Defending Agriculture Legal, environmental hot button issues that impact U.S. farmers. |
|
|
 |
|
EPA Seeks Private CAFO Data |
 |
| Posted on December 19, 2011 at 10:00 AM |
 |
The Environmental Protection Agency claims that 29 states have "…specifically identified animal feeding operations as contributing to water quality impairment." Moreover, EPA says 68 studies have been completed and show the animal livestock industry "…as an important contributor of surface water pollution."
In fact 15 of the 68 studies, EPA alleges, have directly linked confined animal feeding operations to air and water pollutants which have lead to specific health or environmental impacts.
The allegations get much worse!
To start solving this problem EPA has issued a proposed rule to force CAFOs to provide it with data, so EPA can "…achieve more efficiently and effectively the water quality protection goals and objectives of Clean Water Act." The rule was proposed on October 21, 2011 in the Federal Register. (It is a piece of coal for your Christmas!)
EPA is proposing the rule because it signed a settlement agreement with environmental litigants on a case brought in 2008. EPA, in settling, agreed with the environmentalists to force all CAFOs to provide certain information to EPA and make it public. The agreement, according to the proposal, requires CAFOs to submit certain private information to EPA notwithstanding whether the CAFO has a NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit or has a discharge!
EPA has not sought this information in the past, but is now because it signed a consent agreement with environmental groups.
EPA's proposal claims the purpose is to restore water quality by collecting this data to "…ensure that CAFOs are complying with the requirements of the CWA including the requirement to obtain an NPDES permit if they discharge pollutants to waters of the U.S.…"
CAFOs, nor anyone else can discharge into a water of the U.S without a permit. CAFOS have 'no discharge' requirements. What is EPA talking about? If it finds a CAFO discharging, bring an enforcement action.
EPA lost the NPPC (National Pork Producers Council) v. EPA case, 635 F.3rd 738 (5th Cir.2011), which held there must be an "actual discharge" into a water of the U.S. before an NPDES permit is required.
Now EPA is attempting to get around the NPPC decision by claiming it is authorized to collect information from "any point source." True, but CAFOs do not discharge therefore are not point sources.
EPA is not giving up on attempting to regulate CAFOs, regardless of what the courts have ruled.
Just review EPA's Impact Analysis on page 65,447 of the Federal Register, which claims that this October CAFO reporting proposal will help it as did the 2003 CAFO rule, to obtain pollutant reductions of 56 million pounds of phosphorus, 110 million pounds of nitrogen, and two billion pounds of sediment from entering waters of the U.S. EPA claims: "The effect of the proposed rule would be to enable full attainment of the benefits calculated in the 2003 rule."
EPA claims against CAFOs
EPA claims pollutants from manure, litter and waste water from CAFOs contain pathogens, heavy metals and pharmaceuticals. When the manure is applied before rainfall these nutrients run into the waters of the U.S.
Also, EPA claims there are 40 diseases found in manure which can be transferred to humans, such as Salmonellosis, Tuberculosis, Leptospirosis, infantile diarrheal disease and Trichinosis. These pathogens, EPA claims, are in recreational surface waters from CAFOs.
EPA continues its accusations to support its rule by saying heavy metals such as arsenic, cadmium, iron, lead, and nickel are commonly found in CAFO manure. EPA cites a report which says that 80-90% of copper, zinc and arsenic which are consumed by animals is excreted and then contaminates the soil, runs into rivers and "…may eventually release to pollute the water."
EPA also claims that the health hazards that result from manure runoff may result in chronic exposure and lead to nervous system disorders, cardiovascular effects, diabetes, respiratory effects, reproductive effects and cancers from multiple tissues from arsenic.
EPA cites an FDA 2010 Summary Report on Antimicrobials Used in Food Producing Animals which claims antimicrobials used in CAFOs increased from 8.8 million kilograms in 1995 to 13.3 million kilograms in 2009. EPA claims these antibiotics are not metabolized completely and suggests that these antibiotics are in the waters of the U.S. and are "…increasing the severity of [human] disease and limiting treatment options for sickened individuals..." and cites an EPA report dated 2005.
