|
|
|
EPA proposal on livestock emissions causes stinkLINCOLN, Neb. (AP)--The Environmental Protection Agency is proposing that livestock farms be exempt from reporting non-emergency emissions associated with livestock waste. The proposal stinks, opponents say. The EPA's plan appeared in the Federal Register Dec. 28, 2007 and seeks to exempt livestock farms from reporting non-emergency emissions of ammonia, hydrogen sulfide and other pollutants. A public comment period continues through late March. Duane Gangwish of Lincoln, vice president of environmental affairs with the Nebraska Cattlemen, told the Lincoln Journal Star that the EPA plan is "necessary and needed and timely--and we'll see what's in it." Laura Krebsbach of Lincoln, a consultant to Nebraskans concerned about byproducts of livestock operations intruding in their lives, said many modern confinement operations go beyond the realm of agriculture. "It's just absolutely ridiculous that these industrial facilities should get a pass under the guise that it's agriculture and ignoring the fact that it's an industry," she said. "That's what frustrates me beyond any other aspect of the issue." Krebsbach and Ed Hopkins of the Sierra Club in Washington, said they think the EPA made the announcement during the holiday season to keep the proposal under the radar. "It's just a huge favor for this industry," Hopkins said. "There's no evidence whatsoever that ammonia or hydrogen sulfide from confined animal feeding operations are any less dangerous than from any other facility." Hopkins said the EPA is allowing the livestock industry to weasel out of toxic right-to-know requirements. The absence of such requirements would protect the industry from lawsuits, Krebsbach said. The EPA says the proposal has the backing of national associations representing cattle, pork and poultry producers and processors. Jon Scholl, counselor to the EPA administrator for agricultural policy, told the Journal Star that more than two-dozen emergency planning agencies also support the proposal. There already are air emissions consent agreements in place, but they are not a form of absolute protection for agriculture, Scholl said. "Even in the air consent agreements, the agency reserved the right to take enforcement action for an imminent and substantial danger to the public health," Scholl said. Livestock operations currently are required to make regular administrative reports on air quality. Scholl acknowledged that the number of livestock outlets responding to the rule, so far, fits the description of "some of them." Gangwish, of the cattlemen's association, said sees little danger arising from livestock waste. "When manure hits the ground," he said, "one of the things that comes off that is hydrogen sulfide. And it hits the ground every day, whether it's deer or cattle or hogs--or a bear in the woods." 1/14/08 Date: 1/9/08 Advertisement
Copyright/Privacy
Copyright 1995-2009. High Plains Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. Any republishing of these pages, including electronic reproduction of the editorial archives or classified advertising, is strictly prohibited. If you have questions or comments you can reach us at High Plains Journal 1500 E. Wyatt Earp Blvd., P.O. Box 760, Dodge City, KS 67801 or call 1-800-452-7171. Email: webmaster@hpj.com |
Market Snapshot Inside Futures |
