EPA is at war with ranchers says NCBA

NCBA Defends Cattle Ranchers During Forum on EPA Regulations
National Cattlemen’s Beef Association

WASHINGTON (Sept. 29, 2010) – National Cattlemen’s Beef Association Chief Environmental Counsel Tamara Thies spoke on behalf of U.S. cattlemen and women today, Wed., Sept. 29, 2010, at a forum in Washington, D.C., focused on the impact of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on job creation and economic expansion in America’s rural communities. Thies told members of Congress in attendance that the “EPA is waging an unprecedented war” to end animal agriculture production.

“EPA exhibits reckless indifference to scientific fact and, instead, imposes stringent regulations based on nothing more than its biased anti-animal agriculture agenda that will leave many cattle operations with no recourse but to shut down and eliminate jobs,” said Thies. “It is ironic that as we work to become less dependent on foreign oil, Obama policies are likely to make us more dependent on foreign beef. Maybe we’ll need to start a strategic hamburger reserve after the Obama Administration is finished with us.”

The forum, entitled “The EPA’s Assault on Rural America: How New Regulations and Proposed Legislation are Stifling Job Creation and Economic Growth,” was hosted by U.S. Representatives Frank Lucas (R-Okla.), Sam Graves (R-Mo.), and Doc Hastings (R-Wash.), co-chairs of the Rural America Solutions Group. Thies discussed several examples of EPA regulations that could potentially stifle the U.S. cattle industry. She said the EPA has laid the foundation to impose the “most stringent regulation of dust in U.S. history.” Thies was referring to EPA’s draft policy assessment on particulate matter (dust) released in June, which calls for regulations twice as stringent as the current standard.

“Incredibly, we are talking about dust kicked up by tilling fields and harvesting crops, cattle movements, and pickups driving down dirt roads. For agriculture, the current standard is already very difficult and costly to meet – doubling it would be virtually impossible,” said Thies.

She said the EPA is also “bound and determined” to regulate ammonia without legal authority. The Clean Air Act sets forth strict procedures for regulating pollutants. Instead of complying with those procedures, the EPA is attempting to circumvent them, she said. Eliminating the phosphorous index was also an issue of concern. The phosphorus index is a tool used by cattle producers to assess the appropriateness of applying manure to land near our waters. The phosphorus index is different in every state and appropriately takes into account differences in climate, topography, soil type, soil test, water sensitivities, among other factors.

“In typical Obama fashion, the unique considerations of states would be done away with as EPA develops a national tool that would largely be based on a soil test for phosphorus to determine the upper limit. Such an approach is entirely inappropriate, is not based on science, and is likely to result in the inability of cattle producers to land apply their manure in many areas of the country,” she said. “Depending on the outcome, this regulation may be one of the most economically devastating to animal agriculture.”

 Print This Post  Email This Post