Above Ground Fuel Storage Capacity Increased in SPCC Rules

VOL. 32, No. 1 July/August 2014 Landowners fi le trespass lawsuit against Western Watersheds Project The United States and Wyoming against their private property. The Constitutions hold the ownership Plaintiffs are also seeking recov- and protection of private property, ery of actual, nominal and punitive including the right to exclude third damages. parties, in the highest regard. Re- According to Western Water- gardless whether your private prop- sheds Project, Inc.’s website, “Pol- erty is your backyard in town or icy Memo Number 2” is “To Do: rangeland in the country, trespassing Get all cows and sheep off public is illegal. lands ASAP!” In order to advance On June 13, 2014, fi fteen land- the agenda of WWP, the Defendants owners in Fremont County, Wyo- were willing to break laws by ille- ming and Lincoln County, Wyo- gally trespassing on private prop- ming fi led a civil trespass lawsuit in erty. Wyoming District Court, Fremont “In many areas in Wyoming, pri- County, against Western Watersheds vate land is interspersed with fed- Project, Inc. (WWP) and Jonathan eral lands. We (Wyoming private Ratner, WWP Director for Wyo- landowners) have typically allowed ming, Utah and Colorado, and John public access through our private Does 1-10 with the Western Water- lands,” said Anjie McConnell with sheds Project, Inc. for intentionally Frank Ranches. “Allowing public “Landowners have the same rights Trespasses by WWP occurred and without landowner permission access is a property owner’s choice.” and the ability to say “no” to groups while collecting and submitting water trespassing and entering private “For instance, if you are not com- and individuals that knowingly tres- quality samples to the Wyoming De- property. The Plaintiffs in the case fortable allowing someone into your pass; including those trying to ad- partment of Environmental Quality are seeking a permanent injunction home you are able to tell them “no” vance an agenda against multiple- (DEQ). Trespasses also occurred while to stop further unauthorized trespass and close the door,” She explained. use of federal lands.” See ‘Trespass lawsuit’ page 13 Above ground fuel storage capacity increased in SPCC rules By Brett Moline storage capacity has increased from from 50 gallons under the previous Tier II will require having a pro- Want some good news? The Envi- 1,320 gallons to 6,000 gallons. If rules. fessional engineer certify the produc- ronmental Protection Agency (EPA) you store less than 6,000 gallons Producers will be able to self- er’s SPCC. Producers will move up has relaxed the rules on fuel storage you are exempt from regulation. An- certify if their total storage capacity to Tier II if their total storage capac- obligations under the Spill Preven- other change is only containers of is between 6,000 and 20,000 gallons ity is above 20,000 or if they have a tion Control and Countermeasure more than 1,000 capacity will count and do not have a tank above 10,000 tank greater than 10,000 gallons. (SPCC) rule. The above ground fuel towards the limit. This is an increase gallons. This is referred to as Tier I. See ‘SPCC rules’ page 17 Farmers, ranchers and State of Texas win whooping crane case By Regan Beck of whooping cranes. Who owns the airspace ...............................................Page 2 The U.S. Court of Appeals for the The court also concluded an in- Fifth Circuit reversed a district court junction imposed by District Court decision on July 30 and ruled in fa- Judge Janice Jack on water manage- Election Issue: Candidate Statements ......Pages 4-9, 14-15 vor of the State of Texas in a lawsuit ment was an abuse of discretion. GRICULTURE concerning the whooping crane. This is a great win for farmers, A It was the classic example of wa- ranchers, property owners and all Tex- label County news .............................................................. Page 11 ter for people weighed against an ans who would suffer from the lower environmental group suing under court’s opinion that overreached and YOMING WyFB Photo Contest ............................................... Page 17 the Federal Endangered Species relied on dubious science. W Act. The Fifth Circuit concluded the TAP sued, claiming the State of environmental group, The Aransas Texas was responsible for the deaths Polaris new member benefi t .....................................Page 18 Project (TAP), failed to prove the of 23 cranes in an estimated popu- Texas Commission on Environmen- lation of 247 birds in the winter of tal Quality (TCEQ) management of 2008-09. water permits resulted in the deaths See ‘Whooping crane case’ page 16 Page 2 July/August 2014 Who owns the airspace? By Ken Hamilton, WyFB Executive The big issue comes down to who many hundreds started to create issues regulate