A proposed federal rule could dramatically reduce the number of wetlands in Louisiana that qualify for protection under the Clean Water Act, a move that could expose millions of acres to development. 

Under the proposal from the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, only wetlands with a “continuous surface connection” to waters that are “relatively permanent” — meaning they hold water year-round or with only brief interruptions — would remain federally protected. Wetlands that are seasonal, intermittent or connected only after storms would likely fall outside federal jurisdiction.

The change is intended to conform with the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, which sharply restricted how wetlands can be regulated. But the new proposed rule, issued last month, goes further by removing several longstanding categories of protected water, like interstate waters, and by formally defining terms that are likely to make federal oversight even narrower. 

“This rule would turn the Clean Water Act on its head,” said Mark Davis, the director of Tulane University’s Institute on Water Resources Law and Policy. 

A report from the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy nonprofit, estimates that up to 3.9 million acres of Louisiana wetlands — roughly half of the state’s remaining wetlands — could lose protection under the proposed rule. Nationally, the group projects that as much as 84% of wetlands protected prior to the Sackett ruling, or 55 million acres, could fall outside federal authority.

Since the 1930s, Louisiana has lost more than 2,000 square miles of wetlands. 

The EPA, led by Administrator Lee Zeldin, said the proposal is designed to provide legal clarity by defining a “Water of the United States,” or area protected under the Clean Water Act. 

“Democrat Administrations have weaponized the definition of navigable waters to seize more power from American farmers, landowners, entrepreneurs, and families,” Zeldin said in a statement. “No longer should America’s landowners be forced to spend precious money hiring an attorney or consultant just to tell them whether a Water of the United States is on their property.” 

Where in Louisiana will wetlands lose protection?

A map produced by NRDC from federal data illustrates the potential impact in Louisiana. Coastal wetlands that are continuously connected to the Gulf of Mexico are likely to remain protected. But inland wetlands — including wetlands areas in parishes such as Avoyelles, Concordia and St. Tammany — could lose federal safeguards.

Other parts of the state, including deep marshes in lower Terrebonne Parish and wetlands near the mouth of the Mississippi River, appear as gaps on the map because water there is considered sufficiently deep and permanent to retain federal protections. The map focuses on areas where protection status is likely up for debate. 

Even so, the analysis is only an estimate. Determining whether a wetland is protected requires a site-specific assessment, which can be time-consuming and costly. That’s one reason the homebuilding and agricultural industries have pushed for a narrower federal rule.

“When the Clean Water Act passed, it was the best thing that ever happened. We needed it,” said Randall Noel, the president of Reve, Inc., a homebuilding company in Laplace, and a former president of the National Homebuilders Association, which supports the proposed rule. But in the years since it was first passed, Noel said the law’s scope has expanded past its original intent.

“A quarter of Americans can’t afford a house, in part due to the costs required for wetlands determinations at the beginning of a project,” he said. Noel pointed to a sugarcane field he hoped to build on that was initially classified as a wetland, a decision he disputed. He said the new rule would make the permitting process more predictable. 

But environmental groups say the proposal would leave large portions of the state vulnerable. Wetlands act as natural storm-surge buffers, slow the flow of floodwaters, filter pollution and provide crucial habitat for fisheries. Those functions could be compromised if protections are lifted.

“It will reduce the number of streams, wetlands and other waters that the Clean Water Act protects from pollution and destruction,” said Matthew McKinzie, a senior director with the NRDC. “Even for those waters that remain technically protected, it will make it harder to enforce the law against illegal polluters.”

Davis argues that the rule’s lack of clarity means it could make permitting decisions more difficult. The agency says a wetland must be connected to a relatively permanent waterbody at least during the area’s wet season, though the rule does not define when that season occurs. 

“What is the ‘wet season?’ Nobody knows,” Davis said. “For something that’s supposed to eliminate confusion, it creates a lot of confusion.” 

The EPA and Army Corps published the proposal on Nov. 17 and are accepting public comments through Jan. 5. After the comment period closes, the agencies will decide whether to finalize the rule, revise it further, or reopen it for additional review.