Farm Bureau Supports Bill To Halt Controversial WOTUS Rule

The American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) asked Congress last week to pass legislation ordering EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to withdraw the controversial “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) proposal.

Advertisement

In a letter copied to all members of Congress, AFBF President Bob Stallman wrote that the Regulatory Integrity Protection Act of 2015 represents an opportunity for Congress to take “the first important step toward resolving this issue fairly.” The bill was approved by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, chaired by Rep. Bill Shuster (R-PA).

According to AFBF, if the legislation does not pass and EPA moves forward with a final rule, the result may be landowners “being forced to engage in expensive litigation to protect their rights.”

Farm Bureau also called into question a “Dear Colleague” letter circulating on Capitol Hill mentioning the American Farm Bureau by name. That letter states that delaying the rule would be “bad for farmers.”

“Because our name has been used, we feel obliged to make our position clear,” Stallman wrote. “Our members overwhelmingly oppose this rule. It is a bad rule for farmers. There is no question about that. Anyone who alleges the opposite either misunderstands the rule or misunderstands farming.”

Top Articles
Have a Plan For Climate Change? Why Fruit Growers Need To Act Now

AFBF also questioned the “Dear Colleague” letter’s assertion that delaying the WOTUS rule would leave “many of our nation’s waters unprotected.”

“As a matter of record, EPA has made repeated statements that the proposed rule does not expand its jurisdiction, while its proponents take the view … that without the rule, waters would be left unprotected. Proponents (of the WOTUS rule) cannot have it both ways.”

According to a news release, Farm Bureau believes the WOTUS rule expands EPA’s authority beyond congressional intent and the limits imposed by two Supreme Court opinions. Among other provisions, AFBF said the proposed rule improperly extends federal regulation to isolated waters and, in cases, regulates land use under the guise of the WOTUS rule.

 

 

0