It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


EPA declares hay a pollutant [see UPDATE]

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+9 more 
posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:01 PM
EPA declares hay a pollutant in effort to drive small, mid-sized family cattle ranchers out of business

The assault against American industry and individual livelihood continues -- and no, it is not coming from Al-Qaeda or other foreign terrorists. A recent report from R-CALF USA, an advocacy group for American cattle producers, says the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has declared harmless cattle hay a "pollutant," which is part of the agency's agenda to squelch family-scale cattle ranches in favor of corporately-owned, mega-sized feedlot operations.

At the recent 12th Annual R-CALF USA Convention in Rapid City, SD, an audience member asked Mike Callicrate, a Kansas cattle feeder, if the EPA had, indeed, declared hay a pollutant. His affirmative answer was startling to many, but not necessarily surprising in light of the US government's apparent agenda to destroy every single producing sector in the nation and to reduce the country to a poverty-stricken, corporately-dominated wasteland.

"Now that EPA has declared hay a pollutant, every farmer and rancher that stores hay, or that leaves a broken hay bale in the field, is potentially violating EPA rules and subject to an EPA enforcement action," responded Callicrate. "How far are we going to let this agency go before we stand up and do something about it?"

Public Enemy Number 1: Hay

This highly dangerous pollutant is threatening our environment which means your children could die terrible deaths in the near future according to research by the government. For public safety reasons they needed to label this very dangerous substance a pollutant, so be sure not to spend too much time near farms in the countryside, the air will be full of toxic pollutants from hay
. But do not worry your little head, you can sleep nice and snug in your bed tonight now that the EPA is tackling this impending destruction of our environment.

It is only smart that we make sure these destructive ranchers and family farms are punished to the fullest extent of the law for violating the “Just Say No To Hay” laws. Have we not suffered enough? It is time to put these hard-core polluting criminals where they belong. They stored illegal grazing material in their barn; prison time!

But do not fear you will still have well fed cattle! We have talked it over with the large meat packing corporations and they were more than happy to take over where these farmers just cannot manage.

Note: Hay is not actually dangerous and causes no harm to the environment. This is just the EPA doing its typical destruction of the American small and family businesses as usual.


EPA Never Said Hay is a Pollutant
edit on Tue Sep 20 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: to add EPA material to OP

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:09 PM
reply to post by Misoir

I don't believe I've ever seen or even read of a period in American history where our own Government has worked so hard, across so many different approaches to devastate it's own population. Now HAY is a pollutant? Hey, I hate feedlots too when I'm close to them....but that isn't HAY I am having a problem with. The EPA needs to evaluate what really matters in the areas they control and focus on it. This control for the sake of control across every conceivable thing the EPA has started into is just downright Anti-American!

+7 more 
posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:11 PM
Hay is dried grass, so is grass also a pollutant, or is it the moment that grass dries that it becomes a pollutant? Does that mean dried fire wood is also a pollutant, since it's dry? Is dryness now a "pollutant"? When you feel itchy and dry, are you now a pollutant?

Note to the EPA: no one cares.
edit on 18-9-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:11 PM
reply to post by Misoir

Well then I guess it's just a matter of time before they outlaw everything possible.
Or just find new ways to make money off of the people.
This is beyond horrendous.
This is borderline contrived destruction.

Either way, we the people either need to tear down this tyranny, or keep bending over.

I choose to tear down.
The farmers need to stand up and refuse this ridiculous notion.

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:13 PM
this is almost as good as where the DEA says coc aine and meth are better than weed. our government its a few nuggets short of a happy meal. the sad part is that these obviously mental things are not even met with the slightest resistance from the public

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:14 PM

I just went out into my field and told my Hay this..

know what Hay said?

Hay said that the EPA is crazy and should be locked up...

yes..i talk to Hay..


posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:14 PM
reply to post by filosophia

EPA special notice: All grass is hereby deemed a pollutant. You are now required by law to strip all of your property of grass in all forms. However if you harm insect life in the process of removing said grass you will face a fine for harming the local ecosystem.

Note: Either way, we're getting money from you.
edit on 9/18/2011 by Misoir because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:15 PM
the federal government and all its agencies are a direct threat to people of this country and to the world and must be eradicated like crab grass with round up

you know Monsanto's running that show

edit on 18-9-2011 by anumohi because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:16 PM
this really shouldnt surprise anyone for crying out loud they wasted millions of tax payer money

on studying cow flatulence more of the same

governemnet is the master and we are the slaves.

i will say this government stupidity is hazardous us to our health
edit on 18-9-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:19 PM
So it's illegal to have a front lawn now? And remember what happened to the lady who tried to replace her grass with a garden? She got arrested or something. So I think we should all replace our grass with a garden. The EPA said so, grass is a pollutant

The EPA is a pollutant.

A bit off topic but also right on topic, my theory has been things are getting crazier and crazier in order to put The Onion out of business. Imagine an Onion headline: "EPA BANS HAY" funny, right? Well what can The Onion do now that the EPA really is doing this? "EPA BANS HUMANS" This won't be far behind.
edit on 18-9-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:21 PM
reply to post by Misoir

I'd love to see the actual announcement from the EPA, and what they are actually planning.
This article is clearly propaganda, and includes very few facts. It was written to draw an emotional response. Whoever wrote it has a serious agenda. I'd like to see what the reason the EPA gives for this action, IF they even did(And I highly doubt it), not the reason the author gives.

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:21 PM
Somewhere in the dark recesses of Washington, there is a room full of monkeys randomly punching buttons and pulling levers on the law maker machine.

Every time one of those monkeys fart, a new law gets its wings.

