Vital Climate Tool at Risk Following Supreme Court Decision

One year ago, the U.S. Supreme Court quietly undermined one of our best strategies to meet the climate crisis, eroding federal protection for a fragile ecosystem that’s as large as Montana. Wetlands, which can both absorb climate pollution and protect communities from the impacts of a warming world, are now at alarming risk across the United States.??

?

The Court's decision threatens between fifteen and ninety million acres of marshes, stream edges, and other natural areas, according to recent preliminary analysis. The opinion not only creates uncertainty for businesses and landowners but, as Justice Kavanaugh noted, the language used may have “significant repercussions for water quality and flood control throughout the United States.”???

?

Historically, the federal courts have recognized that wetlands that are connected to federal waterways -- including those connected below the surface -- are protected under the Clean Water Act. But in Sackett v. EPA, the Supreme Court flipped this precedent and declared that wetlands must have “a continuous surface connection” to federal waters to be federally protected. Since most wetlands have fluctuating surface water levels throughout the year, the Court’s decision isn’t consistent with the realities on (and under) the ground.??

?

You might not always notice them, but wetlands are everywhere – from the muddy mangroves along the Gulf coast to the mountain bogs in Appalachia to salt marshes within New York City. They clean the water we drink and swim in, are home to 75 percent of commercially harvested fish and shellfish and reduce flooding by absorbing up to 1.5 million gallons of water per acre. Critically, wetlands also store 20% to 30% of global soil carbon.??

?

Lost wetlands create a real cost for communities and the climate. When they are degraded or developed, the carbon they store is released into the atmosphere and further exacerbates our already rapidly changing climate. Intact wetlands provide flood reduction benefits for downstream communities. Since wetlands occupy locations where stormwater collects across the landscape, homes and communities located on filled wetlands are built directly in harm’s way. If you look across the nation, many of today’s flood-prone communities were built atop yesterday’s wetlands and streams.????

Flooding is our nation’s most costly natural disaster. Damage runs an average of $5 billion per year. Year after year, communities are regularly devastated by flooding, with lost lives, critical infrastructure, and homes, costing U.S. taxpayers more than $850 billion since the year 2000. Communities across the country, both along coastlines and inland, are facing rising sea levels and more frequent and intense storms.??

These risks also deeply and disproportionately impact communities of color, especially Black and Latino communities. In a recent study, Redlined, Now Flooding, researchers found that across 38 metro areas in the nation, redlined communities had more than 25% more in property values at high risk of flooding ($107 billion) than in non-redlined communities. Nationally, 44% of Latinos in the United States live in counties with high flood risk. When we lose wetlands, we are putting families at even greater risk of losing their homes, businesses, and communities to flooding.?

One year later, we are seeing the first signs of the impending impacts. A review of permitting decisions since the Supreme Court decision demonstrates that fewer wetlands are being considered protected under the federal Clean Water Act. While the true impact, like increased flooding for communities and more climate pollution, will be seen over time, any change in wetlands protections is concerning. That’s particularly true in states that have few state level protections, such as North Carolina, a state that rolled back its state level protections to match the Supreme Court opinion. State agencies are also left confused, many now with added pressure to pick up the slack despite having limited funding and capacity to do so. And while some communities have strong state-level protections put in place, others have no state-level protections at all. This lack of certainty and consistency is particularly concerning for the potential impacts to the countless communities that are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change as well as the ecosystems that wetlands support.?

?

The good news is that wetlands and wetlands protections are very popular. Recent polling shows consistently that most voters want to protect wetlands due to the overwhelming value they bring, with strong support across the political spectrum.???

?

Through implementing smart, lasting, and effective legislative action, both at state and federal levels, we can balance growth and conservation to benefit communities, ecosystems, and climate. At the state level, that means immediately ensuring that we have strong state protections in place, and investing in state environmental agencies so that they can manage the increased burden and effectively and predictably deliver wetlands protections. At the federal level, we need strong bipartisanship to evaluate and chart a path towards long-term protections. ?

?

Let’s not lose this precious natural resource. A safe and healthy future depends on it.??