A dire situation is unfolding in Ohio: potentially losing Clean Water Act protections for up to a staggering **96% of its wetlands and streams.** This could have devastating consequences for the state's precious water resources. Let's dive in and understand what's at stake.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to weaken the Clean Water Act rules. These rules currently safeguard over 265,000 acres of wetlands and a remarkable 50,000 miles of streams in Ohio. But here's where it gets controversial: the proposed rule change would drastically alter what qualifies for protection.
According to Angela Blatt, the senior agriculture policy manager at the Alliance for the Great Lakes, the new rule would only protect wetlands that hold surface water during the wet season and directly connect to a continuously flowing or standing body of water. This leaves many critical wetlands and streams vulnerable to pollution and destruction from industrial discharge, agricultural runoff, and development. The EPA, in its press release, suggests the rule will 'cut the red tape' for polluting industries.
This proposed rule is a direct response to a 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Sackett v. EPA, which redefined what constitutes a 'Water of the United States.' Jon Devine, director of freshwater ecosystems at the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC), notes that 'Even the least damaging interpretation of Sackett was a real kick in the teeth for wetland protections nationwide.' He adds that this proposal goes even further than the Supreme Court required.
And this is the part most people miss: the rule shifts wetland protection responsibilities to the states. While Ohio already has its own regulations, many wetlands and streams will lose crucial federal protections that help reduce pollution.
But what does this mean in practice?
NRDC's GIS survey, analyzing the potential impacts of Sackett, estimates that up to 96% of Ohio's wetlands could lose protection. The report outlines different scenarios based on how the Supreme Court ruling is interpreted. Devine believes the EPA's proposal will likely fall somewhere between the more and most damaging scenarios. The NRDC is currently conducting further analysis to better understand the EPA's choices.
Several wetlands near the Cuyahoga River and its tributaries could be left unprotected, making them vulnerable to pollution and development. Tinkers Creek, the largest tributary of the Cuyahoga, is particularly at risk, with large portions of its watershed potentially losing protection. This creek flows through 20 communities and several local, metro, and state parks.
Many wetlands in the Tinkers Creek and Brandywine Creek watersheds could also lose federal funding that helps reduce nonpoint source pollution, which is pollution from runoff after it rains. Erica Matheny, the executive director of the Tinkers Creek Watershed Partners, emphasizes the potential risk to Northeast Ohio's incredible resources, including Cuyahoga Valley National Park and local parks.
The consequences could be severe. Wetlands act as nature's filters, removing toxins before water flows into rivers, lakes, and streams. Without protecting the surrounding wetlands and the streams that feed into them, pollutants from the Cuyahoga's tributaries could return to the river.
Matheny urges that if the rule is enacted, it would be time to call on state and local governments to find alternative means to protect these wetlands. She hopes people will speak up.
What do you think? Do you believe these changes are necessary, or do they pose a significant threat to Ohio's environment? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
Suggested Reading:
Devin Nunnari is an award-winning independent journalist and the founder of Burning River News, Cleveland's environmental newsletter. You can find more of his work at the provided link.
