OKLAHOMA CITY, Okla. – A bill that could lax regulations for the poultry industry has advanced out the Senate Thursday afternoon. House Bill 4118 would weaken water protection laws by lessening protocols that regulate chicken feces contamination. Run-off from the agriculture industry can increase the abundance of certain chemicals, having disastrous effects on rivers, lakes and streams. 

Manure is commonly used as fertilizer for certain crops. Chicken manure is particularly high in the three main chemicals that promote plant growth. Nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus can be found in any chemical or organic fertilizer. But when they enter natural water systems it can cause a range of issues. 

Run-off from chicken farms can cause eutrophication, an excess of nutrients. One harmful side effect of nutrient excess is algal blooms. An overabundance of algae can cause other wildlife including fish and aquatic plants to die off as they struggle for oxygen and sunlight. 

Oklahoma currently has two laws on the books that provide strict guidelines to the poultry industry. Both the Oklahoma Poultry Waste Applicators Certification Act and the Oklahoma Registered Poultry Feeding Operations Act prevent the industry from over polluting the state’s waterways. Before establishing these measures, phosphorus pollution caused widespread algal blooms in the Illinois River and Lake Tenkiller. The lake is located within the Cherokee Nation, which has had a longstanding battle with the state over water rights and protection in the area. 

Tribes Speak Out Against HB 4118

The Inter-Tribal Council for the Five Civilized Tribes have been actively voicing opposition to HB 4118.

“Poultry farmers and the agriculture industry are essential to our economy, but they also have a responsibility to be good neighbors who avoid polluting the community’s drinking water and recreational areas,” a joint letter from tribal leaders says. “The State Department of Agriculture lacks the capacity to protect water quality and ensure best practices across Oklahoma on its own. We are united in opposition to a bill that threatens to undermine safe drinking water and healthy environments across our Reservations.”

Former Officials Against the Bill

In a guest column published by The Oklahoman former governor Frank Keating and attorney general Drew Edmondson air out their grievances regarding HB 4118. Both were in office when the state passed strict regulations for poultry farming in 1998. Before the laws’ passage, water protection from the industry was sparse.

Related Stories

“If this legislation becomes law, the large poultry companies — the integrators — along with contract farmers and poultry waste applicators, would receive immunity from public nuisance lawsuits if they comply with ‘nutrient management plans’ approved by the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry. And while there may well be a problem with nuisance lawsuits under current law, HB 4118 is not the answer.”

Big Chicken Infiltrating Oklahoma Politics

When Edmondson was in office, advertisements accused the former attorney general of attacking local farmers. He believed that out-of-state corporations could be behind the attacks. Tyson Foods, the largest chicken operation in the U.S., has several operations in the state. Edmondson was putting pressure on Tyson and other companies because of their hand in pollution in northeastern Oklahoma’s watershed. 

In 2005, he filed a suit against Tyson, Cargill, Cal-Maine Foods and ten others for causing an increase of harmful nutrients and even E. Coli in the Illinois River. Tyson played both hands claiming the government was attacking small farmers while also blaming those farmers for the increased pollution. 

Tyson and similar corporations often use smaller farms to maintain supply levels. The state’s Farm Bureau claimed that the litigation would harm small-scale farmers. 

After Edmondson’s term ended in 2011, Scott Pruitt succeeded him and showed favoritism to poultry corporations. Tyson and similar industry executives donated to Pruitt’s 2010 campaign. Once in office, Pruitt unsuccessfully motioned to have the 2005 case dismissed.

Over two decades later, judges sided with the state. The court instructed all parties to negotiate a deal, but history repeated itself, and they never reached an agreement.