Restore Federal Protection, Restore our Nation’s Wetlands and Streams

 

By Arthur Feinstein,

Sierra Club San Francisco Group Executive Committee member

 

As the 19th century faded into the 20th, a realization began to dawn on American sailors and shippers: So much junk was being tossed into our rivers that commercial navigation was being threatened and so our nation’s first water pollution act was specifically aimed at protecting navigation in water bodies that could be used by boats. 

 

The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 became the first federal environmental law ever written. Congress created it to protect our “navigable” rivers and streams from refuse and debris.

 

When the Clean Water Act was written in 1972 (the Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972) it was clear to a majority of legislators that the Act had to extend to all waters of the nation, not just our larger streams and rivers, if we were to restore the health of our nation’s waters. After all, many small streams make up the large ones.

 

So a debate took place over how to define the waters that would be regulated by the Act. As a final compromise, the Act contains two definitions of those waters. First, it states, the Act will regulate all “navigable waters” and then if defines “navigable waters” as “waters of the United  States.”

 

Muddying The Waters

 

Looking back at the Congressional Record of that debate, it is clear that the legislators added that latter definition to mean that the federal government should indeed regulate all the waters of the United  States, not just those one can boat on. For 30 years, the Army Corps of Engineers, the federal regulator of the Clean Water Act, implemented the Act on that basis and many court decisions upheld that decision.

 

But big business and industrial agriculture resented these regulations and constantly sought to restrict federal jurisdiction. Finally, with the help of an increasingly conservative Supreme Court they succeeded. Two federal Supreme Court decisions, ignoring the Congressional record and 30 years of tradition (talk about an activist court) have so confused the jurisdictional issue that the Army corps has now essentially decided to regress to America’s 19th-century definition of “navigable waters,” i.e., bodies of water large enough to boat.

 

Now, all of our small streams and creeks, the headwaters of our rivers no longer are protected. Nor are our wetlands that are not immediately adjacent to a navigable waterway. And this is disastrous not only because these waters do so much to clean our water, provide flood control, and serve as wildlife and fisheries habitat, among other benefits. It also leaves these waterways unprotected from the discharge of pollutants.

 

Because there is only one definition of water in the Clean Water Act, if a body of water no longer is protected under the Act then a polluter can now dump chemicals into a small stream with impunity. It can fill a wetland with toxic soils with no need to get a permit or face threat of punishment under the Act! In fact, a Congressional committee has just revealed that the EPA has refused to take action on over 400 pollution cases because they were no longer sure if there was federal jurisdiction over the polluted waters.

 

Let’s Turn This Boat Around!

 

All it takes to correct this problem is for Congress to remove the word “navigable waters” from the Clean Water Act – and a piece of legislation that does just that is currently moving through Congress. Two measures, House Resolution 2421 and Senate Bill S. 1870, would solve this problem by removing the words “navigable waters” from the Act and replacing them with a definition of “waters of the United States” that encompasses all of the waters that are now at risk.

 

As you might expect, big business, industrial agriculture, water polluters and wetland and stream destroyers are all up in arms to defeat this legislation and they are a potent enemy.

 

Please look up your Congressman or Congresswoman and let them know that you want him or her to sign on to the Clean Water Restoration Act (CWRA) HR 2421.

 

Senator Barbara Boxer has already signed on to the Senate bill but amazingly Senator Dianne Feinstein has not! Please inform Senator Feinstein that it is essential that she sign on to S. 1870.

 

Let them know that you want clean water and want to protect our wetlands and streams. You can use this letter to kick-start your own efforts.

 

Sample letter:

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

Dear Senator Feinstein:

 

It is essential to the health to California and to our nation that we protect all of our state’s and nation’s wetlands and streams no matter how small.

 

Recent Supreme Court decisions such as Rapanos have resulted in the Army Corps of Engineers and the US EPA refusing to protect most of our nation’s isolated wetlands and small streams. We can’t afford to lose these critical natural resources.

 

Please sign on to S. 1870 the Clean Water Restoration Act. This simple bill will allow the federal government to protect all the waters of our United States once again. 

 

Thank you,

 

[your name and address]

__________________________________________________________________________________________________