How’s this for a hook: The golf industry is fighting the Obama administration.
Multiple golf organizations, including the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America, are part of a group lobbying against a proposed EPA-Army Corps of Engineers rule they say will harm the game. The “Waters of the United States” rule, issued in April, aims to settle what jurisdiction the federal government has over bodies of water under the Clean Water Act — and whereas the administration says the rule amounts to a “clarification” in the wake of recent Supreme Court rulings, the golf industry sees it as a dangerous encroachment.
“We support the Clean Water Act and can see that there is a need to clarify some of the jurisdictional questions, but this proposed regulation goes too far,” Mark Johnson of GCSAA said in a statement. “It is not the answer. It would bring unnecessary challenges to everyone, not just the golf industry.”
The GCSAA warned that the new rule could subject all drainage ditches, storm water ditches and water storage or treatment ponds on golf courses to the possibility of federal regulation, adding regulatory burdens that would keep course managers from doing their jobs and costs that could make the game more expensive.
In addition to the GCSAA, such golf heavyweights as the PGA of America are part of the broader coalition, known as the Waters Advocacy Coalition, pushing against the rule. The PGA hadn’t returned a request for comment at the time of publication.
The advocacy effort comes amid a House of Representatives-led drive to blunt the rule. The chamber approved legislation Tuesday evening that would block implementation of the proposal and require the EPA and Corps to consult with local and state officials on crafting recommendations for a new, presumably less ambitious definition of federal waters. The golf groups signed their names to a letter approving the bill.
“We believe the course of action set forth in the bill will lay a foundation for the resolution of this controversial and divisive issue in a way that achieves environmental benefits and ensures our nation’s ability to engage in the robust economic activity that sustains and supports Americans working in all sectors of the American economy,” the coalition wrote.
The EPA maintains that concerns about the rule’s overreach are unfounded. It says that the Supreme Court caused certain U.S. waters to fall into a “gray area,” necessitating a regulation to provide landowners certainty about who holds jurisdiction over their waters and lessen their risk to litigation. The agency says its rule achieves that goal, since it will “[reduce] the amount of waters in this gray area.”
Whether or not that leads to an increase in the amount of waters in a more well-defined area — one subject to the federal government — is what’s at issue.
This story has been updated.
