A USDA-certified meat processing facility is being proposed on land south of Cortez.

The project at 7429 U.S. Highway 160/491 was recommended for approval by the Montezuma County Planning Commission Feb. 10. But obtaining adequate water for the operation could be challenge.

The proposal now goes to the Board of County Commissioners for a review, public hearing and final decision.

Rocky Mountain Meats has submitted plans for the facility, which would have the capacity to process up to 50 animals per week, said company agent Chad Foutz.

He said the modern plant would be fully enclosed, and no animals would be held outside. An engineered septic system would be required and must meet U.S. Department of Agriculture standards. Hours would be Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

The project would be on land formerly operated by a trucking company. Existing buildings would be used and upgraded. The facility requires a special-use permit and rezoning to “light industrial” from “agriculture,” said Planning Director Don Haley.

Foutz said the company is “in desperate need” of a larger USDA processing facility to keep up with demand for its beef products.

He said there is a lack of USDA-certified slaughterhouses in the region and nationally.

“I’m having to take animals to Wyoming to fulfill orders,” Foutz said.

He uses three USDA meat processing plants, and it can take six months to a year to obtain a kill slot.

According to project documents, the USDA Cattle Inventory Census for 2017 shows the beef cattle inventory was 46,743 for the combined counties of La Plata, Montezuma, San Juan (New Mexico), and San Juan (Utah).

Foutz plans to process about 20 animals per month at the facility, which can handle up to 200 per month. Half the slots beyond company needs will be reserved for local ranchers who want to process meat at a USDA facility.

“That would be our commitment to Montezuma County,” Foutz said.

He said the county location on U.S. 491 is ideal because it is on the way to company feedlots in Waterflow, New Mexico, and is a good distribution point to ship meats to customers in Utah, Colorado and California.

The company has utilized the USDA processing plant in Mancos approved in 2019, but it can’t handle the needed volume.

Foutz has met with neighbors, who have concerns about noise, odor, lighting and traffic. He said modern processing plants are enclosed and prevent odors. The closed engineered septic system controls wastes.

Cow manure will be collected inside the plant and shipped to fertilize corn and alfalfa farms in New Mexico.

Foutz said the plant will be state of the art and adopts best practices learned from a tour of a modern facility at Colorado State University in Fort Collins. An H-VAC system keeps the facility at 45 degrees, and an exhaust system includes layers of filtration, he said.

Foutz said the processing operation requires 50 to 100 gallons per animal. The property has a tap from Montezuma County Water District No. 1 that delivers 2,500 gallons to 3,500 gallons per month.

But that would not be sufficient for the planned operations. At full capacity of 200 animals per month, the facility would need 10,000 gallons to 20,000 gallons per month.

Water District Operations Manager Chuck Martin said the district could not provide more than current volume because of limited water supply.

“We are short on water, our district is maxed out,” he said. “I don’t want to shortchange everyone else in the district to give you more water.”

The water district has a contract with the city of Cortez fora set amount of water, Martin said. Whether the amount could increase would be up to the water district board and the city. Martin is a neighbor of the proposed project.

Foutz said he plans to meet with the water district board. To reduce pressure issues, he would draw water at night and store it in tanks. Processing facilities rely on pressurized hot water for operations.

Supporters and opponents spoke during the public comment period.

Wanda Martin, who lives adjacent to the proposed facility, said it would “negatively impact for residents in the area.”

“The majority of properties are residential and agricultural, not commercial,” she said. Her concerns include odors, traffic, light pollution, spills and runoff onto her property and McElmo Creek.

Bryson McCabe, representing neighbor Jim Black, said there is concern that nearby homes could lose their value. A detailed management plan and explanation about how the septic and odor would be handled would help, he said.

Jerry Ayers, a ranch manager next to the proposal, said he was “on the fence” about the project. He also wants information about the septic system and where waste would go.

Planning Director Haley said the business must provide an approved and engineered system that is approved before operations could begin per county and USDA codes.

An audience member stated the city of Cortez and Cortez Sanitation District should also weigh in.

Proponents commented on the potential economic benefits.

“We have dozens of producers shipping cattle hundreds of miles to get processed. If we could do that locally, it would be a huge benefit,” said Colton Black, director of the Cortez Chamber of Commerce. “There is an outdated perception on these facilities. The technology has changed, a lot of the impacts imagined have been mitigated out.”

Beef producer Bob Ower welcomed the proposed plant. He hauls his animals to Montrose for USDA processing, certification he needs to sell the meat by the piece at the farmers market.

“I’m booking appointments into next year and am lucky to get spots. Having more local processing would be a game changer,” Ower said.

Larry Don Suckla, of the Cortez Livestock Auction, agreed.

“Farmers and ranchers are struggling. This will keep us here and help hundreds of ranchers,” he said.

The planning board recommended the plant for approval because it complied with the land use code.

Commissioner John Hernandez urged a specific site plan be made available. Commissioner Eddie Mac Taylor was concerned about water use.

“Without a water agreement and resolution with the water district, where do we stand?” he said.

jmimiaga@the-journal.com