The Chief commented on this half-a…er half-baked idea at the time it was first proposed by Sen. Kloucek and some of his fellow Donks. This idea hasn’t improved with the pasage of time, and here, even the Argus Leader has come out recognizing the inanity of the idea, but at the same time it reserves enough qualifiers that…well, maybe not this bill at this time, but some bill at some other time….
Let’s be realistic. A bill to regulate hydrogen sulfide emissions – the rotten-egg-smelling gas that comes from livestock operations and causes respiratory problems – is going nowhere. It just isn’t.
No sh-t, Sherlock!
Kloucek’s bill – backed by four other Democrats – would limit emissions to 50 parts per billion, as measured at the property line. The rules wouldn’t kick in when manure is removed from storage facilities or for a week after that. Kloucek says he’s not trying to regulate smell – although that might be part of the impact – but rather protect health.
Typical Donk attitude: you are helpless and incompetent, so it’s essential for us, your wise legislators, to protect you from any real or (even better!) imagined danger.
Hydrogen sulfide is fatal at high concentrations, but at lower concentrations, such as at feedlots, it’s linked to respiratory and other health problems.
This IS true, BUT – does anyone else have a problem with imagining a high concentration, or even serious low concentration given the tendancy of air to move around a lot here on the northern plains?
UNDERSTATEMENT ALERT:
The science is a little messy, though, because studies that find those links haven’t considered exposures to other chemicals. And certainly other chemicals are involved in odors, said Dick Nicolai of the agricultural engineering department at South Dakota State University.
“The science is a little messy” indeed! Any resemblence to a controlled experiment is totally theoretical – with NO attachment to reality. (A controlled experiment is ESSENTIAL in science, otherwise there is NO proof of anything!)
Kloucek’s proposal received almost immediate opposition. “I’m very hesitant when state government tries to start regulating things more than they already do, especially in agriculture,” said Republican Rep. Justin Davis, a crop consultant from Ipswich. “I guess I don’t see that there is really a need for this right now.”
“We can regulate ourselves out of existence,” said Republican Sen. Jay Duenwald of Hoven.
However, the Argus makes its turn to the left at this point:
Duenwald certainly is right. But his comment is out of step with reality in South Dakota.
The Chief agrees with the first of those sentences, but NOT the second.
That reality is that anywhere there’s a public vote on whether to allow feedlots – especially large feedlots – the feedlot loses. And a statewide ballot measure would allow such votes in every case.
There is a logical disconnect here: just because votes have gone against feedlots has NOTHING to do with whether or not we are regulating ourselves out of existance. Voters can do just as much damage as legislooters – and THAT’s the reality!
The other thing is that the votes against feedlots shows nothing except that it’s very easy to generate a swell of a NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) attitude, especially when the opposition has no scruples about distortions, exaggerations, and junk science, of the sort of stuff used in these elections by activist groups like the Dakota Rural Action and others of that ilk.