Clean Water Act gets expansion

The Clean Water Act has recently been expanded with the new Clean Water rule, and a range of stakeholders in Wyoming are concerned about this decision.

Under the new Clean Water rule, the federal government has expanded the definition of “navigable” waters to “extended tributaries across the country”. This expansion has major consequences for the country, as 60 percent of water in the United States is not considered “navigable”.

Many are concerned that this expansion is too vague and there needs to be significant clarification.

Wyoming Gov. Matt Mead, wrote a public comment letter on behalf of the National Governor’s Association. This comment suggested more time for clarity on what waters come under jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act with these changes.

“A key issue for states is increasing clarity in the definitions of the proposed rule determining what constitutes a ‘significant nexus’ between bodies of water for jurisdictional purposes.”

The term ‘significant nexus’ according to the National Association of Counties is, “either alone or in combination with similarly situated waters in the region, significantly affect the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of traditional navigable or interstate waters.”

Jack Berger, rancher and chairman of the Saratoga Encampment Rawlins Conservation District (SERCD) board, sees the impact that this will have personally on his ranch and he is concerned about the impact it may bring to the ranching community.

“The bottom line is that we all want clean water, but it’s always been the feds who have jurisdiction over navigable waters, and the states have jurisdiction over everything else—which works well,” stated Berger. “The state is a lot closer to the land and can take care of the other stuff but they just continually try to take that word navigable out of there.”

Berger is convinced that this rule will impact ranching—even his own. “Yeah I think that our normal everyday ranching practices would be impacted. Even putting a culvert in an ephemeral draw they would have jurisdiction over.”

The Wyoming Association of Conservation Districts (WACD) submitted a comment letter as well; which expressed desire for more collaboration with states.

“Further, the Association (WACD) suggests that a more appropriate approach to determining jurisdiction is for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to consult with each state to review existing readily available data including hydrology, geology, flow, etc., and develop and concurrence process in which the state and federal agencies jointly determine jurisdictional/non-jurisdictional waters.”

However, according to Berger, they were not given that opportunity.

“The [WACD] just asked to meet with each state and have clarity on what they are doing. Sit down with the states and lets have a definite line here whats included and what not—but they have refused to do that.”

With the rule passing, Berger mentioned in his public comment letter, that he fears for the future of his ranch. “This rule makes most ranching and farming practices cost prohibitive to comply with. I would hope that our ranch would continue for future generations and this rule would likely drive us out of business.”

For more information on the Clean Water rule go to epa.gov/cleanwaterrule.