Members of the Senate Agriculture Committee used a recent hearing with Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson to vent concerns about various regulatory actions by the agency that affect agriculture.
Farmers are "increasingly frustrated and bewildered by vague, overreaching and unnecessarily burdensome EPA regulation," said committee Chairman Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.). She noted several areas of concern including dust, spray drift, Clean Water Act and climate change. Lincoln also called on EPA to work with agriculture interests to develop policies in these areas instead of relying on a "command and control, top-down approach that this administration has relied on thus far."
Administrator Jackson sought to ease lawmaker concerns, saying she and her agency realize the need for an "active partnership" with agriculture interests and said the agency will work with lawmakers and farmers to that end. Also, Jackson said that while there has been a lot of concern that EPA will attempt to regulate dust in rural areas, the agency has made no proposal on a recommendation from a scientific panel that dust be regulated.
Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) said EPA's rules are having a more severe effect on small farmers, who have a harder time adapting to them than larger agricultural operations. "There's a feeling out in the country that you walked in, the president walked in, and every idea for more regulation was dusted off and cut loose and agriculture is under attack," Johanns told Jackson .
Jackson responded that EPA imposed fewer rules on farms last year than it did during the last year of the George W. Bush administration. That was despite a "huge regulatory backlog," she said, "much of it driven by court cases that compelled the agency to follow the law."
Jackson said EPA has worked hard to shield farmers from its rules. "I believe that we cannot be a strong country without a strong agricultural sector, that we cannot be prosperous if we cannot feed ourselves. And from an environmental perspective, importing food with the huge carbon footprint that it means is much less preferable," Jackson said. "Any belief that there's an agenda that somehow targets that sector would be the furthest thing from who I am."
Farm-state lawmakers raised a host of issues they received from farmer constituents and Jackson responded when she could on various EPA regulatory actions. In nearly every case, Jackson sought to ease lawmaker worries by pledging to work with agricultural interests and lawmakers on many of the proposals or issues raised. Jackson also committed to keeping the committee updated on various regulatory actions that EPA is pursuing.
Given the number and scope of issues raised, it is clear Jackson 's agency has a lot more work to do to convince agricultural interests that EPA is not working against farmers and ranchers and the agricultural industry.
Senators were especially critical of a proposed general discharge permit requirement for spraying pesticides over water, which EPA published for comment June 4 and which is to become effective in April 2011. The proposed general permit requirement for spraying pesticides over water would set general conditions for point source discharges from the application of pesticides to U.S. waters.
The requirement was mandated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which in January 2009 vacated an EPA rule authorizing permit exemptions for farmers, public health officials, and ranchers who apply pesticides into, over, or near water bodies to control mosquitoes and other pests. The ruling requires anyone who applies a pesticide in, over, or near waters of the United States to obtain a Clean Water Act permit.
Many EPA rulemakings are the result of court decisions Jackson explained, and she assured the committee that EPA is not singling out or targeting farmers and ranchers.
.jpg?auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=crop&h=167&q=70&w=250)
