Pesticides Blamed for Declining Bee Populations

Image Source

By: Maegan Pirtle, Staff Member

It is difficult to exaggerate the importance of bees to our agricultural system. One-third of the food consumed by Americans benefit from bee pollination, and their efforts are responsible for $15 billion in added crop value each year.[1] It is no surprise then that much concern surrounds the not yet fully understood phenomenon in which entire colonies of bees suddenly die off. The occurrence is known as Colony Collapse Disorder, and it has pushed environmentalists and beekeepers to sue the EPA for approving pesticides that have been linked to decimated bee populations.[2]

Scientists have not conclusively determined the cause of CCD, but some point to a group of pesticides known as neonicotinoids as the culprit.[3] Citing numerous scientific studies that suggest a link between the pesticide and CCD, the European Union recently banned the use of neonicotinoids.[4] Proponents of the ban hailed the decision as a significant victory for declining bee populations.[5] Critics, on the other hand, found the solution overly simplistic and argued that the ban was based on faulty science.[6]

With concerns about CCD continuing to grow, a similar debate is happening in the United States. And while an EPA ban on neonicotinoids might be a good place to start, it is important to remember that much is still unknown about the exact causes of CCD. The ban will do little for other potential causes such as pathogens, viruses, and other environmental factors. Regardless of what the EPA ultimately decides to do about the use of these pesticides, we should be wary of myopic solutions that only address pieces of a complicated problem.
_________________
[1] Honey Bees and Colony Collapse Disorder, U.S. Department of Agriculture, http://www.ars.usda.gov/News/docs.htm?docid=15572
[2] James Gerken, Bee Death From Colony Collapse Disorder On The Rise As Researchers Point to Pesticides, The Huffington Post (March 29, 2013), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/29/bee-deaths-colony-collapse_n_2979959.html.
[3] U.S. Department of Agriculture, supra note at 1.
[4] Charlotte McDonald-Gibson, 'Victory for bees' as European Union bans neonicotinoid pesticides blamed for destroying bee population, The Independent (April 29, 2013), http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/victory-for-bees-as-european-union-bans-neonicotinoid-pesticides-blamed-for-destroying-bee-population-8595408.html.
[5] Id.
[6] Id.

A Legal Mechanism for Nationalizing the Coal Industry

Image Source

By: Will Emmons, Staff Member

In my last blog post I argued the coal industry should be nationalized because it's too hard to regulate.[i] This step could be beneficial as part of a Green New Deal economic public works program. To pull the economy of Central Appalachia up, UK Law alum Harry Caudill argued for a Southern Mountain Authority, which would encompass nationalized coal and gas reserves.[ii] He believed that a democratic and planned economy was necessary to save the region from poverty and ecological destruction.[iii]

The name Caudill chose for this entity was obviously meant to evoke the Tennessee Valley Authority.[iv] However, where the TVA was conceived as a massive public works to bring employment and infrastructure to a region with no industry, the Southern Mountain Authority would require the wholesale absorption of a private industry into the public sector.[v] His plan meant literally seizing the mineral assets and mining equipment of the great oil and gas companies.[vi]

The Fifth Amendment, of course, prevents the whole sale expropriation of such assets without “just compensation.” This cannot stand in the way of the Southern Mountain Authority.

There are examples of how to practice nationalization within our Anglo-American common law system. In twentieth century Britain, the need to martial resources during two world wars and bitter industrial struggles ensured that the coal industry would be nationalized.[vii] In 1947, the Labour government, backed by the militant miners' union, brought the coal industry into the public sector.[viii]

In Britain, “the procedure by which the transfer [of private property into public control] was effected was a vesting provision in the nationalization act which provided that on the appointed day certain assets should vest in the corporation created by the act.”[ix] This took either the direct form of vesting a public entity with real and personal property or the indirect form of vesting a public entity with the shares of a private corporation.[x]

While the Labour government and the National Union of Miners both espoused an agenda of socialism on the installment plan at that time, scholars and British courts have juxtaposed this kind of nationalization to that practiced in the old Eastern bloc.[xi] The difference overcomes the Fifth Amendment problem:

The right to compensation is one of the features which distinguish the nationalization of basic industries in Britain from the expropriation of property carried out in communist countries....

[T]here is another fundamental distinction between nationalization and expropriation. The latter usually contains a discriminatory element which is absent from the former. In Great Britain, no discrimination has been practiced on account of the nationality, domicile, or other personal criteria of the companies or persons owning the assets acquired by the state.[xii]

Without prejudice, we can take the coal companies. Barring a social revolution that amends the Constitution, we will compensate the shareholders.

Some critics will note that “the era of big government is over” and that, under a very different Labour government, what's left of the British coal industry re-entered the private sector in 1994.[xiii] While at least the latter is true, recent labor problems have caused some to rethink this decision. Government ministers are considering renationalizing troubled private coal operations in Nottinghamshire to protect the pensions of the workers.[xiv] Perhaps the United Mine Workers should be calling for the nationalization of Patriot, Peabody, and Arch?[xv]
_________________
[i] Will Emmons, Nationalize The Coal Industry To Overcome Regulatory Difficulty, KJEANRL Blog (May 15, 2013), http://www.kjeanrl.com/2013/05/nationalize-coal-industry-to-overcome.html.
[ii] See Harry Caudill, Night Comes To The Cumberlands, 365-394 (1st ed., 1963).
[iii] Id.
[iv] Id.
[v] Id.
[vi] Id.
[vii] 'NC Bloody B': The National Coal Board in South Wales, National Museum Wales, http://www.museumwales.ac.uk/en/rhagor/article/2046/ (last visited July 22, 2013).
[viii] Tom Hansell and Patricia Beaver, Life After Coal: Does Wales Point The Way?, Daily Yonder (Mar. 4, 2013), http://www.dailyyonder.com/life-after-coal-does-wales-point-way/2013/03/04/5665.
[ix] Cliv M. Schmirhoff, The Nationalization of Basic Industries in Great Britain. 16 LCP 557, 564 (Fall 1954).
[x] Id. at 565.
[xi] See Id. at 566-67.
[xii] Id.
[xiii] Overview, UK Coal, http://www.ukcoal.com/about-us/at-a-glance/overview-aag (last visited July 22, 2013).
[xiv] Simon Bowers and Simon Neville, Parts of UK Coal may be nationalised after colliery fire closes pit, The Guardian (May 12, 2013, 3:50 PM), http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/may/12/uk-coal-nationalised-ministers-fire-pensions.
[xv] See Fairness at Patriot, http://www.fairnessatpatriot.org/ (last visited July 22, 2013).

Farmers Count Warrior Dash As Agritourism Event

Image Source

By: Yvette DeLaGuardia, Staff Member

The Warrior Dash is a 5k event organized by Red Frog Events, a Chicago based company.[i] The Warrior Dash is described as “the world’s largest obstacle race series”[ii] in which registered participants compete in maneuvering a muddy obstacle course full of obstructions, such as “muddy mayhem,” “warrior roast,” “barricade breakdown,” and “petrifying plunge.”[iii] Many participants or “warriors” also look forward to celebrating the event with food, live music, funky costumes, and a complimentary beer after completing the race.[iv]

As the obstacles names seemingly indicate, the Warrior Dash is particularly attractive to adventurous, risk-taking, and adrenaline seeking individuals. These individuals certainly may be competitive athletes, but what about some other type of competitor? What about farmers?

Recently, some farmers have gravitated toward the Warrior Dash because it presents the opportunity to host an event that allows farmers to market their farms to thousands of people and thus engage in and promote “agritourism.”[v] At least this was the position of the Stevens Family[vi] of Barre, Massachusetts, owners of the Carter & Stevens Farm[vii] located in Central, Massachusetts. Concerned with the adverse impact the Warrior Dash could have on the farmland, Massachusetts state officials, however, were not initially receptive to the Stevens’ assertion that the Warrior Dash an appropriate agritourism attraction.[viii]

Specifically, Massachusetts officials were worried allowing the Carter & Stevens Farm to host the Warrior Dash event would conflict with the 1979 Agricultural Preservation Restriction (APR) law.[ix] The effect of the APR law is to protect farms from being used for nonagricultural development by allowing “farmers to collect cash payments from the state equaling the difference between the agricultural value of their land and the fair market value of the land”[x] in return for their promise to avoid using the land for nonagricultural purposes.

