Despite our obvious need for clean water, our nation’s primary protections for rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands are constantly under attack. Recent Supreme Court action shows there is no consensus at the federal level to keep our water clean.
It seems like a no-brainer – after all, human beings are three-fourths water, so having access to clean drinking water is pretty much vital to our survival, right?
And here in New Jersey, we are witnessing the ongoing recovery of some of the most polluted rivers in the country. The Supreme Court decision involved two cases from Michigan which the Court combined into one ruling. In the first, a landowner cleared and filled wetlands without a permit, after he was told they were likely regulated by the federal Clean Water Act. The property is 20 miles from the nearest navigable water, but still within the drainage systems of Lake Huron and two rivers. The government prosecuted the landowner criminally (he was convicted) and civilly (to recover millions of dollars in fines). In the second case, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers denied a permit to a Michigan couple seeking to fill wetlands so they could build a condo development.
The court vacated previous appellate court decisions and remanded the cases back to the lower court. On the one hand, that’s good news because four Supreme Court justices were ready to gut the Clean Water Act, and five justices rejected that course of action. On the other hand, there were five separate opinions in the case, covering over 100 pages. The lack of a cohesive opinion is likely to complicate efforts to protect individual water bodies in the future. We really won’t know how much damage was done, if any, to the Clean Water Act until the lower court makes a new ruling while trying to interpret all the conflicting signals from the Supreme Court.
The central issue in both cases is the limit of the Army Corps’ jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act to regulate wetlands.
The decision on this issue – or lack of one – should be a wake up call for anyone concerned about having clean water in the future. We need strict, clearly defined protections for our drinking water supplies, and the wetlands that are their natural filters.
In the face of this lack of unity on clean water protections, Congress should act decisively and immediately to pass the Clean Water Authority Restoration Act, which would reaffirm the historic scope of the law. And regardless of what the federal government does, more states would also do well to follow New Jersey’s example – ours is one of only two states to regulate wetlands beyond the federal statutes.
Let’s send a clear message that the health, welfare and quality of life of future generations are tied intrinsically to having clean water! To take action, visit www.cleanwateraction.org to contact your U.S. senators and representatives to urge them to support the Clean Water Authority Restoration Act, which was introduced by a bi-partisan coalition.
Michele S. Byers
New Jersey Conservation Foundation
Far Hills