Media Contacts
Cat Lazaroff
Communications Director
(202)
772-3270
Christine Merker
Communications Coordinator
(202) 772-0284
Not a journalist but need help? Contact our Member Services
team:
1-800-385-9712
Sign up for our Press List
Get Defenders Headlines
Get the latest wildlife conservation news and information... right when we post it online.
For Immediate Release
Supreme Court Calls Into Question Clean Water Protections for Hundreds of Thousands of Acres of Wetlands
Washington, DC − The Supreme Court today cast into question federal protections for many streams and wetland areas. In a mixed ruling, conservative members of the Court, including new justices Roberts and Alito, ruled that the Clean Water Act (CWA) applies only to "permanent, standing or continuously flowing" bodies of water. Four other justices disagreed, while Justice Kennedy, in a separate opinion, essentially said that the issue of whether protections apply to a body of water or wetland area essentially needs to be examined on a case by case basis. Kennedy's opinion essentially prevented the Court from invalidating protections for huge swaths of wetland areas, but does throw into confusion the entire issue of how, when, and where the Clean Water Act applies.
"Today's decision creates an administrative nightmare as regulating agencies are forced to examine building and development permit requests on a case by case basis to see if Clean Water Act protections apply,” said Jason Rylander, spokesperson for Defenders of Wildlife, which filed an amicus brief in the case. "Worst case scenario, it will encourage timber, mining, and development companies to push the envelope and apply for even more permits to destroy areas they think aren't covered by the Clean Water Act."
The cases before the court were brought by two development companies that argued that they should be allowed to destroy and build upon wetland areas because the CWA applies to waters that can be navigated by boats and ships, which rules out most streams and wetland areas.
"We feel that Congress clearly intended the Clean Water Act to cover all permanent and seasonal bodies of water, many of which are vital to public health and the health of our environment,” said Rylander. "In light of the court's confusing decision, Congress must stand up and clarify its intent. It must make it clear that a strong Clean Water Act is in the best interests of all Americans."
Wetland areas are an essential part of any local environment. They provide untold benefits in terms of water purification, sediment control, flood control, wildlife habitat, and recreation opportunities, including hunting and fishing.
Defenders also pointed out that this case served as the first big environmental test for President Bush's two Supreme Court appointees.
"It is important to note that President Bush's two recent Supreme Court appointees essentially voted to do away with clean water protections for millions of acres of wetlands. But if you elect a president who bows to the desires of industry at every turn, this is what you get: Supreme Court justices that focus more on catering to industry than on strengthening the conservation laws that protect us all," said Rylander.
###
Defenders of Wildlife is recognized
as one of the nation's most progressive advocates for wildlife and its habitat.
With more than 490,000 members and supporters, Defenders of Wildlife is an
effective leader on endangered species issues.
