the setbacks that are in place are sufficient, or they could actually grant a variance."

Feedlots with large animal herds, sometimes known as concentrated animal feeding operations, are under scrutiny from environmentalists over the effects on air and water quality. State leaders say North Dakota lags behind neighboring states in animal agriculture but some projects have faced local backlash. A Senate bill, based on panel recommendations, calls for reducing the maximum setback distance by a quarter mile in most cases.

Supporters of expanding livestock output said it brings more jobs to smaller towns.

Aaron Birst, executive director of the North Dakota Association of Counties, who sat in on the task force, said it recognized the need but cautioned it cannot outweigh how a local community values quality-of-life metrics and whether they would be harmed by an industry.

"It's not even just concentrated feeding-lot operations. It's any economic development, whether it's oil activity or putting in a large Amazon station," Birst outlined. "Those all, if they want to be successful, have to have local government buy-in."

While Birst acknowledged a healthy balance is desirable, his group has yet to take a stance on the proposed changes. There were similar debates in 2023 when the Legislature narrowed the scope of corporate farm regulations. More broadly, researchers at the University of Missouri found despite what backers of large livestock operations say, their economic strengths do not stretch as far as advertised.


get more stories like this via email

By Nina B. Elkadi for Sentient.
Broadcast version by Judith Ruiz-Branch for Wisconsin News Connection reporting for the Sentient-Public News Service Collaboration

At least eight miles of a Southwest-Wisconsin stream were polluted by a manure spill earlier this month. The spill killed hundreds of fish, including many wild brown trout. The affected waterways — Spring Valley Creek, Moore Creek and the Kickapoo River — have long been remarkable for their healthy water quality, healthy enough to sustain naturally-reproducing trout populations. The source of the spill appears to be manure applied to fields by a 600-head dairy operation near Norwalk, Ben Uvaas, who works at the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), tells Sentient. A “gully washer,” or massive rain event, appears to have triggered the runoff, he says. Though the farmer of the dairy operation took measures to protect soil health, the combination of heavy rains and 11,500 gallons of applied manure per acre were enough to trigger a spill.

This year, there have been at least 9 documented manure spills in Wisconsin, according to the DNR. The Kickapoo River, where some of this manure was observed, eventually carries water all the way to the Gulf of Mexico. Contaminants like manure and other agricultural byproducts contribute to an oxygen-depleted area known as the “dead zone” that can kill marine life. In 2024, the dead zone spanned 6,705 square miles.

On May 17, the DNR received a call about this spill to their violation tip line. The warden who received the call — a law enforcement official tasked with enforcing natural resources laws — went out to the stream, where they observed the hundreds of dead fish.

Uvaas works on the state DNR’s non-point source pollution program, referring to the kind of pollution that tends to be carried by rain or snowfall, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The warden was able to track the source back to a farm field in Monroe County, southwest of Norwalk, Uvaas says. Wisconsin Public Radio reported the farm as Brueggen Dairy Farm, a 600-head cow operation.

Brueggen Dairy is not considered a concentrated animal feeding operation as it falls under the 700-head dairy threshold set by the EPA. In 2022, the operation received the Monroe County Conservation Farmers of the Year award.

On Monday, May 19, the DNR fisheries team examined most of the area — collecting hundreds of dead fish along the way. Spring Valley Creek, Moore Creek and the Kickapoo River, where the spill occurred, are prized trout habitats in a region that is a destination for fishers and other recreationalists.

So far, the investigation has determined that the week of May 11, a farmer injected approximately 11,500 gallons of manure, per acre, to around 130 acres of farmland. A Wisconsin DNR official recently said that anywhere from 12,000 to 15,000 gallons per acre is acceptable.

On May 14, the rain storm hit. Farmers frequently apply manure to their fields as fertilizer, but over-application can contaminate drinking water with nitrates, and high levels of ammonia can kill fish and other wildlife.

