Farmers and Republican lawmakers blasted the Environmental Protection Agency in a July 10 hearing, saying the agency’s regulations are excessive and sow uncertainty.
Democratic leaders said the agency values agriculture and is trying to improve relations. corrosion resistant eptfe
The waters of the United States rule was a popular target at the House Agriculture Committee hearing.
The rule lays out which waters the federal government can regulate under the Clean Water Act.
Its definition has shifted repeatedly thanks to court rulings and the preferences of presidential administrations.
Since the latest Supreme Court ruling last year, the EPA has failed to provide farmers with clear rules to ensure they can comply with the law, said Chris Chinn, the director of the Missouri Department of Agriculture.
Farm groups also said the EPA has needlessly restrained pesticide use.
A draft rule to protect endangered species from pesticides overestimated species’ vulnerability and called for excessive spray buffer zones that would have taken small fields out of production, said Rebecca Larson, the vice president of government affairs at the Western Sugar Cooperative.
The EPA also needs to provide clarity on over-the-top uses of dicamba products, said Jeff Kippley, a South Dakota farmer and vice president of National Farmers Union.
As a result of a court decision, the EPA allowed the sale of only existing stocks of the herbicides for this year, and it has not said what the rules will be for next year.
“These products are vital to current production systems, and the court decision threatens to create chaos in distribution chains,” Kippley said.
Chairman Rep. Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., said he was encouraged by EPA Administrator Michael Regan’s testimony before the committee in April 2023, when Regan emphasized his willingness to work with farmers.
But since then, Thompson said, the EPA has created several regulations that are burdensome and costly to farmers.
“The EPA under the Biden administration does not understand American agriculture or rural America, nor do they understand the consequences of their actions,” Thompson said.
The EPA did not have a representative testifying at the hearing.
Thompson said the agency has rebuffed his requests to have Regan make a second appearance before the committee.
Regan was not available for the Ag Committee because he had already committed to testify at an Oversight Committee hearing the following day, according to the agency.
“Farmers and ranchers are crucial partners as we work together to deliver clean air, clear water and climate solutions, all while playing the critical role of ensuring an abundant food, fiber and fuel supply,” the agency said in an email.
The agency also touted its recent creation of an Office of Agriculture and Rural Affairs to support farmers and rural people.
The Ag Committee’s ranking Democrat, Rep. David Scott of Georgia, said Regan has expanded farmers’ voice in regulatory decisions.
Scott also criticized Republicans’ tone, saying they seemed willing to blame the EPA for actions the agency was compelled to take because of court decisions.
A Supreme Court opinion from June will add a new wrinkle to the EPA’s relationship with farmers.
The court demolished a 40-year-old principle called Chevron deference, under which courts generally deferred to federal agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous laws on the grounds that agencies have expertise in the specialized topics being regulated.
The American Farm Bureau Federation praised the court’s decision, which shifted power from agencies to judges. But it’s too soon to know how specific ag regulations might change.
The day of the hearing, Thompson announced he had sent a letter to Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack seeking information on the potential effects of the court’s decision on USDA.
“Perhaps no administration has gone as far as President Biden’s to found sweeping and intrusive agency dictates on such questionable assertions of agency authority,” the letter reads in part.
House Republican lawmakers sent similar letters to many government agencies, including the EPA.
Scott used his opening statement to goad Thompson about why the Farm Bill had not received a vote in the full House in the almost two months since it passed the Agriculture Committee.
“There’s a lot I could say, but I’m not going to say anything. We’re going to move ahead with this hearing and stay grounded in reality,” Thompson said.
Success! An email has been sent to with a link to confirm list signup.
Error! There was an error processing your request.
Farm groups are unimpressed with federal cuts to water regulations, even though the changes were the result of a court ruling favorable to agriculture.
The Supreme Court has ruled that a relatively narrow category of wetlands can be regulated by the federal government as waters of the United States.
Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch could bring a dash of skepticism about federal agencies’ authority to the high court and determine the fate of a water regulation loathed by farmers.
A grant of over $200,000 will help a Pittsburgh-based nonprofit provide disease-resistant fruit to disadvantaged areas.
When regulation, efficacy and resistance management are equal across multiple fertilizer choices, the environmental impact quotient can help farmers pick which product will provide better health benefits for employees and the earth.
Phil Gruber is the Print Content Manager at Lancaster Farming. He can be reached at 717-721-4427 or pgruber@lancasterfarming.com.
Success! An email has been sent to with a link to confirm list signup.
Error! There was an error processing your request.
desiccant for pharmaceuticals Your browser is out of date and potentially vulnerable to security risks. We recommend switching to one of the following browsers: