Clean water act roll back...

Driftless Dan

Driftless Dan
WFF Supporter
Agreed.
The original clean water act was tacked on to so many times by the EPA, as regulatory bodies are incentivised to do, adding much broader purview beyond its original design. This is just the pendulum swinging back a little. The sky isn't falling, though I think the article is successful in inciting its intended reactions from the public.
It's not swinging back "a little." It's being plundered. I hate it when people try to defend the indefensible.
 

Skip Enge

Uck Uck Uck, bitches
Look, while I don't believe in Satan per se'...I do recognize the satanic evil that is pervasive in the world today...I will leave it at that.
 

Gene S

Active Member
EPA committed some examples of rediculous over-reach on some farm properties that would have been wiser to avoid. .
True, but...
The Obama administration expanded EPA authority (WOTUS) waaay beyond the original intent of the Clean Water Act and appeared to be more about power grabbing than protecting water. It was an assault on private property rights...government overreach and abuse has consequences.
 

Zak

Active Member
True, but...
The Obama administration expanded EPA authority (WOTUS) waaay beyond the original intent of the Clean Water Act and appeared to be more about power grabbing than protecting water. It was an assault on private property rights...government overreach and abuse has consequences.
But no. The Clean Water Act's central prohibition makes it unlawful for any person to add any pollutant to any water of the United States without being in compliance with a federal permit, period. It's said that since it was passed in 1972. Lots of law was decided in (US Supreme) court about what each of those terms means.

EPA, until the Trump administration, had it's own interpretation going back 20 years or more. Obama's Clean Water Rule formalized EPA's long-standing interpretation and resolved the circuit Court split in favor of protecting public waters. Trump's EPA is now, after the Pruitt disaster, run by a smart, political coal lobbyist. In my opinion, this is like a hostile corporate takeover of public waters for use by industry (including the livestock industry, i.e., "farmers"as) a free disposal system.

If you are for environmental protection, there is no defending this. Like so many other adminstrative actions right now. They are hitting NEPA, the ESA, and climate regs. I'd you think that's a good thing, we don't have much in common.

Sorry for the rant and using the post above to make it.
 

NukeLDO

Active Member
But no. The Clean Water Act's central prohibition makes it unlawful for any person to add any pollutant to any water of the United States without being in compliance with a federal permit, period. It's said that since it was passed in 1972. Lots of law was decided in (US Supreme) court about what each of those terms means.

EPA, until the Trump administration, had it's own interpretation going back 20 years or more. Obama's Clean Water Rule formalized EPA's long-standing interpretation and resolved the circuit Court split in favor of protecting public waters. Trump's EPA is now, after the Pruitt disaster, run by a smart, political coal lobbyist. In my opinion, this is like a hostile corporate takeover of public waters for use by industry (including the livestock industry, i.e., "farmers"as) a free disposal system.

If you are for environmental protection, there is no defending this. Like so many other adminstrative actions right now. They are hitting NEPA, the ESA, and climate regs. I'd you think that's a good thing, we don't have much in common.

Sorry for the rant and using the post above to make it.
Bob Dole's remarks on the floor of Congress left no doubt as to the intent of the CWA. His speech on it's passage is a matter of public record. For those who would claim over-reach, first go back and read his words.
 

Support WFF | Remove the Ads

Support WFF by upgrading your account. Site supporters benefits include no ads and access to some additional features, few now, more in the works. Info

Latest posts

Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

That said, WFF displays just a single ad regardless of the device, and that ad helps cover the server fees. The position and size of the ad has been set to minimize impact to your experience, negating the need for adblocking the site. Disable your AdBlocker / Whitelist WashingtonFlyFishing.com to continue using the site. Thanks.

I've Disabled AdBlock