If “agritourism” means “the act of visiting a working farm or any agricultural, horticultural or agribusiness operation for the purpose of enjoyment, education, or active involvement in the activities of the farm operation,”[xi] then the farmer’s assertion seems unfounded. While Warrior Dash participants of the event held at the Carter & Stevens Farm can say they ate “grass-fed beef hamburgers prepared and sold by the farm,”[xii] the nexus between running through a muddy obstacle course and enjoying, learning, or participating in the operation of a farm is extremely attenuated.
_________________
[i] Warrior Dash, http://www.warriordash.com/ (last visited July 15, 2013).
[ii] Id.
[iii] Id.
[iv] Id.
[v] Lisa Eckelbecker, Rethinking the state’s agricultural preservation law, Telegram.com (July 14, 2013), http://www.telegram.com/article/20130714/NEWS/307149990/1237.
[vi] Id.
[vii] Carter & Stevens Farm, http://www.carterandstevensfarm.com/ (last visited July 15, 2013).
[viii] See note supra 5.
[ix] Id.
[x] Id.
[xi] UC Small Farm Program, http://sfp.ucdavis.edu/agritourism/Definitions/ (last visited July 15, 2013).
[xii] See note supra 5.

Study To Address Declining Dairy Industry In Southeastern Region

Image Source

By Megan Crenshaw, Staff Member

The Southeastern dairy industry seems to be in big trouble. While the nation is experiencing a surge in dairy and milk demand, the Southeastern dairy industry has experienced a greater than 37 percent decline in total production of milk.[1] Since 1995 more than two-thirds of the dairies in the Southeast have closed.[2] A six-state study is in the works to reverse this trend.[3] The main focus of the study is to “pinpoint the causes of the decline in the Southeastern U.S. dairy industry.”[4] The United States Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture will fund the study for five years with a $3 million grant.[5] The University of Tennessee’s Institute Of Agriculture is the lead institution for the study.[6] “Regional participants in the study include the University of Florida, University of Georgia, University of Kentucky, Mississippi State University and Virginia Tech.”[7] A scientist in each participating state will oversee the state’s outreach and research efforts.[8]

Researchers seek to reach out to struggling dairies that are underperforming in hopes to enhance regional milk production and improve milk quality. [9] “The assistant dean of the University of Tennessee explained that the study will focus on improving herd health and milk quality and quantity by lowering the incidence of mastitis.”[10] One of the central concerns surrounding low milk quality in the southeastern regions is the high level of mastitis.[11]

“Mastitis is the inflammation of the mammary gland and udder tissue.”[12] It has been categorized as a “major endemic disease of dairy cattle.”[13] The illness is a very complex disease.[14] Typically it occurs as an “immune response to bacterial invasion of the teat canal by a variety of bacterial sources present on the farm.”[15] It can also occur as a “result of chemical, mechanical, or thermal injury to the cow's udder.”[16] “Practices such as close attention to milking hygiene, the culling of chronically-infected cows, good housing management and effective dairy cattle nutrition to promote good cow health are essential in helping to control herd mastitis levels.”[17]

Researchers will work to identify factors that affect regional farmer’s inability to adopt practices to control mastitis.[18] They will conduct research aimed at strategies to solve this issue and work to develop continuing education programs for those working within the dairy industry.[19] Researchers are hopeful that this study will result in an “implementation of cost effective, science-based mastitis prevention and control strategies” that can help producers “improve quality milk, increase production and therefore improve industry profitability and sustainability.”[20]
_________________
[1] Aimee Nielson, Kentucky Dairy Farmers to Benefit from New Six-State Study on Southeast Milk Decline, KyForward (July 1, 2013), http://www.kyforward.com/2013/07/kentucky-dairy-farmers-to-benefit-from-new-six-state-study-on-southeast-milk-decline/.
[2] Tim Lundeen, Program to Aid Southeastern Dairies Through Herd Health, Milk Quality, Feedstufs (June 21, 2013), http://feedstuffs.com/story-program-aid-southeastern-dairies-through-herd-health-milk-quality-45-99532.
[3] Id.
[4] UT Heading Dairy Study In Southeast, News Channel 5 (June 20, 2013 1:19 PM), http://www.newschannel5.com/story/22645402/ut-heading-dairy-study-in-southeast.
[5] Id.
[6] Id.
[7] Id.
[8] Patricia McDaniels, Saving Southeastern Dairies Through Improved Herd Health, Milk Quality, UT Institute of Agriculture (June 19, 3013) https://ag.tennessee.edu/news/Pages/NR-2013-06-MilkQualityGrant.aspx.
[9] Nielson, supra note 1.
[10] Id.
[11] Id.
[12] Mastitis in Dairy Cows, DAIRYCO.ORG, http://www.dairyco.org.uk/technical-information/animal-health-welfare/mastitis/ (last visited July 4, 2013).
[13] Id.
[14] Id.
[15] Id.
[16] Id.
[17] Id.
[18] Nielson, supra note 1.
[19] Id.
[20] McDaniels, supra note 8.

