Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
WoIverine

EPA Declares Hay a Pollutant

20 posts in this topic

Nice. Remeber, tax payers are coughing up the cash for all of this. There is a 15 trillion dollar deficit, wake up before it's too late!

http://r-calfusa.com/news_releases/2011/110901-epa.htm

"Callicrate said the EPA does not appear to be going after the corporate feedlots. “EPA is turning a blind eye toward the mega-feedlots that are a real risk for pollution and, instead, is antagonizing small to mid-sized family operations in an effort to help their packer-partners capture the entire live cattle supply chain away from family farm and ranch operations.”

We thought the Obama Administration was going to bring about a change to the ongoing corporate control and corporate dominance that has been decimating the U.S. cattle industry. I guess we’re seeing that change right now. Rather than reduce corporate control and dominance the EPA is overtly partnering with the corporate beef packers to accelerate the exodus of sustainable, independent family operations. This really smells,” Callicrate concluded."

Edited by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boushama keeps on going and going and going.. the name changed not the policies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boushama keeps on going and going and going.. the name changed not the policies.

In a nutshell. Different sides of the same coin. We need someone wholly in the middle, but I don't think that would even make a difference at this point. Give Rome back to it's people.

Edited by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. And it's on every conservative blog on the planet. But not so much at any EPA site. The best I could find was a page that said that hay bales should not be used in pollution control.

Is this real or something made up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, I guess that would probably depend on whether or not there's been some legally binding documents filed.

In the article it states:

"Callicrate responded affirmatively and explained that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently initiated a formal enforcement action against his Kansas feedlot for, among other things, failure to store his hay in a pollution containment zone."

It honestly seems pretty crazy to me...I mean, hay as a pollutant? Seriously? I think however crazy it sounds, it may be possible. Kind of reminds me of the story that broke a few weeks ago about the whole food market being raided in California. There does seem to be some push against small farming outfits. I know Monsanto has been giving them a hard time for a while now.

Edited by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh but he doesn't work for the EPA - "Kansas cattle feeder Mike Callicrate" - he's a mega feedlot guy. So he says the EPA did something and the entire world believes it's true and posts it on every blog there is. Codswallop. I could just as easily say that Ron Paul is homosexual just to p*** off his followers. It's not true of course but it's the same thing.

Edited by ninjadude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh but he doesn't work for the EPA - "Kansas cattle feeder Mike Callicrate" - he's a mega feedlot guy. So he says the EPA did something and the entire world believes it's true and posts it on every blog there is. Codswallop. I could just as easily say that Ron Paul is homosexual just to p*** off his followers. It's not true of course but it's the same thing.

So that is the story behind that. And yes, I can see how tons of hay dust could be classified as pollutant (besides a fire hazard). Which is not exactly the same as hay being declared such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, I could look for the formal enforcement action, just kind of not motivated right now. Will try to find something a little bit later. Don't know what's wrong, all the fight drained out of me today. *shrug*

Edited by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is yet another attack on small business owners.... you know, the people who built the USA. Meanwhile Obama just finished his much anticipated 'Jobs' speech where he used numerous ways to try and identify himself with the average Joe in America while his federal government is pulling the rug out from underneath the people at home. I'm getting soooo sick of listening to him lie to everybody who isn't a CEO of some large corporation that is in bed with the Federal government. But I have to watch... I must identify myself with the enemy of liberty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is yet another attack on small business owners.... you know, the people who built the USA. Meanwhile Obama just finished his much anticipated 'Jobs' speech where he used numerous ways to try and identify himself with the average Joe in America while his federal government is pulling the rug out from underneath the people at home. I'm getting soooo sick of listening to him lie to everybody who isn't a CEO of some large corporation that is in bed with the Federal government. But I have to watch... I must identify myself with the enemy of liberty.

It's wholly demoralizing, I agree, maybe that's the goal? Monsanto's been pulling stunts like this for a long time in regard to small farming outfits, so it really wouldn't surprise me.

Job creation, bah! That's such a ploy, unless you sign your life away to the military, goodluck finding a "government created" job.

Edited by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's wholly demoralizing, I agree, maybe that's the goal? Monsanto's been pulling stunts like this for a long time in regard to small farming outfits, so it really wouldn't surprise me.

Job creation, bah! That's such a ploy, unless you sign your life away to the military, goodluck finding a "government created" job.

Being an American who happen to live in the EU, I noticed more and more freedom reducing laws over here also. Soon, older cars wont be able to go into some larger EU cities for example. Is this a world wide trend? In which case I know I will be called a conspiracy wacko.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being an American who happen to live in the EU, I noticed more and more freedom reducing laws over here also. Soon, older cars wont be able to go into some larger EU cities for example. Is this a world wide trend? In which case I know I will be called a conspiracy wacko.

