The Government of the USA weakened on Tuesday the norms that protect millions of hectares of wetlands and claimed that it had no choice after the Supreme Court drastically reduced the jurisdiction of the state Government fed on them.
The norm would require that wetlands be more connected to other bodies of water, such as oceans and rivers, a change from politics that deviates from half a century of norms that regulate the country’s waterways.
The administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Michael Regan, stated that the agency had no choice after the Supreme Court drastically reduced the power of the government to regulate federally regulated wetlands that do not have a “continuous surface connection” with masses of water that are larger and more regulated.
In one assessment issued in May in favor of a Couple from Idaho who wanted to build a house near a lake, the judges gave priority to property rights over concerns about the cleanliness of the property. Chantell and Michael Sackett had objected when federal officials needed a permit before infilling part of the property with rock and soil.
It’s the second assessment in two years where a conservative majority of the top Court reduces the range of normative knowledge in the environment.
“Although I’m disappointed in the decision out of the Supreme Court, In the Sackett case, the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers have a duty to enforce this Decision along with our state co-regulators,” Regan said in a statement Tuesday.
The rule announced on Tuesday changes the norm. The law, completed earlier this year, regulates the “waters of the USA”. Come on, groups! Proponents and farmers have long sought to limit the power of the federal government to apply the law of Agua Clean to regulate waterways, arguing that the law should cover fewer types of rivers, streams, etc. wetlands. Come on, groups! Environmentalists have long advocated a broader definition that protects more water.