>

then there's Flint, MI
This is great an all, until another member of the GOP is elected and they have their head of the EPA roll these back. 
We need to stop relying on an agency whose mandate changes with every election cycle to keep things clean, and start electing people to congress who will make this shit law. >

As someone currently studying to get their wetland delineation certification, this is some great news!! Protect our wetlands!! >

Countdown to Circuit 5 saying that the Founders didn't mean that literally >

"if we look at this obscure law from 1809, we can see that..." >

I'm glad. My property has a small but thriving forested wetland that serves as the keystone of my local ecosystem. I hope this rule protects it from being developed/drained by future owners. >

You realize you can record a conservation easement that would protect that area forever, right? And you even get a tax break if that is donated to a nature group. Win/win. >

Not to rain on any parades, but this is pretty much just going back to the pre-2015 rules.   Which, suburban development was following anyways, since the industry view was that the 2016 EO wasn't going to be a forever situation. >

And companies will seek to sue over the new ruling. Elevating it to the supreme court, who will inevitably dismantle the EPA. 
Idk man, I'm sick of living in this dystopia. >

Sounds good, I hope water quality continues to be routinely tested and that the Government will impose penalties high enough to deter farmers and factories from letting their chemical waste run into waters >

Environmental scientist here!  If it's any reassurance, water is pretty rigorously monitored in this country.  The EPA and state/municipal agencies all test water quality indicators and pollutant concentrations regularly, and the results should be publicly available through the websites of those agencies.
Generally, municipal drinking water and wastewater plant influent/effluent are tested for various contaminants regularly throughout the year, and held to specific standards.  The big problem is making corporations take action if their industrial discharges cause water to fail standards.
We also have federally and state mandated water quality monitoring programs at known polluted sites.  If you look at all the EPA National Priorities List (Superfund) locations, a part of the legal process involves studying the sites to establish baseline water quality, and then periodically testing during and after remedial actions are taken to make sure those actions actually keep the water clean.  We usually do similar monitoring/testing for sediment, soils, vegetation, and animal tissue.