Farmer facing massive fines for … plowing his own field

John Duarte is being fined $2mill for plowing his field.

The EPA is upset with him for planting his field with wheat. He messed with the Clean Waters Act in their opinion. Not because there is a pond or a river or even the tiniest stream running through his field. Nope. None of that at all. John's field has what the EPA considers a "seasonal wetland" meaning during the rainy season, parts of it can get swampy and then dry up later on.

So he's in court facing fines of $2.8 million for plowing a field he bought and planting wheat in it. Because the government has been so zealous in their desire to protect a mudhole that dries up after the rainy season, he didn't even get to harvest the wheat he planted.

The best part? He wasn't dumping chemicals or anything else you might think of as bad. All he did was plow!

Duarte never even got to harvest the wheat that he planted because the government was all over him. Keep in mind that we’re not talking about dumping chemicals into a stream or building some sort of permanent structure. The guy was plowing. He was literally moving dirt a foot or so to the side so he could plant his crops.

The EPA is going after him because they are claiming the blades he used were "discharging material" into the "wetlands" (temporary mudhole). So they felt he needed to get a permit (likely he was unaware they would think that since the mudhole dries up and isn't permanent) and he didn't have one.

And this is why so many think the regulatory state is out of control. Better explore getting a permit before you till the soil near that mudhole in your backyards in order to plant your gardens. Just a word of advice. You might be messing with "wetlands" of the US.

a reply to: ketsuko

Wounder if he would have gotten in trouble if he planted corn.

So in trying to be productive as a human...

Maybe if he promises to recreate the mud hole, they'll call it even.

Would he be in this mess if he had followed the rules by getting the permit in the first place? There's more to this story I'm sure.

a reply to: ketsuko

So, what next the fines disappear if frankenfoods are grown in said field?

a reply to: ketsuko

Well if the soil contains iron, it must be from the blades....
Either way, the only one with any real risk is the farmer since he would be planting where his crops could get destroyed if the water collects there before harvesting. Totally bogus action on the EPA's part.


Off Topic: I just noticed your avatar, is that Mr Bean's face on there?

originally posted by: 38181
Would he be in this mess if he had followed the rules by getting the permit in the first place? There's more to this story I'm sure.

Considering the rules are under the Clean Water Act, if you have a spot that gets muddy during the rainy season and is dry the rest of the time, do you think of it as a "wetland"?

Are you assuming he knew the EPA was going to consider it under their jurisdiction?

Since he couldn't plow it up, then he plowed around it, but they considered that an offense to do.

a reply to: evc1shop

Yes, that is the Beana Lisa.

If they don't want to let him plow it up, they should have to buy it at market value from him.

a reply to: ketsuko

That's why when your able to buy 450 farm acres in California, you cover all your bases so crap like this doesn't pop up and bite you. If you can afford to buy this land then you can afford a few hours of attorney/state/government research.

In the USA Today article the farmer admits to having plowed wetlands that he knew weren't supposed to be plowed so I mean....

The fine seems pretty over the top, yea. But the guy as much as admits to plowing where he knew he wasn't supposed to.

a reply to: ketsuko

Every time I read one of these stories. There's usually something else that we aren't being told.

I'd look for a non biased source that actually tells the entire story.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: ketsuko

Wounder if he would have gotten in trouble if he planted corn.

If it was Monsanto corn I would bet not

a reply to: 38181

?

why would a farmer feel compelled to get a permit for his land to farm if he doesn't have said land within a zoning authority? Who in this country would ever in their right mind think that a farmer would seek EPA permission before farming his farm.

There may be more....but i've known people who get state permits to create ponds along creek beds in order to create wetland habitat for migratory Texas birds (sometimes having the state pay for all of it), create a return system that flows water out of the pond cleaner than it comes into the pond, and still have the EPA make them fill the pond. The EPA and BLM trample all over states rights and citizens rights.

a reply to: imwilliam

It is our civic duty to responsibly manage our land. That is the highest honor, and most important task you can accept. But if you own land, it is your duty to manage it responsibly.

And people cry when funding for this type of idiocy gets cut.

You want to go after Farmers, go after the ones spraying thousands of acres with poison first.

a reply to: ketsuko

Get rid of this and every other agency.

Send the power/responsibility to the states.

Scum bag bureaucrats making rules which have the power of law.

And worse are the scum bag politicians who gave them this authority.

Wyoming welder faces $75,000 a day in EPA fines for building pond on his property.

Veteran serving time in federal prison for digging ponds.

Man Serves Hard Time for Cleaning Dump.

a reply to: lordcomac

Farming and spraying for insects, weeds, and fungus go hand in hand in our country. I bet you all of my savings that farmer sprayed for weeds and bugs before he had a chance to harvest his wheat.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
Why do we land owners feel compelled to pay our property tax. Nobody sent me the regulations, so I had to march down to the county tax office to make sure I paid my dues. Due diligence it's called.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: ketsuko

Every time I read one of these stories. There's usually something else that we aren't being told.

I'd look for a non biased source that actually tells the entire story.

USA today has the entire story.

www.usatoday.com...

Because the property has numerous swales and wetlands, Duarte hired a consulting firm to map out areas on the property that were not to be plowed because they were part of the drainage for Coyote and Oat creeks and were considered “waters of the United States.”

Francois conceded that some of the wetlands were plowed

However, the tractor was not plowing the field, according court documents filed by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Sacramento. Rather, it was equipped with a ripper that had seven 36-inch shanks, which dug an average of 10 inches deep into the soil.

Duarte disturbed portions of the property that included wetland areas, the U.S. attorney alleges.

The ripping deposited dirt into wetlands and streams on the property in violation of the Clean Water Act, according to documents filed the U.S. attorney filed.