|
|
Op-Ed: Opposition to Clean Water Restoration Act is the Right Decision Billings, Mont. (June 17, 2008) – Congress is considering a measure that would expand the areas covered under the Clean Water Act, including areas that are only intermittently wet. This new proposal is called the Clean Water Restoration Act (CWRA). It would expand the power of the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) beyond the Clean Water Act. Even though the proposed law is generating controversy within the ranching community, the R-CALF USA Private Property Rights Committee has carefully considered the CWRA and believes when 96 percent of its members voted to oppose the CWRA, those voting members made the right decision. The CWRA is intended to undo two U.S. Supreme Court (Court) cases that limit federal regulatory powers under the Clean Water Act (Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers; Rapanos v. United States). R-CALF USA members may have breathed a sigh of relief when the Court decided federal agencies would not be able to interfere with sound ranching practices, but environmentalists gasped because they believe these cases were a blow to clean water. The environmentalists want to restore the power of the regulatory agencies by requesting that Congress pass the CWRA, but the proposed CWRA would expand the federal agencies’ power to regulate every tank, stock pond, playa and other wet spot in the country. The extent of the agencies’ powers depends on the answer to a very technical legal question: “What is the meaning of ‘waters of the United States,’” in the Clean Water Act? The relevant Court opinions read like an argument over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, or in this case, on “the waters of the United States.” This technical question likely will be the focus of a loud and heated debate between environmentalists and large industrial polluters. Environmentalists likely will accuse the opposition of being against clean water, while large industrial polluters likely will accuse supporters of opposing private property rights. This debate likely will be dramatic, but it won’t shed much light on the issue. Unfortunately, the practical voices of ranchers and farmers may not be heard as the debate reaches its crescendo, but ranchers need to speak up in this debate. Some see the harm caused by large, industrial polluters and live with the consequences. Some ranchers living downstream from coal-bed methane producers have seen the wastewater discharged from these industries pollute the ephemeral streams upstream from the perennial rivers and believe this polluted discharge threatens their irrigated lands. These ranchers perceive the CWRA to be a protection for their land and support the law. Too often the Clean Water Act has not protected ranchers from pollution. While some ranchers have had bad experiences with industrial pollution, the majority of R-CALF USA members do not support the CWRA. Based on past experience, this majority does not trust federal regulatory agencies. They know the agencies will grant permits that authorize industries to pollute rural water. They also know the regulatory process is expensive and that only the large industrial polluters understand the process and can afford the time and money it takes to obtain a permit. Most importantly, they know they do not have the resources to defend themselves if the federal agencies decide to impose expanded and stricter standards on their ranching operations. The majority of R-CALF USA members believe the federal agencies have enough power already and expanding that power will not necessarily result in cleaner water. It would, however, likely result in interference with many current, sound ranching practices. For these reasons, R-CALF USA members believe their decision to oppose the CWRA is still valid. # # #
Editorial co-authored by R-CALF USA Private Property Rights Committee Vice Chair Judy Keeler and committee member Harlan Hentges. Keeler and her husband Murray ranch in southwestern New Mexico. A fifth generation rancher and activist for private property rights, Keeler currently serves as secretary for the Hidalgo County Public Lands Committee and vice-chair of the Hidalgo County Cattle Growers Association. Hentges is a 1992 graduate of the University of Texas with a juris doctorate from the School of Law and a Master of Public Affairs from the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs. He is a 1987 graduate of Oklahoma State University with a bachelor’s degree in agricultural economics. He is admitted to practice law in Oklahoma, Texas and the Federal District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. He is a member of the Oklahoma Bar Association, the Oklahoma County Bar Association and the American Agricultural Law Association. His legal practice is concentrated in agricultural law, civil litigation, Endangered Species Act, eminent domain and appellate law. R-CALF USA’s Private Property Rights Committee will promote private property rights as defined in the Constitution of the United States of America and envisioned by the Founding Fathers, including the right of U.S. citizens to own and use the land and water, free from intrusive government regulations and fear of eminent domain abuses by state and federal agencies. R-CALF USA (Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America) is a national, non-profit organization dedicated to ensuring the continued profitability and viability of the U.S. cattle industry. R-CALF USA represents thousands of U.S. cattle producers on trade and marketing issues. Members are located across 47 states and are primarily cow/calf operators, cattle backgrounders, and/or feedlot owners. R-CALF USA has dozens of affiliate organizations and various main-street businesses are associate members. For more information, visit www.r-calfusa.com or, call 406-252-2516. |
|
This page was last updated on Wednesday, December 24, 2008. |