The farmer had been performing a range of what Uvaas describes as “soil health” practices meant to improve soil structure and the amount of manure applied does not appear to be beyond acceptable ranges. But the spill occurred anyway, illustrating that manure application has the potential to go wrong.

“Despite all our efforts to find the best time to apply (manure), Mother Nature is unpredictable,” Farm owner Randy Brueggen wrote in a statement to Wisconsin Public Radio.

“We as a dairy farm know how valuable this resource is, which is why we utilize incorporation practices in an intentional, safe and compliant manner,” Brueggen continued. “We strive to utilize our organic fertilizer over synthetic fertilizer for our crops. Our group’s farming practices always prioritize conservation. We want to sustain the land, so the land sustains us.”

In Wisconsin, “more than 1,500 miles of streams and rivers, and 33 lakes, in the nine counties assessed have impaired waters due overwhelmingly to combined pollution from manure and commercial fertilizer,” a 2022 investigation by the non-profit Environmental Working Group and non-profit law group Midwest Environmental Advocates found.

In the Driftless region of the Midwest, an area that covers parts of Northeast Iowa, Southwest Wisconsin and Southeast Minnesota, pollution containment and cleanup is especially difficult, Uvaas says. Unlike the rolling hills and lush soils of the Corn Belt, the karst topography is characterized by natural spring-fed streams, rocky bluffs and a thin layer of topsoil.

As a result, the streams are “fairly high gradient” and “high velocity,” says Uvaas, and this creates “an extremely narrow window” for response time, at least “compared to other parts of the state.” In the flatter parts of Wisconsin for instance, officials can put in barriers and collection sumps to collect contamination. But by the time DNR officials got to this site, it was too late. “There’s not any kind of collection or containment that’s feasible in the waterway, which is unfortunate, but that’s largely driven by timing and the topography here.”

Sentient is awaiting records from the Wisconsin DNR for more information regarding this spill, including enforcement action.


Nina B. Elkadi wrote this article for Sentient.


get more stories like this via email

By Seth Millstein for Sentient.
Broadcast version by Mark Richardson for Oklahoma News Service reporting for the Sentient-Public News Service Collaboration

On May 11, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins announced that the U.S. is suspending all livestock imports from Mexico due to a resurgence of New World screwworm. Mexican authorities detected the parasitic fly, which was ostensibly eradicated decades ago, in southern Mexico earlier in the month after an outbreak in Panama years ago. Now, officials are increasingly concerned that the screwworm could reach the U.S., and wreak havoc on American farm animals.

Rollins says that the suspension will apply to live cattle, bison and horses, and will be renewed "on a month-by-month basis, until a significant window of containment is achieved." In the meantime, U.S. officials and cattle farmers are on edge.

"It is very, very bad, and it's not just cattle," Dr. Rod Hall, the state veterinarian for Oklahoma, tells Sentient. "The screwworms can affect any warm-blooded animal, so it would be devastating to any of our livestock species."

What is a New World Screwworm?

The New World screwworm isn't a worm at all, but a parasitic fly whose larvae infest and burrow into the tissue of warm-blooded animals. Female screwworms are attracted to open wounds, and bodily orifices in general, and that's often where they lay their eggs. Once the larvae hatch, they burrow into the host creatures' tissue with their powerful mouth hooks.

While several fly species are attracted to open wounds, screwworms are unique in that they infest healthy, living tissue, as opposed to the flesh of dead creatures. What's more, screwworms can lay up to 400 eggs at once, so even a single pregnant fly is bad news for any warm-blooded creature unfortunate enough to encounter one.

"When they get to a certain point, they fall out, burrow into the ground for a week or so, and then they turn into more flies," Hall explains. "So oftentimes, by the time a human realizes that an animal is infected, the damage has already been done, and the next generation [of screwworms] is in the soil, waiting to turn into adult flies so they can lay more eggs."

Myiasis is the official term for a screwworm infestation of living tissue, and it can kill the host creature in one to two weeks if not treated. Thankfully, myiasis is survivable if treated with larvicides, insecticides and daily cleaning of the wounds - that is, if it's detected in time, which is often the biggest challenge for livestock farmers.

