'Smothered' and 'shoved aside' in rural America

[Hutch Starskey]

oic

I think it is a matter of concessions on either side. Even if her farm is taken care of it doesn't mean that the farm one county over has taken measures. And the voluntary part is not working out on the pig farms.

You can't just shut down a farm that people rely on for a half-acre of wetland and then charge x amount of money for wetland someplace else.

And this is where those changes should occur: With Trump in the White House, she sees farmers getting more attention: "It's the difference between feeling like you are being talked to and being listened to."

You can't just shut down a farm that people rely on for a half-acre of wetland and then charge x amount of money for wetland someplace else.

This isn't about the poor old family farmer. This is a big deal nowadays. She said they farmed 160 acres. At 300lbs of fertilizer per acre, that's 24 tons of fertilizer applied annually. That's a lot and certainly should be regulated. That's not even counting the manure.

I'm sure she was free to conserve or create a new wetland on her land if she wanted. She opted to pay instead. Given all of the new land management and conservation programs, I would say that $5k to bring 160 acres into compliance is cheap.

Here's a good source for what we're talking about.

Iowa conservation progress and future challenges

$5,000 may not seem like much to a farmer who has 10,000 acres of land but to a farmer who subsists on 160 acres it very well be the expense that breaks the bank.

*****SMILE*****

NO FARMERS---NO FOOD! NO TRUCKERS--NO DELIVERIES!

Just try to get along without either of them!

Great. None of them are precluded from operating with best practices.

...and they shouldn't be forced out of business by an asshole President pacifying the overzealous environmental shitheads that will someday want to reclassify rice fields constructed by man made levees to be protected wetlands.

The Green Party, environmentalists and communist all have similar goals....destroying capitalism.

No one was forced out of business, dope.

 

[asaratis]

This isn't about the poor old family farmer. This is a big deal nowadays. She said they farmed 160 acres. At 300lbs of fertilizer per acre, that's 24 tons of fertilizer applied annually. That's a lot and certainly should be regulated. That's not even counting the manure.

I'm sure she was free to conserve or create a new wetland on her land if she wanted. She opted to pay instead. Given all of the new land management and conservation programs, I would say that $5k to bring 160 acres into compliance is cheap.

Here's a good source for what we're talking about.

Iowa conservation progress and future challenges

$5,000 may not seem like much to a farmer who has 10,000 acres of land but to a farmer who subsists on 160 acres it very well be the expense that breaks the bank.

*****SMILE*****

NO FARMERS---NO FOOD! NO TRUCKERS--NO DELIVERIES!

Just try to get along without either of them!

Great. None of them are precluded from operating with best practices.

...and they shouldn't be forced out of business by an asshole President pacifying the overzealous environmental shitheads that will someday want to reclassify rice fields constructed by man made levees to be protected wetlands.

The Green Party, environmentalists and communist all have similar goals....destroying capitalism.

No one was forced out of business, dope.

Did she not have to reduce the size of her farm?

 

[Disir]

It isn't cheap if you are shut down. Simply because you stop working does not mean the bills don't stop rolling in. Don't dismiss the shit.

At issue in 2015 was how it was defined.
eCFR — Code of Federal Regulations

Your source indicates it's all under control.

When was she shut down?

I will put it between 2013 and 2014. That was when the EPA came under fire heavily.

No, where in your article does it say she was shut down?

"Suddenly, this piece of land that we had been farming for 70 years was federally protected, and we had to stop everything," said Sweeney, who was born on the farm and raised two boys there.

In the end, Sweeney had to pay $5,000 to preserve a small parcel of wetland elsewhere so she could continue farming her own property. T

Great, for how long?

The article doesn't say. However, if it goes like others you have to wait for the EPA to sue you before you can do anything at all. So, the EPA comes out and tells you to do A, B, C and if you don't do it then you're fined so much a day for not complying. You have to wait some six months for the EPA to sue you before you can even take action. That raised all kinds of crap during 2012, 2013, etc. And by the time 2015 Clean Water Act hit there was a hell of a backlash.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

$5,000 may not seem like much to a farmer who has 10,000 acres of land but to a farmer who subsists on 160 acres it very well be the expense that breaks the bank.