The Debate is Simple: Horses Health vs. Better Public Perception

Image Source

By Wes Bright, Staff Member

Proponents of Lasix have an array of reasons why the drug should be used in horseracing. The most obvious of these is that it prevents bleeding in horses. The number of horses that bleed is said to be close to 80%.[i] Because of this great majority, many studies have been done, similar to one conducted at the University of Melbourne, in Melbourne, Australia.[ii] This study was performed in South Africa and used 167 thoroughbreds to determine if the use of Lasix actually helped control Exercise Induced Pulmonary Hemorrhage (EIPH). These horses were raced twice, one week apart, with every variable being controlled except for the administration of Lasix.[iii] Randomly, the horses were either given Lasix or a placebo saline solution during the first race. Those that received the Lasix in the first race would then receive the saline in the second and vice versa. The study found that horses given the saline solution were far more likely to develop EIPH and that almost 68% of the horses that bled when given the Lasix had a reduction in the severity of the EIPH.[iv] This study is often cited as one of the main reasons Lasix should be used in horse racing.[v]

The most popular reason for banning Lasix is that the drug is a black eye to the sport’s public perception. The Jockey Club cites a poll conducted by the Horseplayers’ Association of North America (HANA) that found almost 75% of its members supported the phasing out of Lasix.[vi] They go on to say that, “they’re against the idea of performance enhancing drugs in sports.”[vii] Therein lies the problem. If we believe the popularity of the sport is dwindling, it may be because the public has not been well informed enough to know that the phrase “performance enhancing” does not always involve steroids. Organizations and the public observe certain studies finding that horses on Lasix are better at running than those without and assume Lasix must be like steroids.[viii] If they understood how water could also be seen as a performance enhancer, it is likely that they would realize the need for Lasix.[ix]
_________________
[i] Kenneth W. Hinchcliff, Paul S. Morley & Alan J Guthrie, Efficacy of furosemide for prevention of exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage in Thoroughbred racehorses, 235 J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 76 (2009).
[ii] Id.
[iii] Id.
[iv] Id.
[v] Erica Larson, EIPH and Furosemide Use in Racehorses Explained, TheHorse.com (Oct. 4, 2012) http://www. thehorse.com/articles/29833/eiph-and-furosemide-use-in-racehorses-explained.
[vi] Transcript of The Jockey Club Annual Round Table Conference, The Jockey Club (2011) (available at http://www.jockeyclub.com/roundtable_11.asp?section=4).
[vii] Chris Wittstruck, Banning Lasix is wrong for the horses, USTANews.com (May 7, 2012) http://xwebapp.ustrotting.com/absolutenm/templates/article.aspx?articleid=47932&zoneid=29.
[viii] Study: Furosemide has health benefits for Thoroughbred racehorses: AVMA Press Room 6/29/09, Racing Medication and Testing Consortium (June 29, 2009) http://www.rmtcnet.com/content_ headlines.asp?id=&s=&article=546.
[ix] See Wittstruck, supra note vii.

Genetically Modified Tobacco Has Bright Future

Image Source

By: Ted Walter, Staff Member

The news has given profuse attention lately to genetically modified plants. Much of that attention has been focused on agribusiness giant, Monsanto. Just last month, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously “that when farmers use patented seed for more than one planting in violation of their licensing agreements, they are liable for damages.”[1] Another issue is whether there should be mandatory labeling of food products containing GMOs. “In all, 28 states considered genetic labeling this year, but so far the two New England states [Maine and Connecticut] are the only ones to pass legislation.”[2] One writer put it best: “Love them or hate them, this is for certain: GMOs have easily become one of the most divisive topics in the world of food production.”[3]

If it isn’t easy to tell, much of the attention casts GMOs in a negative light. And all of these issues are on a national scale. But the biggest question is how does this relate to Kentucky? More specifically, how will this impact Kentucky’s most nationally recognized crop: tobacco.

