New EPA Rule for Clean Water Protections Would Threaten Fish and Waterfowl

December 11, 2018

The EPA and Army Corps of Engineers proceeds with rolling back Clean Water Act protections for headwater streams and wetlands—harming trout, waterfowl, and outdoor recreation businesses

Today, the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers took the next step to replace an Obama-era rule that benefited headwater streams and wetlands across the country. The new rule would redefine which waters are eligible for Clean Water Act protections and leave important habitat for fish and waterfowl vulnerable to pollution and destruction.

The rule proposed today would remove Clean Water Act protections for ephemeral streams, which only flow in response to rainfall, and likely excludes intermittent streams, which only flow during wet seasons. These waters are important for fish and wildlife, especially in the West.

Under the new rule, adjacent wetlands will only receive protection if they are physically connected to other jurisdictional waters. This disregards the EPA’s own research that shows wetlands and ephemeral and intermittent streams, even those that lack surface connection, provide important biological and chemical functions that affect downstream waters.

“No matter which party holds the power in Washington, the needs of America’s hunters and anglers have not changed since we supported the 2015 Clean Water Rule—all streams and wetlands are crucial to supporting healthy fish and waterfowl populations that power our sports, and an entire swath of these important habitats does not deserve to be overlooked or written off on a technicality,” says Whit Fosburgh, president and CEO of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership. “Sportsmen and women will remain engaged in the public process of creating a new rule for how our smaller streams and wetlands are regulated, because our quintessentially American traditions in the outdoors depend on it.”

“The agencies’ refusal to consider the science is detrimental to the integrity and security of our fish and wildlife resources,” says Doug Austen, executive director of the American Fisheries Society. “Headwater streams are key to the sustainability of fish stocks in both upstream and downstream waters. Now, species that are already in trouble will be harder to recover, and more species will be at risk of becoming imperiled. Loss of protections for these waters will have grave ecological consequences for fish and fisheries—and ultimately the communities across the U.S. will lose the economic, social, and cultural benefits that are derived from headwater streams.”

“This proposal is fundamentally flawed for one simple reason: It focuses on the wrong criteria—continuous flow of water—rather than protecting water quality in our rivers, lakes, and drinking water reservoirs,” says Scott Kovarovics, executive director of the Izaak Walton League of America. “This misguided approach is completely unsupported by science and common sense, and it not only jeopardizes public health, it will undermine the $887-billion outdoor recreation economy.”

The Obama administration finalized its Clean Water Rule in 2015 and clarified that the Clean Water Act protects smaller streams and wetlands. The Trump administration’s rule embraces the minority opinion written by late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on what constitutes the “Waters of the U.S.”

Scalia’s definition was not adopted by the Supreme Court and is not supported by hunters and anglers. In fact, 80 percent of sportsmen and women in a 2018 poll said Clean Water Act protections should apply to headwater streams and wetlands. Additionally, 92 percent believe that we should strengthen or maintain current clean water standards, not relax them.

“The administration’s new proposal turns its back on the importance of small headwater streams to healthy waterways and sportfishing recreation,” says Chris Wood, president and CEO of Trout Unlimited. “Small headwater streams are like the roots of our trees, the capillaries of our arteries. Sportsmen and women know that all the benefits of our larger streams, rivers, and bays downstream are dependent on the health of our small streams.”

Today’s proposed rulemaking would roll back protections on diverse wetland habitats, including prairie potholes in the Great Plains region. Also known as America’s duck factory, these wetlands support more than 50 percent of our country’s migratory waterfowl. Since the Supreme Court created confusion about the application of the Clean Water Act in the 2000s, America has experienced accelerated wetlands loss—only 40 to 50 percent of the original prairie potholes remain.

“From wetlands in the prairie potholes region to the riparian areas that are critical to 80 percent of all wildlife—including big game—our hunting and fishing traditions can’t exist without clean water,” says Land Tawney, president and CEO of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers. “Hunters and anglers will not stand for shortsighted policies that weaken protections and threaten the integrity of fish and wildlife habitats currently safeguarded by bedrock conservation laws like the Clean Water Act.”

The new rulemaking could also threaten America’s outdoor recreation businesses and communities that rely on tourism spending related to hunting and fishing.

