Mae Culumber

Mae Culumber

Keys To Effective Potassium Management in Nut Crops

Carol Miller

Carol Miller

How Dixondale Farms Is Aiming To Protect Its Legacy

David Eddy

David Eddy

Pistachio Power: Where Growing and Research Mesh for Success

Bob West

Bob West

Data Dig: California Farmers Working Hard To Protect Their Assets

Federal Judge Blocks Clean Water Rule

Christina Herrick Posted by Christina Herrick|August 28, 2015

 

According to RISE (Responsible Industry For A Sound Environment), a federal judge in North Dakota has blocked implementation of EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ final Clean Water Rule, which was slated to take effect today. EPA has suggested the injunction will only impact 13 states.

In issuing a preliminary injunction against the rule, Judge Ralph Erickson of the District Court for the District of North Dakota found the 13 states that brought the lawsuit would likely be harmed without court intervention.

The 13 states that filed for the injunction include Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming.

EPA said the rule takes effect today for all other states and the agency is evaluating the court order.

Top Articles
A New Biopesticide in the Making To Fight Spotted Wing Drosophila

0

Christina Herrick is former Editor of American Fruit Grower magazine and Western Fruit Grower magazine, published by Meister Media Worldwide. See all author stories here.

Leave a Reply

Avatar for Barry Thoele Barry Thoele says:
September 5, 2015 at 8:33 am

So we should again cater to business interests when it come to our drinking water? Not surprising this comes out of ND. With the continued damages caused by fracking and the potential for many more. They granted the drillers the right to “reduction” in dealing with the fracking waste water. Reduction is the atomizing of fracking chemicals to remove the water by evaporation. What goes up in ND comes down in MN,WI, MI and points east. We learned this lesson in the 70’s with acid rain from the dirty coal power plants.
They said the same things back then about the scrubbers they were required to add to their emissions.
While I don’t agree with all the EPA rules they are put in place to protect the surface water for drinking and irrigation. They also are going to make Ag clean up their practices. Since over 1/2 of the wells in MN are contaminated with nitrates caused by overuse and indiscriminate use of synthetic fertilizers. Groundwater should not have to come with warning against pregnant women drinking or in some case bathing in the well water.

Reply
Avatar for Vincent P. Colandrea Sr, Vincent P. Colandrea Sr, says:
September 5, 2015 at 1:45 pm

BRAVO Mr. Thoele, BRALO and Thank You for speaking out.

Reply
Avatar for Lucy Lin Lucy Lin says:
September 9, 2015 at 12:57 pm

Have you read the content of clean water rule? Do you really think it’s rules write to benefit the public?

Reply
Avatar for Barry Thoele Barry Thoele says:
September 9, 2015 at 10:20 pm

Actually yes they do. the most important ones cover discharges from ag waste and discharges from companies that have been allowed to pollute for years. I don’t like all the rules or the fact that they are subject to interpretation by every district. but essentially the do address the runoff and will make mandatory buffers between ag and our watersheds and wetlands.

Reply
Avatar for Mark Hetler Mark Hetler says:
September 6, 2015 at 9:30 am

Why don’t we ban fertilizer and pesticide applications to lawns especially by the uneducated homeowner as a first realistic step toward ground water protection? Is that lush green lawn more important to you than clean ground water Mr. Thoele?

Reply
Avatar for Barry Thoele Barry Thoele says:
September 9, 2015 at 10:23 pm

Not a bad idea. I don’t use chemicals on my lawn or water it for that matter. And I could care less about a lush green lawn. So not it’s not worth my clean water.

Reply

Related posts