Keep up with essential planning news and commentary, delivered to your inbox every Monday and Thursday.
EPA and Army Corps of Engineers Propose Revision of Wetlands Definition
"The proposal, announced Tuesday at the Environmental Protection Agency, would change the EPA's definition of 'waters of the United States,' or WOTUS, limiting the types of waterways that fall under federal protection to major waterways, their tributaries, adjacent wetlands...," reports Nathan Rott for NPR. [Audio available on source article.] The rule is also referred to as the Clean Water Rule.
Targeted are streams and wetlands that do not flow year-round that were added in 2015 by the Obama administration after much controversy. "For years, Republican opponents, agriculture groups and real estate developers have decried that move as a regulatory overreach," notes Rott.
Under EPA's proposal, the only wetlands that will be federally protected are those that are adjacent to a major body of water, or ones that are connected to a major waterway by surface water.
If the new rule is approved and passes legal challenges, which are expected, the result would be loss of federal protection for "millions of acres of waterways and wetlands, including up to two-thirds of California’s inland streams," reports Evan Halper for the Los Angeles Times.
At stake are billions of dollars in potential development rights, the quality of drinking water for tens of millions of Americans and rules that affect farming in much of the country, as well as wildlife habitat for most of the nation’s migratory birds and many other species.
For example, Rott of NPR interviews Randy Noel, chairman of the National Association of Home Builders, who said the new proposal should make it easier for development to take place.
"As a home builder, I'm pretty excited about it because we hadn't had any lots to build on," he said.
Noel lives in south Louisiana, an area with a lot of wetlands. He says developers were running scared because it wasn't ever clear which wetlands were federally regulated and which weren't. "Hopefully this re-definition will fix that," he said.
On the opposing side, Rott speaks with Chris Wood, president of Trout Unlimited, a nonprofit group dedicated to conservation of streams and other habitats for trout. But it's not only fishing that has Wood concerned.
Wood said this rule could affect people's drinking water. For that reason, he said, "if need be and we find it deeply flawed enough, we will likely litigate."
"This proposal is reckless. Given the problems facing our lakes, streams and wetlands from the beaches of Florida to the drinking water of Toledo, now is the time to strengthen protections for our waterways, not weaken them.
On the PBS Newshour on Tuesday night, Coral Davenport, energy and environmental reporter for The New York Times (see her piece), tells anchor Judy Woodruff that the proposed revision extends beyond the Obama protections to those added under both Bush administrations.
- United States
- Government / Politics
- Land Use
- Bush Administration
- Clean Water Act
- Clean Water Rule
- Drinking Water
- Obama Administration
- Regulation Rollback
- Trump Administration
- Waters of the United States Rule
- National Association of Home Builders
- Natural Resources Defense Council
- Trout Unlimited
- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- Coral Davenport
- Jon Devine
- Evan Halper
- Randy Noel
- Nathan Rott
- Andrew Wheeler
- Chris Woods