“No one who loves the outdoors wants to fish a lake covered in toxic algae, duck hunt near a bulldozed wetland, or pitch a tent next to sewage ditch,” says Collin O’Mara, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation. “Yet more water pollution is exactly what will happen if the administration dismantles clean water protections. It’s bad for wildlife, and it’s bad for the nearly 8 million jobs powered by the outdoor recreation economy.”

Today’s proposal will be published in the Federal Register here. At that time, the public will have 60 days to comment.

6 Responses to “New EPA Rule for Clean Water Protections Would Threaten Fish and Waterfowl”

Alan Harper December 15, 2018

Trump administration doesn’t care about the environment

December 15, 2018 at 12:41 am

Reply
sam knotts December 15, 2018

Do not dismantle clean water protections as they are now.

December 15, 2018 at 7:15 am

Reply
George Bogenschutz December 15, 2018

As a S.Dakota resident I can personally, emphatically, support the need for stronger, not weaker protections for our water resources. It is utterly shameful for S.D to be listed in the top 10 most polluted rivers list!! And “they” try to tell us that “non-point” pollution is not a problem? I lived in Colorado for 5 years and had to make do with the typical well out there that might produce as much as 1/3 gallon per minute – that teaches one the value of clean water!

December 15, 2018 at 9:42 pm

Reply
Greg Alspach December 16, 2018

I strongly oppose the proposed EPA revision to the Clean Water Act, especially those regarding temporary and ephemeral waterways. Although they may occasionally look like nothing more than dry gulches, they are important to maintaining quality fisheries and wetlands throughout the year. I support clean water in all of the United States and urge you to reconsider this revision.

December 16, 2018 at 9:08 am

Reply
Hugh Carola December 18, 2018

I agree 100% with the above comments. And if I may:
THIS is the issue that bloody well should unite EVERYONE who loves the outdoors and finds their true sense of belonging in the woods, in the field and on the water. REGARDLESS of why you go there, whether it be to fish, hunt, bird, hike, paddle or any other reason, this insane proposal attacks every single one of us. And as such, we need to stand together as ONE to fight against this rollback, fight FOR clean water and in defense of the Public Trust!
Ducks Unlimited – Are you listening?

December 18, 2018 at 1:59 pm

Reply
Juan Carlos Perez December 20, 2018

I support stronger laws for both streams that are always running and also streams that only run when rain is present. I’m tired of seeing non-stop development and not having representatives who do not stop and think about our lands future and how we will live side by side with it.

December 20, 2018 at 2:26 pm

Reply

Do you have any thoughts on this post?

Click here to cancel reply.

by: Kristyn Brady

posted in: Habitat and Clean Water

December 10, 2018

Farm Bill Agreement Includes Boost for Access and Habitat Programs

Passage before the end of this Congress would deliver certainty for landowners and sportsmen who use walk-in access

House and Senate negotiators have reached an agreement on provisions to be included in the 2018 Farm Bill, setting lawmakers up to pass legislation that makes significant investments in land and water conservation and boosts support for hunting and fishing access.

This is welcome news to farmers, ranchers, landowners, and sportsmen and women, who depend on farm bill programs to restore and improve wildlife habitat, enhance water quality, and make private acres available for hunting and fishing.

“We’re relieved to see a Farm Bill move forward before this Congress concludes, because every day we go without critical programs for habitat and access it creates more uncertainty for rural America,” says Whit Fosburgh, president and CEO of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership. “With full funding for conservation and increased funding for states to create new walk-in access for hunting and fishing, this bill is a win all around—for sportsmen and women, landowners, wildlife, water quality, and our economy.”

The agreement includes a $10-million increase for the Voluntary Public Access program, which funds walk-in access for hunting and fishing on private land across the country.

“Since the 2014 Farm Bill expired this fall, it has been tough for landowners like me to make definitive decisions about how to put conservation on the ground, despite having the best intentions,” says Zane Zaubi of Horizon Land Development, who hosts youth and first-time hunters on land he has enrolled in VPA. “For farmers, ranchers, and landowners across the country who are willing to do the right thing, it’s a tremendous positive to have a Farm Bill on the horizon, ready to work for our business portfolios, local wildlife, and access to hunting and fishing.”

The conference committee was able to agree on providing increased funding for the Agriculture Conservation Easement Program, which helps landowners protect, restore, and improve wetlands. The legislation also provides a much needed increase in funding and flexibility for the Regional Conservation Partnership Program, which funds multi-state and watershed-scale projects to enhance soil, water, and wildlife conservation.

