Farm Progress is part of the Informa Markets Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Farm-Impacting Lawsuits Could be Settled in 2012

Farm-Impacting Lawsuits Could be Settled in 2012
National Corn Growers talk about two suits - both with EPA - and what they might mean.

The rising amount of litigation requires farmers and farm groups to play along or get bull-dozed by special interests who can lobby administration officials to achieve an array of outcomes. While not a new phenomenon, in the Obama Administration, a move to court may be the best move at all.

Here's a look at the two key lawsuits the group believes could be settled in 2012:

Earlier this year, NCGA joined with the American Farm Bureau Federation and other agricultural organizations to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency's Total Maximum Daily Load for nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment in the Chesapeake Bay. The farm groups stated the Chesapeake Bay TMDL goes beyond the scope of Clean Water Act authority, that the science used by the Agency is flawed and that the regulatory process lacked transparency. The case has been filed in a federal court in Pennsylvania.

NCGA notes that the outcome of this lawsuit "could establish significant precedent for future water quality regulations throughout the country." Many corn growers are concerned that the Chesapeake Bay TMDL could be used as a blueprint for addressing nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment runoff in the Mississippi River Basin and other watersheds. In recent months, EPA has begun to publicly question its own confidence in the agency's water quality modeling, particularly for establishing localized nutrient allocations. How this shapes up remains to be seen, but the lawsuit could set new ground rules for this type of regulation.

The second lawsuit NCGA is involved with, covers pesticide registrations and their potential impact on endangered species. The Center for Biological Diversity filed a suit against EPA in 2011 alleging that the agency failed to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service on hundreds of pesticide registrations potentially affecting hundreds of species.

EPA has lost similar cases in recent years and federal judges have often established buffer zones and product restrictions until interagency consultations between EPA, FWS and NMFS could be conducted. NCGA and other agricultural organizations are interveners in the CBD case to ensure that growers have a seat at the table in any potential settlement negotiations.

It looks like 2012 is already shaping up to be an interesting year.


TAGS: Regulatory
Hide comments


  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.