Screwworm is a health threat to animals and an economic threat to meat industry producers. But it's generally not considered a public health risk to humans.

Public health officials have said that any livestock infected by the screwworm wouldn't make its way into the domestic meat supply, due to federal meat inspection laws. And although the parasite can infect humans, anybody with such an infection "would notice something" was wrong in time to treat it, Todd Thrift, associate professor of animal sciences at the University of Florida, tells Sentient.

"Unless it was someone that was just totally unaware, this is not something that rapidly affects people," Thrift says. "The probability of it being a human health threat is very, very, very, very low."

As its name implies, the New World screwworm only exists in the Western hemisphere; there's also an Old World screwworm, which is found in parts of Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Oceania. Both types of screwworms live in tropical and subtropical climates, and can't survive extreme heat or cold.

New World screwworms are endemic in South America, Cuba, Haiti and the Dominican Republic, but usually aren't found north of Panama. There are no screwworms in the U.S. - but there used to be, and it's taken quite a bit of effort to keep them out.

Screwworms Were Once A Major Issue On U.S. Farms

Until the 1960s, the New World screwworm was common across Mexico and the southern United States. After its initial detection off the coast of Guiana in 1858, the parasite became a major problem in North America around the turn of the century as America's livestock industry became more developed and expansive.

By 1920, the screwworm was a serious enough issue on U.S. farms that the Department of Agriculture produced an informational video on how to stop them. But the species was still poorly understood at this point, and it wasn't until the 1930s that a series of discoveries about the screwworm equipped scientists to begin developing a plan for eradicating them.

The key was sterilization. Female screwworms only mate once in their lives, so scientists developed a way of sterilizing male screwworms without otherwise harming them, then released the sterile males en masse into screwworm populations. This became known as the Sterile Insect Technique, and it worked: By 1966, New World screwworm was fully eradicated in the U.S., and remaining populations in Mexico were successfully eliminated by 1991.

Ensuring that the U.S. remains screwworm-free, however, has been an ongoing and international effort. Because an adult screwworm can travel up to 125 miles before laying eggs, eradicating the species in the U.S. effectively requires that Mexico be free of the fly as well. The U.S. and Panama maintain a buffer zone of sterilized flies in eastern Panama to prevent the screwworm from migrating northward, and several other international collaborations have helped keep the species' populations in check - for the most part.

How Did This Recent Outbreak Occur?

Although the U.S.-Panamanian buffer zone has largely been a success, it's not completely impermeable. There have been isolated outbreaks of the screwworm in the U.S. at various points since 1966, most recently in the Florida Keys in 2016, but all were eventually contained.

In 2023, however, a major screwworm outbreak occurred in Panama; though it's not entirely clear how the screwworm managed to escape the buffer zone, conservationists have suggested that illegal cattle trafficking is to blame. Since then, the fly has been detected in several countries north of the buffer zone, including Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala, Belize and El Salvador.

"Panama was pretty much focusing all the sterile male flies in the Panama region to control it there," Hall says. "So once it got out of the control area without people knowing it, it had the opportunity to begin spreading. And it's hard to get ahead of it, because the animals can't talk to us and tell us they have a problem."

This is a big reason screwworm is so hard to combat: the lag time between infection and detection. It's why screwworms are a much bigger problem on cattle farms, where cows are often dispersed over a large area and aren't seen for days at a time, than on pig farms, where animals tend to be confined in tight quarters, and farmers can typically put eyes on each animal every day.

"It might be a few weeks before the authorities [in Central America] would realize that they had a case of it," Hall says. "And by then, the screwworm flies had multiplied and moved even further. So instead of being able to get ahead of it, we're kind of chasing it."

