EPA Region 7's 'Udder' Job

This story crossed the MoosWire on June 4th, 2012 (source: Infowars.com):

Kurt Nimmo writes:  Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency is using aerial drones to spy on farmers in Nebraska and Iowa. The surveillance came under scrutiny last week when Nebraska’s congressional delegation sent a joint letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson.

On Friday, EPA officialdom in “Region 7” responded to the letter.

“Courts, including the Supreme Court, have found similar types of flights to be legal (for example to take aerial photographs of a chemical manufacturing facility) and EPA would use such flights in appropriate instances to protect people and the environment from violations of the Clean Water Act,” the agency said in response to the letter.

“They are just way on the outer limits of any authority they’ve been granted,” said Mike Johanns, a Republican senator from Nebraska.

In fact, the EPA has absolutely zero authority and is an unconstitutional entity of an ever-expanding and rogue federal government. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution does not authorize Congress to legislate in the area of the environment. Under the Tenth Amendment, this authority is granted to the states and their legislatures, not the federal government.

The EPA has not addressed the constitutional question, including its wanton violation of probable cause under the Fourth Amendment. It merely states that it has authority to surveil the private property of farmers and ranchers. It defends its encroaching behavior as “cost-efficient.”

Yes, and as we all know, Agencies of the Federal Government are nothing, if not, 'Cost-Efficient'...

Okay, a couple of things about this report are freaking me out a 'bit':

First, is it JUST me, or does the drone above look a little like the 'Hunter Killers' featured in the original Terminator film of 1984?

Go ahead, I'll give you a moment to check out the following:

 

Oh, sure, I'm sitting here connecting dots again, but sometimes dots ARE connected.  Okay, I'll grant you that the Terminator version of the drone is MUCH cooler to look at than our current-day Environmental Protection Agency's 'cow-watcher version', but what else are they looking at while they're flying around up there?

Hey you pig farmers, you'd better watch your swine...  

The pigs step out of line, one EPA-drone-fired Hell-Fire Missile from above and...

Whoosh, BLAM-O! 

Bacon, as far as the eye can see. 

Second, what, exactly, does the EPA believe these cows are DOING which warrants this observation? 

*  Are the cows driving 'environmentally-insensitive' SUV's around the ranch (while listening to 'way-loud' RAP music)?

*  Neglecting to pick up their 'patties' at the end of each day?  I have a problem with this one myself...

*  Creating a toxic-waste nuisance by discharging un-pasteurized milk into the stream while no one is looking?

*  Operating Coal-Fired power plants to run their bovine air conditioning units, hot tubs, and home theater systems?


Third, hey, um, didn't the nice folks at the EPA Region 7 Office write to me last year when I posted that article where Mike Callicrate accused the EPA of declaring 'hay' a 'pollutant'?  Yes, looking back now, I see that it WAS the hyperactive Region 7 Office of the EPA which I wrote of in "Don't Say Hay About the EPA" in September of 2011!

Super! 

And now they have drones!

Imagine my excitement!!! 

I may never leave my hidden mountainside lair ever again...

Yes, in an effort to step up 'much needed' protection of the Environment, the Environmental Protection Agency is cracking down on, cows.  It is taking to the air to find (fine?) more creative ways to monitor, punish, and bill the people who raise the beef, swine, and chickens which makes their way into grocer's refrigerated meat cases across the Nation. 

Oh, but don't worry about America's farmers because if they get fined, they'll do what most other businesses do...  They'll pass the costs of EPA fines and compliance on to you! 

But that's okay, because you're doing just fine, aren't 'cha?  This evening you'll sleep well knowing that the EPA has it's Eyes In the Sky above Nebraska.

They'll be watching 'herds' grazing, pooping, eating, and, of course, driving Yukons around the ranch.  All so YOU won't have to.  Cool. 
   

Okay, it's after midnight, I'm calling today's (yesterday's?) post officially DONE. 

I would, however, be remiss if I didn't post this Terminator-inspired image of President "If I don't turn the economy around I'll be a one-term President" Obama.

I'd PAY extra to see this particular film in 3-D, but please, no popcorn, and no nachos with cheese during the film itself...  Who's got THAT kind of money?  And, it's only a matter of time before 'corn' finds its way onto the EPA's Enemies of the State list. 

Night all...

Source:  dailyrushbo.com

Don't Say 'Hay' About the EPA

"We didn't say nothin' Boss, honest, we didn't"

About a week ago I wrote a post entitled,  EPA: "Hay, Hay, What'd You Say!?!?" .  It was based upon an article I found online.  It was about a small independent cattle farmer making CRAZY claims against EPA regulations and the total awesomeness that is a Federal Bureaucracy.  If you want to read this original post, click the link above.  I don't want to re-write THAT post because I've moo-ved on (and somehow re-writing it again would be strangely redundant). 

