Environment America
From the Chesapeake Bay to the Puget Sound to the many smaller waters in between, America’s waterways are today one step closer to protection under the Clean Water Act, as the Obama administration is now in the final stage of issuing guidelines to restore critical Clean Water Act protections to the nation’s waterways.
“This is an important step forward for America’s waters and the people who depend on them and enjoy them,” said Shelley Vinyard, federal clean water advocate for Environment America. “Once these guidelines are final, everyone from the Great Lakes fisherman to the family visiting the shores of the Narragansett Bay will be able to reap the rewards of cleaner water.”
The guidelines come at a time when nearly 60 percent of the country’s streams, 20 million acres of wetlands, and 117 million Americans’ drinking water is at risk of pollution, thanks to two polluter-friendly Supreme Court decisions in the last decade. The guidelines, which were proposed last April, received overwhelming support from ordinary citizens, thousands of public health professionals, and hundreds of farmers, local elected officials, and recreational businesses—from Confluence Kayaks in Colorado to Angus Murdoch, a farmer from central Virginia.
The proposed guidelines are expected to be finalized by early spring, and were sent to the Office of Management and Budget on Feb. 22.
The industries primarily responsible for this pollution—mega-agribusiness, the coal industry, Big Oil and big developers, are fighting to block these guidelines. In fact, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced a bill Feb. 16 that, if passed, would block the president and his administration from ever finalizing these guidelines, and would leave as many as 2.5 million miles of streams nationwide permanently unprotected.
“We are excited that the administration has taken this step toward restoring the Clean Water Act and has reiterated its commitment to protecting America’s waterways from pollution,” Vinyard said. “We are counting on the Obama administration to continue to stand up to big polluters, and look forward to working with them to ensure all Americans have clean water in which to swim, fish, recreate, and drink.”
For more information, click here.
Thank goodness, clean water is so important. The Obama administration is working hard to protect our natural resources. Thanks for all you do
I’m confused as to these enhanced protections will work, as well as the two cited Supreme Court cases. Can you all provide links to further information?
Thanks,
n
The Association of State Wetland Managers has detailed and good overview info on the Supreme Court cases (Rapanos and SWANCC) cited in this article, as well as related information. http://aswm.org Or visit http://aswm.org/wetlands-law/rapanos-carabell (for info on Rapanos court case) and http://www.aswm.org/wetlands-law/cwa-guidance (for info on Clean Water Act Guidance) and http://www.aswm.org/wetlands-law/swancc-decision (SWANCC decision).
I don’t understand. First, who is the author? Second, it mentions “polluter friendly” entities without qualifying or elaborating. Third, What are these guidelines. Isn’t that the topic? Fourth, it mentions entities that are “responsible for this pollution” but never mentions what pollution. Fifth, it says if the [restoration guidelines] are not passed it would leave streams unprotected. How so? How does not passing “Restoration” guidelines undermine current reg’s?
As a stream restoration and wetland specialist working 16+ years for both government and private sectors, this aticle doesn’t explain anything. But it is apparent that the author is pro-”administration.”
D. Koldoff, CPESC, CWS, DECI, Arborist
Why did you delete my comments? I’m all for wetland and stream protection but was confused by the article. Did you delete it because I said it sounded more like a pro-administration article than a unbiased report? Perhaps the article should be re-written to explain more. Editor, thanks for editing ME.
D. Koldoff, CPESC, CWS, DECI, Arborist