Lesson 9 Activity

Your assignment for Lesson 9 is to review scientific, legal, policy, and guidance documents concerning the “fallout” from the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Rapanos v. United States 547 U.S. 715 (2006), and write a two-page opinion paper that summarizes reactions to the outcomes of this “fallout,” addressing relevant scientific and ecological principles as you understand them, and your personal predictions regarding any changes to the law in the near future.

If you are interested in pursuing this topic further, then you should keep following the continuing saga of USEPA’s efforts to forge new guidance for defining the legal jurisdiction over waters, especially wetlands and their relative connectivity to downstream streams and rivers. In a nutshell, USEPA through its Science Advisory Board (SAB) is releasing a science report, Connectivity of Streams and Wetlands to Downstream Waters. The original author of Geography 431 was one of about two dozen experts who reviewed and commented extensively on this report (Summer of 2014). Simultaneously, the USEPA and Army Corps of Engineers released a guidance document, Definition of ‘‘Waters of the United States’’ Under the Clean Water Act, to explain what waters are subject to federal jurisdiction in the U.S., and how to identify them. The final science report ultimately will inform the guidance document. The pair of documents, however, has generated significant angst from various interest groups that will be or think they will be affected by this guidance. To put it mildly, the blogosphere has been active. Have a look.