Select the search type
  • Site
  • Web
Search

Blog

Published on Wednesday, February 10, 2016

You’ll Never Want To Eat Another Vegetable Again

[GROSS]

You’ll Never Want To Eat Another Vegetable Again

Remember the time when you were little and your mother wouldn’t let you have desert without eating all your vegetable? You were made to believe that vegetables are good for your health and that they are healthy. What if you were to what farmers put in their crops to make them look healthy and green, would you still feel the same way about your veggies?

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia recently came to the conclusion that the legal standard for controlling biosolids (a.k.a. human fecal matter) application and whether or not it’s a practice safeguarded from indictment under the state’s RTFA (Right to Farm Act) is best left in the hands of judges.

In December 21st, a unanimous verdict by the Supreme Court overruled a decision from the Supreme Court, which stated that a jury was required to assess the process in which biosolids operations were executed prior to deciding whether or not it was a practice safeguarded by the RTFA.

The genesis of the legislation

Biosolids are materials rich in nutrients generated from sewage sludge. In York County, a group of landowners pressed charges against Synagro Central, protesting about appalling scent from biosolids operations Synagro was running n farmland alongside plaintiffs. This is how the Law enactment started.

Synagro was accorded summary judgment by the trial judge in York County because of the complaints brought forward by the plaintiffs, which was after one year statute of response expiry of the RTFA. Later on, the Superior Court concluded on appeal that it would be the jury’s responsibility to determine if biosolids application was a ‘normal’ agricultural practice viewed as a protected scheme under RTFA.

It was decided by the Supreme Court that RTFA is under jurisdiction hence its extent is a question of law that can only be determine by law courts, as stated by Supreme Court Justice J. Michael Eakin.

In addition to making a ruling, the decision whether a specific action for example, biosolids exercise, is a ‘normal’ agricultural operation and safeguarded rests exclusively with the judge’s scope and not a jury.

According to Attorney James Slaughter of Beveridge & Diamond whose firm stood for the defendant, the decision was the first state Supreme Court ruling which addressed the implementation of a RTFA to land use of biosolids. Justice J. Michael stated that the unanimous solid statement of the court that fertilizing farm fields with biosolids is a ‘normal’ agricultural practice shielded by the RTFA will impact courts all over the country to safeguard biosolids recycling under the other state RTFA.

“The Supreme Court’s decision conveyed to outstanding biosolids practices in modern farming, and will offer a structure for both municipalities and courts to utilize when dealing with issues in the future,” said Slaughter. He went on to state that the Gilbert discussions of decision of several urban and farm amici in support of biosolids recycling, also undervalues the significance of biosolids farm use and will lead courts faced with local mandate looking to control the process or tort claims.

Rate this article:
No rating
Comments ()Number of views (1211)

Author: Vrountas

Categories: Blogs, Food & Cooking, Benefits of Going Green, Green Living

Tags:

Print

Search Jobs

Calender

«March 2024»
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
26272829123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
1234567

Category

    Help Us Go Green
      
    Help Us Go Green