Tobacco has a long history of being genetically modified. In 1983, tobacco became the first genetically modified plant.[4] In fact, “[t]obacco often is chosen as a production platform, since it is easily modified genetically.”[5] Further, not only does tobacco have a long past of genetic modification, but the future of genetically modified tobacco is promising too. Currently, “[s]cientists are touting tobacco as the risk-free biofuel capable of weaning us off fossil fuels.”[6] Additionally, a pharmaceutical company is using genetically modified tobacco to develop flu vaccines.[7] And if those are not enough, right now lab experiments are underway “using a genetically altered version of [tobacco that] might provide a relatively inexpensive cure for the deadly virus rabies.”[8]

While there is some merit to the negative attention GMOs receive in the media, there are definitely many positive aspects to GMOs, especially for crop so important to the state of Kentucky, such as tobacco.
_________________
[1] Nina Totenberg, For Supreme Court, Monsanto’s Win Was More About Patents Than Seeds, NPR, (May 13, 2013), http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/05/14/183729491/Supreme-Court-Sides-With-Monsanto-In-Seed-Patent-Case.
[2] Bill Cummings, Few states have genetically modified food laws, Connecticut Post, (June 17, 2013) http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Few-states-have-genetically-modified-food-laws-4606162.php.
[3] Jen Russell, Farmers Say ‘No’ to Labeling GMOs, Ag Web, (June 20, 2013) http://www.agweb.com/article/farmers_say_no_to_labeling_gmos/.
[4] History of Genetically Modified Foods, Global Change, http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/workspace/sect008/s8g5/history.htm
[5] GMO Compass, http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/database/plants/304.tobacco.html.
[6] Biofuel-ing change with tobacco, Euronews, http://www.euronews.com/2013/05/30/biofuel-ling-change-with-tobacco/
[7] Katherine Gammon, Fight Flu With Tobacco, Wired, (March 18, 2013) http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/03/fight-flu-with-tobacco/.
[8] Genetically Modified Tobacco Plants Produce Antibodies to Treat Rabies, Science Daily, (February 1, 2013) http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/02/130201100244.htm.

Genetically Modified Crops: A Positive Perspective

Image Source

By: Rebekah McKinney, Staff Member

The controversy du jour of the agriculture community is the recent discovery of genetically altered wheat, which has not been approved for sale or commercial production in an Oregon farmer’s wheat crop.[i] While the developer, Monsanto, was given clearance to legally test the product in 1998, such testing stopped in 2005.[ii] While officials are frantically trying to determine how the genetically altered wheat made its way into the crop, wheat farmers are already feeling the effects of the discovery as Japan and South Korea have stopped all shipments of U.S. wheat.[iii] One Kansas farmer has even filed a claim against Monsanto alleging gross negligence by driving down wheat prices.[iv]

With the current debate involving a mostly negative perspective concerning the use of such products, it is important to consider the benefits these technological developments can bring to society. Genetic modification is when a segment of DNA from one organism is extracted and then combined with another organism’s DNA.[v] This scientific development has enabled the scientific community to select desirable traits, such as resistance to herbicides, from one species and confer that trait onto another in ways that were previously thought impossible.[vi] Such scientific developments have the potential to lower cost of production, increase yield, decrease toxic runoff, and provide important employment opportunities in developing countries.[vii] Furthermore, land once thought unusable and unproductive can now sustain crops, thus presenting opportunities for farmers where none existed before.[viii] The positive effects of genetically modified crops have already been documented, with the National Academy of Sciences reporting an increased yield of 24% over traditional cotton plants.[ix] Furthermore, due to increased yields and changes in pesticide and seed cost, farmers experienced a 50% increase in profits due to the genetically modified crop.[x]

