Continuing its changes in environmental regulations, the Trump administration announced its plans to drastically rewrite the definition of what constitutes "waters of the United States" under the Clean Water Act, paving the way for lessened protections for certain streams and wetlands.
The new language, unveiled Dec. 11 by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, specifically limits or removes protections for vernal pools — bodies of water that appear only after heavy seasonal rains — and wetlands and streams that are not "physically and meaningfully connected" to larger navigable bodies of water. The connections must also be on the surface; subsurface connections between waterways, connections protected under regulations from the administrations of Barack Obama and George W. Bush would no longer be recognized.
Why the rule change
This pothole lake in Wisconsin State Natural Area No. 66 relies on rains to stay full and support wildlife. (Photo: Joshua Mayer/Flickr)
The new language is seen as a rebuttal to 2015 definitions laid out by the Obama administration. These definitions provided vernal pools and smaller waterways strong protections from development and pollution, like industrial and agricultural runoff. The rules, which were never enacted nationally due to various legal proceedings, were considered confusing and a land grab enacted by the federal government by a group of critics made up of farmers, landowners and real estate developers. Opponents within these groups felt the rules infringed on rights to use their land how they saw fit.
The Obama administration's definitions were a 2016 campaign talking point for President Trump, who referred to them as "one of the worst examples of federal regulation" and vowed to review and repeal them during his tenure in office. In February 2017, Trump issued an executive order calling for that process to begin. By July 2018, the administration was moving forward with the repeal, saying the earlier definitions placed too much emphasis on scientific surveys and not enough on the legal history of the Clean Water Act.
Vernal pools aren't always pretty, but they are pretty important. (Photo: Chris Phan/Flickr)
The Trump administration bases its new rules on the opinion of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in the 2006 Supreme Court case Rapanos v. United States, a case about federal jurisdiction over isolated wetlands. Scalia believed the Clean Water Act only applied to "relatively permanent" bodies of water, with the other bodies falling under state jurisdiction. Scalia's opinion was not adopted by the court itself.
The Clean Water Act was a point of contention long before the Obama administration tackled it. The primary point of focus has been what is considered a navigable body of water, and how those ephemeral pools and streams fit into the rules. NPR offers a good survey of the debate leading up to the 2017 executive order.
Portions of the Delmarva Peninsula, the largest peninsula on the East Coast, may lose protections under the revised rules. The peninsula lies in Delaware and parts of Maryland and Virginia. (Photo: Michael Alford/Shutterstock)
For critics of the 2015 definitions, the proposed rule changes — which have a 60-day comment period before a final version of the rule is issued — eases what they consider unfair regulatory burdens.
Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler declared, "Our new, more precise definition means that hardworking Americans will spend less time determining whether they need a federal permit and more time upgrading aging infrastructure, building homes, creating jobs and growing crops to feed our families.
"Property owners should be able to stand on their property and be able to tell if a water is federal or not without hiring outside professionals."
What the rule change means for wetlands and vernal pools
The proposed definitions could have significant impacts on wetlands and bodies water that are seasonal rather than permanent. The Center for Biological Diversity noted that the new rules "would virtually eliminate the Clean Water Act's protections across the arid West, from West Texas to Southern California, including most of New Mexico, Arizona and Nevada." The map above, created by the Center for Biological Diversity, shows areas that could lose protections under the new rules.
The potential ramifications of the proposed rule changes are far-reaching, affecting wildlife, the environment and humans alike, especially in the areas mentioned above. According to a study conducted during the Obama administration, 60 percent of all U.S. waterways, and 81 percent in the arid West, are ephemeral or flow seasonally. Current EPA officials dispute these numbers, saying there isn't a way to confirm them. Officials did not offer other numbers.
This vernal pool is located at the Santa Rosa Plateau in California's Riverside County. It may no longer receive federal water protections. (Photo: Joanna Gilkeson/Pacific Southwest Region USFWS/Flickr)
Wetlands and vernal pools provide vital support for wildlife. Some amphibians, in particular, rely on vernal pools to safely reproduce since, due to the ephemeral nature of the pools, fish aren't there to eat them or their eggs. Additionally, some amphibians must spawn in the same place they were spawned themselves. Migratory birds also rely on them for water and food since plants that are dormant during fall and winter months will flourish following the rains, attracting insects (which the amphibians also enjoy eating).
Developing or polluting these areas could destroy these habitats. The Center for Biological Diversity says the proposed rules could accelerate the extinction of more than 75 different species, including the steelhead trout and the California tiger salamander.
"This sickening gift to polluters will result in more dangerous toxic pollution dumped into waterways across a vast stretch of America," said Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the center. "The Trump administration’s radical proposal would destroy millions of acres of wetlands, pushing imperiled species like steelhead trout closer to extinction."
Polluting these ephemeral bodies of water and wetlands could also have impacts on drinking water. The Los Angeles Times reports that, per another Obama-era EPA study, 1 in 3 Americans get at least some of their drinking water from ephemeral streams. Additionally, despite the proposed rules no longer acknowledging subsurface connections between wetlands and seasonal bodies of water to navigable waters, the pollution could still leak into those permanent bodies of water, affecting those habitats as well.
Vernal pools support wildlife and the environment all over the country, including these pools in Triangle, New York. (Photo: Andy Arthur/Flickr)
"They're trying to sidestep the science," Mark Ryan, a water expert who used to work at the EPA, told The Guardian. "The science is pretty clear that whatever happens at the top of the watershed affects the bottom of the watershed."
Many states, like California, have their own, more stringent rules in place, or adopted the Obama-era rules as their own. Other states, however, simply aren't prepared to take over or replace regulatory systems established by previous federal guidelines, some of which that date back to the George H.W. Bush administration and were expanded by George W. Bush.
"It is hard to overstate the impact of this," Blan Holman, managing attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center told the Times. "This would be taking a sledgehammer to the Clean Water Act and rolling things back to a place we haven't been since it was passed [in 1972]. It is a huge threat to water quality across the country."