In 2024, a New World screwworm infected a cow in southern Mexico near the border of Guatemala. In response, the USDA suspended livestock imports to the U.S. from Mexico in November 2024, and increased its deployments of sterile screwworm males south of the border. By February 2025, the U.S. and Mexico had agreed to a series of enhanced security protocols aimed at preventing screwworm from crossing the U.S.-Mexican border, and the suspension was lifted.

In May, however, the USDA announced that screwworms had been detected in Mexican farms around 700 miles from the U.S. border. It was this discovery that compelled Rollins to suspend Mexican livestock imports again.

Screwworm Policy: Public Health, or Politics?

In her announcement, Rollins stressed that the import suspension "is not about politics or punishment of Mexico, [but] about food and animal safety." Nevertheless, there has been a bit of political tension between the U.S. and Mexico as of late that's worth noting.

Some of this tension has been strictly rhetorical; Mexican President Claudia Scheinbaum didn't take kindly to President Trump's suggestion that the Gulf of Mexico be renamed the "Gulf of America," for instance. But some has been more substantive, stemming from Trump's new tariffs on Mexico and his visa suspensions of certain Mexican officials.

In April, Rollins accused the Mexican government of delaying U.S. efforts to contain screwworms in Panama, and demanded that it "eliminate restrictions on USDA aircraft and waive customs duties on eradication equipment."

The two countries quickly struck a deal to resolve this issue, but the new import suspension has frustrated Mexican authorities, with Scheinbaum calling it "unfair" and defending her government's efforts to fight the parasite.

Zooming Out: Screwworms Are Common In South America

The presence of screwworms is panic-inducing for many American farmers. But in many parts of South America, they're just the cost of doing business.

"In South America, they live with this," Thrift says. "It's there all the time, and so it doesn't wipe out their cattle populations or the wildlife populations or anything else. It's just part of the normal flora."

This begs the question of how these countries deal with the screwworm. The answer is decidedly low-tech, according to Thrift: They just check the cattle for infections more frequently.

"Beef production in some of the South American countries is different because their labor is considerably cheaper," says Thrift. "Having 20 cowboys out there checking for this pest, and doctoring any animals that might have it, would not be near the labor burden that it would be in this country."

For his part, Thrift isn't quite as apocalyptic as some others about the prospect of screwworms returning to the U.S. He notes that the detections in Mexico are "still 700 miles from the [U.S.] border," and that although the parasite would cause problems for cattle ranchers, the screwworm itself "is not an unsolvable problem."

"There's definitely concern," he says, "but this is not something that is insurmountable."


Seth Millstein wrote this article for Sentient.


get more stories like this via email

Groups advocating for clean, safe water are pushing back on proposals to revive a pesticide labeling law introduced last year in Congress which would give chemical companies legal immunity from claims if their products cause cancer.

A similar measure failed in Iowa this year, despite intense lobbying by the pesticide manufacturer, Bayer.

Jennifer Breon, Iowa organizer for the group Food and Water Watch, said public sentiment has been decidedly against giving chemical manufacturers immunity from lawsuits if their products are shown to cause cancer.

"I was not surprised there was overwhelming opposition to this bill," Breon observed. "There was polling by one of the organizations in our coalition that said 89% of the people they polled on this bill were opposed to that. Hundreds of Iowans took thousand of actions to stop this bill."

The pesticide glyphosate, contained in the herbicide Roundup, is as the heart of what's known as the "Cancer Gag Act." While there is circumstantial evidence, the Environmental Protection Agency has not declared glyphosate carcinogenic Congress has not yet introduced a bill.

Bayer has four lobbyists working in Iowa. Despite the special interest pressure to pass the Cancer Gag Act, Breon noted the people of Iowa spoke up on social media, used phone banks and contacted their lawmakers, asking them to oppose it.

"This Cancer Gag Act was a cruel bill," Breon contended. "Nobody wants this in their community. To have their right to make their case in court that their cancer could have been caused by pesticide exposure."

Cancer Registry data show Iowa ranks second in the nation for cancer cases and is the only state where cancer rates are on the rise.


get more stories like this via email