Farm Bureau encouraged by Supreme Court Wetlands Decision

 

The recent United States Supreme Court decision dealing with the extent of Clean Water Act jurisdiction on private property is being hailed by the South Dakota Farm Bureau.  “Farm Bureau will continue to analyze the court’s opinion; however, we believe that it helps clarify that the federal government does not have authority to regulate ditches and dugouts,” said SDFB President Scott VanderWal.

 

“We do not believe that every puddle or pond on every farm and ranch should be regulated by the government,” said VanderWal.  The Corps of Engineers and Environmental Protection Agency were making arbitrary and sometimes inconsistent interpretations of their jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act (CWA).  The Supreme Court ruling, issued on Monday, held that the Corps was using too broad of an interpretation of “waters” in defining its regulatory scope.

 

Justice Scalia had said the Corps of Engineers misinterpreted the term "waters of the United States." He wrote:  "In applying the definition to `ephemeral streams,' `wet meadows,' storm sewers and culverts, ... man-made drainage ditches, and dry arroyos in the middle of the desert, the Corps has stretched the term `waters of the United States' beyond parody."

 

 “The decision appears to favor landowners by limiting the regulatory reach of the Clean Water Act to navigable waters and permanent, continuous water bodies,” says Farm Bureau field services director Wayne Smith.  He noted that the American Farm Bureau filed a friend-of-the-court brief that fields and pastures that have been used by farmers and ranchers for many years should not be regulated the same as rivers and streams. 

 

“Farmers and ranchers know it’s in their best interest to take care of the land and the water,” said Smith.  “We hope this ruling will allow farmers to continue as the primary caretakers of their land.”

 

-          30 -