WASHINGTON, D.C. – The EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have released an amended Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule after the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in favor of farmers and ranchers earlier this year.

The revised rule, which was released Aug. 29 and came into effect Sept. 8, however, has created mixed reactions from national farm organizations.

“Today’s revised WOTUS definition is an important step toward bringing the EPA more in line with the Supreme Court’s ruling,” said Mary-Thomas Hart, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association chief counsel.

“The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association looks forward to working with the agency to protect farmers and ranchers from burdensome regulations and provide them with lasting certainty on WOTUS,” she added.

In May, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of farmers and ranchers in the Sackett v. EPA case, confirming the EPA overstepped its authority under the Clean Water Act’s WOTUS rule.

Under the opinion, the court narrowed the definition of WOTUS to include open, flowing bodies of water such as streams, rivers, lakes and the ocean, along with those wetlands that share a continuous surface connection with such bodies of water.

The updated rule will remove large bodies of water from regulation, such as streams, rivers and lakes under the Clean Water Act, as well as wetlands connected to them. The updated rule also reduces the number of waters and wetlands that would require a permit for point source pollution.

The case started in 2007 when Mike and Chantell Sackett, of Priest Lake, Idaho, landowners, challenged the EPA in federal court after the EPA prohibited them from building a home on their property near a wetland. However, the Supreme Court ruled the couple’s land does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act.

Prior to the Sackett decision, WOTUS included adjacent wetlands, defining adjacent as “bordering, contiguous, or neighboring,” according to the National Agricultural Law Center. In its updated rule, the EPA redefined adjacent as “having a continuous surface connection,” bringing it in line with the Sackett decision.

“The effects of the EPA’s WOTUS decision will definitely be felt by ag producers, especially when it comes to wetlands,” said Brigit Rollins, staff attorney for the National Agricultural Law Center.

Drew Viguet, communications and special projects coordinator at the National Agricultural Law Center, University of Arkansas system division of agriculture, said the “significant nexus” test was absent from the new rule, which had been part of WOTUS since the 2006 Supreme Court decision, Rapanos v. U.S., which challenged federal jurisdiction to regulate isolated wetlands under the Clean Water Act.

In that decision, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that wetlands should be included in the definition of WOTUS if they shared significant nexus with a water already identified as a WOTUS.

The EPA said a significant nexus exists if the waterbody (alone or in combination) significantly affects the chemical, physical or biological integrity of traditional navigable waters, the territorial seas, or interstate waters.

Scott Hays, National Pork Producers Council president and Monroe City, Mo., pork producer, said, “Farmers work hard every day to adopt climate-smart farming practices by promoting soil health, conserving water, using nutrients efficiently and caring for our animals.

“We look forward to working cooperatively with the EPA and all stakeholders as we continue to work to preserve and protect our farms and lands for future generations,” he added.

However, Ted McKinney, National Association of State Departments of Agriculture CEO, said he shared the frustration agriculture departments across the country have felt regarding the updated rule.

“The ruling in Sackett v. EPA was a chance for the EPA and the Army Corps to correct a deeply flawed, prematurely released rule, and work to truly improve water quality outcomes,” he said.

“It is baffling that the revised rule does not accurately address all the issues and questions raised by the Supreme Court in the Sackett decision, nor does it address many of the questions stakeholder groups raised about the WOTUS rule the EPA released at the end of last year,” he added.

Tom Haag, National Corn Growers Association president, said, “The agency failed to open the process to public comment and engagement, which would have been extremely valuable,” he said. “Instead, the agency has released a rule that does not fully respect the holdings from the recent U.S. Supreme Court case on WOTUS.”

Chandler Goule, National Association of Wheat Growers CEO, said, “While we recognize the intent to bring more clarity to wheat growers concerning waters subject to Clean Water Act jurisdiction, we are concerned about the repercussions for our members’ farming operations.”

He said the intricate significant nexus standard posed challenges for U.S. wheat growers, both in comprehension and alignment with the Clean Water Act.

“The National Association of Wheat Growers is disappointed both agencies are proceeding with these regulatory adjustments without public consultation on the proposed changes prior to finalizing the regulation,” he said.

Daryl Cates, American Soybean Association president and a Columbia, Ill., soybean farmer, said, “These revisions are unfortunately window dressings and leave in place much of the rule’s confusing and harmful foundations.

“It is even more unsettling that the EPA and the Corps plan to finalize this rule without public comment. This revision is a missed opportunity to address very real and impactful farmer concerns,” he added.