The Supreme Court on Thursday rolled back federal safeguards for wetlands with the justices' decision in Sackett v. EPA that narrowed the reach of environmental regulations.

The Environmental Protection Agency said Chantell and Michael Sackett's property in Idaho contained wetlands and their backfill of a wet area violated the Clean Water Act. The Sacketts disagreed.

{/sd-embed}

And the conservative Supreme Court sided with the Sacketts.

WORK TO BEGIN ON $150,000 STORMWATER PROJECT IN ASHEVILLE'S SOUTHSIDE COMMUNITY
{/strong}

The Waters Advocacy Coalition{/strong} said it was a significant victory for all farmers and private property owners, including those in Western North Carolina.

{/sd-embed}

Linda Pryor, a third-generation wholesale farmer in Hendersonville, called it a big win.

"The ruling today essentially affirmed what we’ve been saying and that we need to protect farmers' and private property owners' rights for the water that’s on their land,” Pryor said.

GREENWAY PHASE OF KAREN CRAGNOLIN PARK SLATED TO BE FINISHED BY MID-SUMMER
{/strong}

Pryor said they’re not against regulation. But the EPA made a ruling that was too subjective and hard to understand. She said the next step should be for everyone to come together and decide what regulations will best protect the water. But at the same time, the regulations should be realistic and something that can be followed.

She said water is a vital resource and farmers do everything they can to conserve water and prevent runoff. Pryor said farmers limit their plowing as much as they can to prevent runoff into the creeks and streams to prevent pollution.

Pryor said they use a private well on their farm to source the water for their fields. But many other farmers depend on open water resources to obtain water for their crops.

Pryor said that as water sources change over time, people need clear and reasonable regulations to protect those sources.