Repealing Clean Water Rule Creates Uncertainty for $887B Outdoor Recreation Economy

Discussion in 'Hunters Rights Forum' started by chuam, Jun 28, 2017.

  1. buck_master_2001

    buck_master_2001 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    8,268
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2000
    Location:
    Southern Mitten
    So should we protect headwaters or just the water down stream?

    If anything the law sounds like it needs the gray areas cleaned up in wording. The essence of the bill I support. What's the point of enforcing laws to keep our water clean down stream but do nothing for the headwaters?

    I can see where some people would be against this. It seems like mostly because there's some gray area on exactly what they consider a head water.
     
  2. K Kalls

    K Kalls Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    180
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2001
    Location:
    Kouts IN
    I beleave it was Nixon that started the EPA. And it was the right thing to do. Things then were a mess. But they have gotten why to big and to much over reach. I work for a chemical plant and what we use to have one or two regs. For a product we now have ten to twenty. Very unnecessary. We are next to a big marsh and next alot of geese and ducks
    And winter alot Birds also. The EPA needs to be gone through and gut all needless regs. And redundant regs which there are many
     
    OneShotBandit likes this.
  3. fishnfool

    fishnfool Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    4,476
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    Agreed on the redundancy, some of the needlessness, and the overall sentiments of bureaucracy within the EPA. It's ironic that in many cases, the regulators are the biggest impediment to actually cleaning up or complying with the regulations.

    Regarding the number of regulations though...that needs a finer brush to paint with. Science is evolving. Our knowledge on the harm and thresholds for certain pollutants or chemicals are always changing. What we thought was once safe may not have been. What we once overlooked may have been harming us all along.

    A good example in my line of work is 1,4-dioxane and PFOAs. These were chemicals associated with a gasoline additive and teflon manufacturing. We never had to test for them. We didn't understand them. We were releasing them into the environment for decades. Once the research caught up, we realized that are likely carcinogenic at very low concentrations, and very mobile.

    Now we're retesting sites all of the country. New regulations are being drafted. Is that a bad thing? Are all new regulations bad just? My friend's recently built house (and neighborhood) was just discovered to lie in the huge plume of one of the chemicals...and everyone is on well water. At another site in NH another neighborhood is now on bottled water as they investigate the problem there.

    Is it socialist to try and understand things that are harming us, and try to address or prevent them?
     
  4. TheDuckSlayer

    TheDuckSlayer Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    8,941
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2002
    Location:
    Mobile Delta
    Oh my...

    I find it highly ironic that someone like you will complain about entitlements and "teet suckers" in one thread and then in another thread say the Dept of Education needs to be eliminated. You do realize that the only path to self-sufficiency is education, correct? Whether it be formal education or technical training, education is the only way to avoid a lifetime of minimum-wage jobs that won't even cover monthly rent. Does the Dept of Education need some changes? Certainly. The public school system is failing. Is there waste in the DoEd? I'm sure there is, just like any other federal agency. But is the answer to defund or eliminate the Dept altogether? That has to be one of the more simple-minded things I've ever read. I know that you probably saw it on on Fox News or read it in a chain email or something, but come on man. Let's talk about how to improve things instead of just saying "get rid of it." We can't get rid of Education and kick all the teet-suckers to the curb; that's not what this country is about. We are the best nation in the world, so let's act like it. Everyone benefits from a good education system and an educated populace. Try to think critically and independently instead of agreeing with political dogma.

    That's totally off the subject, so let's talk about the EPA and the Clean Water Act. Defund or eliminate the EPA? Wow, just wow. Once again, is the EPA perfect? Nope. Is there wasted money in the EPA? Yep. But let's look at ways to improve the EPA and make it more efficient, instead of the ridiculous statement of "get rid of it." I like clean air, water, and soil- don't you? A clean environment benefits every living creature in the nation. Our environment is the cleanest now than it has been in 100 years, entirely due to federal oversight and regulation. Before there were any rules, when we were a purely capitalistic society, profit-driven businesses did anything and everything possible to enlarge the bottom line- including dumping waste into the soil, air, and water. They didn't care. They wouldn't care and right back to doing it, if the EPA and federal regulation were eliminated. Irreversible damage was caused during the late 19th and well into the 20th centuries; partly because of ignorance (especially at the beginning of the Industrial Age), but mostly because of lack of regulation. But ignorance is not an excuse any more. We know better now, and in most cases the only thing preventing our land and waterways from being uninhabitable is the EPA and the regulations imposed on farmers, industrial plants, landowners, etc. Everyone in the country deserves to enjoy clean outdoor spaces, and thanks to federal oversight many of the greedy mistakes of the 20th century have been and continue to be reversed. Again, that's not to say the EPA is perfect (e.g. everyone knows that the new gas cans suck and are stupid), but we now have clean air thanks to emissions regulations; we have clean water thanks to run-off and waste disposal regulations on farmers, developers, and industrial plants; we now have clean soil thanks to regulations on mining corporations, etc etc. Who do you think implements and enforces these regulations? You guessed it- the EPA. Eliminating the EPA would not only eliminate decades of mostly successes, but would put us back to square one with an environmental quality on par with a third world country or worse. Improve the EPA and make it more efficient- yes. Eliminate the EPA- no.

    P.S. The wasteful budget of the DoD dwarfs the DoEd and EPA combined. IMO, any budget cuts should start there.

    P.P.S. And I also agree that this belongs in the PAF.
     
  5. slimm21

    slimm21 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    3,985
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Location:
    WI
    I think so unless a private entity does all the work without any gov't funds.

    The DoD waste a ton of money. Should we scrap it?
     
  6. brake man

    brake man Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    880
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    Franklin, TN
    Mods, any chance you can move threads like this to the PAF?
     
  7. bill cooksey

    bill cooksey Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    8,594
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2000
    Location:
    Bartlett, Tn., USA
    I disagree with it belonging in the PAF. Depending on exactly what is being proposed, this could have a direct impact on duck hunting.

    I've been out of town for over a week and not in a position to actually look into the proposal. So, is a significant rollback, or is it simply rolling back to 2015 regulations and determining where anything additional might be prudent?
     
    cast&blast and chuam like this.
  8. ReaPeR105

    ReaPeR105 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    8,603
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2000
    Location:
    East TX USA
    What exactly DOES the DOE do? Local Boards of Education regulate the districts. Why in the world do we need a Federal agency in the mix? They don't regulate textbooks, curriculum or teacher credentialing? The states are perfectly capable of handling public education and the feds have no business in it. You think the public WANTS poor schools? Of course not, it's time the local folks hold their school districts accountable, and the states to step in when needed. No Feds needed.
     
    Banded1, tcc, J.SCOTT and 1 other person like this.
  9. Phytoplankton

    Phytoplankton Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    2,592
    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2008
    Location:
    CA
    Well lets talk about one on the rules that will not be enforced. With the roll back of the rules it will be permissible to dump unencapsulated overburden and mine tailings in headwater areas, allowing toxics such as Mercury, Cadmium, Lead, Chromium, ect. to contaminate watersheds. Look at the environmental damage that just coal tailings have caused.
     
    riverrat47 likes this.
  10. Phytoplankton

    Phytoplankton Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    2,592
    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2008
    Location:
    CA
    What are the unnecessary rules that your plant has to deal with?
     

Share This Page