Homestead mailing list

[bob ford <bobford79 AT yahoo.com>]

I saw a similar article last week about small farmers in rural NY protesting 
about this very same issue.  They will  t*x our spit if they can figure a 
way.  This is just a proposal, likely to fail at first, just like all other 
t*xes started out as a 'likely to fail' proposal....



-------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Proposed fee on smelly cows, hogs angers farmers

Associated Press Writer – Fri Dec 5, 4:43 am ET AP – 

These Montgomery, Ala., cows seem unaware of a proposal Thursday, Dec. 4, 
2008 by the Environmental … MONTGOMERY, Ala. – 

For farmers, this stinks: Belching and gaseous cows and hogs could start 
costing them money if a federal proposal to charge fees for air-polluting 
animals becomes law.

Farmers so far are turning their noses up at the notion, which is one of 
several put forward by the Environmental Protection Agency after the U.S. 
Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases emitted by belching and 
flatulence amounts to air pollution.

"This is one of the most ridiculous things the federal government has tried 
to do," said Alabama Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, an outspoken 
opponent of the proposal.

It would require farms or ranches with more than 25 dairy cows, 50 beef 
cattle or 200 hogs to pay an annual fee of about $175 for each dairy cow, 
$87.50 per head of beef cattle and $20 for each hog.

The executive vice president of the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Ken 
Hamilton, estimated the fee would cost owners of a modest-sized cattle ranch 
$30,000 to $40,000 a year. He said he has talked to a number of livestock 
owners about the proposals, and "all have said if the fees were carried out, 
it would bankrupt them."

Sparks said Wednesday he's worried the fee could be extended to chickens and 
other farm animals and cause more meat to be imported.

"We'll let other countries put food on our tables like they are putting gas 
in our cars. Other countries don't have the health standards we have," Sparks 
said.

EPA spokesman Nick Butterfield said the fee was proposed for farms with 
livestock operations that emit more than 100 tons of carbon emissions in a 
year and fall under federal Clean Air Act provisions.

Butterfield said the EPA has not taken a position on any of the proposals. 
But farmers from across the country have expressed outrage over the idea, 
both on Internet sites and in opinions sent to EPA during a public comment 
period that ended last week.

"It's something that really has a very big potential adverse impact for the 
livestock industry," said Rick Krause, the senior director of congressional 
relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation.

The fee would cover the cost of a permit for the livestock operations. While 
farmers say it would drive them out of business, an organization supporting 
the proposal hopes it forces the farms and ranches to switch to healthier 
crops.

"It makes perfect sense if you are looking for ways to cut down on meat 
consumption and recoup environmental losses," said Bruce Friedrich, a 
spokesman in Washington for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

"We certainly support making factory farms pay their fair share," he said.

U.S. Rep. Robert Aderholt, a Republican from Haleyville in northwest Alabama, 
said he has spoken with EPA officials and doesn't believe the cow tax is a 
serious proposal that will ever be adopted by the agency.

"Who comes up with this kind of stuff?" said Perry Mobley, director of the 
Alabama Farmers Federation's beef division. "It seems there is an ulterior 
motive, to destroy livestock farms. This would certainly put them out of 
business."

Butterfield said the EPA is reviewing the public comments and didn't have a 
timetable for the next steps.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081205/ap_on_bi_ge/farm_scene_cow_tax_2