A bill seeking to limit which local, state and federal agencies have authority to conduct livestock and dog breeding facility inspections had minimal opposition during a Wednesday hearing at the Missouri State Capitol.

Organizations voicing support of the bill included Missouri Cattlemen's Association, Missouri Pork Producers, Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Veterinary Medical Association, Missouri Soybean Association and Missouri Corn Growers Association.

Members of the Missouri Association of Local Public Health Agencies were present to oppose the bill in its current form. The association is pleased that amendments are planned, said Will Mars with the association. The Missouri Rural Crisis Center has also opposed the bill, but was not present Wednesday.

House Bill 1583 is sponsored by State Rep. Kent Haden, R-Mexico. He presented the bill to the agriculture policy committee, of which he is a member. HB 1583 is similar to Haden's House Bill 951, which failed to reach Gov. Mike Parson's desk due to a Senate filibuster.

"This bill says that for the inspection of production livestock facilities, there are a group of [agencies] that can do that — Department of Agriculture, USDA, FDA, or basically anybody who has current regulatory authority, state or federal, to be in those facilities," he said.

The county sheriff is the only county-level agency allowed to conduct inspections in Haden's bill.

Haden spent a portion of his career as a regulatory veterinarian for the Missouri Department of Agriculture and said there even were times when he wasn't sure he had authority to conduct facility inspections. His bill clears up which agencies are allowed, he said.

The bill allows operators to have outside inspectors come to a facility, such as if a farmer wants to get into agriculture markets in places like California or Ohio, Haden said.

"[Those states] are passing humane laws and they want to impose them on producers in Missouri. I don't have a problem with that as long as the producer on his own farm could say, 'Yes, this is value added. I would allow that inspection,'" he said.

It also seeks to ensure inspectors are adequately knowledgeable of issues like biosecurity, which aims to prevent the spread of disease at facilities, such as concentrated animal feeding operations or CAFOs.

"You have to put off your personal opinions and base your decision on what does the regulation and what does the law say. That is how you do an inspection as USDA, FDA, Missouri Department of Ag. It's very important to have that neutrality," Haden said.

Haden recognized his previous bill was seen as an extension of Senate Bill 391, which nullified county health ordinances relating to CAFOs, and was signed by Parson last year.

Haden doesn't see his new bill as an extension of SB 391. HB 1583 leaves it up to a producer to make a decision on who they allow to inspect their facilities, such as with a production expansion, Haden said in December. The agencies listed in the bill are ones already with regulatory authority, he added. It still prevents county health departments and county commissions from conducting farm inspections, which also was a goal of SB 391.

CAFO health ordinances affected by SB 391 typically related to manure placement in farm fields and the setback distances limiting application near properties and waterways. A person could file a complaint with a county health department or commission, which then would have inspection authority over manure application.

Haden's bill currently exempts Class 1 counties from the regulations. Class 1 counties zone for agriculture, unlike most Missouri counties, so those counties already regulate inspections. Haden plans to introduce an amendment to change it from Class 1 counties to Home-Rule counties of Jefferson, St. Louis, St. Charles and Jackson. Sheriffs in those counties have a different operational structure than in rural counties, Harden said.

Dairy facilities that also process cheese would allow county health department inspections of cheese production facilities, but not the milking facilities in Haden's bill.

Rep. Greg Sharpe, R-Lewis County, asked Haden if the state would have any liability against an unauthorized person visiting a facility and introducing a disease, he asked. CAFOS can have more than thousands of animals. A pathogen such as with African Swine Flu could wipe out a large portion of livestock in the confined spaces of a CAFO, Haden said.

Haden couldn't say exactly who would be liable if a disease was introduced.

Ranking committee member Rep. Tracy McCreery, D-Olivette, thanked Haden for taking suggestions like the exemption for home-rule counties and allowing county health departments to inspect cheese production facilities from the previous year and incorporating them into the bill. The compromises satisfy a lot of areas, she said.

cdunlap@gatehousemedia.com