The Rollback of Obama Clean Water Protections

[krimsonviper]

Since I am not a farmer and I don't know of any farmers, I don't know what exactly this did them. What did Obama's administration do that affected farming? What kind of negative effects did this have on you or anyone you know? Any positive effects that you saw in your community as a result of the stricter policies? This question comes from NYT's newest article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/clim ... tions.html

Do you think that something can be done to help protect the water while also helping the farms and if so, what? I feel like lobbyists put their tendrils into this and fed into Trump's hatred for Obama that the lobbyists took advantage of it to think purely of profits and not a common ground for both parties to talk about it and find mutual ground.

I will also ask for telcoman and therogueone stay out of this conversation because I think both have a cloud in judgement that will throw off the conversation. I will also stay out of the postings except to ask questions to learn something new and understand.

[Desert Rat]

Obama's rules made temporary water supplies (i.e. seasonal puddles, washes that run occasionally when it rains, etc. all "designated wetlands" that were under EPA protections. That could even include stock ponds, etc. It was a vast overreach that really doesn't help any one or any species.

Read this article on how badly the EPA was screwing over a Wyoming rancher because of the rule change. Trump was right in rolling this back, and those who say uninformed BS like "Trump rolls back clean water regs", or blame Trump for bad drinking water are about as full of it as they can get.

https://www.dtnpf.com/agriculture/web/a ... -penalties

[RCA]

So

Obama's rules made temporary water supplies "designated wetlands" that were under EPA protections. That could even include stock ponds, etc. It was a vast overreach that really doesn't help any one or any species.

So if that's true why not remove that provision?

So far from what I read is the farmer didn't get a federal permit to build a pond.
He thought his pond was exempt and didn't need a permit, the EPA thought it did.

• "Mr. Johnson sued the EPA last year after the agency refused to withdraw its compliance order even after he commissioned a report from environmental experts concluding that the pond was exempt and provided numerous benefits, such as habitat for migratory birds, fish and wildlife."

So if his pond was indeed exempt then why get rid of the law?
The law is fine, the people enforcing it made mistakes or overreached.

Is there something more sinister here? I don't see it.

Police make a mistake, the solution is to remove police.

Seems extreme. I'm sure companies that pollute love it though.