Posted on 09/05/2023 4:18:05 AM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
Since the creation of the Clean Water Act in 1972, the federal government has had the authority to protect bodies of water throughout the U.S. from pollution. This traditionally included wetlands, which play a vital role in feeding open bodies of water like rivers and lakes.
However, thanks to a Supreme Court ruling in May, this federal protection has been removed from many crucial wetlands across the country, the Guardian reports.
What happened? According to the Guardian, Michael and Chantell Sackett are Idaho residents who bought a half-acre lot in 2004 near Priest Lake, one of the state’s largest bodies of water. They intended to build a home there and started to fill in the marshy site with gravel.
The Sacketts didn’t know that the site was a protected wetland, which they would need a permit to fill in, the Guardian explains. The EPA stepped in to stop construction and issued serious fines for the work already done.
The Sacketts began a 15-year legal battle, which made it to the Supreme Court this year. The central question was whether the EPA had the authority to prevent the Sacketts from building on a wetland area........
“For 50 years the Clean Water Act has been instrumental in revitalizing and safeguarding drinking water sources for people and wildlife, wetlands for flood control, and habitats that sustain our wildlife heritage,” said Murphy. “The court’s ruling removes these vital protections from important streams and wetlands in every state. We call on both Congress and state governments to step in, plug the gap, and protect our threatened waters and the people that depend on them.”
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
The central question is really whether the EPA has the authority to expand the definition of "wetland" anytime and anyway they want. Other federal agencies (coughcoughATFcough) have certainly accreted power by pushing this sort of regulatory envelope. It's too bad it had to get all the way to the Supreme Court.
Pray for a FONSI.
For the preceding 15 years, it turns out the federal government was impeding the lawful use of private property in the interest of public policy. It should have been ordered by the SC to make the couple financially whole for the injury the illegal government action caused. The agents responsible for implementing and furthering the illegal government action should be fired and their retirements forfeited. Without consequences, future government actors would be otherwise free to disregard rights without fear of punishment.
In WA state, there is a 100 acre site that is cradled by a year around river. The land has been labeled as a source for water in the aquifers for decades, even before the EPA over reach. The City purchased the land, and plans on placing warehouses on the land, with of course large expanses of asphalt parking for trucks. This would be insane IMO.
The people building a house and filling wet spaces with gravel does not even compare to what govt does. I am happy they won, now will they get back the years and the $$$$$$’s they lost in this fight?
Yep. The legislation defines the protected water as the Navigable waters of the United States. Their solid land 100 feet from a lake or pond doesn’t fit into that definition!
And replaced by what? The Pence regime?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>....
The Pence regime. That’s funny. The only aspirant other than the 2020 winner that might be trustworthy is Vivek. I wouldn’t rely on any of the others to walk my dog around the block!
That’s very true according to Mr. L’Amour.
Tell Sackett would have rightfully shot the EPA criminals.
It probably wasn’t considered a wetland when they bought it.
When they started the work some asshole neighbor was probably pissed off that they were destroying his/her “beautiful view of the lake” and called one of the ENVIRONAZI ORGANIZATIONS and the environazi’s probably called in their running dog buddies at the EPA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.