Is livestock manure hazardous waste? By every indication, the Environmental Protection Agency thinks so. EPA announced its presence in all things agricultural by changing its interpretation of the federal Clean Water Act. After a public comment period, which closes July 30, 2001, the regulatory agency will choose a course to implement in December 2002. All of the proposals contain four important changes.

• Lagoons for hogs and poultry will have to be covered or closed.
• Applications of manure will face new restrictions.
• Farmers and ranchers will begin extensive record keeping, which will be available to the public (read Sierra Club).
• Phosphorus will replace nitrogen as the basis for manure-application rates.

Up for grabs is how many farms have to comply and the specific number of animals. Scientists John Lory and Raymond Massey with the Commercial Agriculture section of the University of Missouri College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources are analyzing EPA's proposals. The duo's first words of advice are for farmers and ranchers to speak up during this public comment period. Our cover article in this issue explains how you can make your voice heard. See pages 4 through 6.

Still, make no mistake: New regulations will be imposed. EPA's dramatic revisions are an attempt to appease groups opposed to the large production facilities. Both the agency and the activists have been frustrated that the federal Clean Water Act exempts agricultural fields.

As a result, EPA's strategy is to focus on management practices. That gives the agency authority to suspend exemption if it finds fault with a farming practice. But the approach raises more questions than it answers. What agencies are involved? What practices are covered? Who makes the call? Who sets what standards? The list is endless. So, too, would be the snare of bureaucratic legalese.

Agriculture's cost of compliance is an unknown. EPA's cost and time estimates fall short in many instances, says Massey.

Consider, for instance, that EPA's proposals just for nutrient management will require an enormous amount of time and money. Those requirements include review by a certified specialist annually and renewal every five years. Then there are soil tests for all fields in grids of no more than 20 acres, plans that include tested nutrient content of manure with application rates and optimum application times.

The head of the Kansas Cattlemen's Association said it best in a recent hearing. He will no longer manage a feedlot. He'll be a waste-product manager. If your operation fits EPA's specs, you will be too.

Even by modest estimates, at least 650 additional operations will be covered in just the state of Missouri. Keep in mind federal or state officials will come to every farm in the watershed if they find a nutrient problem in a stream--regardless of the type of farm (livestock or crop), regardless of size. Does anyone believe government will do cost/benefit analyses?

EPA's proposed switch to phosphorus as the limiting factor in manure application could dramatically increase the land area needed. The government's interest in manure doesn't end there. There will be new, more elaborate storage and inspection requirements, as well as new requirements for application and handling. That puts EPA in a position to regulate manure sales and hauling.

EPA's proposals, says Lory, show the agency does not understand agriculture. But, Lory says, EPA officials realize their incomplete understanding of the industry. They're in "a listening mode," he said. So speak up.

For agriculture's sake, let's hope they hear. Because we'll be waist deep in manure until EPA stops shoveling it.