Idaho’s senate has passed a bill that would designate the Idaho State Department of Agriculture as the monitoring agency for swine, poultry and their waste, according to the Idaho Reporter. The responsibility currently falls to the state’s Department of Environmental Quality.
The bill now moves to the Idaho House. Concentrated animal feeding operations would be required to have state permits, the specifics of which would vary for small, medium, large and extra large operations. The legislation would not require CAFOs to share their nutrient management plans for animal waste.
Showing posts with label Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. Show all posts
Monday, March 29, 2010
Monday, August 10, 2009
NPIC offers info on pesticides
The National Pesticide Information Center is operated by the Environmental and Molecular Toxicology Department, Oregon State University.
The NPIC is a cooperative effort between OSU and the U.S. Environment Protection Agency. Questions relating to the toxicity of pesticides, application of compounds and interpretation of labels can be addressed by the NPIC, seven days a week.
For more information, call +1.800.858.7378.
The NPIC is a cooperative effort between OSU and the U.S. Environment Protection Agency. Questions relating to the toxicity of pesticides, application of compounds and interpretation of labels can be addressed by the NPIC, seven days a week.
For more information, call +1.800.858.7378.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Preemptive responses to caged legislation
House Bill 2151 has been introduced into the Oklahoma Legislature stating “The Legislature occupies and preempts the entire fields of legislation in this State but concerns in any way the regulation and enforcement of the care and handling of livestock to the complete exclusion of any order, ordinance, or regulation by any municipality or other political subdivision of this State.”
A similar motion was introduced into the Georgia House of Representatives reading “no county, municipal cooperation, consolidated government, or other political subdivision of this State shall adapt any ordinance, rule, regulation or resolution regulating crop management or animal husbandry practices.”
These initiatives are in response to California Proposition 2 which was a ballot initiative. It is presumed by some animal agriculture industry members that where animal rights and welfare activist have failed in their attempts to introduce legislation at the state level, that county and municipal action would be taken to prevent the establishment of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations including egg production facilities.
These actions in Oklahoma and Georgia should be followed in all states which do not have constitutional provisions for either statewide or countywide voter initiatives.
A similar motion was introduced into the Georgia House of Representatives reading “no county, municipal cooperation, consolidated government, or other political subdivision of this State shall adapt any ordinance, rule, regulation or resolution regulating crop management or animal husbandry practices.”
These initiatives are in response to California Proposition 2 which was a ballot initiative. It is presumed by some animal agriculture industry members that where animal rights and welfare activist have failed in their attempts to introduce legislation at the state level, that county and municipal action would be taken to prevent the establishment of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations including egg production facilities.
These actions in Oklahoma and Georgia should be followed in all states which do not have constitutional provisions for either statewide or countywide voter initiatives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