I want to spend a few moments today discussing what happened AFTER I wrote the above post.

Five days later, one of the Moderators over at Grumpy's site received a message from Karl Brooks, EPA Region 7 Administrator (yes, THAT EPA) via Kris Lancaster, also of the EPA. 

[MoosNote:  I work for the EPA also, but I can't talk about it, Region 7 Security Protocals, you know...]

On September 20th, 2011 I received a call from Grumpy.  Unfortunately, he reached my youngest son as I was still at work at my REAL job.  Walking in from the garage at 5:45pm, the boy delivered the message I always wanted to hear, "Dad, the government's after you!"

O-K-A-Y...  I guess I could have jumped out the window of my home, but as it's a raised-ranch (not 'quite' two stories) I'd only twist an ankle and perhaps mash a shrub or two as my bulk plummetted all 12 feet to the ground.  And my wife really likes those shrubs.

"Um, what are you talking about?", I asked.

"Dad, a guy called and he said that someone at the government wrote back about your hay blog."

"And?"

"I told him to call back so he could leave you the message.", my son said.

"And when is he (whoever 'he' is) going to call back?", I asked.

"He already did.  I told him I wouldn't pick up so he can leave you a message on the answering machine.", says the once-amusing boy.

"Can I take my tie off first? I may need something to hang myself with after I listen to the message." I reply.

"Sure, I guess, but he was laughing when he called the first time.  The second time he sounded a little more serious." says the boy who wants me to 'freak' for no good reason.  (He's sooooooo like me!)

"Thanks kidd-o, go up in your room and play with something sharp.  I'm going to listen to the message, then I'm going to cook dinner, and if the message is 'not a good thing', we'll be changing our name to 'Obama'.  Because if you're last name's Obama, you can pretty much do whatever you want and no one can say 'Boo' to you.  Oh, and remember to say 'Hi' to Aunt Zeituni and Uncle Omar when they're over for Thanksgiving..." I laugh.

"Dad, who are they?" he asks.

"Your new relatives.  I'll tell you later.  Hey, dude, you speak Kenyan?"   

"No."

"Well, we need to get you one of those Rosetta Stone language courses - soon.  Okay, I'll listen to the message and let you know what's up.  Oh, and pack a small bag in case we need to get 'invisible'..." 

I'm such a good Dad.

I listened to the message.  It was Grumpy in Florida.  His message was short and to the point, "Mike, your post on the EPA attracted some attention; we got a comment from them online."

Say it with me now:  "My name is Michael Obama.  My name is Michael Obama.  My name is Michael Obama, you killed my father, prepare to die!" 
(You can't squeeze enough obtuse references to The Princess Bride into a normal post, so, sure, why not?)

So what did Karl, via Kris, both of the EPA have to say?  Something interesting.  Something hard to argue with.  Something profound in a 'circular-kind-of-way'. 

Basically, Karl, Kris, whoever, said that the EPA never used the word "Hay" in their "Finding of Violation Order For Compliance".  Which is odd, since the nice cow-farming-man-quoted in Kansas said that the EPA declared "Hay" as a pollutant back on September 1st, 2011. 

Here is Karl / Kris response to my post, in its entirety:
...
Kris Lancaster
September 20, 2011 - 15:04

EPA Never Said Hay is a Pollutant
By Karl Brooks, EPA Region 7 Administrator

A Kansas feedlot operator is trying to make hay by falsely claiming that EPA defined hay as a water pollutant.

The owner of the Callicrate Feeding Company has been spinning a “hay-as-pollutant” myth through the blogosphere for a couple of weeks now . While the company is certainly entitled to its own opinions about EPA, the company is not entitled to its own set of facts. [Italics courtesy of Moos.  It's interesting that I've so much 'Channeling of Daniel Patrick Moynihan -D, NY' lately.]

Here are the facts. On August 15, EPA’s Region 7, which includes Kansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska and nine tribal nations, took action to correct several serious environmental violations at the Callicrate Feeding Company in St. Francis, Kansas. EPA found water permit violations at Callicrate’s operation that needed to be addressed. The compliance order was not based on hay. Nor would EPA have issued such an action based on hay.

To be clear: The order had nothing to do with hay. At no place in the 11-page order is the word “hay” mentioned. Nor is there mention of alfalfa or grass.

EPA cited the Callicrate operation for failure to control harmful runoff, maintain adequate manure storage capacity, keep adequate operation records, and meet the state and federal requirements of its nutrient management plan. Compliance Order (PDF) (11 pp, 1.5MB, About PDF)

EPA inspectors observed silage, and dried distillers grains within the uncontrolled feedstock storage area.