EPA would have you believe it merely wants the name of the owner of the CAFO, location, type and capacity of manure storage, whether the CAFO land-applies manure, whether there is a nutrient management plan, whether the CAFO transfers manure offsite and whether the CAFO has applied for an NPDES permit. Sounds straight forward enough, but as you can see from the foregoing claims, EPA believes it needs basic information from CAFOs to support its alleged goal of water quality protection.
In reading the Federal Register 76 F.R. 65431 (October 21, 2011) it is clear that EPA will do everything in its power to bring CAFOs under its regulation. CAFO managers need to read the fine print set forth in this proposal. |
 |
| Add a Comment |
 |
| Comments |
 |
| Posted by Anonymous on December 21 at 7:57 AM |
|
|
| Look to the tea party ideas and I am regulated enough already! I knife in manure with a flow meter at the desired rate and nothing gets close to a creek. Do you know how many jobs from feedmill to the packing plants the hog industry employs? This government seems to want us to import all our food, fuel, &manufactured products and China is more than willing to supply it. Someone (hopefully a new administration) needs to rein in these environmentalists before they totally destroy ag and other industries.
|
 |
|
 |
| Posted by Anonymous on December 20 at 12::38 PM |
|
|
| If it is true, as this article-writer claims, that "CAFOs do not discharge therefore are not point sources," then what are CAFO operators all up at arms about in EPA collecting a little data? Why the huge pullback by Big Ag from opening their operations to public scrutiny and information gathering by the EPA TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT!? Why be mad at the EPA? As one commenter wrote: "EPA should be studying how the waste can be converted into useable products." It is NOT the job of the EPA to figure what to do with all that animal waste. That charge ought to be leveled at the producers of all that sh*t. EPA's job is to protect the environment--period. Big Ag, if it has nothing to hide, ought to welcome EPA's efforts, willingly and with full disclosure, cooperate in all efforts to protect the environment for all generations, including future ones, to enjoy. |
 |
|
 |
| Posted by Anonymous on December 20 at 9:24 AM |
|
|
| We must start fighting the EPA and department of Energy by refusing to comply. Yes, there will be some that could end up in jail but if enough people rebel against these corrupt government entities then they will lose support of the American people. This country is being legislated and regulated to death. It may well be the time for another revolution starting with this next election. Vote every Democrat and RINO, that's running, out and of course we need to replace the failure in the White House. |
 |
|
 |
| Posted by Anonymous on December 20 at 9:23 AM |
|
|
| We must start fighting the EPA and department of Energy by refusing to comply. Yes, there will be some that could end up in jail but if enough people rebel against these corrupt government entities then they will lose support of the American people. This country is being legislated and regulated to death. It may well be the time for another revolution starting with this next election. Vote every Democrat and RINO, that's running, out and of course we need to replace the failure in the White House. |
 |
|
 |
| Posted by Anonymous on December 20 at 9:06 AM |
|
|
| One more camel nose under the edge of the tent. I am for clean air and water, but I would also like to have affordable beef, chicken and pork.
So we have a bit of a conundrum, factory farms are only marginally humane and do produce tons of waste.
So the eggheads at the EPA should be studying how the waste can be converted into useable products, not collecting data on how to shut these producers down, and drive the price of food through the roof.
My crystal ball says there will be head count limits, solid waste volume regulations, and $25.00 a lb ground meat.
