Cookie Policy

We use cookies to give you the best experience of our website. By using EDA, you agree to our Privacy Policy , including cookie policy.

The information in this Cookie Policy is provided to you in an open and transparent way, so that you can see how cookies are used to enrich your visitor experience and make an informed choice to allow their usage. However, if you wish to delete cookies, this can be done via settings in your web browser. Below you can read more about our use of cookies.


When you visit this website your online device will automatically receive one or several cookies, which are transferred from this website to your internet browser.

What is a cookie?

A cookie is a small text file. It does not contain any personal information and is not able to collect information. Two types of cookies can be used, “session-only” and “persistent”. “Session-only” cookies are deleted when you end your browser session. “Persistent cookies” remain on your device for the time period set in the cookie after which time they delete themselves. However, these cookies may be renewed every time you visit the website.

Cookie types

It is common to distinguish between first-party cookies and third-party cookies. First-party cookies are allocated to the website that you visit while third-party cookies come from a third-party, such as a web analytics program.

Why does Jysk use cookies?

We use cookies to assess content usage and to compile statistics about the use of the website in order to improve the user experience. This data may be used to define where the visitors come from, what content is viewed and for how long. This information cannot be used to identify a visitor as an individual. Both first-party and third-party cookies may be used on this website.

How long will cookies be stored on my computer?

Cookie lifetime may vary. Some cookies will disappear when you close the browser while others exist for longer. For more information on cookie expiry see the cookie declaration.

Can I still visit the website if the cookie-function is disabled?

Yes. Should you have cookies disabled on your online device, you will continue to have the same access to the website content as with cookies enabled. However, some functions such as surveys and tools might operate with reduced functionality or not at all.

How to avoid or delete a cookie?

Most browsers accept cookies by default. You can alter your browser settings to not accept cookies or delete the cookies from your computer. Different web browsers may use different methods for managing cookies. Please follow the instructions below, from the most common web browser manufacturers directly, to configure your browser settings*.

* These links are to third party sites, over which we have no control – no liability can be claimed if they are inaccurate.

Strictly necessary cookies help make a website navigable by activating basic functions such as page navigation and access to secure website areas. Without these cookies, the website would not be able to work properly.

Functional cookies make it possible to save information that changes the way the website appears or acts. For instance your preferred language or region.

Statistical cookies help the website owner understand how visitors interact with the website by collecting and reporting information.

Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and interesting to the individual user and thus more valuable for publishers and third-party advertisers.

We are in the process of classifying unclassified cookies together with the providers of the individual cookies.

President Trump’s Opening Salvos on Clean Water—and Other Public Health Safeguards

March 14, 2017


Earlier this month we published two posts about the concerns that we are seeing regarding the future of clean water with the US Administration’s desire to severely weaken the Environmental Protection Agency.  In combination with an Executive Order intending to rescind regulations preventing pollution of our rivers, lakes and streams, the head of the EPA has taken steps in his early days in his position to weaken the entire agency.

We believe that it is in our best interest to spread the word about the importance of maintaining the protection of our water for our generation today and for future generations.  As humans, we can live without a lot of things – but water is not one of those.  We must have clean water to survive; we cannot allow the economic interests of a few to cause irreversible harm to this Common resource.

Earlier this week, we heard two things from President Trump about clean water. In his address to the joint session of Congress on Tuesday night, he talked about protecting and ensuring clean water. That’s an important goal and one broadly shared by the American public.

But a day earlier, he signed an Executive Order (EO) to get rid of a rule that would actually help keep water clean. And two weeks before that, he signed off on a congressional action that rolled back a rule limiting the coal mining industry from dumping mining waste in streams and waterways. There’s some serious cognitive dissonance going on here.

Like clean water?

Rhetorical question. Everyone recognizes the essential role that clean water plays in protecting and promoting human health, along with the health of the ecosystems that sustain our wildlife and nourish our spirit when we swim, fish, stroll, or just plain gaze and take it all in. President Trump’s remarks before Congress and the viewing public suggest agreement—at least in principle.

Yet, days before making these remarks, he issued an Executive Order (EO) directing Scott Pruitt’s EPA to start of the process of rescinding regulation aimed at preventing water pollution in small streams, headwaters, and wetlands. President-2

In his words, “With today’s executive order, I’m directing the EPA to take action, paving the way for the elimination of this very destructive and horrible rule.”

We’re not talking puddles here, though that’s a clever ruse for the regulation’s detractors. These bodies of water feed into larger ones downstream, so keeping them clean and pollution-free is just common sense. And the peer-reviewed science supports what seems intuitively obvious.

Politics trumping science and public health?

The so-called Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule was not just some new and arbitrary regulation. It was a carefully considered clarification of the types of water subject to EPA protection under the Clean Water Act, prompted by a Supreme Court decision and some very solid science. Now water under the bridge, so to speak, because the Administration seems bent on dismantling and undermining the very public health and environmental protections Congress required when it enacted the Clean Water Act in 1972.

This latest assault on science-based regulation should give us great pause. It’s another worrisome signal that politics and industry influence could trump the public interest when it comes to public health and environmental safeguards. It follows an EO at the end of January that directed federal agencies to identify for elimination two regulations for every new one they might propose.

These efforts don’t get rid of ‘unnecessary’ protections. They can actually make us less safe, less healthy, and are based on a false premise—that we must choose between our health and safety and economic growth. Not so. We can and have had growth while strengthening protections for clean water. After all, the Clean Water Act has been around since 1972 and while our economy has grown enormously, our water has gotten cleaner. Just look at Boston Harbor or the Charles River here in Cambridge, or thousands of other places around the country. The Clean Water Act says it is the goal of the US for our waters to be fishable and swimmable. Does that sound extreme? What does sound extreme is that 2 for 1 directive that agencies eliminate two for any one new regulation needed to protect our health, safety, or environment.

Stand up for science

The US public wants and relies on the safeguards and protections that our agencies—at all levels of government—provide.  And they want these protections to be informed by the best available scientific evidence. It’s no quick and easy feat to develop (and may I add rescind) a rule or regulation; it’s a painstaking process based on science and significant public input. Public health and safety should be a top priority, not politics or the pockets of the most powerful interests. Science-based policy is in the public interest, and we need everyone—scientists and non-scientists alike—to stand up for science. We  have developed a toolkit to help. Join us and others in this effort.

Article by:  Kathleen Rest, executive director

Originally published by Union of Concerned Scientists

Written by Tracy Edmonds

Written by
Tracy Edmonds

Share with friends

Share on email
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin

Sign up for our newsletter

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.