When stored inappropriately, the silage and grains can turn into a liquid material that contains contaminants detrimental to water quality. EPA inspectors also observed slaughter wastes being stored outside in an uncontrolled area. The EPA order was based on those contaminants and the other violations mentioned above.

The Callicrate facility is permitted by the State of Kansas for a capacity of 12,000 head of beef cattle and had 3,200 head at the time of the inspection. Under EPA definitions, 1,000 head of beef is considered a large Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO). This is not a small operation. The permitted capacity puts the company in the top five percent of the largest animal feeding operations in Region 7.

This action by EPA was issued to correct problems. Less than two weeks after the order was issued, Callicrate’s attorney informed us that the company had already taken action to address the problems identified in EPA’s order.
 We have some indication of how other producers have perceived this fracas in a feedlot. Region 7’s offer to meet with Kansas cattle producers to discuss CAFO enforcement was warmly received and we will be meeting within days. Drover/Cattle Network published an article debunking the “hay-as-pollutant” myth. 


As that article concludes: “But as the industry confronts and negotiates these genuine regulatory issues, R-CALF’s claim that ‘EPA declares hay a pollutant to antagonize small and mid-sized U.S. cattle feeders’ is unnecessary, inflammatory hyperbole.”
--Brooks is administrator for U.S. EPA Region 7 that includes Kansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska and nine tribal nations.

First, let me apologize for the long stretch of 'un-funny' verbiage above.  It's government-speak, and not meant to be entertaining - especially to the recipient of such a communication.

Second, I find it interesting that the EPA references the article found on Drover / Cattle Network 'de-bunking' the "Hay as Pollutant" myth. 

Why?  

It was written by the EPA.  (Yeah, the same EPA referenced everywhere above)  You'll find the exact same post (as above) on the Drover / Cattle Network website, written by...  You guessed it...  our friend, Karl (not sure where Kris was for this one).

It would be like me telling you that I have a family of Conservative Liberals in my basement and quoting an article I found online (written by me) which stated that I, you know, have Conservative Liberals IN my basement.  [MoosNote:  This is an excellent idea for a subsequent post, although I'd better change the subjects of the post to 'Space Aliens' because NO ONE is going to believe that I have Conservative Liberals in my basement now, or ever, for that matter...]

Did the EPA use the word "Hay" in their write-up of Callicrate?  No, they did not.  I read the 11 page document.  The word "Hay" does not appear anywhere within the electronic document. 

Mike Callicrate 'took liberties' when he answered a question from an audience member on September 1st, 2011.  Just like Solyndra 'took liberties' when they told the Federal Government that their financials were stable and they 'promised' that our loaning them over one-half a BILLION dollars was a 'good' idea. 

"Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice...  Oh, you must be from the government!!!  Are you here to help???" 

But here's the thing, Mike Callicrate isn't lying down for the EPA.  He released a statement on his website which addresses the report given to him by Karl / Kris / whomever. 

You can read the entire response at his website by clicking here:  Mike Callicrate's Response to EPA

Between you, me, and the fence post, all this 'Hay' about 'hay' or 'not hay' is the real issue.  I've looked at Mr. Callicrate's website. 

Here are a few of the topics he's discussed on his site recently:

Questioning this President, Democrat & Republican policy, the EPA AND describing 'Eating' as Moral? 

He's obviously a mad man who must be stopped!

I'll stop him!

I'll stop him allright - right after I place my online order for some of his yummy steaks at RanchFoodsDirect shipping anywhere you have a hankerin' for farm-fresh meats! 

RanchFoodsDirect.com -- Yumm-O!

All this typing and 'research' is making me a little bit hungry for quality Callicrate Red Meat Products!  

I'd like to thank the EPA for providing me with the new Purveyor of Quality Meats for the household.  

I knew the EPA was good for something... 

I just didn't know what, until now.

Carpe Steak-Yum!

I'm not sure if Karl / Kris of the EPA will respond to this post, but if they do, I'm wondering if they have any recommendations on where I can stock up on 'Chickens'? 

I love me some Chicken BBQ, yes, I do...

EPA: "Hay, Hay, What'd You Say!?!?"

"When hay is outlawed, only outlaws will have hay...
From my cold, dead hoof!"  -- Buttercup

The EPA, which recently required Dairy Farmers to develop "Milk Spill Disaster Plans" (I'm not making this up) for each of their dairy facilities, is at it again.

Being a guy whose blog features Cows on a regular basis, I've got to tell you, I feel a bit Moo-dy right now.  I think they're picking on me - and I don't HAVE an actual cow.  I'd hate to be a Dairy Farmer in the US, you know, between the Milk Spill Disaster Planning requirements and Schools looking to ban Chocolate Milk - I'd think someone within the government 'has it in' for me.  But, you know, that's just me.  I'm thinking someone's been after me for years - only question is...  Who?