*****SMILE*****

NO FARMERS---NO FOOD! NO TRUCKERS--NO DELIVERIES!

Just try to get along without either of them!

Great. None of them are precluded from operating with best practices.

...and they shouldn't be forced out of business by an asshole President pacifying the overzealous environmental shitheads that will someday want to reclassify rice fields constructed by man made levees to be protected wetlands.

The Green Party, environmentalists and communist all have similar goals....destroying capitalism.

No one was forced out of business, dope.

Did she not have to reduce the size of her farm?

No. Read it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

When was she shut down?

I will put it between 2013 and 2014. That was when the EPA came under fire heavily.

No, where in your article does it say she was shut down?

"Suddenly, this piece of land that we had been farming for 70 years was federally protected, and we had to stop everything," said Sweeney, who was born on the farm and raised two boys there.

In the end, Sweeney had to pay $5,000 to preserve a small parcel of wetland elsewhere so she could continue farming her own property. T

Great, for how long?

The article doesn't say. However, if it goes like others you have to wait for the EPA to sue you before you can do anything at all. So, the EPA comes out and tells you to do A, B, C and if you don't do it then you're fined so much a day for not complying. You have to wait some six months for the EPA to sue you before you can even take action. That raised all kinds of crap during 2012, 2013, etc. And by the time 2015 Clean Water Act hit there was a hell of a backlash.

It states clearly that she paid $5k to maintain a wetland off site. Did you read your own article?

 

[asaratis]

NO FARMERS---NO FOOD! NO TRUCKERS--NO DELIVERIES!

Just try to get along without either of them!

Great. None of them are precluded from operating with best practices.

...and they shouldn't be forced out of business by an asshole President pacifying the overzealous environmental shitheads that will someday want to reclassify rice fields constructed by man made levees to be protected wetlands.

The Green Party, environmentalists and communist all have similar goals....destroying capitalism.

No one was forced out of business, dope.

Did she not have to reduce the size of her farm?

No. Read it.

She had to pay $5000 to continue to farm. That hurt her wallet...kept her from buying $5000 worth of supplies and equipment...reduced her profits. You're picking at gnats.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

$5,000 may not seem like much to a farmer who has 10,000 acres of land but to a farmer who subsists on 160 acres it may very well be the expense that breaks the bank.

*****SMILE*****

I don't buy that at all. It sounds more like her failure to keep up with the times and plan accordinly finally caught up with her.

It's a rainy day here. While on my way home from dropping my son at School this morning, I passed an area of flooded roadway. It was muddy runoff from an adjacent corn field. A field that I know for a fact had manure applied last fall. We aren't even in the peak of the spring rainy season yet. I shook my head as I watched it draining into the storm sewer. I almost stopped to take a picture. I wish I had. I did however call and report it to the county.

Review the best practices put out by the Iowa Farm Bureau that is freely available to everyone.

Iowa conservation progress and future challenges

It's one thing to prevent runoff from a manure pit. That can be controlled by placing it at the top of a hill with high sidewalls and a roof of some sort over the top...

Exactly how do you expect any farmer from preventing runoff from a whole field?

*****SMILE*****

Exactly how do you expect any farmer from preventing runoff from a whole field?

I don't. I expect the application of chemical fertilizers and manure to be done with the expectation of runoff in mind and to employ runoff controls.

View attachment 178292

So what you're saying is you expect no run off from any farm field whatsoever...

Exactly what kind of runoff controls are going to accomplish this magnificent feat?

*****CHUCKLE*****

I've given you the link twice, dope. Try reading it.

I have idiot and the methods used are only to prevent the loss of topsoil as much as possible. It will not stop runoff in heavy rains.because the soil can only soak up so much water. When you have forty to eighty acres draining off into a small fixed point there is going to be runoff no matter what. This is what helps create rivers. So unless you can prove the farmer you're complaining about is not following practices to prevent the loss of topsoil your complaints will be at best dully noted by the whoever you wish to report those complaints.

*****CHUCKLE*****