For all the benefits of farm bill conservation and access programs, click here..

by: TRCP Staff

posted in: Habitat and Clean Water

December 7, 2018

Featured Podcast: Will Congress Act in Time to Pass a 2018 Farm Bill?

Tune in to find out how the Farm Bill could enhance habitat and access on private land—if lawmakers can strike a deal in time

The hosts of the Your Mountain Podcast remind us that decisions are being made every day that could affect your land, water, and wildlife. So you should know about them. That couldn’t be more true right now, when we’re anxiously awaiting an agreement on the next Farm Bill. This critical legislation helps landowners implement conservation practices and open hunting and fishing access you wouldn’t otherwise have in rural America.

Here’s what you need to know about the time crunch and how conservation could lose out if lawmakers need to start the process all over again next Congress.

Learn more about the Your Mountain Podcast here.

by: Kristyn Brady

posted in: Habitat and Clean Water

December 6, 2018

BLM’s Revised Sage Grouse Plans Continue Conservation But Create Uncertainty

The agency’s revised sage grouse conservation plans for 11 Western states will play a major role in determining the future of the sagebrush ecosystem, which supports more than 350 species

Today, the Bureau of Land Management revealed its revised plans to conserve greater sage grouse populations across nearly 70 million acres of public land in 11 Western states. The Trump administration’s approach will replace the original Obama-era plans, which helped to give the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service confidence that the species did not warrant listing as threatened or endangered in 2015.

While the state-specific plans maintain the basic framework of the originals, which were created through years of collaborative effort, the new plans do not provide the same safeguards for certain sagebrush habitats. There is more potential for development and mineral extraction within sage grouse habitat in the new plans. Combined with the Department of Interior’s policy shift on habitat mitigation, this could be cause for concern.

“These new plans are a mixed bag, with some changes addressing legitimate requests from the states to help align with their conservation approaches and other changes stripping back protections for core sage grouse habitat and creating more uncertainty for the West,” says Whit Fosburgh, president and CEO of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership.

“Unless the impacts of development are properly mitigated to avoid further habitat loss, sage grouse could easily become a candidate for the threatened and endangered species list yet again. Success will ultimately come down to implementing these new plans to the letter, and never wavering from an approach that produces results for sage grouse populations and other species that depend on the sagebrush ecosystem. We will continue working with the BLM, the states, industry, and local partners to ensure that happens,” says Fosburgh.

Changes That Create Uncertainty

The revised plans eliminate focal areas, a subset of about 11 million acres of priority habitat on BLM land that would have been permanently withdrawn from any potential mineral extraction in the 2015 plans. The original no-surface occupancy policy remains—meaning infrastructure for development cannot be built on priority habitat—but the revised plans also give the BLM more flexibility to waive these protections in certain cases.

Mitigation also remains a sticking point, now that the Department of the Interior maintains that it lacks legal authority to require developers to pay for any negative impacts to habitat. (Quick tip: Here’s a metaphor that helps explain mitigation using beer!) This shifts the onus of regulation to the individual states, each of which has different mitigation standards and legal requirements. The states now must ensure their mitigation approaches are not only effective at curbing habitat loss, but also at holding all developers accountable on a level playing field.

“We cannot manage grouse at a level where we are only one major event away from having to list the bird,” says Steve Belinda, executive director of the North American Grouse Partnership. “Habitat, particularly on public lands, must be managed to withstand events we cannot control, like drought, fire, and disease, so conservation can be balanced with energy development, grazing, and other human activities we can control.”

No Time to Waste

The Trump administration first initiated a review of the original conservation plans in 2017. Since that time, secretarial orders and instruction memorandums issued by the DOI set the stage for amending the 2015 plans and changing how habitat is prioritized in relation to eligibility for oil and gas leasing.
A year ago, 105 wildlife and habitat experts urged the BLM and Secretary Zinke not to deviate from what the best science indicates is necessary in sagebrush country. They warned that major amendments to the 2015 plans and a lengthy delay in implementing conservation work could drastically alter the course for habitat conservation and undo years of hard work.

This is time that sage grouse don’t have to waste.