Yeah, I might be paranoid...  But it doesn't mean that THEY'RE not after me...

Okay, so which toxic substance has the EPA set its sights upon this month?

"Hay, glorious Hay, I'm gonna Eat Some!!!"

From the article found online: In a news release last week, the Environmental Protection Agency labeled hay a pollutant, according to the Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF USA). A non-profit organization representing thousands of U.S. cattle producers, R-CALF USA says the EPA’s outlandish affidavit could potentially require farmers and ranchers to store hay in pollution containment zones.

The EPA's 'Beef'?  During the 12th Annual R-CALF USA Convention held in late August, Kansas cattle feeder Mike Callicrate was asked, "Has the Environmental Protection Agency declared hay a pollutant?" Callicrate responded affirmatively, while he described the EPA’s enforcement action against his Kansas feedlot for failing to store hay in a pollution containment zone.

"Now that EPA has declared hay a pollutant, every farmer and rancher that stores hay, or that leaves a broken hay bale in the field is potentially violating EPA rules and subject to an EPA enforcement action," he charged. "How far are we going to let this agency go before we stand up and do something about it?"

...

Callicrate and other small to mid-sized feedlots claim that the EPA’s compliance order is a ploy for corporate beef packers to eliminate small feeders from the market, as the agency is singling out only certain feeding enterprises. "I believe the EPA’s enforcement action is a premeditated effort by EPA to partner with the beef packers to finish the job the beef packer’s couldn’t do alone," Callicrate alleged. "Along with my feedlot, the EPA has filed enforcement actions against five other smaller feedlots, including one with only 400 cattle."

Callicrate contends that while badgering small feedlots with burdensome regulations the EPA is overlooking the large corporate operations: "EPA is turning a blind eye toward the mega-feedlots that are a real risk for pollution and, instead, is antagonizing small to mid-sized family operations in an effort to help their packer-partners capture the entire live cattle supply chain away from family farm and ranch operations."

Okay, so here's the deal, it's the contention of Callicrate that the EPA is after his, and other smaller feed lots at the behest of the 'mega-feedlots'.  Is it true?  I don't know.  

What I do know is that once again the EPA is looking to add regulations and monitoring requirements to American Farmers who grow, store, and possibly distribute... Hay.

The people who grow corn for chicken feed won't be happy about this.  Hmm, what else is corn used for?

Oh, that's right, it's used to make Ethanol - that corn-based gasoline additive which Congress LOVES to subsidize since it's NOT a fossil fuel.  I'm sure that the EPA must be riding rough-shod over the Corn Growers of America too, right?  You can't just have corn lying about all 'Willy Nilly', now can you?

I found this at Chemical & Engineering News online (February, 2010):  EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson has announced a determination by the agency that corn-based ethanol qualifies as a renewable energy fuel if made in a modern, low-carbon-dioxide-emitting facility. This determination, made last week, allows producers of corn-based ethanol to have their product designated as a "renewable fuel"...

...

EPA's determination also aids corn growers by providing an exemption for currently operating ethanol plants that use coal-based energy sources. Under the decision, these plants can be designated as renewable fuel producers, too. Also last week, the Obama Administration created an interagency government panel to develop within 90 days a plan to have five to 10 commercial-scale carbon capture and sequestration demonstration projects on-line by 2016.

So, the EPA will allow you to get a carbon-footprint penalty 'exemption' for the production of Ethanol (since the Federal Government incents farmers to grow corn to chunk into gas tanks), but if you dare feed your cow, hay, well, you're pretty much out of luck. 

I guess the only answer is to create Congressional 'Methane-Subsidy' legislation in which bovine 'gaseous discharges' will be collected to power 'Green' vehicles nationwide.  I'll bet that hay (particularly 'gassy hay') will become okie dokie with the EPA once some lunatic decides that farts are about as 'natural' of a gas as you're going to find.

I'm thinking that cow flatulence is a 'Renewable Fuel' also.  Come to think about it, this would make my son's Boy Scout Troop a 'Renewable Fuel' source following their annual Chili cook-off each February at the Scout Cabin at Chenango State Park. 

Only problem is, no one wants to be close enough to the cabin to collect the methane weeping through the rafters of the 60+ year-old cabin.  


In summary, your EPA is addressing critical environmental dangers facing America today:

• Hay storage

• Curtailing Cow Flatulence by witholding the 'Cow Chow'

• Making sure that food prices continue to rise by shoving inexpensive corn into stills, and squeezing out Ethanol

Don't ask questions.  Just go with it. 

It's for your own good.

It's all for your own good.

Yeah, it's ALL good.