Vol. XVII No. 2
March / April 2023
Serving Soil, Mulch, Compost & Wood Pellet Producers www.SoilandMulchProducerNews.com
Attention Readers !
u le s R S U T O W the Co
Are you looking for Products, Equipment or Services for your business? If so, check out these leading companies advertised inside:
Automatic Floor Systems Keith Manufacturing Co – pg 16
Bagging/Palletizing Equipment Amadas Industries – pg 18 nVenia – pg 12
NEWS
Wind T
h g u hro
u r ts
By Ken McEntee
Compost Turner
Resource Machinery & Engineering – pg 7 Action Conveyors – pg 4 Amadas Industries – pg 18 Smalis Conveyors – pg 3
Cutting Tools & Attachments Quadco USA – pg 7
Equipment Sales
GrinderTrader.com – pg 10
Grinders, Chippers & Screening Systems Action Conveyors – pg 4 Amadas Industries – pg 18 Bandit – pg 13 Diamond Z – pg 11 HogZilla – pg 8 Precision Husky – pg 5
Mulch Coloring Equipment/ Colorants AgriCoatings – pg 9 Amerimulch – pg 17 BuildAMixer.com – pg 16 Britton Industries – pg 10 CMC – pg 19 Colorbiotics – pg 2 Faltech – pg 6 Milagro Rubber Inc – pg 8 T.H. Glennon Co – pg 20
Payload Weighing & Measuring Systems Walz Scale – pg 15
Tree & Stump Splitters U.S. Pride Products – pg 14
Trommel Brushes Power Brushes Inc – pg 10
Wear Parts
ArmorHog – pg 6 Quadco USA – pg 7
A
lmost three months after the Biden had legal authority. EPA claimed the Sacketts were administration announced its final rule unlawfully discharging fill dirt onto their land, which defining “Waters of the United States the agency claimed as federally protected wetlands. (WOTUS)” and how and which waters will EPA threatened the couple with fines of tens of be regulated by the federal government, a thousands of dollars per day if they continued to federal court in March blocked implementation of develop the property. the rule in Texas and Idaho. However, Judge Jeffrey While the Sacketts disputed the claim, EPA Brown, U.S. District Court, Southern Texas District, provided them with no proof of any violation and no denied a nationwide injunction that was requested by opportunity to contest its claims, PLF said. The case 18 trade associations who were co-plaintiffs in a suit is now before the Supreme Court for the second time. filed by Texas and later joined by Idaho. For landowners, the WOTUS battle with the The ruling came the day before the rule went federal government—specifically EPA and the U.S. into effect in the remaining 48 states. Separate suits Army Corps of Engineers—has been going on since that seek injunctions in other states remained open as the Obama administration. of the time this article was written. Meanwhile, the “Successive presidential administrations have U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on a current failed to craft a regulatory definition of ‘navigable case — Sackett v. EPA — this summer. The Supreme waters’ that satisfies the requirements of the Clean Court ruling could make the other lawsuits moot, Water Act and survives judicial review,” said Charles said Margaret Byfield, executive director of American Yates, PLF attorney. “[The Biden administration’s] Stewards for Liberty (ASL), in Georgetown, Texas. final rule represents the fourth time since 2015 that the “If that decision comes out and it’s favorable EPA and the Army Corps have attempted to define to our position, which is less regulation, then that is that phrase.” going to trump all of this,” Byfield said. “The Supreme Court basically could wipe out the Biden rules. It The Latest “Final Rule” could stop all of these other cases. There are a lot of PA and the Army announced their “final rule” pieces to the puzzle.” establishing a new definition of “waters of the Sackett, which was argued in October by United States” on December 30, 2022. the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), Sacramento, “The final rule restores essential water protections California, aims to clarify what that were in place prior to 2015 under constitutes navigable water and, the Clean Water Act for traditional The Clean Water Act says thus, the scope of federal power navigable waters, the territorial that the federal government over private property under the seas, and interstate waters as well can regulate navigable waters, federal Clean Water Act (CWA), as upstream water resources that and through this rule they’ve PLF said. The plaintiffs are significantly affect those waters,” basically extended that Chantell and Mike Sackett, an EPA said. definition to reach far inland. Idaho couple who the U.S. EPA The rule gives the federal The way they have written prohibited from building a home government more control over on their land after they obtained [the rule], their definition private property than a rule the necessary local permits. implemented during the Trump is so vague that it gives EPA claimed the Sacketts’ administration’s, but is not quite federal agencies the ability to construction violated the CWA as overreaching as the Obama subjectively determine what because their property was a administration’s rule that preceded a navigable water is and what federally regulated “navigable the Trump rule, Byfield said. applies under this rule. water” over which the agency Continued on page 3
E
“
“
Conveyors & Conveyor Parts