Trump administration strips pollution safeguards from drinking water sources
This article is more than 6 months old
Rollback of clean water protections for streams and wetlands
Obama-era rules have long been targeted by Trump
Oliver Milman in New York
@olliemilman
Thu 23 Jan 2020 12.35 EST Last modified on Thu 23 Jan 2020 13.01 EST

Shares
4,282
An egret looks for food along Valhalla pond in Riverview, Florida. Trump has called clean water protections ‘very destructive’.

The Trump administration has completed its rollback of environmental protections for streams, wetland and other bodies of water, a process that has stripped pollution safeguards from drinking water sources used by around a third of all Americans.

Clean water protections strengthened under the Obama administration have long been targeted by Donald Trump, who has called it a “very destructive and horrible rule”.


Trump administration to strip pollution protections, harming vital wildlife
Read more
Trump has been backed by ranchers, farming groups and golf course operators, who claim the so-called “Water of the United States” (Wotus) rule impinged upon landowners’ rights.

The Obama-era water rule was repealed last year and on Thursday the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a weakened replacement that removes millions of miles of streams and around half of America’s wetlands from federal oversight, potentially allowing pesticides and other pollutants to be dumped into them without penalty.

The move has dismayed former EPA staff who worked on the expansion of protections to ephemeral streams that supply drinking water to an estimated 117 million people in the US.

“The new rule is scientifically indefensible and socially unjust,” said Betsy Southerland, who was scientific director of the EPA’s office of water for three decades before departing in 2017.

“This EPA’s Wotus definition, which will limit federal water quality protections to a very small set of waters and wetlands, will result in the impairment of drinking water, fisheries and flood control for communities throughout the US.”


The latest major Trump resignations and firings
Read more
The Trump administration had promised the demise of the water rule to industry groups that lobbied against what they saw as costly federal overreach. “This new rule will provide much-needed clarity and regulatory certainty for companies that site and build infrastructure that delivers essential energy to America’s communities,” said Karen Harbert, chief executive of the American Gas Association.

But opponents of the repeal point out that the replacement regime not only scraps the Obama-era rule but also reverses protections reaching back to the 1972 Clean Water Act, such as requirements that landowners seek permits that the EPA considers on a case-by-case basis.

The new, far narrower, definition of water protections will maintain safeguards for major rivers such as the Mississippi River and the Colorado River but not short-lived streams that feed into them after it rains or snow melts. About 60% of streams in the US are dry for part of the year but then connect to large rivers following rainfall. Wetlands not situated next to large rivers will also be excluded from protections.

People living in the western US are set to be particularly affected by the new rule, with ephemeral streams making up around 89% of Nevada’s stream miles and 94% of Arizona’s, for example.

Environmental groups warn that as many as 75 endangered species dependent on temporary streams will be imperilled by the move, while any degradation of wetlands would also harm wildlife and worsen the climate crisis by lessening their ability to store carbon.

Trump told the World Economic Forum at Davos this week that the US has “among the cleanest air and drinking water on Earth”, despite widespread contamination with chemicals such as PFAS and neurotoxins such as lead in Americans’ water.

The Trump administration has dismantled about 100 environmental rules while in office, including the reversal of a ban on mining companies dumping their waste into rivers.

“The ‘dirty water rule’ will put clean drinking water for tens of millions of people at risk, especially the low-income communities and communities of colour already disproportionately impacted by polluted water,” said Madeleine Foote, deputy legislative director of the League of Conservation V**ers.

“Clean, safe drinking water is a basic human right and we should be doing more to protect our water resources, not less,” she added.

Another expert warned of additional risks.

“The goal of the Trump administration rollback is to reduce the obligations of farmers, ranchers and other landowners in their requirements to protect water quality in the US,” said Catherine Kling, an environmental economist at Cornell University.

“This will lower regulatory costs to that group of Americans. But there are costs to the environment that will be borne by other Americans.”

These include, Kling said, the loss of healthy drinking water, algal blooms that sicken swimmers and pets and reduced value of properties near waterways.

Trump administration strips pollution safeguards from drinking water sources
This article is more than 6 months old
Rollback of clean water protections for streams and wetlands
Obama-era rules have long been targeted by Trump
Oliver Milman in New York
@olliemilman
Thu 23 Jan 2020 12.35 EST Last modified on Thu 23 Jan 2020 13.01 EST

Shares
4,282
An egret looks for food along Valhalla pond in Riverview, Florida. Trump has called clean water protections ‘very destructive’.

The Trump administration has completed its rollback of environmental protections for streams, wetland and other bodies of water, a process that has stripped pollution safeguards from drinking water sources used by around a third of all Americans.

Clean water protections strengthened under the Obama administration have long been targeted by Donald Trump, who has called it a “very destructive and horrible rule”.


Trump administration to strip pollution protections, harming vital wildlife
Read more
Trump has been backed by ranchers, farming groups and golf course operators, who claim the so-called “Water of the United States” (Wotus) rule impinged upon landowners’ rights.

The Obama-era water rule was repealed last year and on Thursday the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a weakened replacement that removes millions of miles of streams and around half of America’s wetlands from federal oversight, potentially allowing pesticides and other pollutants to be dumped into them without penalty.

The move has dismayed former EPA staff who worked on the expansion of protections to ephemeral streams that supply drinking water to an estimated 117 million people in the US.

“The new rule is scientifically indefensible and socially unjust,” said Betsy Southerland, who was scientific director of the EPA’s office of water for three decades before departing in 2017.

“This EPA’s Wotus definition, which will limit federal water quality protections to a very small set of waters and wetlands, will result in the impairment of drinking water, fisheries and flood control for communities throughout the US.”


The latest major Trump resignations and firings
Read more
The Trump administration had promised the demise of the water rule to industry groups that lobbied against what they saw as costly federal overreach. “This new rule will provide much-needed clarity and regulatory certainty for companies that site and build infrastructure that delivers essential energy to America’s communities,” said Karen Harbert, chief executive of the American Gas Association.

But opponents of the repeal point out that the replacement regime not only scraps the Obama-era rule but also reverses protections reaching back to the 1972 Clean Water Act, such as requirements that landowners seek permits that the EPA considers on a case-by-case basis.

The new, far narrower, definition of water protections will maintain safeguards for major rivers such as the Mississippi River and the Colorado River but not short-lived streams that feed into them after it rains or snow melts. About 60% of streams in the US are dry for part of the year but then connect to large rivers following rainfall. Wetlands not situated next to large rivers will also be excluded from protections.

People living in the western US are set to be particularly affected by the new rule, with ephemeral streams making up around 89% of Nevada’s stream miles and 94% of Arizona’s, for example.

Environmental groups warn that as many as 75 endangered species dependent on temporary streams will be imperilled by the move, while any degradation of wetlands would also harm wildlife and worsen the climate crisis by lessening their ability to store carbon.

Trump told the World Economic Forum at Davos this week that the US has “among the cleanest air and drinking water on Earth”, despite widespread contamination with chemicals such as PFAS and neurotoxins such as lead in Americans’ water.

The Trump administration has dismantled about 100 environmental rules while in office, including the reversal of a ban on mining companies dumping their waste into rivers.

“The ‘dirty water rule’ will put clean drinking water for tens of millions of people at risk, especially the low-income communities and communities of colour already disproportionately impacted by polluted water,” said Madeleine Foote, deputy legislative director of the League of Conservation V**ers.

“Clean, safe drinking water is a basic human right and we should be doing more to protect our water resources, not less,” she added.

Another expert warned of additional risks.

“The goal of the Trump administration rollback is to reduce the obligations of farmers, ranchers and other landowners in their requirements to protect water quality in the US,” said Catherine Kling, an environmental economist at Cornell University.

“This will lower regulatory costs to that group of Americans. But there are costs to the environment that will be borne by other Americans.”

These include, Kling said, the loss of healthy drinking water, algal blooms that sicken swimmers and pets and reduced value of properties near waterways.

Did the so-called “Water of the United States” (Wotus) rule impinge upon landowners’ rights.?? Were they impractical to businesses or threaten jobs?? What of those 100 hundred roll backs?? What were they about, specifically??

Do states have full authority over what they will allow and control by permits, licenses, working standards in waste control?? Or does Trumps roll backs, prohibit them from enforcing any regulatory control they want followed if companies want to do business in that state??

