Trump finalizes repeal of Obama-era clean water rule

[GMDino]

Poisoning the water...promises kept.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/12/trump-expected-to-roll-back-obama-era-water-regulations.html

Quote:The Trump administration on Thursday announced a repeal of a major Obama-era clean water regulation that limited the amount of pollution and chemicals in the nation’s rivers, lakes, streams and wetlands.

The rollback of the Waters of the United States rule was announced by Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Andrew Wheeler at an event in Washington at the headquarters of the National Association of Manufacturers, a trade group that has pushed for its repeal and replacement.

The EPA proposed replacing the 2015 water rule in December after an executive order from President Donald Trump, who has criticized the regulations for curbing the rights of farmers, real estate developers and landowners.


The new rule limits the number of waterways the federal government can protect from pollution, including ditches, storm water control facilities and groundwater systems. It would also limit the government’s oversight to larger bodies of water. The repeal could take effect in just a few weeks.


The clean water rollback is the latest in a string of moves by the administration to dismantle major environmental protections against pollutants, from curtailing regulations on methane emissions and energy-efficient light bulbs, to pushing for oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.


Environmental groups condemned the move to weaken water regulations, claiming that loosening restrictions will substantially harm the country’s sources of safe drinking water and habitats for wildlife.


The Obama rule was developed to limit pollution in roughly 60% of the country’s bodies of water. It gave the federal government the authority to oversee a wide range of lakes, streams and wetlands that connect to large waterways protected under the 1972 Clean Water Act.

“The clean water rule represented solid science and smart public policy. Where it has been enforced, it has protected important waterways and wetlands, providing certainty to all stakeholders,” said Jon Devine, director of federal water policy at the Natural Resources Defense Council.



“The Trump administration’s wild-eyed attempts to reward polluters, however, knows no bounds, so it is repealing these important protections without regard for the law or sound science.”


In contrast, farming groups that represent a vital voting constituency for Trump support the repeal of the regulation they say had restricted them from using their property as they see fit. Other groups that support the repeal include oil and gas producers and golf course owners.


“Today’s final rule puts an end to an egregious power grab, eliminates an ongoing patchwork of clean water regulations and restores a longstanding and familiar regulatory framework while we consider public comments on our proposed revised definition of waters of the U.S.,” Wheeler said Thursday.


Under the Obama rule, some farmers using land near water bodies were restricted from several types of land use, including plowing and planting, and would need permits from the EPA to use chemical fertilizers and pesticides that could run off into water on their property.


“The millions of children newly back to school could give this administration’s officials a basic science lesson: wetlands and streams connect to larger rivers. They are vitally important to protecting water quality for all of our communities,” said Bob Irvin, president of advocacy group American Rivers.

“The destruction we cause upstream impacts our neighbors downstream.”

[Dill]

(09-13-2019, 01:59 PM)GMDino Wrote: Poisoning the water...promises kept.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/12/trump-expected-to-roll-back-obama-era-water-regulations.html

Without all those regulations, water should be cheaper.

[GMDino]

(09-16-2019, 03:07 PM)Dill Wrote: Without all those regulations, water should be cheaper.

[Benton]

The law meant well, but a potential nightmare.

Farmers were particularly concerned because it expanded pollution safeguards to any 'body of water.' Like puddles. Heavy rain storm around where you were parking a truck loaded with weed killer? The resulting rain puddle could be deemed as in violation of the regulation and shut down your farm.

[GMDino]

(09-16-2019, 05:47 PM)Benton Wrote: The law meant well, but a potential nightmare.

Farmers were particularly concerned because it expanded pollution safeguards to any 'body of water.' Like puddles. Heavy rain storm around where you were parking a truck loaded with weed killer? The resulting rain puddle could be deemed as in violation of the regulation and shut down your farm.

Well then we better just throw it out and rollback protections back to 1986 levels.

Wouldn't want a "potential nightmare" concerning our drinking water! 

[Benton]

(09-16-2019, 05:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well then we better just throw it out and rollback protections back to 1986 levels.

Wouldn't want a "potential nightmare" concerning our drinking water! 

Well, yeah.

If we are going to legislate everything and not give authorities room to use judgement, then the wording has to be specific enough to make mistakes almost non-existent. 

[GMDino]

(09-16-2019, 07:10 PM)Benton Wrote: Well, yeah.

If we are going to legislate everything and not give authorities room to use judgement, then the wording has to be specific enough to make mistakes almost non-existent. 

When the only tool you have is a hammer everything is a nail.  Trump only knows how to destroy, not how to fix.

[CJD]

"I know my trade war is making your lives hell, Farmers. So here you go, now you can pollute water more. Did I earn your vote back?"

