TCJatko
Platinum Member
Since when do facts mean anything to government bureaucrats?
Study backs farmer in pollution battle with EPA
- Thread starter Western
- Start date
- Views: 4578
buickanddeere
Super Member
Won't be long until these farm bureaus who are providing support are investigated, harassed and threatened by sympathetic government agencies.
3v0
Platinum Member
I had made a post about an individual but as they say if you can't say anything nice.... So I removed it. Sorry
jinman
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2001
- Messages
- 20,387
- Location
- Texas - Wise County - Sunset
- Tractor
- NHTC45D, NH LB75B, Ford Jubilee
Aren't they scheduled for an IRS audit?:laughing:
dave1949
Super Star Member
There is a context to this news item that is not mentioned by FOX News. It involves efforts to improve the watersheds that supply the Chesapeake Bay. That would be a valid EPA mission I believe, and they would be criticized for not undertaking it.
Farm bureaus: EPA lawsuit could affect thousands | Maryland Daily Record
"Alt sued the EPA in U.S. District Court in June to stop it from imposing new rules as part of a multi-state effort to clean up Chesapeake Bay. She argues any waste-tainted runoff is agricultural storm water, not 菟rocess wastewater, and that means it痴 not subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act."
"Last fall, EPA determined that dust, feathers and fine particles of dander and manure from Alt痴 poultry house ventilation fans could land on the ground, come into contact with stormwater and flow into ditches, eventually reaching Chesapeake Bay tributaries.
The EPA is focused on protecting the watershed, which encompasses parts of Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia, and all of the District of Columbia."
Mrs. Alt would like to have her waste run-off classified in the least expensive way to her business, fair enough. The people who are economically dependent on the Chesapeake Bay could also have file as "intervenors" in a case such as this, just as the Farm Bureau did in the interest of other agriculture interests.
An article about the "health" of the Chesapeake Bay which is important to many, just like chickens are important to Mrs. Alt:
Chesapeake Bay?s health improving slightly, report says - Washington Post
I'm sure large government agencies can be cumbersome and difficult to deal with. So can Time Warner. We should demand they do their best, use good science, etc., but overall, the EPA is between at least three competing interests in this case: farms in the watershed, the bay interests, and environmentalists.
Farm bureaus: EPA lawsuit could affect thousands | Maryland Daily Record
"Alt sued the EPA in U.S. District Court in June to stop it from imposing new rules as part of a multi-state effort to clean up Chesapeake Bay. She argues any waste-tainted runoff is agricultural storm water, not 菟rocess wastewater, and that means it痴 not subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act."
"Last fall, EPA determined that dust, feathers and fine particles of dander and manure from Alt痴 poultry house ventilation fans could land on the ground, come into contact with stormwater and flow into ditches, eventually reaching Chesapeake Bay tributaries.
The EPA is focused on protecting the watershed, which encompasses parts of Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia, and all of the District of Columbia."
Mrs. Alt would like to have her waste run-off classified in the least expensive way to her business, fair enough. The people who are economically dependent on the Chesapeake Bay could also have file as "intervenors" in a case such as this, just as the Farm Bureau did in the interest of other agriculture interests.
An article about the "health" of the Chesapeake Bay which is important to many, just like chickens are important to Mrs. Alt:
Chesapeake Bay?s health improving slightly, report says - Washington Post
I'm sure large government agencies can be cumbersome and difficult to deal with. So can Time Warner. We should demand they do their best, use good science, etc., but overall, the EPA is between at least three competing interests in this case: farms in the watershed, the bay interests, and environmentalists.
Dave, just a "hunch" ,but I would bet the populace closer to Chesapeake causes much more harm than chicken dander landing on the ground.
I may have read it wrong too, but I understand that the EPA used miss leading data to substantiate their claims. (in a nutshell) so to speak
I may have read it wrong too, but I understand that the EPA used miss leading data to substantiate their claims. (in a nutshell) so to speak
Rustyiron
Super Member
You are so right! Just Baltimore City street runoff alone must do more harm than any chicken feathers.
Not sure of the numbers, but the population of that area is insane. With just about every house in those massive developments getting lawn service.....(spraying).
dave1949
Super Star Member
That chicken dander is dangerous stuff. :laughing: I think the concept is that it is cumulative and additive over that watershed region.
I think the issue raised by the chicken manure nitrogen content study is a case of out-dated science, if it is accurate. The EPA was relying on established estimates that the study calls into question. That's what I meant by demanding good science be used.
What I find confusing is that apparently a large run-off farm operation can apply for a permit. I don't know what the conditions or cost of the permit may be.
Whatever the facts about the dander, nitrogen, etc., I just wanted to point out that these stories are not exactly what they seem; that the EPA is hounding someone with no perceptible reasons. I'm sure a Chesapeake Bay oysterman or crabber is wanting his business to succeed also, and he needs a clean bay for that to happen. Competing interests.
A good read on the Chesapeake Bay history is: Chesapeake (novel) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ; by James Michener. Long read like all Michener novels, of course.
dave1949
Super Star Member
I don't disagree there. All or most of those people eat eggs too. And they would like to have fresh oysters on the half shell, or a blue crab dinner too.
It is population driven. The more people, the more waste produced and resources consumed. The problem is running into the limits of what the total system can handle unless methods change, or stricter limits are applied.
On an individual basis, such as Mrs. Alt's chicken farm, it seems ludicrous. Multiple the effect by many such pollution sources and concentrate them in one water system, and it's a problem.