As the media frenzy surrounding the discovery of the genetically modified wheat unfolds, the issues surrounding these crops will undoubtedly be placed squarely in the spotlight of public awareness. As such, being aware of the potential benefits these crops can offer is critical to a thorough understanding of this hot topic.
_________________
[i] CBS News, Nonapproved strain of genetically modified wheat discovered in Oregon (May 29, 2013), http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57586713/nonapproved-strain-of-genetically-modified-wheat-discovered-in-oregon/.
[ii] United States Department of Agriculture, USDA Investigating Detection of Genetically Engineered (GE) Glyphosate-Resistant Wheat in Oregon, Press Release (March 29, 2013), http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/05/ge_wheat_detection.shtml.
[iii] CBS News, How did genetically altered wheat end up in Oregon Field? (June 6, 2013), http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57588150/how-did-genetically-altered-wheat-end-up-in-oregon-field/.
[iv] CBS News, Kansas Farmer Sues Over GMO Wheat Discovery (June 4, 2013), http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162-57587625/kansas-farmer-sues-over-gmo-wheat-discovery/.
[v] John Charles Kunich, Mother Frankenstein, Doctor Nature, and the Environmental Law of Genetic Engineering, 74 Cal. L. Rev. 807, 809 (2001). See also Matthew Rich, The Debate Over Genetically Modified Crops in the United States: Reassessment of Notions of Harm, Difference, and Choice, 54 W. Res. L. Rev. 889, 890 (2003).
[vi] Matin Qaim, The Benefits of Genetically Modified Crops-and the Costs of Inefficient Regulation, Resources for the Future (April 2, 2010), http://www.rff.org/Publications/WPC/Pages/The-Benefits-of-Genetically-Modified-Crops-and-the-Costs-of-Inefficient-Regulation.aspx.
[vii] Id.
[viii] G. Masip et al. Opinion: Don’t Fear GM Crops, Europe!, The Scientist, News and Opinion (May 28, 2013) http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/35578/title/Opinion--Don-t-Fear-GM-Crops--Europe-/.
[ix] Jonas Kathage and Matin Qaim, Economic Impacts and Impact Dynamics of Bt (Bacillus Thuringiensis) Cotton in India, 109 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 11652, 11653 (2012).
[x] Id. at 11654.

iPhone, iPad, iCigs… Really?

Image Source

By: Shannon Lawson, Staff Member

At a time when almost everything can be purchased in an electronic form, should we really be surprised that there is such a thing as electronic cigarettes? Or should I say, e-cigs? For those who don’t know, electronic cigarettes are battery-powered devices that contain cartridges of liquid nicotine, which heats and vaporizes into the lungs as the smoker inhales.[1] However, unlike traditional cigarettes, e-cigarettes are tobacco free, which makes them difficult for the FDA to regulate.[2] Since they are tobacco free, many of the FDA regulations on tobacco products do not apply.[3] For instance, commercials for electronic cigarettes are not regulated to the degree of traditional cigarettes.[4]

Since the U.S. government decided to abandon graphic warning labels on cigarette packages,[5] the regulation of electronic cigarettes is likely to be the FDA’s next big smoking related issue. Although the FDA has the authority to regulate electronic cigarettes if they are marketed as tobacco cessation aids,[6] healthcare professionals are concerned about the side effects of directly inhaling nicotine.[7] These professionals along with the FDA, are worried electronic cigarettes might “perpetuate the use of nicotine and tobacco products among smokers who might otherwise quit.”[8]

There are also questions on the second hand effects of electronic cigarettes. We have all heard of second-hand smoke, but what about second-hand vapor? While it might seem as though second-hand vapor might not be a problem, we should be aware that not all the micro particles found in the vapor are completely taken in by the smoker.[9] At this point, there is not enough evidence available to say that second-hand vapor is a health hazard.[10]