[GMDino]

(09-18-2019, 08:31 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: "I know my trade war is making your lives hell, Farmers. So here you go, now you can pollute water more. Did I earn your vote back?"

Part of it. 

Also Trump as a "businessman" thinks all regulations are bad.  They cost him money.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-18-2019, 08:31 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: "I know my trade war is making your lives hell, Farmers. So here you go, now you can pollute water more. Did I earn your vote back?"

Ironic thing is, the people who are crying the loudest about repealing clean water bills are more or less the same ones driving the demand for those farmers water needs. Pistachios, almonds, avocados, lettuce, kale, wild rice.... water-needy crops that California and some other places grows to meet the trendy folks demand. Gotta drive your car to go get that Almond Milk and Avocado Toast so you're fueled up and ready to fight for and save the environment.

It brings up thoughts about the upcoming New York climate protest...
Meanwhile de Blasio is promoting the protest while having 3 SUVs convoy him 12 miles so he can go to a gym.
Also Greta Thunberg made a big show of sailing to New York because she refused to fly so her trip would be carbon-free... but SIX sailors needed to take flights in order to get her ship back to Europe, meaning she would have literally created less of a carbon footprint for her trip if she had just flown by herself here.

[CJD]

(09-18-2019, 09:03 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Ironic thing is, the people who are crying the loudest about repealing clean water bills are more or less the same ones driving the demand for those farmers water needs. Pistachios, almonds, avocados, lettuce, kale, wild rice.... water-needy crops that California and some other places grows to meet the trendy folks demand. Gotta drive your car to go get that Almond Milk and Avocado Toast so you're fueled up and ready to fight for and save the environment.

It brings up thoughts about the upcoming New York climate protest...
Meanwhile de Blasio is promoting the protest while having 3 SUVs convoy him 12 miles so he can go to a gym.
Also Greta Thunberg made a big show of sailing to New York because she refused to fly so her trip would be carbon-free... but SIX sailors needed to take flights in order to get her ship back to Europe, meaning she would have literally created less of a carbon footprint for her trip if she had just flown by herself here.

The same goes for the housing market. The people who want those trendy foods are spending so much on them, they can't afford to purchase a house.

The Avocado Toast life is a rough one.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-18-2019, 09:20 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: The same goes for the housing market. The people who want those trendy foods are spending so much on them, they can't afford to purchase a house.

The Avocado Toast life is a rough one.

[Belsnickel]

(09-18-2019, 09:03 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Ironic thing is, the people who are crying the loudest about repealing clean water bills are more or less the same ones driving the demand for those farmers water needs. Pistachios, almonds, avocados, lettuce, kale, wild rice.... water-needy crops that California and some other places grows to meet the trendy folks demand. Gotta drive your car to go get that Almond Milk and Avocado Toast so you're fueled up and ready to fight for and save the environment.

It brings up thoughts about the upcoming New York climate protest...
Meanwhile de Blasio is promoting the protest while having 3 SUVs convoy him 12 miles so he can go to a gym.
Also Greta Thunberg made a big show of sailing to New York because she refused to fly so her trip would be carbon-free... but SIX sailors needed to take flights in order to get her ship back to Europe, meaning she would have literally created less of a carbon footprint for her trip if she had just flown by herself here.

I'll be sure to tell this to the fine folks at the Isaac Walton League, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, Trout Unlimited, Bull Moose, and the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, among others, at the next meeting of folks concerned about protecting our waterways and wild places so we can continue to hunt and fish in them.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-18-2019, 10:40 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'll be sure to tell this to the fine folks at the Isaac Walton League, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, Trout Unlimited, Bull Moose, and the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, among others, at the next meeting of folks concerned about protecting our waterways and wild places so we can continue to hunt and fish in them.

Don't forget about the fine folks at the Get Over Yourself Conservation Partnership.

Almost like I said more or less the same, rather than exactly the same to prevent people from smugly listing groups with 200 people in it to try and counter hundreds of thousands-to-millions of others who are Twitter/Facebook conservationists.

[Belsnickel]

(09-18-2019, 11:51 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Don't forget about the fine folks at the Get Over Yourself Conservation Partnership.

Almost like I said more or less the same, rather than exactly the same to prevent people from smugly listing groups with 200 people in it to try and counter hundreds of thousands-to-millions of others who are Twitter/Facebook conservationists.

You greatly underestimate the size and efforts of these organizations. We put far more into fighting things like this than those social media activists. But hey, let's just dismiss anyone with environmental concerns as some urban hipster who uses almond milk and eats avocado toast rather than someone that drinks their coffee black on the way to their deer stand and stocks their freezer with wild game meat.

[Belsnickel]

A little bit about this from a sportsman angle: https://www.themeateater.com/conservation/policy-and-legislation/how-changes-to-the-clean-water-act-affect-hunters-and-anglers