Time to go hunting. |
 |
|
 |
| Posted by Anonymous on December 20 at 6:36 AM |
|
|
| This one is tough for me. While I am nearly 100% opposed to the EPA, I am almost equally opposed to CAFOs. It is absolutely not true that they do not discharge into waters. Having lived with one on the hill above me, with two creeks at the bottom of the hill, I personally observed the spreading of litter right to the edge of both creeks. I literally stood with one foot in the creek and the other in chicken manure. I told Missouri Department of Natural Resources and the guy simply said, "well, they shouldn't do that". No action whatsoever. My well was polluted. So there has to be some accountability. |
 |
|
 |
| Posted by Anonymous on December 19 at 6:49 PM |
|
|
| CAFOs need to be part of this process. Their current methods will not pass the increase public awareness of the run-off pollution potential. CAFOs need to begin finding ways to deal with the by-product production. If they are not part of the regulatory process, then they will be shocked five years from now. |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| EPA Demanding CAFO Data - Now! |
| Posted on March 14, 2012 at 10:00 AM |
| Despite a lack of legal authority to do so, the agency may soon be demanding sensitive information from large animal operations. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Will You Need EPA Spray Permits? |
| Posted on January 16, 2012 at 1:00 AM |
| Producers need to be extremely vigilant as to what state environmental agencies do regarding requirements for pesticide spraying |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
| EPA Seeks Private CAFO Data |
| Posted on December 19, 2011 at 10:00 AM |
| The Environmental Protection Agency's latest attempt to regulate large animal farms. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Wetlands: The New Land Grab by EPA |
| Posted on June 06, 2011 at 12:03 PM |
| New government plan creates the potential for EPA to substantially increase its jurisdictional reach over private property. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
| EPA 'Out of Control' |
| Posted on May 25, 2011 at 10:39 AM |
| Congressman says Congress must police environmental agency; here's why. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
| EPA Faces Hostile Ag Congressmen |
| Posted on April 18, 2011 at 2:28 AM |
| Congressional panel members claim EPA is exceeding its authority by ordering states to develop nutrient water runoff plans. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
| Do CAFOs Pollute? |
| Posted on April 04, 2011 at 1:51 PM |
| Nonprofit environmental group confuses facts with fiction. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
| NEPA's Effect on Farmers |
| Posted on March 14, 2011 at 11:26 AM |
| National Environmental Policy Act has become a "recipe for stagnation." |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
| Time to Reform NEPA |
| Posted on March 08, 2011 at 10:22 AM |
| Environmental policy law is being manipulated and used by environmentalists to sabotage biotech agriculture. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Farm Oil Spills! |
| Posted on January 25, 2011 at 4:01 PM |
| Clearing up confusion over EPA oil spill regulations. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| EPA's Misguided Math |
| Posted on September 27, 2010 at 10:49 AM |
| Agriculture has a lot at stake in EPA's calculated efforts to put farmers on 'pollution diets' |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
| Pollution Diets For Farmers |
| Posted on September 13, 2010 at 1:38 PM |
| Virginia Farm Bureau calls potential law "…one of the worst pieces of federal legislation for farmers in recent memory" |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Climate Bill Compromise? |
| Posted on July 08, 2010 at 12:14 PM |
| Sen. Lugar's Climate Bill may be better than Waxman-Markey, but it will still be restrictive and expensive. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| RFS2 – New Opportunities for Farmers? |
| Posted on February 22, 2010 at 9:41 AM |
| An inside look at EPA's vision for how land, exports and crop prices will shift to fulfill the need for future renewable fuels. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Growing Corn Imperils Wildlife? |
| Posted on January 26, 2010 at 8:54 PM |
| University study claims increased acreage from biofuel demand converts wildlife habitat to cropland. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Copenhagen: What Next? |
| Posted on December 23, 2009 at 11:27 AM |
| Agriculture has plenty to worry about when it comes to greenhouse gas regs. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CAFOs Under Fire |
| Posted on November 09, 2009 at 8:46 AM |
| Why does EPA want to shut down large-scale livestock farms? |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
| Got an EPA Permit? |
| Posted on November 04, 2009 at 11:24 AM |
| Thanks to a court ruling, you may need to get a Clean Water Act permit every time you spray herbicides or fungicides. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| More Attacks Against Animal Ag |
| Posted on September 29, 2009 at 7:34 AM |
| New Humane Society petition to EPA threatens to regulate and eventually shut down large-scale livestock operations. |
| Category: Issues |
 |
|
|
|
|
| Blog |
|
 |
|
 |
| Category |
|
 |
|
 |
| Archives |
|
 |
|
 |
| About The Writer |
Gary H. Baise is an Illinois farmer and trial attorney at the law firm Olsson Frank Weeda Terman Matz PC. Specializing in agricultural and environmental issues, he also serves as outside General Counsel for the U.S. Grains Council, Agricultural Retailers Association, National Association of Wheat Growers, and National Sorghum Producers. |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|