Next...These farmers will be forced to pay green (Carbon) taxes. Can't tax these criminals enough I guess. Serves them right for growing all that nasty broccoli.

I hate monkeys...


ETA: Does anyone think it's still crazy to start stocking up on Non-GMO seeds? Didn't think so.

edit on 18-9-2011 by jude11 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:23 PM

Originally posted by neo96

i will say this government stupidity is hazardous us to our health
edit on 18-9-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

I love grammar fails when people are calling others stupid. Pot meet kettle.

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:23 PM
reply to post by Misoir

Actually the cattleman's allegation is somewhat exaggerated:

After investigating the EPA-Callicate fiasco, Drovers/CattleNetwork, a news source for the beef industry, inferred that R-CALF USA’s release was somewhat "exaggerated." Reporters from the network contacted Dan Breedlove, assistant regional counsel for the EPA’s Region 7 office, who detailed the violations in the compliance order.

Breedlove noted that under the Clean Water Act, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations can be subjected to four counts of violations: failure to maintain adequate records, failure to maintain adequate storage capacity, failure to maintain nutrient management plan requirements, and failure to operate production within controlled areas to prevent pollution.

Drovers/CattleNetwork reported:

Asked specifically what types of feed were stored in the feed stock area at the Callicrate facility at the time of the inspection, Breedlove says the area contained "distillers’ grains, silage and other feeds that could leach pollutants. It was not just hay." Feed stock storage areas are part of a feedlot’s production area subject to runoff-control regulations, he says, adding however that EPA focuses on feeds such as distillers’ grains with greater potential to leach nutrients, rather than hay.

Though R-CALF USA’s spirited allegation that the EPA labeled hay a pollutant may be somewhat of a stretch, Drovers/CattleNetwork concedes that cattle feeders are undoubtedly constrained by many burdensome EPA regulations. Feeding permits are expensive and meticulous record-keeping and reporting are time-consuming for owners and managers. And with new environmental regulations streaming through the government pipeline, they ought to brace themselves for more.

The New American

They do have a beef with the EPA regarding how they are trying to use enforcement actions like this to drive small and mid-sized cattle operations out of business while turning a blind eye toward mega-feedlots. The EPA is obviously using its power to drive the little guy out of business in order to further enrich the large outfits who can contribute large sums to congressional campaigns.

Unfortunately, by making wild accusations like "they are making hay a pollutant" they hurt their own credibility. They do grab the attention of the public but, when the whole truth comes out, it makes them look dishonest and people are less likely to pay attention to them when the EPA cracks down for something genuinely outrageous.

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:23 PM
I read all of the linked articles. S@F because this situation should receive more attention. I would like to see some of the facts and details of the complaint. What for instance in the run off from this guys winter hay stack for his mid sized feed lot. Cellulose perhaps? Complex carbohydrates? Maybe mold spores from wet hay?

This is the government doing what it likes to do most. They specialize in making up new rules and barriers that will trip up the little guy in the business and help the big corporations who know how to pay and how much.

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:23 PM
reply to post by Misoir

I had to do a face palm after reading this.

About the only time hay is a dangerous airborne pollutant is after a tornado hits the barn.

I really wish I could dictate were my tax my is being spent.

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:25 PM
reply to post by Ghost375

yeah sorry im not perfect never claim to be guess only certain types on here are allow to make typos

but hey lets make it an issue that has nothing to do with the topic being discussed

and that is government stupidity

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:26 PM

Order of Compliance lists four counts of findings of violations:
1.Failure to maintain adequate records
2.Failure to maintain adequate storage capacity
3.Failure to meet nutrient management plan requirements
4.Failure to conduct all production area operations within areas that are controlled in a manner capable of preventing pollution

Under each of the four counts, the order lists several specific points, including the following under count number 4:
•Respondent’s NPDES permit requires that all runoff and wastewater containing livestock or related wastes not collected or retained by water pollution control facilities shall be controlled in a manner capable of preventing pollution.
•On September 23, 2010, KDHE personnel conducted an inspection of the facility. The inspection revealed that the feed stock storage area was not controlled by waste retention structures.
•During the EPA inspection referenced in paragraph 16, the inspector observed that the feed stock storage area and composting operation were located in areas where process wastewater was uncontrolled by wastewater retention structures.
•Respondent’s failure to operate the feed stock storage area and composting operation within areas that are controlled in a manner capable of preventing pollution is a violation of Respondent’s NPDES permit and of Section 402 of the CWA, 33 U.S.C 1342, and implementing regulations. Any discharge of a pollutant to a water of the United States from these areas would be a violation of sections 301 and 402 of the CWA, 33 U.S.C 1311 and 1342.

Nowhere was "hay" mentioned. Rather it mentions the areas where operations occur are not operated properly, i.e. do not have proper wastewater controls in place.

edit to add (same source)

Dan Breedlove, assistant regional counsel for EPA Region 7, notes that EPA defines a “large CAFO” as an animal feeding operation that stables or confines more than 1,000 cattle other than mature dairy cows or veal calves.

The Callicrate facility has a permitted capacity of 12,000 cattle and was confining approximately 3,219 cattle at the time of the inspection. So the feedlot is relatively small by industry standards, but fits EPA’s definition of a “large CAFO.”

So the rancher is technically not small/medium sized.
edit on 9/18/2011 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:27 PM
reply to post by FortAnthem

Thank you FortAnthem...

that was the stupidest article i ever read..

I feel a little better now..

thanks for clearing that up...

posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 10:32 PM
reply to post by neo96

Again, the story isn't true...
Do you know how easy it would be to find out that the EPA declared hay a pollutant?
You wouldn't have to find it at sites like this
That link takes you to the source of the article the OP is talking about.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in