I’m all for water, air and land pollution control.. Keep it clean, safe and don’t pollute any of it...strict measures needed in some things and more relaxed restrictions also should apply... States can do and enforce what they want and should be the ones regulated their businss(es) and impact on land, water and air, yes??

BTW are you aware of Trump regulations he also enacted? Trump’s administration alternative, called the affordable clean energy rule?? It will recommend a set of technologies to increase power plant efficiency, which individual states will then use to come up with plans of their own choosing. The EPA says should all states adopt these new efficiencies – it’s unlikely all will – emissions will go down by around 1% by 2030. Coal’s share of the energy market will grow slightly... This coming from your article too~~ not worth recognition, right?

The EPA under the Trump administration argues its previous work is costly and unlawful, a position held by a coalition of states that sued the agency to stop the clean power plan.

The federal government isn’t permitted by the Clean Air Act to trigger sweeping changes to the energy grid in the name of c*****e c****e, the administration says. Rather, it should help upgrade individual power plants and leave the energy mix down to the states.

Or how about this??
March 12, 2019
President Donald Trump signed a bill that provides protections to over two million acres of lands across the United States. The massive package was well-received by environmental groups, hunting and angling groups, and lawmakers from both parties; before Trump signed, it had easily passed in both the House and the Senate.
The package touches nearly every state, designating 1.3 million new acres of wilderness lands across several western states; creating new national monuments in Mississippi and Kentucky; and protecting hundreds of miles of rivers under the Wild and Scenic Rivers program. In addition, the bill guarantees authorization for the popular Land and Water Conservation Fund, a program that uses revenues from offshore oil and gas drilling to fund public lands and conservation efforts nationwide. (Read more about the law.)

Plenty to argue both ways~~ just a bit more realistic to include both sides don’t you think??? I mean unless it hinders your position, right?

** Did the so-called “Water of the United States” (Wotus) rule impinge upon landowners’ rights.?? Were they impractical to businesses or threaten jobs?? What of those 100 hundred roll backs?? What were they about, specifically??**

You think fresh water regulations would impinge on landowners rights???

I didn’t about the 100 roll backs. I do know he’s allowing the coal industry’s toxic sludge waste to be dumped wherever. Streams, lakes ,ponds wh**ever.
Who cares!if landowners are
Not concerned about maintaining decent water supplies, then who cares?

This statement you claim I made is a lie!!
“Why is it at the Farmers Markets the first thing out of your mouth is...
“Why is everything so expensive?”

I did not say that at all! I made no comment money wise and can tell you farmers market prices are very good!! One, because so many attend hoping to sell their crops they are competing at very good prices.. Secondly, they look for return business so put out high quality, chemical free fruits and veggies etc..Third, even if they were slightly higher I would buy from them to support them!! Half a cow costs me about 600 hundred and lasts me a year or there about.. Fresh, chemical free cattle and veggies well worth it!! Not to mention being outside going through the place seeing so many grateful, happy and working together!!

From now on if you quote me be sure to include my original post as written...please and Thank You..

We've had problems with the government overstepping their boundaries. Land around here is very flat. After heavy rains, especially when we have a very wet period, we have standing water until it can finally soak in or evaporate. The same happens in the spring when we have snow melt and the ground is still frozen. The government was trying to claim that these were wetlands. Last year we had heavy snowfalls late in the season, then we had a rapid warm-up including heavy rain fall that resulted in massive flooding that took weeks to go down. This did not mean most of the state was wetlands, it just meant that we had too much water at one time.
These are some of the wetland problems we've had with the government.

[“The ‘dirty water rule’ will put clean drinking water for tens of millions of people at risk, especially the low-income communities and communities of colour already disproportionately impacted by polluted water,” said Madeleine Foote, deputy legislative director of the League of Conservation V**ers.]

I don't know where she lives, but I live in a city of about 300,000and unless we buy our water, we all drink the same water...poor people drink the same water as a millionaire. Is she saying that rich people get mountain spring water while poor people in the SAME place get water sucked up from a pond? Never in my life have I been in a place where poor people HAD to drink inferior water while the wealthy got better water, ( unless they bought it).
Since the League of Conservative V**ers seem to be backing AOC's Green New Deal, I don't put much stock in their opinions.