Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Burn ban angers Idaho farmers

Grass and wheat farmers fumed Tuesday when they learned details of how past efforts by Idaho lawmakers to protect field burning backfired and ended up dooming the practice.

The growers weren’t any happier when they were told by the state’s top agriculture and environment officials there was little chance of overturning the January ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The ruling ended the practice of burning crop residue on fields outside Indian reservations in Idaho.

“This is a difficult presentation,” Department of Environmental Quality Director Toni Hardesty told the estimated 120 people attending Tuesday’s public hearing on the state’s post-field-burning future. “There’s not a lot of good news in this.”

Health advocates successfully sued to stop the practice, claiming plumes of smoke from burning grass fields not only violated the federal Clean Air Act but also harmed people with breathing problems.

Regaining federal approval to burn crop residue would require at least three years of costly scientific studies, Hardesty said. Even then, there’s no guarantee the outcome would comply with the Clean Air Act.

Hardesty told farmers the state was evaluating its legal options, then added, “We are not going to be focusing on that portion today.”

Facing immediate and massive changes to their livelihoods, growers weren’t willing to wait for answers. They have crops to plant and loan applications to prepare. Six weeks have passed since the ruling and little information has come from the state, the growers said. Without the use of fire to clean fields and spur new growth of perennial bluegrass plants, farmers worry they will have to resort to expensive fertilizers and labor-intensive tilling.

“What exactly happened here?” asked David Lampert, who grows bluegrass on the Coeur d’Alene Indian Reservation. “How did we lose our grandfather clause?”

Lampert was referring to a provision in federal law that allows some age-old polluting practices to continue in western states, including burning crop residue and timber slash piles. Some crop residue burning continues in Washington and Oregon. The practice also remains legal inside Idaho’s Indian reservations, though its long-term legal fate remains unclear.

Growers were surprised by the ruling because Idaho lawmakers have been among the fiercest supporters of field burning – they have repeatedly passed laws to protect the practice and shield it from regulation. But this zealousness might have gone too far, said Celia Gould, director of the Idaho Department of Agriculture.

The problem goes back to the 1986 Legislature, when lawmakers took away the Department of Environmental Quality’s authority to regulate the burning of crop residue, Gould said.

“It didn’t work,” Gould said. “Things fell out of bed because we would not allow DEQ to write rules.”

After a gap of several years, the state again began regulating field smoke, as required by the Clean Air Act. But the state never proved the new rules complied with the federal law, according to the 9th Circuit. Many in the audience grumbled at this explanation and called it a technicality.

One farmer said, “Maybe we should learn from our Legislature: just keep on burning and call it an honest mistake.”

Another farmer suggested a conspiracy by the EPA.

Gould tried to douse the rumors. “It was a mistake,” she said. “It’s not a conspiracy.”

Wayne Meyer, who grows grass on the Rathdrum Prairie, asked, “How closely are we going to be scrutinized if we have a fire?”

Other farmers laughed. But Meyer wasn’t joking – sparks from combine mufflers frequently ignite dry fields, he said. Meyer has had three such fires in the past five years, including one where he lost $30,000 worth of grass seed.

Repeated fires could result in big fines, particularly if the fires aren’t accidental, said Deputy Attorney General Brian Oakey. “Our hope is combine fires don’t become more frequent. … Illegal activity is not going to help.”

The state has until April 30 to petition for a new hearing in front of the 9th Circuit. The chances of even getting a hearing, much less winning the argument, are “very, very, very, very small,” said Deputy Attorney General Lisa Kronberg. “We were pretty clobbered.”

Judging from the amount of seed caps, cowboy boots and weather-worn skin, much of the audience Tuesday was made up of farmers. But a handful of field-burning opponents also attended, including longtime Rathdrum Prairie resident Vivian Evans, an asthma sufferer, who reminded growers they have the ability to change how they plant and harvest crops, but “I can’t change my asthma.”

Without fire, growers say they will need to use twice the fertilizer and have to till more frequently. Nitrogen fertilizer costs have doubled since fall, said Tim Dillin, a Boundary County wheat grower and president of the Idaho Grain Producers Association. He expects to pay an extra $50 per acre to grow a crop that already has thin profit margins.

Dillin also said he expects “a lot more field work.”