|
Farmers face a complex set of factors when they make
decisions about farm management and conservation practices.
The vagaries of weather and markets introduce uncertainty
into farmers' operations. The use of conservation practices
may also introduce uncertainty about net returns while
producing benefits enjoyed mostly off the farm. Decisions
made by farmers on how and where to produce commodities
can be influenced by policies and programs for protecting
the environment. USDA has several major programs for providing financial and technical assistance to farmers for protecting water quality, soil quality, and wildlife habitat.
Farmers can also be influenced by other Federal environmental protection
policies and programs that may restrict or encourage certain production practices.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is chiefly responsible for administering environmental protection policies and programs. The Clean Water Act (1972) is the major law protecting water quality. Several CWA programs address "nonpoint-source" pollution, which is the most prevalent type of pollution associated with agriculture.
The Nonpoint Source Program (Section
319) requires States to develop nonpoint-source management
programs. Nonpoint-source control plans can include State
regulatory measures, but usually emphasize voluntary
actions like those used in USDA conservation programs.
Implementation grants to States and tribes ($200 million
in FY2008) fund projects like installation of best management
practices (BMPs) for animal waste; design and implementation
of BMP systems for stream, lake, and estuary watersheds;
and basinwide landowner education programs. The Clean Water State Revolving
Fund (CWSRF), created by Congress to fund the construction of water treatment
plants, can be used by States to provide reduced-rate loans for water quality
projects included in the State nonpoint-source plan. Fifteen States have used
CWSRF for funding waste management systems, manure spreaders, conservation
tillage equipment, irrigation equipment, filter strips, and streambank stabilization.
In 2007 $240 million in CWSRF funding was used for nonpoint source pollution
reduction and estuary protection in over 600 projects (including urban and
other non-agricultural projects).
Water pollution from some animal
feeding operations is treated as a point source under the Clean Water
Act. Confined animal feeding operations meeting certain
size thresholds or
other conditions fall under the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). These operations, known
as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), must obtain NPDES permits
that specify standards for the production area (i.e., housing, waste storage)
and for the land where wastes are applied. CAFOs must
also implement a nutrient management plan for animal manure applied to land.
As a form of nonpoint pollution, nutrient runoff from fields has traditionally been addressed with voluntary approaches. This is the first time that a nonpoint source of water pollution has been regulated at the Federal level. EPA estimates that up to 15,500 operations are covered by the CAFO regulations. These regulations may impose significant manure management costs in areas where land for spreading manure is scarce. These costs could influence location decisions for large operations and spur the development of alternative uses for manure. EPA encourages CAFOs to seek financial and technical assistance from USDA to help them meet manure management requirements.
The Total Maximum Daily Load provisions
of the Clean Water Act are intended to be the second
line of defense for protecting the quality of surface-water
resources. When technology-based controls are inadequate
to insure that water quality meets State standards, Section
303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires States to develop
total maximum daily loads (TMDL) for affected waters.
A TMDL is the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water
body can receive and still meet water quality standards,
and an allocation of that amount to all the pollutant's
sources. States must submit to EPA a list of impaired
waters and the cause of the impairment. More than 20,000
such waters have been identified
as impaired under Section 303(d).
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act establishes a program
for protecting
wetlands. It regulates the discharge of dredged
and fill material into U.S. waters, including wetlands,
and is a key policy for meeting the "no net loss" goal
for wetland acreage. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
administers the program, while EPA develops and interprets
environmental criteria used in evaluating permit applications.
Ongoing farming activities are generally exempt from
Section 404, but filling wetlands to create new farmland
requires a permit.
The Coastal
Zone Management Act Reauthorization Amendments (CZARA)
of 1990 added nonpoint-source water pollution requirements
to the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. The Coastal
Zone Management Act is a collaboration between Federal,
State and local governments for managing and allocating
coastal resources. All coastal States, including Great
Lakes States, can develop a coastal zone management
program and receive financial assistance from the Federal
Government (developing a program is not mandatory).
CZARA requires that each State and territory with an
approved coastal zone management program submit a plan
to implement management measures for nonpoint-source
pollution to restore and protect coastal waters. Currently,
34 coastal States and territories have developed nonpoint-source
pollution control plans.
The Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA) of 1974 requires the EPA to set
standards for drinking-water quality and requirements for
water treatment by public water systems. States are required
to develop Source Water Assessment Programs to assess the
areas serving as public sources of drinking water in order
to identify potential threats and to initiate protection
efforts. EPA is required to establish a list of contaminants
for consideration in future regulation. The Drinking
Water Contaminant Candidate List, last released in
2005, lists several agricultural chemicals—including metolachlor,
acetochlor, methyl bromide, and the triazines—for consideration.
The Clean
Air Act (CAA) of 1970 sets limits on how much
of a pollutant can be in the air anywhere in the United
States . The criteria pollutant most associated with
agriculture is particulates. Where airborne dust from
fields, burning crop residues, or other sources exceeds
permissible levels, States must take steps to reduce
emissions. Airborne dust from fields in Washington
and particulates from burning rice straw in California
have led to State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for controlling
emissions from agricultural fields. Ammonia is a precursor
for fine particulates in the atmosphere, and confined
animal operations are the source for over 50 percent
of atmospheric ammonia emissions in the United States
. California has implemented State regulations for
reducing ammonia emissions from dairy operations that
were affecting air quality in heavily populated areas
downwind. In 2006, EPA
revised the particulate matter standard to control
for fine particulates.
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) of 1947 provides direct controls over the sale and use of pesticides. Under FIFRA, all pesticides must be approved by EPA through a mandatory registration process.
In 1996, the Food Quality Protection Act amended FIFRA to eliminate inconsistencies between it and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 (which regulates pesticide residues on food). The amendments allow EPA to move quickly to suspend the use of a pesticide to prevent serious risks to human health and the environment.
The Endangered
Species Act (ESA) of 1973 conserves the ecosystems
upon which endangered and threatened species (wildlife
and plants) depend. To do so, the law regulates the
modification or degradation of habitat deemed critical
for species survival. All Federal agencies are required
to protect endangered species and protect their habitat.
Private landowners who wish to conduct activities on
their land that might incidentally harm wildlife listed
as endangered or threatened are required to obtain
an incidental take permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Under the Act, EPA must also ensure that the
use of pesticides it registers will not result in harm
to any species listed as endangered and threatened,
or to habitat critical to those species' survival.
EPA's Endangered Species Protection Program (http://www.epa.gov/espp/
) is a program designed to determine whether pesticide
use in a certain geographic area may affect any listed
species. If limitations on pesticide use are necessary,
information on use restrictions is relayed through
Endangered Species Protection Bulletins. Use limitations
are enforced through FIFRA.
The Endangered Species Act may have a large impact on
agriculture through the supply of irrigation water from
Federal irrigation projects. The Bureau of Reclamation
has taken measures to protect the flow of rivers supporting
endangered species, such as salmon. Sufficient flow for
endangered species can reduce the irrigation water available
to farmers from Federal irrigation projects, with obvious
implications for crop production.
The Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act, commonly known as Superfund, was enacted
in 1980 to provide broad Federal authority to respond
to releases of hazardous substances that might endanger
public health. Originally focused on hazardous wastes
from industrial plants, the increased size and consolidation
of animal feeding operations has raised the possibility
that the emission of substances like ammonia and hydrogen
sulfide from such operations may be subject to the
notification provisions of CERCLA.
Role of USDA Conservation Programs
Federal environmental laws cover many aspects of agricultural
production. Laws aimed at preserving habitat (Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act) or
at controlling the use of toxic agricultural inputs (FIFRA)
are the source of direct constraints on agriculture at
the Federal level. Those Federal laws directed at reducing
environmental pollution (i.e., Clean Water Act, Clean
Air Act, Coastal Zone Management Act) have generally
not constrained agriculture directly, opting instead
for voluntary approaches overseen primarily by the States.
Constraints on agricultural production to reduce pollution
emissions are more likely to arise at the State level
in response to local problems.
USDA's conservation
programs can help farmers respond to resource
issues subject to regulation. For example, being in
a 303(d) impaired watershed is a screening advantage
in applications for EQIP. EPA encourages CAFOs to seek
financial and technical assistance from USDA to help
them implement Clean Water Act provisions, and 60 percent
of EQIP's funding is earmarked for animal feeding operations.
USDA also helps farmers reduce air pollution in dust
and ozone non-attainment areas in California with a
cost-share program funded through EQIP. The Wildlife
Habitat Incentives Program is being used to help landowners
protect habitat for endangered species. The Conservation
Reserve Program and Grassland Reserve Program both
consider potential benefits to endangered
species in the selection of land offered for
enrollment.
|
