Two US Federal Agencies Cleared Farmer to Plow His Field. Then a Third Federal Agency Slapped Him with Millions in Fines

Army.mil
image_pdfimage_print
Tehama County, California: Jack LaPant planted 900 acres of winter wheat on his property in 2011. The US Department of Agriculture Farm Services Agency and the Natural Resources Conservation Service, both federal agencies, assured him that growing wheat would be legal because it was consistent with past use of the land. A year later, the US Army Corps of Engineers informed him that, under the Clean Water Act, he needed a permit to farm his property and . According to Congress, under the CWA, normal farming activities, such as LaPant ’s, are exempt from the permit requirement. Nevertheless, the Army Corps of Engineers took action against him. LaPant now faces severe penalties. -GEG

Following government rules is often a tough enough task. But when federal agencies secretly move their own rules’ goalposts and then threaten millions of dollars in fines for noncompliance, it can be devastating.

Ask Jack LaPant. In 2011, the rural farmer in Tehama County, Calif., planted 900 acres of winter wheat on his property. Before he ever put a plow to the soil in his field, he sought the official views of both the U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Services Agency and the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Both agencies assured him that since growing wheat would be consistent with past use of the land, he could legally proceed as planned.  

With approval from those two federal agencies, LaPant thought he was in the clear and set about planting his wheat. More than a year later, however, he was shocked when a third federal agency came knocking on his door. LaPant had never considered consulting the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, not with the go-ahead from two other farm-governing bodies. The Army Corps, nonetheless, informed him that under the Clean Water Act (CWA), he needed a permit to farm his property.

In reality, although the CWA does require a permit for the discharge of dredged or fill material into “navigable waters,” LaPant’s wheat-planting did not fall into that category. According to Congress, under the CWA, normal farming activities — such as LaPant ’s — are exempt from the permit requirement.

This fact apparently didn’t matter to the Army Corps of Engineers. The agency dismissed the farming exemption for LaPant and proceeded with enforcement action against him.

Today, even though he no longer owns the property, LaPant faces ruinous civil penalties for farming practices he was told he was perfectly within the law to undertake. It is unacceptable that a farmer needs bureaucratic approval of not one, not two, but three separate agencies to avoid prosecution in a country that purports to respect property rights and freedom.

LaPant is not alone. Many property owners across the country long have been victims of confusing, labyrinthine laws and regulations that govern farming. Navigating these rules is difficult at the best of times, but becomes impossible when the controlling agencies fail to speak with a single voice or act consistently within a single statute.

Instead of suing Jack LaPant, the federal government should take responsibility for clarifying and fairly enforcing its web of regulations. Farming’s regulatory regime has made one of the nation’s most respected and essential professions one of the most onerous. 

Suing LaPant for trusting the government’s word is unquestionably unfair. He did what the Farm Services Agency and the Natural Resources Conservation Service gave him permission to do. Farmers ought to be able to rely on the word of federal agencies when it comes to implementing government regulations. It is unreasonable to expect small family farmers, who likely cannot afford an army of lawyers, to hunt down and fact-check the permissions of every last federal agency. 


Read full article here…

Visit our Classified ads.

Check out our Classified ads at the bottom of this page.

Recent stories & commentary

Other

Minneapolis Police Warn People to Obey Criminals Amid Crime Surge

August 3, 2020 RT 3

Minneapolis Police Department issued some tips for residents to limit their risk of robbery that includes “be prepared to give up your cell phone and purse/wallet” to robbers, “do not walk alone,” and avoid fighting with criminals, “Do what they say. Your safety is most important.”

Freedom

Detroit Police Chief Explains How He Has Prevented Riots

July 31, 2020 Fox News 2

Police Chief James Craig says his city kept the peace because they decided at the beginning that “We weren’t giving up ground to the radicals.” He credited the residents of the city, who he said stood with the police. Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan has supported the city’s police department.

Classifieds

For classified advertising rates and terms, click here. The appearance of ads on this site does not signify endorsement by the publisher. We do not attempt to verify the accuracy of statements made therein or vouch for the integrity of advertisers. However, we will investigate complaints from readers and remove any message we find to be misleading or that promotes anything fraudulent, illegal, or unethical.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
4 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
trackback
Daily Dose Of Babel AmeriKa – 13 | Daily Dose Of Babel AmeriKa
7 months ago

[…] Two US Federal Agencies Cleared Farmer to Plow His Field. Then a Third Federal Agency Slapped Him wi… […]

Bob
Bob
7 months ago

I hope his asking the two ag agencies was just a matter of whether he’d be in compliance with NRCS programs.

Boomer Lady
Boomer Lady
7 months ago

I can’t tell if the Pacific Legal Foundation is going to bat for the farmer. He needs to sue the government.

bob
bob
7 months ago

The Chief Executive of the Executive Branch should fire everyone involved and issue a) an EO banning those people from all future federal employment, and b) stripping the first dozen liberal judges who issue rulings against it, of their power to enforce rulings. Police power only resides in the Executive Branch. Refusing to sign their paychecks would be good, too.