Why Is The EPA Targeting The Amish?

by Nikki Gloudeman · 2010-06-11 06:15:00 UTC
Topics:

In a bit of ironic news, The New York Times reports that the Amish—famous for their stewardship of the land—are being targeted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for their eco-unfriendliness.

Plain-sect dairy farmers in Lancaster, Pennsylvania have been warned to reign in manure run-off from their cows, which is seeping into the Chesapeake Bay. They could now face stiff penalties if they don’t make EPA's suggested improvements, including building fences to keep livestock away from streams and constructing buffers to reduce run-off.

The pressure is coming straight from the top. Restoration of the heavily polluted bay is a key priority of the Obama administration. And the Amish are undoubtedly making a huge impact: Of the dozens of watershed counties that contribute to the damage, Lancaster ranks at the top, and Amish farmers own 50 percent of the farms in the area.

In a practical way, then, it makes sense for the government to force the community take responsibility. But the decision has come up against an interesting question of cultural relativism.

The Amish, of course, shun political interference in their lives, refusing both the rules and benefits of the U.S. government (as the Times notes, they neither contribute to nor accept Social Security, for instance). So while it’s fair to suggest they make changes, it gets complicated when government fines and edicts enter the equation, as they may have to soon.

And as Katherine Gustafson on Change.org's Sustainable Food blog notes, the situation also challenges the commonly held stereotypes regarding "good" and "bad" farming practices.

That's because, in almost every other way the Amish are ideal citizens of the land. Writing about an Amish family she followed, reporter Sunya N. Bhanoo notes in a follow-up blog post, “…compared with those of us who drive gas-guzzling cars, fly on planes, and don’t think twice about turning on the lights, the Stoltzfuses have a small carbon footprint.”

In this particular case, though, it does seem the intervention is warranted. According to EPA data, Lancaster County generates a whopping 61 million pounds of manure a year, pumping tons of nitrogen and phosphorous into an area filled with sensitive wildlife. Those excess nutrients feed the growth of dense algae that block sunlight and suck up oxygen in the water, killing the bays' grasses, crabs, and oysters. That’s enough damage to make potential government interference appropriate—though one hopes it won’t have to come to that.

Photo credit: Ernest Mettendorf, Wikimedia Commons

Nikki Gloudeman is a senior fellow at Mother Jones magazine where she writes about the environment and other topics.
PREVIOUS STORY:
Dirty Air Act Fails the Senate: On To The Big Fight
NEXT STORY:
Stopping the Water Grab in Nevada

COMMENTS (3)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.