Bold Colors Blog

Stickin’ it to the libs, one day at a time

More evidence that the environmental agenda is destructive to America

Posted by Liberty on December 6, 2008

EPA asking for a cow tax?

By Adam Rodriguez

“BOISE – Joe Stewart is used to giving tours of his dairy farm. But kids usually stay home. They say it smells funny.

“You stand around several hundred cattle and it’s not that offensive,” Stewart said. “The public restroom smells a lot worse than this does.”

But the Environmental Protection Agency is worried about the smell of methane, a gas that’s produced by cows when they digest hay. Scientists believe methane contributes to global warming. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the EPA was responsible for regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouses gases like methane as pollutants.

The decision has the EPA considering a “cow tax” to curb greenhouse emissions.

According to the New York Farm Bureau, the tax could cost farmers up to $175 per cow – $87.50 for each head of beef cattle and $20 for a hog.

Local dairyman Mike Garner says it would be a death sentence for the already struggling dairy industry.

“I don’t know any dairy that could sustain that kind of fee,” Garner said. “It would put us out of business.”

An EPA media representative for region 10 (Idaho, Oregon, Washington and Alaska referred all questions to a national spokesman in Washington, D.C. A call to the office was not returned.”

Here’s a little more in-depth coverage:

Proposed fee on smelly cows, hogs angers farmers

“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.”

“‘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.”

No surprise here but these regulations are supported by the radical animal rights activist group, PETA.  They are hoping to use regulations like this to force farmers into producing crops that are more acceptable to their radical agenda while forcing American consumers to cut back on their meat consumption.  Note to PETA:  stick to what you do best: protesting the circus and assaulting little old ladies in fur coats.

So, we’re already dependent upon other countries for our oil because environmental activists have made domestic production and exploration so difficult.  The price spike that we saw with oil this past summer will be only the beginning.  If the environmentalists get their way on these regulations, it will drive American livestock producers out of business and we’ll be stuck getting even more of our food from overseas.  As it stands currently, we have an extremely safe food supply here in America but if we deliberately drive our farmers out of business, we open ourselves up to more than just exorbitant prices.  Why is our collective memory so short?  Not too long ago, America was up in arms because pets were poisoned by melamine-tainted food that was produced with ingredients from China.  And how about this summer’s salmonella outbreak that was linked to produce grown in Mexico?

The entire premise behind these regulations is a lie.  Global warming is an unproven theory and we shouldn’t be regulating American farmers out of business because of it.  It is completely illogical that the natural by-products of breathing and living should be considered as pollutants.  It’s my opinion that environmentalists are so tainted by their own feelings of guilt and self-loathing that they simply can’t relate to the rest of us who don’t believe that the Earth is going to hell in a handbasket.  I’m an optimist, I love America and I want our society to grow and prosper–environmentalists are pessimistic and frightened and they want to use their negative, alarmist agenda as a club to force the rest of society into submission.  This is not to say that Conservatives want a dirty, ailing planet–we’re just seeking balance between responsible stewardship and the growth and potential of all mankind.

[Just a footnote:

If some day we import all of our food from foreign nations and we have to depend upon our socialized health care system to help us recover from food borne illness and industrial chemical poisoning…we are screwed.]

Advertisements

2 Responses to “More evidence that the environmental agenda is destructive to America”

  1. Keith said

    I am in complete agreement with you on taxing the farmers for gases emitted from their livestock. If you follow that logic, people will have to pay for the emissions resulting from their driving, heating their homes, and other industries for the resulting pollutants created from their manufacturing processes.

    Insane, for what? A sustainable planet?

    Of course there are a wide range of ways to mitigate a problem, not have to pay for the pollution, and make money from the mitigation itself…

    And you are absolute: Global warming is just a theory, why should we give any credence to a theory?

    “The Big bang” is only a theory, yet we are here.
    “Gravity” is a theory, but we are not floating away.
    “Evolution” is a theory, yet I am not an ape (well maybe a little).

    While I disagree with the premise of your rant, I agree with the need to balance growth with sustainability – the problem is both extremes are still pushing against each other so hard that for the folks who really want to do the right thing it can get a little convoluted.

    Just saying.

  2. Liberty said

    Thanks for the comment, Keith. And great point about the Big Bang, gravity and evolution. I’m not sure I’d equate global warming with gravity but that’s just my opinion. We can agree though, that there does need to be balance between taking care of the environment while still promoting commerce and the natural progress of society. It seems to me that the loudest voices on this issue tend to be on the environmentalist side, though, and that worries me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: