News
Opposition softens to new WOTUS rules
Changes to the Waters of the U.S. rule have gained favor from some of
the groups that previously opposed the measure. National Waterways Conference
board member Blake Roderick tells Brownfield a clearer definition of regulated
waters softened that organization’s opposition.
“Getting ‘navigable’ back into the Clean Water Act is a big step,” Roderick
told Brownfield Ag News Wednesday, “because that was one of the big concerns
that we had before, that the federal government was just going to regulate all
waters.”
Lauren Lurkins with the Illinois Farm Bureau says the old WOTUS rule only added
to the federal agencies farmers had to deal with.
“The two additional federal agencies, U.S. EPA and the Army Corps [of Engineers]
in this proposal would not have regulatory authority over isolated wetlands and
ephemeral features,” said Lurkins, “and we feel like those are very adequately
protected under yet another federal agency.”
Lurkins and Roderick are among those testifying at an EPA WOTUS hearing in
Kansas City, Kansas.
Tom Y is absolutely right about the socializing costs and privatizing profits; a modus operandi that doesn’t look forward to the long term health of ag industry, or the health of farmers, their neighbors and their soil.
I would add that the role of government is to protect the health and welfare of the people, something that the Democratic Party has at its core. I am not sure that anyone in the GOP, in policy or opinion has indicated that government has that role.