Monday, August 22, 2011

Senator Roberts tries to educate Obama on ag regs

I've previously posted how at a recent town hall meeting Obama dismissed a farmer's complaint about regulations, saying "don't always believe what you hear." Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas has taken it upon himself to educate Obama on what his administration is doing to ag with a plethora of rules and regs.  In a letter to the President, the Senator lists the following items:

GIPSA Rule Impacting Livestock Producers – USDA has proposed a new regulation for livestock marketing that will undo years of progress and innovation in the livestock industry. Many of the provisions of this proposed rule were rejected on a bipartisan basis during debate on the last Farm Bill, which was signed into law when you were serving in the United States Senate. This proposed rule could eliminate
the use of many alternative marketing arrangements in the livestock industry. A 2007 GIPSA study showed that over ten years a 25 percent reduction in alternative marketing arrangements would cost feeder cattle producers $5.1 billion; fed cattle producers $3.9 billion; and consumers $2 billion. If marketing arrangements were eliminated, the 10-year cumulative losses for producers and consumers would top $60 billion.

NPDES permits – This duplicative regulatory burden is scheduled to go into effect on October 31, 2011, less than three months from today. It will require 5.6 million applications of pesticides by 365,000 applicators to have NPDES permits to apply pesticides. These permits are duplicative, unnecessary and will add a new requirement under the Clean Water Act for pesticide applications, which are already regulated under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone – EPA has proposed to strengthen the primary ozone standard. Under the proposal, the vast majority of counties with ozone monitors would be considered in nonattainment. If finalized, this could mean that additional rural and/or agricultural counties are designated as non attainment. This will limit the ability of farmers to manage crop residue on their farms and will create a substantial new burden on livestock operations where ammonia and methane are naturally emitted by animals.

PM 10/Dust – EPA is preparing to reconsider its large particulate matter (PM 10) standard. EPA’s Clean Air Advisory Committee has recommended lowering the standard. This is problematic because the current standard is already difficult for many rural counties, especially in the West, to meet. Working and harvesting farm fields is an inherently dusty business, as is driving down rural dirt and logging roads. A change in this rule will make it impossible for many farming and forestry operations to be in compliance and could result in substantial fines for many family operations.

Water Quality Standards Rulemaking – Last year, EPA announced it will propose a rule to strengthen anti-degradation standards, adopt a presumption that all U.S. waters should be fishable and swimmable, and require state decisions to be approved by EPA. In effect, this proposal would federalize decisions historically made by the states under the Clean Water Act.

Climate Change – Proposed new greenhouse gas regulations will increase the cost of virtually every input used in agriculture and forestry production. These regulations will not impact just producers but also agribusinesses. As these businesses face increased costs, those expenses will be passed on to producers and ultimately consumers. This will likely lead to higher food and fuel costs for all Americans while the economy is still struggling.

Clean Water Act Strategy – Earlier this year the Administration announced new “guidance” for federal employees to implement the Clean Water Act, thereby expanding the water bodies included under regulation. This action was taken without adherence to federal regulatory process through the promulgation of a regulation in the Federal Register. This expansion of the Clean Water Act will impact farmers and ranchers, not to mention increased burdens on States.

Spray Drift Policy – Last year, EPA proposed a rule to help states identify and prevent drift. The proposed rule counters decades old EPA policies that acknowledge small levels of spray drift are unavoidable. In fact, EPA has long recognized some de minimus level of spray drift will occur from most or all applications as a result of using pesticides. The proposed policy establishes a precautionary principle approach and is inconsistent with FIFRA.

Prior Converted Cropland – In April 2009, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers adopted a policy that “once a property changes from agricultural use to non-agricultural use, a prior converted cropland (PCC) designation is no longer applicable.” Therefore, the moment agricultural use ceases on PCC, the PCC designation is no longer valid and a jurisdictional determination will be conducted under a provision in the Corps’s Wetlands Delineation Manual that allows the Corps to assert jurisdiction over areas that do not exhibit all three wetlands characteristics. This is contrary to current Corps of Engineers policy and was adopted without any public input.

Atrazine – In response to a New York Times article, EPA has announced an unscheduled re-review of atrazine. Atrazine was favorably reviewed by EPA in 2006 and is scheduled to begin registration review in 2013. Reviews should be based on scientific justifications and established timelines and should not be done in response to a single press report.

Arsenic and Dioxin Risk Assessments – EPA is considering a cancer risk factor for arsenic that will cause virtually all soils to exceed the agency’s target risk range as well as a risk factor for dioxin that will cause nearly all agricultural products to exceed the agency’s level of concern. This means rice, wheat, corn meal, peanuts, apples, lettuce, carrots, onions, sugar, and tap water would be considered unsafe. Since 2000, the incidence of dioxin contamination has dropped 90 percent.

We in the public lands states could certainly add to the list.

Senator Roberts closes his letter by stating:


Mr. President, I hope this list of regulations provides more clarity on the real, proposed regulations and directives by your administration that will add costs to every farming, livestock and forestry operation in this country. They will also increase costs for consumers and limit opportunity for economic activity in rural communities across the country. I urge you to do all that you can to put the brakes on this regulatory agenda aimed at further weakening the economy in rural America.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Not too much longer and with the stupid regs and drought, agriculture will be reduced to a mere fraction of its former productive self. What then? I guess meals will have to start with a sewage plant somewhere.