Changing the Clean Water Act

Brown and Caldwell Water News has an exclusive article on the effect two cases before the US Supreme Court might have on the Clean Water Act (CWA).

At issue is, largely, the definition of "navigable waters".

The 1972 act states that the government has the right to protect "navigable waters," but justices must wrestle with how to define that term and whether the law includes smaller creeks that reach remote, navigable waterways. The U.S. government contends that the act extends to wetlands, small rivers and even dry creek beds.

In order to be protected, does a waterway have to be deep enough to float a boat, or is it "navigable" when you can walk through it?

Environmentalists want CWA protections extended to smaller streams, creeks, dry river beds and seasonal rivers, mud puddles, and the like because of the possibility of flushing contaminants into navigable waterways. When it rains, anything that may have been dumped into a dry creek bed will be washed downstream and impact a navigable waterway.

One thing I note in the definitions portion of the CWA:

(7) The term “navigable waters” means the waters of the United States, including the territorial seas.

I'm not sure what "the waters" means. Maybe it does mean that when someone leaves a hose running, that's a navigable water, according to the Act.