Effective enforcement of environmental laws that protect the public depends on clear, well-understood rules. In the absence of coherent standards, legal controversies subvert regulations, and only lawyers benefit.
Over the past decade, enforcement of the 1972 Clean Water Act has suffered from such a lack of coherence. Confusion over two U.S. Supreme Court decisions, along with patchwork “guidance” issued in 2003 and 2008, provoked uncertainty about protection of tributaries and wetlands. Resulting disputes threatened critical water quality, fisheries, wildlife and public health.
Deficient enforcement standards also threatened drinking-water supplies due to unprotected water sources serving some 117 million Americans. They weakened or eradicated protection of 20 million acres of interconnected wetlands that provide important flood protection and essential wildlife habitat, and endangered water quality in more than 60 percent of all waterways sampled in Georgia.
In response, the EPA has proposed a new rule to improve America’s water protection. The rule would:
• Restore regulatory protection to most seasonal and rain-dependent streams as well as wetlands;
• Reduce flooding, filter-out pollution, provide important wildlife habitat, support hunting and fishing, and protect groundwater recharge areas, and
• Improve reliable enforcement of the Clean Water Act by clarifying which resources are protected.
Streams and wetlands are tributaries to rivers and lakes that provide drinking-water sources and recreational areas. So, to ensure public safety, all these interconnected hydrological features must be properly protected. Cumulative damage can cause serious public health risks, including contaminated fish and water supplies.
A year ago, EPA released a “connectivity report” that was used to determine which waters should be regulated. Before its release, the report was reviewed and approved by scientists from public agencies, universities and non-profits. Facts about the interconnections among streams, wetlands, and major waterways were carefully incorporated into the proposed rule.
This new rule will strengthen understanding about resources subject to regulation, consistent with the original Clean Water Act, while reducing costly delays and regulatory conflicts by clarifying how the law is applied.
Even so, farmers, industrialists, developers and others who need water-related EPA permits are raising alarms about the rule, claiming it will hamper activities. Objections to the rule should be carefully examined to expose errors of interpretation and unfounded claims about compliance costs. Experts familiar with the rule say it will actually reduce compliance costs and improve regulatory safeguards.
Opposition to the rule is predictable but unjustified. Contrary to strident protests raised by some who are regulated, the new rule leaves intact existing exemptions for agriculture and forestry. It does not expand regulated waters.
Reliable water protection is essential to our state and nation, increasingly so as growth continues. Because the proposed EPA rule is scientifically based, it strikes a sensible balance by enhancing essential safeguards while reducing regulatory uncertainties.
In coastal Georgia, water quality is imperative to the health of our fisheries and the area’s vibrant eco-tourism industry. Combined, they contribute at least $2 billion annually to our economy and support some 40,000 jobs, about one-fifth of the coastal region’s total.
As development continues throughout the watersheds of the five major rivers flowing to the Atlantic through our region, environmental safeguards will become even more important. The proposed EPA rule will help sustain the diversity and productivity of both ecosystems — including Georgia’s tidal marshes, among the world’s most prolific fishery habitats — and the highly valued activities that depend on them, such as hunting, fishing, water recreation, nature photography and bird-watching.
Georgia’s future depends on reliable water quality, for which cogent, science-based regulations are utterly vital. The underlying logic of the proposed EPA rule is indisputable: All interconnected waters must be uniformly protected.
Readers are urged to learn more about the rule and send comments to EPA at: http://www2.epa.gov/uswaters .
David Kyler is executive director of the Center for a Sustainable Coast.
