How to fight the rise in factory farms
Thinking about submitting an objection but not sure where to start? You’re not alone, but your voice can genuinely help to protect animals
Factory farming developments are being proposed across the UK, often without the public knowing. These systems prioritise high output over animal welfare and confine tens of thousands of animals in intensive conditions.
But these developments only go ahead if councils approve them, and local people have the power to challenge them. The planning system can feel technical and overwhelming. But once you know what to look for, you can raise clear, relevant concerns that decision makers must consider, and Be Their Voice for the animals who don’t have one.
On this page you will find:
What you can (and can’t) include
To be effective, your objection needs to focus on material planning considerations, that’s the issues councils are legally allowed to take into account.
Strong grounds for objection include:
- Climate impacts, including greenhouse gas emissions
- Animal welfare impacts (these can be considered, even if not always given full weight)
- Water pollution risks (e.g. slurry, manure, ammonia runoff can contaminate rivers and groundwater)
- Air quality and public health (ammonia and other particulates cause air pollution that affects the most vulnerable in society)
- Noise, traffic, and landscape impacts
- Proximity to nature reserves, schools, or residential areas
- Harm to wildlife or biodiversity, or failure to meet biodiversity net gain rules
- Conflicts with local or national planning policy
Points that won’t carry weight:
- Personal opinions about the developer
- Property prices
- General views about eating meat
Animal Welfare: why it matters in planning
Factory farms are designed to keep very large numbers of animals in confined spaces, and this has serious welfare consequences that are directly linked to further planning concerns like pollution, public health and environmental impact.
In intensive poultry units, tens of thousands of birds may be kept inside a single shed. These crowded, barren environments can lead to:
- High stress and frustration
- Abnormal behaviours such as feather pecking, leading to farmers mutilating the birds by trimming their beak so they can’t peck each other
- Painful conditions including lameness and ammonia burns from unhygienic conditions
- Respiratory illness caused by poor air quality
- Increased disease risk and early mortality
How to review an application
In intensive pig systems, many animals will never experience the outdoors. 60% of mother pigs (sows) in the UK are confined in farrowing crates for five weeks at a time with each litter, with just enough room to stand or lie down but unable to even turn around. With two litters per year, this means that the sow will spend almost a quarter of her life in one of these barren, tiny crates.
These conditions aren’t just ethical concerns. They are closely linked to issues like waste production, air pollution and disease risk, all of which are relevant to planning decisions.
Planning applications can be long and technical, but you don’t need to read everything. Focus on key areas and look for missing information or weak evidence.
Climate and emissions
There should always be an Environmental Statement (ES) that properly assesses greenhouse gas emissions. Many developers downplay the climate impacts of factory farming, counting emissions from the on-site machinery or boiler, but ignoring much bigger sources of emissions like nitrous oxide from manure, fertiliser and imported feed like soy.
A recent ruling (Finch v Surrey County Council) made it clear that if emissions are foreseeable and quantifiable, they must be transparently assessed for the public to consider. Developers downplaying their climate impacts might describe it as ‘negligible’ for example, because poultry or pigs produce less methane. However, this is not a quantitative emissions assessment and is therefore not compliant with the law.
Waste and pollution
Factory farms produce huge volumes of manure and slurry. Look for:
- Where waste will go
- Whether there’s evidence it can be safely managed
- Risks to rivers, soil, and groundwater
More recent rulings (NFU v Herefordshire, and Caffyn V Shropshire) make it clear that planning authorities cannot lawfully determine intensive livestock applications without a full assessment of the ‘downstream’ impacts of manure and waste. Relying on exporting waste to other farms or anaerobic digesters is not enough
Animal welfare indicators
While welfare may not always be fully assessed, you can still highlight:
- Extremely high stocking densities
- Lack of enrichment or outdoor access
- Links between poor welfare and pollution, disease and antibiotic use
Consultation and transparency
- Has the public been properly consulted?
- Are expert responses available?
Warning signs to watch for
Be aware of common issues in applications, such as:
- Splitting applications into smaller ones to avoid Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs)
- Outdated ecological or environmental surveys over two years old
- Vague plans for waste disposal such as exporting waste to “other farms”
- Glossy language with little supporting evidence
If key details are missing, that’s important to highlight.
What happens next?
After you submit:
- The council reviews all responses
- If there is significant public interest, the application is likely to go to a planning committee where councillors and the public will hear arguments for and against the application. If this happens, you can register to speak at the meeting with your concerns (usually for around two minutes) or ask experts to speak on your behalf.
- A decision will be made in due course whether to approve or refuse the application
You can also:
- Encourage others to object
- Contact your local councillors and MP with your concerns
- Stay involved as the process develops
Why your voice matters
Councils are beginning to reject factory farm applications that don’t meet all the legal requirements. Unfortunately, developers still push these applications hoping they’ll slip through and that we won’t notice. But communities across the country are successfully challenging these developments, especially where there are clear gaps or concerns. Animal suffering is an inherent part of these systems, and when combined with environmental and public health risks, it strengthens the case against them.
Every objection helps shine a light on what these developments really mean and why councillors should say no: for animals, for local communities and for the environment. By taking action, you can Be Their Voice.
