The EPA wants to expands the clean water act.

[Olly]

This doesn't sound too good for duck hunters. Basically from what I can find this morning the EPA is wanting expand U.S. waters as defined under the Clean Water Act of 1972.

I pulled this from the EPA's website.

Specifically, the proposed rule clarifies that under the Clean Water Act:
• Most seasonal and rain-dependent streams are protected.
• Wetlands near rivers and streams are protected.
• Other types of waters may have more uncertain connections with downstream water and protection will be evaluated through a case specific analysis of whether the connection is or is not significant. However, to provide more certainty, the proposal requests comment on options protecting similarly situated waters in certain geographic areas or adding to the categories of waters protected without case specific analysis.

Looks like a land grab to me. There are a ton of groups getting together to fight this expansion. Here is an article about the proposal that breaks it down. It's one of the only articles I could find that wasn't full of left wing green propaganda promoting this.

http://www.schwabe.com/showarticle.aspx?Show=13558.

Here is the EPA site that defines what they want to change.

http://www2.epa.gov/uswaters

[The Duck Hammer]

It's definitely a land grab. No other real reason for it. Also Louisiana is fucked, cause big brother is gonna own all of it.

[Flyway Stalker]

We need some folks in DC with the nads to eliminate this communist arm of our government.

[Olly]

It's not so funny how this is one of the biggest things going down right now but it's no where in the news.

Government taking control of your land doesn't sell as well as cops killing people I guess.

[gila-river]

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1418074794.851458.jpg

Now now Olly, this issue received extensive coverage in the widely distributed "potato Grower" publication in the November issue! (Bottom right corner)
But seriously all the shit we see in the mainstream is distraction, pure and simple.

[Olly]

[Olly]

Been researching this all day. Here's a case where the EPA slapped this couple with a felony fine for dredging a water bed on their own property because it would drain into a river over 25 miles away.

http://www.pacificlegal.org/releases/Sa ... hat-labels

[Woody]

I heard about this months ago. If I'm not mistaken this could be very beneficial to duck hunters, but have adverse affects on land owners.

Obviously, I would rather see property rights preserved than improved hunting. So I really hope this is stopped before it gets any real traction.

[Olly]

I heard about this months ago. If I'm not mistaken this could be very beneficial to duck hunters, but have adverse affects on land owners.

Obviously, I would rather see property rights preserved than improved hunting. So I really hope this is stopped before it gets any real traction.

How would it be beneficial to duck hunters?

[Woody]

I heard about this months ago. If I'm not mistaken this could be very beneficial to duck hunters, but have adverse affects on land owners.

Obviously, I would rather see property rights preserved than improved hunting. So I really hope this is stopped before it gets any real traction.

How would it be beneficial to duck hunters?

Prevents the draining of wetlands.

[Olly]

I heard about this months ago. If I'm not mistaken this could be very beneficial to duck hunters, but have adverse affects on land owners.

Obviously, I would rather see property rights preserved than improved hunting. So I really hope this is stopped before it gets any real traction.

How would it be beneficial to duck hunters?

Prevents the draining of wetlands.

I could see that, until the EPA has control over every wetland in the country then decides that people walking around/motoring around in wetlands is destroying them. Even privately owned wetlands would be un-huntable.

[Bad17]

I heard about this months ago. If I'm not mistaken this could be very beneficial to duck hunters, but have adverse affects on land owners.

Obviously, I would rather see property rights preserved than improved hunting. So I really hope this is stopped before it gets any real traction.

How would it be beneficial to duck hunters?

Prevents the draining of wetlands.

I could see that, until the EPA has control over every wetland in the country then decides that people walking around/motoring around in wetlands is destroying them. Even privately owned wetlands would be un-huntable.

It will hurt duck hunting because the EPA will stop hunting around on over it. Stating some stupid gov talk that makes no sense to anyone other than those fuck tards.

[Woody]

They would also ended up ending fishing and pleasure boating if they were to do that. Way to many people up in arms for that kind of power grab. Liberals and conservatives would be all over them.

