|
|
|
Connecticut Water Trails Association |
|---|
|
Connecticut Water Trails Program
Connecticut Water Bar
Water Pollution Legislation
Water pollution has been an important issue in United States politics
since 1948, when president Harry Truman signed the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act. This law set the precedent for future government involvement
in water protection by addressing the health effects of water pollution
and sewage disposal. Twenty-four years later Richard Nixon signed major
amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and in 1977 it was
officially renamed the Clean Water Act (CWA).
Clean Water Act: Introduction
The Clean Water Act requires that state regulate
and prevent pollution of watersheds from nonpoint sources. A watershed is
a land area that drains into a body of water such as a river. While point
pollution, for example a chimney or a car, enters the environment at one
location, nonpoint pollution sources cover a large land area. Examples
include crop fields and streets. Nonpoint pollution sources are more
difficult to identify and control because there is no single source of
pollution that can be easily recognized. Under the Clean Water Act, states
must develop plans to protect their watersheds from nonpoint pollution.
Amendments Of The CWA
Various amendments have been made to the Clean
Water Act since its enactment. In 1977, both states and the EPA were given
more authority to regulate water pollution discharge. This reflects an
attempt to balance power between the federal government, individual
states, and the EPA, a trend that can be seen in a variety of
environmental legislation. Four years later a new president, Ronald
Reagan, brought with him a different approach to water protection. His
amendments, passed in 1981, weakened the Clean Water Act by contributing
less money toward the construction of wastewater treatment facilities. In
1987, the act took a step in the opposite direction as funding was
provided for the protection of estuaries and control of nonpoint
pollution. Amendments to the CWA were proposed in 1995, but were defeated
by the Clinton administration. These changes would have relaxed demands on
polluters to meet certain cleanup standards.
Success Of The CWA
Since 1972 the Clean Water Act has been a relative success, though not to
the extent as originally planned. In 1972, the act stated that its goal
was to have all navigable United States waters "fishable" and "swimmable"
by 1983 and to eliminate all pollutant release into said waters by 1985.
While these goals have not been met, the percentage of fishable and
swimmable U.S. rivers and lakes has increased from 36% in 1972 to 62% in
1998. Also, 74% of the population was served by sewage treatment plants in
1998, as opposed to 32% twenty-six years before.
While the CWA has had many triumphs, 100,000 tons of toxic industrial
wastes are still dumped into rivers annually. 40% of surface and
groundwater is deemed unsafe. Less than 2% of U.S. streams are considered
"high quality" under CWA regulations. Fish caught in over 1400 waterways
cannot be eaten due to toxic substances. Clearly, the Clean Water Act has
room for improvement.
Strengthening The Clean Water Act
Many proposals have been made as to how the Clean Water Act can be strengthened:
One idea involves increasing the funding and
authority of the act in order to better control non point sources of
pollution.
Programs that regulate toxic water pollution could also be improved.
Another suggestion is to allow certain states to manage parts of the act
such that federal control would be loosened. Only states with good
environmental track records would be allowed to do so.
The CWA and the Bush Administration
Recently, however, the Bush administration has not been aiming to advance
the Clean Water Act. Instead, it has issued a policy entailing the removal
of protection for small bodies of water that seem to be isolated from
larger rivers and lakes. Even if these "isolated" waters are, indeed,
isolated, removing them from CWA jurisdiction would still have adverse
effects on human health and the environment. According to the Missouri
Department of Conservation, "Failure to afford protection to 'isolated'
wetlands will inevitably lead to increased draining and filling which will
negatively impact ground waters and in-stream flows. Polluted ground water
and the disruption of stream's hydrologic cycles mean increased costs for
the general public, a diminished biosphere, and increased threats to rare
and endangered species of all types."
The Clean Water Act: Conclusion
The Clean Water Act, in its pursuit of water pollution prevention, has
succeeded in some aspects while failing in others. Ultimately, it
constitutes a vital piece of environmental legislation, one that, despite
its shortcomings, has taken steps towards improving the condition of the
nation's water, and should continue to do so into the future.
|
||||||||||
![]() |
|