The U.S. EPA is proposing to weaken Clean Water Act rules that protect more than 265,000 acres of wetlands and 50,000 miles of streams in Ohio.
The proposed rule would only protect wetlands that hold surface water during the wet season and directly touch a continuously flowing or standing body of water, said Angela Blatt, the senior agriculture policy manager at the Alliance for the Great Lakes.
“This leaves many critical wetlands and streams vulnerable to pollution and destruction from industrial discharge, agricultural run off, and development,” Blatt said. According to the EPA press release, the rule would “cut the red tape” for polluting industries like the energy and technology sectors, farmers and developers.
The proposed rule builds off of a 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling called Sackett v. EPA that redefined what qualifies as a Water of The United States.
“Even the least damaging interpretation of Sackett was a real kick in the teeth for wetland protections nationwide,” said Jon Devine, director of freshwater ecosystems at the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC). “This proposal goes even farther than the Supreme Court required.”
This rule leaves wetland protections up to the states. Ohio already has statewide wetland regulations that protect against filling and dredging wetlands without a permit, but many wetlands and streams will lose protections that reduce pollution.
People can tell the U.S. EPA what they think of the proposal by submitting a public comment before Jan. 5.
Where protections would be eroded?
Up to 96% of Ohio’s wetlands could lose protections, according to a GIS survey by NRDC that analyses the potential impacts of Sackett. The report offers three scenarios from damaging to most damaging based on how the Supreme Court ruling is interpreted.
“We believe that the EPA proposal is likely to have impacts somewhere between our more and most damaging scenarios,” Devine said. The NRDC is currently conducting a follow up analysis to better understand how the EPAs choice in wording impacts these projected scenarios.
Several of the wetlands that flank the Cuyahoga River and its tributaries would lose protections under the EPAs new definition of the Waters of The United States, leaving them open for pollution and development.
Tinkers Creek, the largest tributary of the Cuyahoga, would lose protections on large swaths of its watershed. The creek runs through 20 communities and several local, metro and state parks.
Many of the wetlands in the Tinkers Creek and Brandywine Creek watersheds would also lose federal funding support that aids in reducing nonpoint source pollution, or pollution that occurs from runoff after it rains.
“In Northeast Ohio we have such incredible resources, between Cuyahoga Valley National Park, our local parks, and our Metroparks. A lot of that could be at risk if this were to pass,” said Erica Matheny, the executive director of the Tinkers Creek Watershed Partners.
Each of these watersheds are important in their own right, but the collective impact of pollution as each watershed loses protections could be devastating to the Cuyahoga River. Wetlands act as the kidneys of the natural world, filtering out toxins before rainwater enters back into our rivers, lakes and streams. Without protections of surrounding wetlands and the ephemeral streams that lead into these tributaries, all of the pollutants from each offshoot of the Cuyahoga will return to the Crooked River.
“If this rule gets enacted, it would be time to call on our state and local governments and help them find alternative means to protect these wetlands,” Matheny said. “I do feel like we have so much support in Northeast Ohio for our natural areas. I just hope people will speak up.”