It will be important to move forward swiftly with implementation of any plan to conserve sagebrush habitat and begin tracking the effectiveness of conservation measures. “Whatever approach we take, the outcome for sage grouse and sagebrush habitat will need to be legally defensible,” says Dr. Steve Williams, president of the Wildlife Management Institute and former director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “If there is not enough regulatory certainty, if there is too much flexibility leading to negative impacts on habitat, and it is determined that our actions were not effective, we may end up facing a legal challenge deeper than the one we started from years ago. At that point, it’s difficult to see a future where sage grouse aren’t reconsidered for listing.”

“The scale and magnitude of sage grouse conservation planning, while extraordinary, has always been an enormous experiment, and management actions largely remain untested,” says Dr. Ed Arnett, chief scientist for the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership. “We need solid research and monitoring to demonstrate that management efforts implemented in these plans are, in fact, good for grouse. Until we see conservation manifested on the ground, we still just have good intentions for habitat and birds on paper in planning documents.”

The U.S. Forest Service is finalizing its own amendments to eight forest plans dealing with sage grouse conservation in the West. The public comment period for those proposed amendments closes on January 3, 2019.

by: Kristyn Brady

posted in: Habitat and Clean Water

November 21, 2018

We Make Time for the Outdoors, So Why Not for Conservation?

The TRCP is joining forces with REI to urge you to #OptOutside on Black Friday—and get more involved every day in the conservation issues that matter

As we prepare for the Thanksgiving holiday weekend, we’re proud to link arms once again with our friends at REI—and hundreds of global brands—to urge hunters and anglers to #OptOutside.

This year’s theme is about breaking our routines and finding time to spend in the outdoors. And this resonates with many of us, even if, as hunters and anglers, we probably go outside more than the average American. No matter how many days you log in the woods or on the water, don’t you feel the tug of your smartphone screen or the ping of a busy schedule?

This is a troubling factor in the decline of hunter participation overall, and certainly one that we need to reckon with to ensure the future of our traditions.

It never hurts to slow down, shut our devices off, and head down the trail to where true adventure is within our reach—even if we may be unreachable for a few hours. But making time to enjoy the outdoors (and derive the cortisol-lowering benefits of testing ourselves in the pursuit of game and fish) is only meeting half the need.

It’s also critical that we prioritize taking action to safeguard our outdoor recreation opportunities for the next generation.

Engaging in the fight for well-managed public lands, cleaner water, better habitat, more funding for conservation, and stronger outdoor recreation businesses looks different for everyone. You might donate to an organization you trust. (After all, Giving Tuesday is coming up—hint hint.) You might sign a petition, attend a workday, or share an article on social media that taught you something about conservation, hoping others will learn from it, too.

But how many times has something like this happened: You get an email about an upcoming meeting hosted by your local BLM field office to collect public comments on a proposed plan for managing public lands in your area. As someone who cares about the fish and wildlife resources and hunting and fishing opportunities on these lands, the stakes are pretty high for you, and your opinion carries a lot of weight in this public process. But the meeting is on a weekday night and you’re not sure you understand all the issues. You delete the email.

Or this: You’re scrolling through your Instagram feed and see a call to action about the lapsed Farm Bill. A conservation organization you trust says that we lose out every day we go without the programs that help farmers improve habitat and walk-in access for hunting and fishing, and it’s imperative that we pressure Congress to take urgent action. You click the link in their bio, but then a stream of text messages come in that you need to respond to, and before you know it, you’re late to drop the kids off somewhere.

Getting more involved in conservation isn’t always convenient, especially when it’s all we can do to carve out time to actually use our hunting and fishing licenses or the access we worked hard to secure with a landowner’s permission. Still, the routine we may need to break is the one where we tell ourselves, “I’ll do it later,” “This is not my fight,” or worse, “Someone else will do it.”

It’s up to all of us to find the time and energy to dedicate ourselves to the conservation issues that will determine whether or not our children and grandchildren have quality places to hunt and fish. We must sign up, step up, and speak out for more responsible management of public lands, stronger habitat and access incentives for private landowners, and the best possible clean water standards and conservation funding levels.

As REI reminds us, #OptOutside is about more than a company making a bold move on Black Friday. It’s about inspiring a movement.

So find the time. Stretch your legs and your mind. Replenish your soul in the outdoors. Then, when you finally head back to your screens and social networks, do whatever you can, whenever you can, to support conservation.

Need more inspiration? Watch our Wake the Woods video now.