21.04.2015 Views

September 2011 - Iowa Pork Producers Association

September 2011 - Iowa Pork Producers Association

September 2011 - Iowa Pork Producers Association

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

News from the<br />

National <strong>Pork</strong> <strong>Producers</strong> Council<br />

Pew Comission report urges restrictions<br />

on livestock numbers<br />

An environmental group is calling on the U.S.<br />

Environmental Protection Agency to use controls<br />

put in place to enforce total maximum daily limits on<br />

certain nutrients going into the Chesapeake Bay to<br />

impose livestock and poultry density limits.<br />

In a July 27 report, “Big Chicken: Pollution and<br />

Industrial Poultry Production in America,” the<br />

Pew Environment Group – not to be confused with<br />

the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal<br />

Production, but which includes personnel from that<br />

commission – urged EPA to depopulate or limit<br />

livestock and poultry farms through Clean Water Act<br />

permits the facilities would be required to obtain.<br />

The Pew report also calls on EPA to set standards for<br />

land-application of manure and urges states in the<br />

Chesapeake Bay to require large and medium-sized<br />

livestock and poultry facilities to obtain permits. But<br />

in a recent lawsuit NPPC filed and won, a federal court<br />

rejected an EPA rule that sought to require CAFOs<br />

that “propose” to discharge to seek permits. The court<br />

ruled that only facilities that actually discharge must<br />

obtain permits.<br />

Comments submitted on draft<br />

guidance on identifying waters<br />

protected by CWA<br />

NPPC in July joined a number of other organizations<br />

submitting comments on draft guidance on<br />

identifying waters protected by the Clean Water Act.<br />

NPPC and the other organizations expressed concern<br />

with that expansion, commenting that the agencies<br />

misconstrued and reinterpreted a U.S. Supreme<br />

Court case to support their new, expansive definition<br />

of “waters of the United States.” In addition, the<br />

groups said the scope of the guidance and its call for<br />

modifications to existing EPA and Corps rules make it<br />

a proposed regulation, which should be promulgated<br />

under the rules of the Administrative Procedures Act.<br />

Federal welfare law on egg production<br />

a dangerous precedent<br />

The National <strong>Pork</strong> <strong>Producers</strong> Council has expressed<br />

concern that federal legislation being pushed by the<br />

Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and the<br />

United Egg <strong>Producers</strong> (UEP) would set a dangerous<br />

precedent for allowing the federal government to<br />

dictate how livestock and poultry producers raise and<br />

care for their animals.<br />

The proposal would inject the federal government into<br />

the marketplace with no measureable benefit to public<br />

or animal health and welfare, NPPC said.<br />

HSUS and UEP announced an agreement between the<br />

two organizations July 7 on the size of cages for laying<br />

hens, moving from UEP’s standard of 64 square inches<br />

to 124 square inches over 15-18 years. HSUS agreed to<br />

stop litigation against<br />

and undercover<br />

Proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection<br />

Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the<br />

draft guidance would expand the agencies’ jurisdiction<br />

over waterways and bodies of water.<br />

36 SEPTEMBER <strong>2011</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!