A proposed change to the nation’s Clean Water Act by the Environmental Protection Agency would disrupt the long-held protections for the country’s bodies of water. Local and state conservation groups say Iowa and Illinois have lost 90% or more of their wetlands, and this change would put the remaining vestiges of America’s water systems at risk of pollution and habitat loss.
Director of Water Policy at Prairie Rivers Network in Illinois, Robert Hirschfeld, is one of those ringing the alarm for the impacts of the EPA’s revision. He says the Quad Cities will be particularly vulnerable.
“[T]he Quad Cities have seen flooding relatively frequently, with some it's been really disastrous and damaging for the community. And so I would suggest that it is essential that the Quad Cities protect the wetlands that exist, particularly those wetlands along the Mississippi River, because those wetlands act as a sponge, soaking up stormwater that otherwise it's going to be in your basement, on your street, in your home, in your business,” Hirschfeld said in an interview with WVIK. “I've seen some maps, and it's hard to say for 100% certainty, but I think it would be wise to understand that most of these wetlands, Most, not all, but most of the wetlands in the Quad Cities area are not going to be protected by the Clean Water Act. And so whether it is state policy or local policy to protect these wetlands, that is something extremely important to do, not only to prevent even worse flooding, but to keep your drinking water sources clean.”
The main point of contention is the proposed change that only bodies of water with a continuous surface connection to traditional interstate navigable waters will maintain protections.
Nahant Marsh Executive Director Brian Ritter said that would impact virtually all of the wetlands in Davenport, citing that culverts - pipes allowing the flow of water under roads and bridges- would be excluded from protections.
“And so if you look at the main part of Nahant Marsh, where our education center is, Nahant runs under Wapello Avenue and then runs under Interstate 280 and then ultimately eventually into the Mississippi River,” Ritter said in an interview with WVIK. “But we go through, like three sets of culverts, before we hit the river. Water is still flowing. There's always continuous water between us and the Mississippi River. But I am not sure why the rule has been proposed that if there are culverts - those culverts were not there originally. We didn't put them there. That was somebody long ago who installed them. But there is still connectivity with the river. And wildlife is certainly still moving back and forth. Water is still moving back and forth between the marsh and the river.”
Ritter said the organization will continue to protect its 382 acres regardless of the rule change; however, he states that it is just a small fraction of the more than 6,000 acres of wetlands in the Quad Cities area.
“And it really is kind of the largest intact sort of complex of wetlands that we have left in the immediate Quad City region,” Ritter said. “And it is really, really vitally important for things like flood control, for wildlife like bald eagles, migratory birds, and a whole slew of other species. So often try to look beyond just our borders at Nahant and realize that we are part of a much larger wetland complex that, as I said, is a result of the Mississippi and Rock Rivers joining.”
The Clean Water Act, officially called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, was passed after public outcry about extensive pollution in America’s rivers and coastlines. Congress overrode then-President Richard Nixon, who feared the law would be too expensive to maintain. The legislation set out goals to end pollution, none of which have been achieved decades later.
Over time, courts have altered the EPA's enforcement powers under the act, and the agency recently cited the 2023 case Sackett v. EPA to explain its proposed change. That case involved an Idaho family that attempted to build a home, which the EPA claimed included wetlands protected under the Clean Water Act. The litigation lasted for a decade before the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, said only bodies of water with a continuous surface connection to traditional interstate navigable waters will maintain protections. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Elena Kagan claimed the majority was “substituting its own ideas about policymaking for Congress’s.”
Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds is one of the proponents of the rule change, releasing a statement shortly after the announcement in November, “Great news for Iowa farmers and landowners! Thank you, President Trump and Administrator Zeldin, for providing clarity and cutting burdensome regulations for America’s agriculture industry.”
Iowa Secretary of Agriculture, Mike Naig, also supports the rule change, stating the current definition is impending farmer’s ability to maintain and conserve their land, which is impacting voluntary conservation efforts.
In a letter sent to the EPA during its public comment period, which ended in January, Sec. Naig said in part: “We need to ensure federal regulations are not unintentionally standing in the way of conservation work that delivers real environmental benefits. In Iowa, overly burdensome permitting requirements have hindered the construction of water quality wetlands, and those practices are one of the most effective tools we have to reduce nitrates and improve water quality.”
However, an environmental non-profit in Davenport does not believe the remaining wetlands can handle the amount of nutrients and other pollutants flooding the system. Executive Director of River Action, Kathy Wine, said people are testing their groundwater wells and finding nitrates, as well as in Iowa’s rivers and municipal water treatment plants. “[Wetlands] are a kidney that will cleanse, but it's being overtaxed in our area. And fewer wetlands will have even less of an opportunity to do that.”
A slew of farm advocacy groups believe the change will remove burdensome regulations, including the American Farm Bureau Federation, the American Soybean Association, and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. Both Iowa Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst also support the change. Senator Grassley, stating, “Good news from EPA….as Trump admin continues roll back of government overreach with proposal of new WOTUS rules...Trump admin's action is a win for Iowa family farmers and common sense.”
Illinois Senator Tammy Duckworth, along with 15 other senators, wrote a letter to the EPA last month stating the change ignores science and fails to protect water quality: “Because of EPA’s abandonment of responsibility to protect clean water, more of the onus will fall on the states to enforce state-level protections of clean water—protections that can vary greatly state-by-state. States will be forced to pick up the slack, which runs the risk of straining state budgets and environmental enforcement resources. Additionally, by excluding interstate waters flowing between two or more states, the proposed rule would likely result in costly legal battles between states.”
Hirschfeld said the federal government can no longer be relied upon to protect America’s environment and natural resources. “I'd say the Trump administration has been very clear and consistent that it wants to roll back environmental policies for air, water, and land. And, that's a policy choice, and you can approve or disapprove, but if you want to protect the environment, if you want to protect your water, if you want to protect your air, I think the state has to step up where the federal government is stepping back,” Hirschfeld said. “I think we have to build knowledge and expertise and the capacity to protect ourselves here in Illinois, because I just don't think we can depend on the federal government at the moment.”
WVIK reached out to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources seeking how the change would impact state operations. They did not respond by the time of publication. WVIK also reached out to the Illinois Department of Natural Resources seeking the same answers, and the department referred the newsroom to environmental nonprofits and state legislators.
The EPA has not said when it will post the final rule.
This story was produced by WVIK, Quad Cities NPR. We rely on financial support from our listeners and readers to provide coverage of the issues that matter to the Quad Cities region and beyond. As someone who values the content created by WVIK's news department, please consider making a financial contribution to support our work.
