Proposed New Rule Could Mean More Wetlands Lose Protection
9/5/2026 – Yesterday, the administration proposed a new interpretation for “waters of the U.S.” (WOTUS) that could strip almost all wetlands of federal protection. Wetlands help control flooding, filter runoff, break down harmful pollutants, and provide habitat for a large share of threatened and endangered species.
According to PBS, the EPA and Army Corps will accept public comments for 30 days once the new plan is published in the Federal Register, expected in the next week.
Recent Attempts to Develop Clear Definition
The new rule supposedly will provide clarity to a landscape characterized by many shades of green. It hopes to strike a balance between property rights and pollution while cutting red tape and regulatory uncertainty.
The New York Times wrote that the new rule could strip federal protections from millions of acres of wetlands. It “would significantly narrow the definition of “waters of the United States,” or WOTUS, that are protected from harmful pollution under the Clean Water Act of 1972.” The new version is more sweeping than an initial proposal released in November 2025.
The effort to redefine the rule began with a Supreme Court ruling in Sackett v. EPA back in 2023. The majority of the Court wrote that the Clean Water Act of 1977 allowed the agency to regulate only “relatively permanent” bodies of water and wetlands connected to them.
However, the Court’s opinion did not define “relatively permanent.” The NY Times article says, “In the proposal released in November, the Trump administration defined a ‘relatively permanent’ body of water as one that flowed either every day or during the ‘wet season.’ The new proposal would define it instead as one that flowed every day except for temporary interruptions like droughts lasting less than 30 days.”
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) believes the change could strip federal protection from 94 percent of the nation’s wetlands, up from 81 percent under the November 2025 proposal.
The National Wildlife Federation believes “the new plan could end protections for at least one-third of the more than 3.5 million miles of streams in the United States,” said the Times, quoting Jim Murphy, associate VP of Legal Advocacy.
But the American Farm Bureau believes it would end regulatory headaches for farmers and ranchers for unknowingly violating the law.
Provisions in Current Regulation
The Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service writes that under current law, “It is illegal to drain or fill a wetland without a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The entire Texas coast is under the jurisdiction of the Corps’ Galveston District Office.”
“Before a permit can be granted, the requestor must show that the project has considered all viable alternatives and minimized impacts as much as possible. Any wetland loss must be compensated for by constructing new wetlands or by restoring or enhancing existing wetlands,” says A&M.
How Would Change in Definition Affect Lake Houston Area
It’s too early to tell exactly how a change in definition for WOTUS would affect the Lake Houston Area. We certainly have many wetlands near bodies of water that flow year round. But what does “connected” mean? Does it apply only to a swamp at a river’s edge? Or does it also include ponds in floodplains a hundred yards from a river?
This is not an academic abstraction; it lowers the bar for developers. And that could make it easier to build in floodplains, which could endanger lives and property…and increase the federal deficit.
Flooding likely costs the federal government roughly $15 billion to $25 billion a year on average in disaster relief, recovery and related expenditures, with costs soaring much higher after catastrophic storms. Because those expenditures generally aren’t offset by additional revenues or spending reductions, they effectively increase federal deficits. And that number could go even higher if you include pre-disaster flood-mitigation spending (as opposed to pure disaster relief).
The Scarborough Example
Scarborough, for instance, wants to build thousands of homes on 5300 acres in one of the most flood-prone areas in the Houston region…at the confluence of the San Jacinto West Fork with Spring, Cypress and Turkey Creeks.
Hydrologists say that it would be like “aiming a fire hose at the Humble/Kingwood area.” The City of Houston and Harris County have unanimously condemned the proposed development. And almost 10,000 concerned citizens in Montgomery and Harris Counties have signed a petition against it.
Add your voice to those who wish to protect the land and our future. Sign the petition on Change.org today.
For more about this proposed development, check out the video in this post.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/5/2026
3294 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
