- Author: John M Harper
This is a re-post from CWGA.
CWGA Legislative Action Alert – Members located in Marin County and Surrounding Areas:
Marin County is in the process of correcting an omission in the land use code that for the last 15 years has left ranchers in Marin without a pathway to commercial livestock slaughter in the county. On March 14th, the Board of Supervisors will meet to consider changes to the development code that would allow ranchers to conduct small-scale on-farm slaughter of poultry as well as allow a mobile slaughter unit to provide small-scale USDA-licensed slaughter of all species on ranches in the county. Both of these proposed rules would make it possible for ranchers to bring product to market without traveling across the state, submitting animals to stressful travel and costing the farms time and money. Anyone who has an interest in Marin's ranching community and/or locally produced meat should plan to write letters to the Board of Supervisors and speak at the March 14th meeting. Letters can be sent to the Board of Supervisors at BOS@marincounty.org.
The proposed rules would specifically allow:
1. On-farm slaughter by a rancher of his/her own poultry (chickens, turkeys, ducks, geese) for commercial sale without a use permit. This would be limited to 20,000 chickens (or equivalent) per year and only in lands zoned A3 - A60 (lands zoned A2 or ARP as well as those located in the Coastal Zone would be excluded). Ranchers would be able to process animals that are raised "on the same site or on other agricultural properties located in Marin County that are owned or leased by the processing facility owner or operator” but rabbits (traditionally included in the definition of “poultry”) would be excluded from this rule. Additionally, these processing activities would be limited to 5000 square feet.
2. Mobile Slaughter Units (MSUs) could provide USDA-licensed slaughter services to ranchers for all species without a use permit on lands zoned A3 - A60 (lands zoned A2 or ARP as well as those located in the Coastal Zone would be excluded). MSU's could not operate on any single property for more than 3 consecutive days and up to 12 total days within a calendar month unless the rancher secures a temporary use permit. Ranchers from other properties could bring their animals to where an MSU is in operation to have their animals processed. The unit would have to be located more than 100 feet away from any property lines.
3. Stationary slaughterhouses providing USDA-licensed slaughter services for all species would NOT be allowed in Marin County.
On March 14th, the Board of Supervisors has the power to approve, deny or even change these recommendations up to and including:
• Re-inserting rabbits into number 1 above.
• Allowing numbers 1 and 2 above in lands zoned A2 or ARP (the Board cannot at this time change the land use rules for farms in the Coastal Zone).
• Reversing or modifying the recommendation in number 3 in order to allow for some form of brick-and-mortar USDA slaughterhouse.
Substantial pushback from those who oppose ranching and livestock slaughter is expected at the March 14th meeting. It is very important for the Board of Supervisors to hear from the agricultural community on this issue, and members of the public who value local meats produced on local lands should also speak. Potential talking points might include:
• Raising pastured livestock is one of the oldest and most appropriate uses of Marin's coastal grasslands
• Without access to local slaughter services, ranches incur great cost in money, time and fuel to truck animals out of the area …just so they can be sold back to Bay Area consumers.
• Slaughter services are an essential part of the ranching business. Raising animals in an ecologically sound fashion is a fruitless endeavor if those animals cannot affordably be brought to market.
• New and small-scale ranchers are particularly paralyzed by the costs and complexity of working with distant slaughter facilities.
Also being recommended by the Planning Commission is a new rule to require use permits for ranchers in lands zoned ARP if they want to conduct educational tours. Until now, these activities have been considered “principally permitted” (i.e. a by-right activity that requires no permit or permission from the county). In the development code, “educational tour” is defined as: "Interactive excursion for groups and organizations for the purpose of informing them of the unique aspects of a property, including agricultural operations and environmental resources.” This has historically included school visits, chef/buyer tours, tours by organizations such as MALT or AIM, as well as open-farm type programming to help connect with new CSA members and other customers. Lands zoned A3-A60 would be unaffected by this change, but for those in ARP lands, the requirement to secure a use permit could mean $5,000-10,000 and extensive review by county Planning before allowing one of these activities to take place on your land. Given the growing interest by the public in visiting farms and ranches as well as the importance of transparency in the food system, this may pose a problem for many ranchers. Making your voice heard on this issue is recommended as well.
Again, on both matters, letters should be sent to: BOS@marincounty.org and please plan to speak on Tuesday, 3/14 (time TBD) in Suite 330 of the Marin Civic Center.
For questions contact Vince Trotter, Agricultural Ombudsman for Marin County at 415-524-7394 or email@example.com.
- Author: John M Harper
The report was prepared under an Award from the U.S. Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration for the Mendocino County EDFC. The study authors were Shermain Hardesty, Cooperative Extension Specialist, UC Davis Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics and John Harper, UCCE Livestock & Natural Resources Advisor for Mendocino & Lake Counties.
The study examined a proposed project for a small-scale multi-species USDA-inspected meat plant that would primarily serve ranchers in Mendocino and Lake Counties. The plant would handle cattle, hogs, sheep, goats and bison. It is different from most niche meat plants because most of the ranchers interested in using the facility already have established markets, primarily in the North and East Bay. Those ranchers would be shifting their harvest and/or processing from one or more existing facilities (none are located in Mendocino or Lake Counties) to the proposed meat plant.
The study and report included an Analysis of Demand for USDA-Inspected Slaughter & Processing Services; Alternative Organizational Models; Alternative Sources of Financing; Plant Requirements, Options and Siting; and Financial Analysis of Three Options.
The three plant options analyzed were: Option A - provides only cut-and-wrap services using a modular processing unit and a trailer office located in an industrial park with a total cost of $430,500; Option B - includes the same processing facility and trailer office described for Option A, plus a modular slaughter unit and adjacent holding pens located at a leased site on an unspecified ranch with a total cost of $821,100; and Option C - a built-in-place 2,400 square foot harvest and processing facility located on purchased property with a total cost of $1,425,516. All options have a capacity to handle 1,500 equivalent animal units (1 steer = 2 hogs = 2 lambs or goats) per year or 30 equivalent animal units per week. The plant would operate in a 50-week year with a single 8-hour per day shift.
All three options proved to be financially viable. Option B has the highest Internal Rate of Return (IRR) of 11.1%. Option C's IRR is 6.6% and is impacted significantly by the purchase of 3.7 acres for $483,516. Option A's IRR is 3.9% but since it is cut-and-wrap only, it does not meet the needs of the ranchers doing direct marketing. Ten-year cash flow for Option C is included in the report.
A public meeting will be held on September 5, 2013 at 5 pm in Ukiah to present the report and answer questions. The meeting will be held at the Sun House Public Meeting Room. The room is on the west side of the Grace Hudson Museum, located at 431 S. Main Street.
Next steps include that authors Hardesty and Harper will prepare a business plan for implementing Option C for the EDFC.