At any rate, it would probably be best to regulate the sale of e-cigarettes as vigorously as we regulate tobacco products, whether at the federal or state level, until we are well aware of the side effects.
_________________
[1] See Electronic Cigarettes: How They Are – and Could Be – Regulated, Change Lab Solutions, http://changelabsolutions.org/sites/default/files/E-cigarette_FactSht_FINAL_%28CLS_20120530%29_October21_2011_0.pdf.
[2] Id.
[3] Id.
[4] See Mary Katherine Ham, Panic: Ads for e-cigs not banned by tobacco regulations…because they’re not made of tobacco, Hot Air, (June 12, 2013), http://hotair.com/archives/2013/06/12/panic-ads-for-e-cigs-not-banned-by-tobacco-regulations-because-theyre-not-made-of-tobacco/ (last visited June 13, 2013).
[5] See Michael Felberbaum, AP Newsbreak: US to Revise Cigarette Warning LablesAPNEWSBREAK:, The Big Story, (March 19, 2013), http://bigstory.ap.org/article/apnewsbreak-us-revise-cigarette-warning-labels.
[6] See Electronic Cigarettes at 1.
[7] See Susan Cassidy, 10 Little-known Facts About E-cigarettes, Discovery Fit & Health http://health.howstuffworks.com/wellness/smoking-cessation/10-facts-about-e-cigarettes2.htm (last visited June 13, 2013).
[8] Mathew L. Meyers, New Study Finds Increased Use of Electronic Cigarettes, Shows Need for FDA Regulation, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, (Feb. 23, 2013), http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/press_releases/post/2013_02_28_ecig
[9] E-Cigs And The Myth Of Second-Hand Vapor, Free ECigarettes Samples (May 1, 2013) http://freeecigarettesamples.com/e-cigs-and-the-myth-of-second-hand-vapor (last visited June 13, 2013).
[10] Id.

Water Aquifers: A Solution or Further Nuisance to the U.S. Drought Issue?

Image Source

By: Lauren Hart, Staff Member

Much of the United States has serious problems with maintaining a natural resource, which is crucial to anyone’s survival: water.[1] Many places in the U.S. are prone to droughts and some places out West even must have their water brought in so that those places, and their people, can survive.[2] Many of these cities, which have such distinct water problems, are growing significantly, and the water situation is not getting any better.[3]

Utilizing aquifers is a proposed solution to this ever-growing problem.[4] An aquifer is an under-ground water source that allows for water to be stored and drawn from there.[5] It is typically an extremely porous rock under the water-table where varying amounts of water can move fluidly through the rock-face.[6] Water can be added to an aquifer during times of plentiful water and then extracted when needed during times of drought.[7] Some places are using aquifers in this way instead of using reservoirs, as they are “natural” and cheaper as they are just “supplementing” the water already in the aquifer.[8]

The ultimate issue is whether or not this tactic is a good one. Ultimately, it is not. The point of using an aquifer is to store more useable water. However, one of the major issues with the artificial use of aquifers is the tendency to create contamination of the water, making it undrinkable and unusable.[9] For example, if there is pyrite in the rock used for the aquifer, there is a higher likelihood of arsenic poisoning…and we all know that is not good to drink.[10] Ultimately, the chemical make-up that causes this is not the important thing to understand,[11] but what is important to understand is the impact it has on the people drinking the water and that the impact on the environment is not positive.[12]

Although aquifer use is a proposed solution, around the country, many states that have previously used aquifers to store water have been abandoning this course of action due to the enormous contamination issues associated with its practice. Georgia, which is currently in the process of bringing this aquifer issue to the forefront, should be wary of any proposals.
_________________
[1] Environmental News Network staff, NWS forecast leaves drought-prone states high and dry, CNN, May 24, 2000, http://archives.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/05/24/drought.enn/.
[2] Mark T. Anderson and Lloyd H. Woosley, Jr., Water Availability for the Western United States--Key Scientific Challenges, U.S. Dept of the Interior, (Last modified: Friday, January 11 2013, 12:47:22 PM) http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2005/circ1261/.
[3] Id.
[4] Dave Williams, Georgia taking over water supply test project, Atlanta Business Chronicle, May 16, 2013, http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2013/05/16/georgia-taking-over-water-supply-test.html.
[5] Idaho Museum of Natural History, What is an Aquifer?, (last visited Jun. 3. 2013), http://imnh.isu.edu/digitalatlas/hydr/concepts/gwater/aquifer.htm.
[6] U.S. Dept. of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, (last modified Mar. 6, 2013), http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/earthgwaquifer.html.
[7] Dave Williams, supra note 4.
[8] See generally Dave Williams supra note 4.
[9] Aquifer Recharge (AR) and Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR), Environmental Protection Agency (2012) (available at: http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/aquiferrecharge.cfm).
[10] Id.
[11] Id. Essentially, it involves redox potential (and by re-dox: reduction oxidation potential), which has to do with the electron make-up of the water, which then would react, with the stone. of the aquifer creating this contamination.
[12] See generally Dave Williams, supra note 4.