Environmental and public health advocates blasted the Trump administration Thursday for finalizing its rollback of an Obama-era regulation designed to curb the pollution of waterways nationwide.

“Fifty years after the Cuyahoga River fire that inspired the Clean Water Act, President Trump’s administration wants to turn back the clock to the days of poisoned flammable water,” declared Abigail Dillen, president of the non-profit legal group Earthjustice. “This is shameful and dangerous.”

The Washington Post reported late Wednesday that the Trump administration “plans to scrap the Obama-era definition of what qualifies as ‘waters of the United States’ under the Clean Water Act, returning the country to standards put in place in 1986.”

Robert Irvin, president of American Rivers, told the Post that “the administration wants to go back to an era where we are destroying wetlands heedlessly.”

In 2015, under the Obama administration, the Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued the Clean Water Rule—also known as Waters of the United States (WOTUS) Rule—which gave the federal government regulatory authority over many streams and wetlands across the country. Because of various ongoing legal battles involving the 2015 rule, including some cases that relate to the Trump administration’s moves to repeal or weaken it, the Obama-era definition of federal waters remains in effect in only 22 states and is temporarily blocked in the other 28 states.

“We want to make sure that we have a definition that once and for all will be the law of the land in all 50 states,” EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler told the Post ahead of the administration’s official announcement. “What we have today is a patchwork across the country… We need to have a uniform regulatory approach.”

“Under President Trump, the EPA is no longer in the business of safeguarding our resources and protecting us from pollution, but is openly working to advance the agenda of those who profit from fouling our water and threatening our health.”
— Craig Cox, EWG

Click Here: los jaguares argentina

EPA Region 6 Administrator Ken McQueen made the announcement Thursday at a Dallas Builders Association event. In a statement, Wheeler explained that “today’s Step 1 action fulfills a key promise of President Trump and sets the stage for Step 2—a new WOTUS definition that will provide greater regulatory certainty for farmers, landowners, home builders, and developers nationwide.”

Throughout Thursday, advocates for strong water regulations issued scathing critiques of the Trump administration’s repeated attacks and ultimate repeal of the 2015 rule.

“Under President Trump, the EPA is no longer in the business of safeguarding our resources and protecting us from pollution, but is openly working to advance the agenda of those who profit from fouling our water and threatening our health,” said Craig Cox, senior vice president for agriculture and natural resources at the Environmental Working Group (EWG). Research conducted by Cox and a colleague in 2017 showed that removing the Obama-era protections could endanger the drinking water of about 117 million people nationwide.

Noting that estimated impact on drinking water, Food & Water Watch Action executive director Wenonah Hauter declared that “the only incentive to gut water protections like this is to create a safe haven for agrochemical industrial interests against the wellbeing of public and environmental health.”

“Without protections in place, the expansive and insatiable agricultural businesses that run factory farms across our country will not bat an eye when it comes to releasing waste and pollutants into our vital drinking water resources,” Hauter warned. “Unfettered profits will be the law of the land now, rather than the protection of the human right to clean and safe water.”

“Clean water is essential to all life, but instead of protecting it, the Trump administration is giving Big Polluters another handout,” said Marcie Keever, oceans and vessels program director for Friends of the Earth. “Vulnerable communities who already suffer from a lack of access to clean water will be put at even greater risk by this immoral decision.”