[Olly]

They would also ended up ending fishing and pleasure boating if they were to do that. Way to many people up in arms for that kind of power grab. Liberals and conservatives would be all over them.

Just like all the hunters in fisherman in CA that are stopping an all out lead ban in ammo and fishing gear in the name of saving the environment.

Oh wait...

[Woody]

They would also ended up ending fishing and pleasure boating if they were to do that. Way to many people up in arms for that kind of power grab. Liberals and conservatives would be all over them.

Just like all the hunters in fisherman in CA that are stopping an all out lead ban in ammo and fishing gear in the name of saving the environment.

Oh wait...

California isn't Texas, Michigan, Louisiana, etc...

But notice what I said earlier, I don't want them to get away with what they are doing. Not at all. But if they try to take it to far there are millions who will stand in their way.

I do realize that liberals/socialist have learned from history and rather than a dramatic shift in policy that they have tried elsewhere, they have been very good at implementing their policies slowly over time here. This makes it hard to realize your rights are being stripped and even when you do it's such a little cut its hard to justify laying down your life for such a little battle.

[Bufflehead]

Way to many people up in arms for that kind of power grab.

You're kidding right? So this would be the straw that broke the camels back? Because every other thing that this country was ever great for is being trampled in the dirt and there is seemingly no one going to do a damn thing about it.

[Woody]

Way to many people up in arms for that kind of power grab.

You're kidding right? So this would be the straw that broke the camels back? Because every other thing that this country was ever great for is being trampled in the dirt and there is seemingly no one going to do a damn thing about it.

I tried to come up with an argument as to why this would be different, but for every reason I came up with there was Obama Care proving that no matter who's toes it's steps on, no one will do anything. Including those of talking about it right now.

[Olly]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pos ... t-have-to/

This breaks down this fiscal years budget and in the article it states that

CLEAN WATER ACT:

In a win for Republicans, the spending bill blocks the Environmental Protection Agency from applying the law to certain farm ponds and irrigation ditches -- a move that GOP aides said would benefit farmers.

So I guess they won't get the funding in FY2015 to change the CWA.

[Flyway Stalker]

It's like I said earlier, this arm of government needs to be defunded completly. They have way over steped thier original scope and intent. At one time there was probably a small need for some oversight towards industial polution, but they have mandated solutions and laws that have been on the books for decades now to correct these issues. There work is done, its time to cut their budget and reduce them to a group that is in place to only over see that the laws originaly drafted are enforced.
The house should also form a committee that can use some comman sense to evaluate the current policies implimented by the EPA and abolish the ones that serve no purpose other than to appease the tree hugger wack jobs.
And yes, I'm already aware of the monumental task it will be to find one politician in Washington with a shred of common sence.

[The Duck Hammer]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/12/09/whats-in-the-spending-bill-we-skim-it-so-you-dont-have-to/

This breaks down this fiscal years budget and in the article it states that

CLEAN WATER ACT:

In a win for Republicans, the spending bill blocks the Environmental Protection Agency from applying the law to certain farm ponds and irrigation ditches -- a move that GOP aides said would benefit farmers.

So I guess they won't get the funding in FY2015 to change the CWA.

I don't get why the gov thinks they need to monitor farm ponds and irrigation ditches. And I highly doubt whatever commie bullshit they have planned will help farmers.

[Woody]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/12/09/whats-in-the-spending-bill-we-skim-it-so-you-dont-have-to/

This breaks down this fiscal years budget and in the article it states that

CLEAN WATER ACT:

In a win for Republicans, the spending bill blocks the Environmental Protection Agency from applying the law to certain farm ponds and irrigation ditches -- a move that GOP aides said would benefit farmers.

So I guess they won't get the funding in FY2015 to change the CWA.

I don't get why the gov thinks they need to monitor farm ponds and irrigation ditches. And I highly doubt whatever commie bullshit they have planned will help farmers.

You figured it out in your second breath.