ATLANTIC, Iowa — As sixth-generation farmers, Brad and Kristy Pellett are concerned about the proposed Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule they believe would create what they feel has already existed for many years: an adversarial, dictatorial relationship between U.S. cattle producers and federal regulators.

“I am not in favor of the Waters of the U.S. rule as it is currently proposed because it will greatly impact both of my cattle enterprises,” said Brad, who lives with his wife, Kristy, and their three children on their farm, north of Atlantic in Cass County.

“The way the rule is currently written is confusing to understand for both myself and those that are tasked to enforce it.”

Although the Pellets are in a crop-farming partnership with family members, they are solely responsible for a 100-head cow-calf operation, feeding out fewer than 300 head. “Over the past two years, I have used National Resources Conservation (NRCS) personnel and expertise to implement conservation measures on my farm to help improve water quality by taking land out of crop production and establishing pasture. As written, the WOTUS rules will make NRCS personnel your enforcement arm,” he said.

“This will transform them from being a farmer’s partner in soil conservation and water quality to a potential adversary.”

On April 21, the U.S. EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers jointly released a new proposed rule – Definition of Waters of the U.S. under the Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972, which would be amended and expand the range of waters (and their conveyances) that fall under federal regulation.

According to a statement by the National Assoc. of Counties (NACo), changes in the definition would  impact many county operations, and would increase costs and permitting time of those operations. The NACo stated some counties would be required to obtain federal permits for any type of construction or maintenance activities on ditches, called jurisdictional ditches.

“Obtaining these federal permits can be very expensive, cumbersome and time-consuming,” the statement continued. “Counties have missed building seasons waiting for federal permits. NACo has documented numerous examples of problems that exist under the current WOTUS regulation.”

Ben Albright, who owns a Lytton, Iowa, family cattle-feeding partnership in Calhoun County, said he’s strongly against the proposed rule changes because it would “vastly expand EPA jurisdiction.”

“Farmers and ranchers like myself are constantly looking to be better stewards of the land and improve our operations for the benefit of future generations,” he said. “I currently use buffer strips, grass waterways, no-till, cover crops, settling basins, berms, et cetera to control and limit runoff from my farm fields and feedlots.

“Generally, these practices were implemented at my own expense with little help from the government. If this rule is implemented, it would become harder to continue these efforts, and in many cases, it will require a permit to perform common conservation practices, as well as the numerous other day-to-day activities on my farm.

“This is yet another example of a government agency trying to bypass the legislature and expand their authority,” he added. “Ditch these new rules.”

Evan Vermeer, a consultant and nutritionist for Midwest PMS, LLC, in Sioux Center, said the new rule “tries to reach back to defining farming practices, and that is well beyond the scope of the Clean Water Act.”

The comment period regarding the WOTUS rule has been extended from Oct. 20 to Nov. 14.