from the ground up, but just Vice President owns the airspace. Common law has with trespassing on private individu- that level above the ground where it Recently Congress held that a surface owner al’s airspace. was safe to operate an aircraft. The asked the Federal Aero- owns below the property to In order to accommodate the new set upon height for this was generally nautics Administration the center of the earth and technology, Congress passed legisla- 500 feet above the ground with excep- (FAA) to promulgate above the property to the tion that in essence declared the air tions being made for landing fi elds and some rules that would heavens. This common law space above a certain height to be pub- such. It was unreasonable for someone deal with unmanned process worked well until lic. By doing so, they allowed vehicles who wanted to build a structure on his aerial aircraft or as most Wilbur and Orville Wright that traveled through those air spaces land to have to get permission from a of us call them “drones.” came along with a vehicle the ability to avoid having to obtain federal agency prior to the construc- This issue has been on the that could travel through the permission from the many landowners tion of that structure. Of course that FAA’s plate for a number airspace from one point to that the aircraft traversed over. The law was then and this is now. of years. The ability to Ken Hamilton another. Naturally, as aircraft also required that anyone operating The confusion now entering into come up with a workable become more powerful and within those air spaces were regulated. the equation is the advent of afford- answer of how to regulate them may better designed, the ability to fl y over Of course from a practical stand- able drones. Affordable drones can be the big reason for the delay. not just one property owner’s land but point Congress did not feel they should See ‘Airspace’ page 13 It’s time to Ditch the Rule By Bob Stallman, American Two Supreme Court rulings to the process. That sounds rea- opposite of straight talk. Farm Bureau Federation Presi- have limited EPA’s and the Corps sonable. Good talking point. The We Read the Fine Print dent of Engineers’ author- only problem is the statement does When regulators show up on Americans expect ity under the Clean Wa- not reflect what is in the proposed farms and ranches, they won’t be straight talk from ter Act to waters that rule. The regulation will automati- looking back at talking points to their government. If are navigable or have a cally regulate countless small and decide whether farming requires our government says “significant nexus” to remote so-called “waters” that an expensive federal permit. They something, you ought navigable waters. EPA are usually dry and, in fact, look will use the regulation. So let’s to be able to take it to claims the rulings “com- like land to you and me. This is take a look at the fine print. the bank, as the saying plicated” the permitting far more than a “clarification.” It Ditches—The rule regulates goes. process. The reality is not is a dramatic expansion of fed- ditches as “tributaries.” EPA The Environmental all that complicated: The eral power. Expanding the federal claims that the rule would exclude Protection Agency is Bob Stallman agencies dislike the rul- government’s jurisdiction under ditches, but the so-called ditch ex- not meeting that expectation. In- ings and are simply trying to write the guise of bringing clarity and clusion only covers ditches dug stead of making things clear when regulations that allow them to do consistency to the process is the See ‘Ditch the Rule’ page 16 it comes to how the proposed “Wa- what the Supreme Court has said ters of the U.S.” rule would affect they cannot do—regulate nearly farmers and other landowners, the all waters. Save the Date EPA is muddying the waters. EPA has said that it only wants It’s Complicated to bring “clarity and consistency” WyFB 95th Annual Meeting—Nov. 13-15, 2014 Wyoming Farm Bureau mem- Young Farmer & Rancher events bers will gather Nov. 13-15, 2014 also highlight the meeting. at the Holiday Inn in Sheridan to Ryan Yates is the featured Ameri- Calendar of Events set the organization’s policy for can Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) August the coming year. Delegates vote speaker. Yates focuses on western 4-6 .......Joint Travel, Recreation, Wildlife and Cultural Resources Interim Legislative on policy decisions from resolu- agriculture issues as a director of Committee--Thermopolis tions that are formed at the lo- congressional relations for AFBF. 9-16 ..... Wyoming State Fair--Douglas cal level. Elections, speakers and Make plans to attend now! 19 ......... Primary Election 20-22 ...Select Water Legislative Committee—Best Western Sheridan Center in Sheridan September 8-9 ......

Load more