Could Chesapeake Bay Mandates Spread to Midwest?

February 16, 2016 05:00 AM

For producers living and farming in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, rules and regulations are a way of life.  

"It’s become customary now. We're more used to it," said Delaware poultry producer Aaron Thompson. "The fear is the future. Are they going to change the goal line or finish line on us?”

In 2010 under the Clean Water Act, the Environmental Protection Agency published the total maximum daily load rule, also known as TMDL. That determines the amount of pollutants such as nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment that may be released on a daily basis from the six states that compose Chesapeake Bay watershed. It’s all in an effort to restore the bay. Each state can establish its own set of TMDL mandates. If it doesn’t, the EPA can implement them and farmers must comply.

But some agricultural law specialists say it’s a very possible that the rules could change, just as Thompson fears.

Under the Clean Water Act, the federal government is responsible for regulating point source pollutants--that is, a known discharge source--such as a pipe, ship or smokestack. Generally, states are responsible for regulating non-point source pollutants such as runoff from fertilizer, rain or snowmelt.

In 2015, though, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit said the feds could have authority over both point source and non-point source pollution. That could give the government more jurisdiction through the TMDL process.

“That’s a huge development in terms of the way the court construed the rules under the Clean Water Act," agricultural law and taxation specialist Roger McEowen explained. "If that turns out to be the case and if another court follows that same reasoning at the federal level, that is a tremendous development. That gives the feds much greater jurisdiction over various types of runoff from farm fields and ranches too. We’ll have to watch to see what happens as we get into the future of 2016 and beyond." 

It’s a shift that could slowly bleed into other regions of the country, including the Midwest.

"This could have an impact with what's going on in Iowa with the Des Moines Water Works case, where they're trying to say there are requirements and the feds should have requirements in respect with drainage from farm field tile,” McEowen said. 

He said that farmers can see what's occurring in the Chesapeake Bay watershed as a template of what may come to Midwestern agriculture.

“That may not necessarily be a good thing by a lot of agricultural operations in the Midwest. They do have poultry (on the East Coast). We don't have as much poultry in the Midwest. It’s more hogs and cattle. Some of the issues are different, some are similar," McEowen said. "In terms of the regulatory effort of the EPA, I think we can learn as a lesson to see what they've done on the  Eastern Shore of Maryland and the Chesapeake and see what and how much of that could be applied to the Midwest. I think it's only a matter of time."

In the meantime, producers are complying with the regulations and hope others see their efforts too. “I would like to see more credit given to what has been done. It’s a challenge. We may be farther ahead than what many people realize," Thompson said.

Watch the story here:


Back to news


Spell Check

Cochranville , PA
2/16/2016 06:12 PM

  I agree with Zorcon. U first two guys have no clue whts coming your way. Farming in the Chesapeake watershed has way more regulations than u thought possible. Then to boot u have a few bad eggs who ruin it for the rest of us farming "sustainably ". I watched a local organic produce farmer have way more sediment runoff on 10 acres than most grain farmers in this area have on 100! Anyway they will eventually blame all the so called pollution on the farmers. Meanwhile ignoring urban sprawl and all the fertilizer and over application on yards. How bout this one too. We've had 3 of the snowiest winters I can remember. Snow can add 2-12 lbs of nitrogen per acre. It all melts into the Chesapeake!! Pennsylvania just failed it's TDML. Before the three years we were on track. Now they are blaming it on the farmers again

New Ulm, MN
2/16/2016 07:36 AM

  The fear in place is really inhibiting agriculture leaders from seeing future solutions. Thompson is right about fearing changes because this system will not achieve water quality goals and the EPA will be under pressure to change their tactics. - this is for certain. The agriculture community, and all sustainability efforts to date have yet to really grasp the real issue at hand. Give me any plan, IA NLRS, CBay, EPRI WQ trading and I will tell you the achilles heal (s) each on has. The are not just economic models or ecological models -they are both and the interface has to be sensible.

Auburn, IL
2/16/2016 09:02 AM

  Hey boys, we've lost half our soil productivity over the last 100 years and lucky technology has made up for it! We are net polluters plain and simple and had better get out act together soon. Not many other industries get to run their factories down and get away with spewing inputs(legally) into the water and atmosphere. I think the Landowner should ultimately bare the responsibility just as the factory owner does......


Corn College TV Education Series


Get nearly 8 hours of educational video with Farm Journal's top agronomists. Produced in the field and neatly organized by topic, from spring prep to post-harvest. Order now!


Market Data provided by
Brought to you by Beyer