Creed Irena F, Lane Charles R, Serran Jacqueline N, Alexander Laurie C, Basu Nandita B, Calhoun Aram J K, Christensen Jay R, Cohen Matthew J, Craft Christopher, D'Amico Ellen, DeKeyser Edward, Fowler Laurie, Golden Heather E, Jawitz James W, Kalla Peter, Kirkman L Katherine, Lang Megan, Leibowitz Scott G, Lewis David B, Marton John, McLaughlin Daniel L, Raanan-Kiperwas Hadas, Rains Mark C, Rains Kai C, Smith Lora
Department of Biology, Western University, London, ON N6A 5B7, Canada.
US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) Office of Research and Development, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268, USA.
Nat Geosci. 2017;10(11):809-815. doi: 10.1038/ngeo3041.
Governments worldwide do not adequately protect their limited freshwater systems and therefore place freshwater functions and attendant ecosystem services at risk. The best available scientific evidence compels enhanced protections for freshwater systems, especially for impermanent streams and wetlands outside of floodplains that are particularly vulnerable to alteration or destruction. New approaches to freshwater sustainability - implemented through scientifically informed adaptive management - are required to protect freshwater systems through periods of changing societal needs. One such approach introduced in the US in 2015 is the Clean Water Rule, which clarified the jurisdictional scope for federally protected waters. However, within hours of its implementation litigants convinced the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to stay the rule, and the subsequently elected administration has now placed it under review for potential revision or rescission. Regardless of its outcome at the federal level, policy and management discussions initiated by the propagation of this rare rulemaking event have potential far-reaching implications at all levels of government across the US and worldwide. At this timely juncture, we provide a scientific rationale and three policy options for all levels of government to meaningfully enhance protection of these vulnerable waters. A fourth option, a 'do-nothing' approach, is wholly inconsistent with the well-established scientific evidence of the importance of these vulnerable waters.
世界各国政府未能充分保护其有限的淡水系统,从而使淡水功能及相关生态系统服务面临风险。现有最佳科学证据表明,需要加强对淡水系统的保护,尤其是对洪泛区以外特别容易遭到改变或破坏的临时性溪流和湿地的保护。为在社会需求不断变化的时期保护淡水系统,需要通过基于科学的适应性管理来实施新的淡水可持续发展方法。美国于2015年推出的《清洁水规则》就是这样一种方法,该规则明确了联邦保护水域的管辖范围。然而,在其实施后的数小时内,诉讼当事人说服美国第六巡回上诉法院暂停该规则,随后当选的政府现已对其进行审查,可能会对其进行修订或废除。无论其在联邦层面的结果如何,这一罕见的规则制定事件引发的政策和管理讨论在美国乃至全球各级政府都可能产生深远影响。在这个关键时刻,我们为各级政府提供一个科学依据和三种政策选择,以切实加强对这些脆弱水域的保护。第四个选择,即“不作为”的方法,与这些脆弱水域重要性的既定科学证据完全不符。