- Aug 4, 2011
- 81,129
- 14,025
- 2,190
"...the EPA's rule wrongly broadens federal authority by placing a majority of water and land resources management in the hands of the federal government. Congress and the courts have repeatedly affirmed the states have primary responsibility for the protection of intrastate waters and land management, according to Missouri attorney general Chris Koster. In the lawsuit, the states argue that the burdens created by the new EPA requirements on waters and lands are harmful to the states and will negatively affect farmers, developers and landowners.
"Koster said that he is concerned that the agencies' definition of "waters of the United States" goes far beyond what a reasonable person would consider to be a waterway. Koster noted, for example, that the new rule defines tributaries to include ponds, streams that flow only briefly during or after rainstorms, and channels that are usually dry. The definition extends to lands within a 100-year floodplain - even if they are dry 99 out of 100 years.
"DeWine added there is concern the overly-broad definition of “waters of the United States” could be used by the federal government to penalize landowners improperly. For example, the definition could be used to penalize a homeowner who remedies standing water on their property if it is within 1500 feet of even a normally dry stream bed.
"Failure to comply with the new regulations could result in fines of up to $37,500 a day. "
The only purpose of the EPA is to extend illegal federal control over private land.
Lawsuits target EPA water rule
"Koster said that he is concerned that the agencies' definition of "waters of the United States" goes far beyond what a reasonable person would consider to be a waterway. Koster noted, for example, that the new rule defines tributaries to include ponds, streams that flow only briefly during or after rainstorms, and channels that are usually dry. The definition extends to lands within a 100-year floodplain - even if they are dry 99 out of 100 years.
"DeWine added there is concern the overly-broad definition of “waters of the United States” could be used by the federal government to penalize landowners improperly. For example, the definition could be used to penalize a homeowner who remedies standing water on their property if it is within 1500 feet of even a normally dry stream bed.
"Failure to comply with the new regulations could result in fines of up to $37,500 a day. "
The only purpose of the EPA is to extend illegal federal control over private land.
Lawsuits target EPA water rule