Tom Huff loves life on the farm. His family has farmed land near Fair Grove, Missouri since 1938. The President of the Greene County Farm Bureau and his wife Tammy are getting some serious indigestion over what some are calling the 'cow tax'. Livestock - as a natural by-product of simply living - emits methane gas in the form of belches, flatulence and manure. A regulation fee on methane emissions could mean a huge expense for farmers.
"We'd be forced to quit," says Tammy Huff. "It would be bad business."
The controversy started with the EPA's 'Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking' regarding regulated pollutants - which doesn't specifically mention livestock, but doesn't eliminate it either.
The Farm Bureau estimates that farmers could have to pay a fee of $20 per hog, $87.50 per head of beef cattle and $150 for each dairy cow.
"It would shut us down," Tammy Huff says. Tom Huff agrees. "Without an exemption for livestock we'd go out of business," he says. "We could only hope to make that much profit off our beef cattle."
The Farm Bureau estimates that farmers could have to pay a fee of $20 per hog, $87.50 per head of beef cattle, and $175 for each dairy cow. The Huffs figure it would cost them about $8700 a year. "Would you like an $8700 pay cut this year?" Tom asks.
EPA Spokesman Jonathan Shadlar says right now, the EPA is only discussing carbon dioxide, not methane. Besides, he says, there are bigger sources of methane.
"To say the we are going to do a cow tax would essentially be the same as saying we were going to cap Mt. Kilauea in Hawaii because it puts out too much carbon dioxide," Shradar says.
But farmers like the Huffs who fight huge expenses anyway, say this type of regulation will mean fewer farms, more foreign imports, and higher meat and dairy prices.
"People who don't understand farming because of this will see livestock as a problem," Tom says. "Farmers are a solution."
Until the whole issue is settled, he Huffs say they won't be afraid to sound the alarm on an issue they think is 'udderly' ridiculous.
The EPA says it doesn't have the authority to impose a tax, only congress does. And every lawmaker in Washington has farmers as constituents, so a tax would be a hard sell. Congressman Roy Blunt's office says he would not support it.
A 'fee' however, is a different story. EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar says farmers don't need to worry just yet -- but that's little comfort for the farming community.
___
Farmers that pollute the Earth and abuse animals for profit can cry me a river. They can save money by growing plants. They should be held accountable for the impact their production has on animals and the rest fo the planet.
-
- tags:
- Green, Environment, Climate Change, Animal Rights, 7 more + add
-
-
-
-
- animalia_libero
- added this
-
My feelings exactly. What's bad for business isn't bad for the public in this case. Factory farming is linked to too many problems to name and it isn't even sustainable.
-
-
-
-
- wierdobeardo
- 11 months ago
-
-
this is the stupidest idea in the world. we all fart, its natural. if this were to get passed, what would stop the government from taxing land owners on the wild animals on their property.
-
-
-
-
- theirishlion13
- 11 months ago
-
-
I fart and my dog farts, and i know that some 2/3rds of american families have dogs as pets, and my dog can clear a room. Oh where does the stupidification of government end. Speculation can go only so far but with the new trillion dollar deficits for years to come the next administration will be forced to do stupid stuff like this.
-
-
-
-
- futurefarmer
- 11 months ago
-
-
By the way, do you think milk will remain around 4.00 per gallon if the "bad guy" farmers have this as an expense? Do you think 1.89 a pound for hamburger is stable. These products come from cows. I love bacon, but I guess I'll switch to turkey bacon. The nation freaked when gas prices doubled in a years time, what happens when food prices double.
-
-
-
-
- futurefarmer
- 11 months ago
-
-
I understand that being vegan is a choice. In the land of the free we all get to make choices for ourselves. I'm not saying I agree with the truely careless farmer, but some large operations are responsible and humane with the slaughter, just as some small farmers are irresponsible. This is basically a blanket tax to get money from all of them which I disagree with. If you remember about 240 years ago we told Britan to screw themselves because of unfair taxes on colonial exports. A crippling blow to the farming industry may start the same path again.
-
-
-
-
- futurefarmer
- 11 months ago
-
-
I can't imagine a world like that and here's an example why: Some people in the US had a problem with slaughtering horses. This practice is on a large scale no longer allowed. What do you think happens to these horses? Instead of being killed in the US where there are regulations, they are now shipped long distances to Mexico where there are no restriction. The horses are still dying, there's just not much we can do about it. There are realistically no "animal retirement farms" where old animals can live out their days with free medical care. It's just number crunching, all animals and people too must die. Sorry, off point. I guess I'm saying that things like beef and milk production will move across borders where there will be very little regulation. Do you want your milk coming from China with a little melamine in it? No thanks, I'll drink my US produced milk and my free range steaks. Besides, I assume you ride a bike, since there are more cars in the US than cows and they produce alot more CO2. Along with the tractor that burns diesel to produce soy milk. There is no "quick and easy fix" here, as every aspect of living in today's world is entangled with another. Assuming there was no more animal farming and everyone raised crops. Given a long enough time line isn't it possible that the O2 levels could also become toxic? There is a circle of life. Plants grow, cows eat plants, cows poop on plants returning processed nutrients to the soil so that the plants roots have the building blocks to grow. There is no magic dirt that can sustain plants indefinitely. Fertilizer? where does that come from? Either animals or chemicals. Ask the bald eagle if the pesticide DDT was a good idea. Sure we had a handle on those evil ( and necessary) bugs, but at the expense of near extinction.
-
-
-
-
- futurefarmer
- 11 months ago
-