My friend, I have thought about it quite a bit. I sometimes wonder how much is intuition, how much is gut instinct, and how much is actual conspiracy? There seems to be a gap between those who are proactive, and those who are reactive. I guess the best thing is to know history, keep your eyes open, if events start to reoccur take notice and act accordingly. I don't know how much I actually buy into the ideas written in prophetic texts, but the context is usually to warn, so I guess I'll personally keep those things in the back of my mind, can't hurt.

Edited by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being an American who happen to live in the EU, I noticed more and more freedom reducing laws over here also. Soon, older cars wont be able to go into some larger EU cities for example. Is this a world wide trend? In which case I know I will be called a conspiracy wacko.

They will, as long as they can keep up to the emission standards or are older than 25 years (after that they are considered classic cars and therefore donot need to conform any other road standards as those that existed in its time.I know because a friend of mine has a '63 Mercedes 220,and only because he does not need a seatbelt to drive in it).

And,as sorry as I am,we know that high concentration of micro smoke (especially expelled by Diesel cars and trucks) cause lung cancer. Why should those who live near congested areas be at risk of contracting it just because you insist on driving your old clunker?

That is not taken any freedom away beyond giving the right to a healthy life to those people. Perfectly legit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who can't afford anything other than what they have, should walk? Public transportation doesn't service all areas, generally is also costly. Will there be alternatives or "entitlements" if that does occur? Will the scales be balanced, will there be fairness? Somehow I do not think so. What is the mutually beneficial and acceptable solution for all involved?

Edited by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who can't afford anything other than what they have, should walk? Public transportation doesn't service all areas, generally is also costly. Will there be alternatives or "entitlements" if that does occur? Will the scales be balanced, will there be fairness? Somehow I do not think so.

We are talking Europe where public transportation density is only second to Japan (except for Greece, there it is second to last). Many moons back I lived in Bonn, Germany and did not even have a car, the three times a year I needed one it was cheaper to rent one.

Now, the same thing American style would be: We prohibit it , period. Buy yourself a bicycle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Demoralize the masses, they will eventually conform.

Edited by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will, as long as they can keep up to the emission standards or are older than 25 years (after that they are considered classic cars and therefore donot need to conform any other road standards as those that existed in its time.I know because a friend of mine has a '63 Mercedes 220,and only because he does not need a seatbelt to drive in it).

And,as sorry as I am,we know that high concentration of micro smoke (especially expelled by Diesel cars and trucks) cause lung cancer. Why should those who live near congested areas be at risk of contracting it just because you insist on driving your old clunker?

That is not taken any freedom away beyond giving the right to a healthy life to those people. Perfectly legit.

What you write is fascinating, because at the same time various government forbid the use of old cars, they narrow all streets to the point of making dangerous to drive faster than 20 miles an hour which in case you don't know makes cars idle longer and pollute more and to top it all they allow those obnoxious mopeds with 49.9 cc two strokes engines that are not only a noise pollution nightmare, but also a nasty smoking petarading ( :P )smelling pollution making. Two strokes engines have been banned in the US in the late 80's early 90's (methink)... but EU keeps them going. So your argument about cancer giving diesel engine doesn't hold water. My Citroen Xsara diesel doesn't pollute as much as 1 (one) of those little 49.9 vicious machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. And it's on every conservative blog on the planet. But not so much at any EPA site. The best I could find was a page that said that hay bales should not be used in pollution control.

Is this real or something made up?

I don't see a problem, R-CALF USA sounds like a reliable news source to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a continuation of the anti-EPA right wing publicity campaign conducted through the blogsphere.

It's not just that the House GOP is pushing—and will likely pass—a bill that would bar the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating planet-warming emissions and nullify the agency's scientific finding that those gases endanger human health. Congressional Republicans have mounted an all-out assault on the EPA, pushing a lengthy list of measures to handcuff the agency from exercising its regulatory authority. For good measure, they are also trying to slash the agency's budget by a third.

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/republican-epa-ambush

And just to clarify - large quantities of hay incorrectly managed represent a serious threat to public health. They are covered by various health and safety regulations because they can and do cause a condition known as "Farmers Lung" which is chronic and debilitating and in extreme cases can kill. So if the farmer is incorrectly storing his hay then he will be subject to an enforcement notice.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much ado, about nothing, actually in several different ways.

Edited by Spid3rCyd3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.