Search Site   
News Stories at a Glance
Michigan soybean grower visits Dubai to showcase U.S. products
Scientists are interested in eclipse effects on crops and livestock
U.S. retail meat demand for pork and beef both decreased in 2023
Iowa one of the few states to see farms increase in 2022 Ag Census
Trade, E15, GREET, tax credits the talk at Commodity Classic
Ohioan travels to Malta as part of US Grains Council trade mission
FFA members learn about Australian culture, agriculture during trip
Timing of Dicamba ruling may cause issues for 2024 planting
Bill in Kentucky legislature could bring Kentucky its first vet school
Ag census: U.S. lost 142,000 farms, 20 million acres in five years
Indiana farmers make trip to Indonesia to talk soybeans
   
Archive
Search Archive  
   

Farm groups, environmentalists at odds about WOTUS

 

By DAVE BLOWER JR.

Farm World, Senior Editor

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Environmental groups and farm organizations are at odds again after the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that would restrict a rule that some say will empower the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

On Sept. 10, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 5078, known as the Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Act of 2014, by a vote of 262-152. According to farm lobbyists, the bill is an attempt to stop the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers proposed Waters of the United States (WOTUS) regulation.

"We’re extremely pleased to see the House of Representatives gather together in a bipartisan fashion to pass this legislation," said Illinois Farm Bureau President Richard Guebert, Jr. "The (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers have overstepped their authority in their proposed Waters of the U.S. regulations, and the House of Representatives responded with a strong show of support for landowners and farmers. H.R. 5078 will help protect farmers and landowners from this federal land grab, overregulation and red tape."

The Senate is not expected to vote on WOTUS until after the November elections. More than 30 senators have sponsored legislation similar to the House-passed version. However, the White House has threatened a veto. That promise has eased the fears of environmentalists.

"The proposed Waters of the U.S. rule is a commonsense effort to clear the regulatory waters, protect the quality of the nation’s surface waters, and provide an environment in which economically vital activities such as hunting, fishing and birding as well as farming and ranching can both thrive and contribute to a better quality of life and safer drinking water for those of us that live here, and also for our neighbors downstream," said John Crabtree of the Center for Rural Affairs.

"We applaud President Obama for standing up for clean water and against legislation that has all the hallmarks of political grandstanding and contributes nothing to having a real debate about protecting rural and small town America’s most precious resource – our water."

H.R. 5078 was sponsored by Rep. Steve Southerland (R-Fla.) after hearing from many constituents’ complaints.

"As a small business owner and (part of) a family that is also in the timber business, I understand regulatory creep and what we have seen through the EPA and the Corps of Engineers is the very definition of regulatory creep," said Rep. Southerland. "The old rule was adjacent wetlands to navigable waters. Now it’s all waters adjacent to wetlands, adjacent to navigable waters. This really facilitates a capture of private property using the Clean Water Act and this onerous authority as a tool for imminent domain."

Crabtree said WOTUS came after a decade of uncertainty regarding the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act, following Supreme Court challenges in 2001 and 2006. The proposed rule, which is in the midst of a public comment period, would restore Clean Water Act protections to 20 million acres of wetlands and more than half the nation’s streams, helping preserve drinking water quality for 117 million Americans.

"By providing clarity on what constitutes protected Waters of the United States, the EPA has an opportunity to ensure that the rule will provide greater opportunities for farmers and ranchers to partner with USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service conservation programs to better utilize sustainable agriculture practices to enhance water quality," said Crabtree. "And the rule can help reduce some of the economic burden currently faced by many small towns in improving drinking water quality."

Ashley McDonald, an environmental counsel with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Assoc, claims this bill invalidates the interpretative rule which was published along with WOTUS in an attempt to clarify the "normal farming, silviculture and ranching activities" exemptions under Sec. 404 of the Clean Water Act. "The interpretive rule actually narrows the scope of what is considered normal farming and ranching practices," said McDonald. "Practices such as building a fence or grazing cattle have previously never needed a permit. However, without approval of the Natural Resource Conversation Service, producers could face up to $37,500 in fines, per day. This is far from Congressional intent and puts farmers and ranchers livelihoods in jeopardy."

The American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Grange are both against WOTUS.

"The proposed WOTUS regulation by EPA and the Corps is a thinly veiled land grab attempt by the federal government," said National Grange President Ed Luttrell. "Recently released maps by the EPA show that virtually every farmer, rancher and landowner would be adversely impacted by this regulation."

There is some bipartisan support for the fight against WOTUS. "(H.R. 5078) is necessary because, in my view, the EPA does not seem to understand the real world effects these regulations will have on farmers across the country," said House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Colin Peterson (D-Minn.).

Farm groups are continuing a call to action.

"Since (the introduction of WOTUS), farm and business groups have banded together to show their opposition of the proposed regulations," said Guebert, Jr. "Even now, Illinois Farm Bureau members are on Capitol Hill, speaking with their representatives about the potential impacts the new regulations would have on agriculture, including the need to apply for and wait for a permit to build fence, use pesticides or carry out other common farming practices on land the U.S. EPA considers part of the Waters of the U.S., or even the threat of third-party lawsuits challenging farming practices on or near land that falls under the proposed rule.

"We urge farmers and landowners to continue filing comments with the U.S. EPA and ask that the U.S. Senate follow the House of Representatives’ lead in passing the bill."

9/17/2014