A Murky Ruling Threatens the Fate of Millions of US Wetlands

IF 1.8 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ECOLOGY
B. Alexander Simmons, Marcus W. Beck, Kerry Flaherty-Walia, Jessica Lewis, Edward T. Sherwood
{"title":"A Murky Ruling Threatens the Fate of Millions of US Wetlands","authors":"B. Alexander Simmons, Marcus W. Beck, Kerry Flaherty-Walia, Jessica Lewis, Edward T. Sherwood","doi":"10.1007/s13157-024-01801-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>For decades, federal protections were extended to wetlands adjacent to “waters of the US” by the Clean Water Act. In its <i>Sackett v. EPA</i> ruling, however, the US Supreme Court redefined the meaning of “adjacent,” eliminating protections to wetlands without a continuous surface connection to these waters (i.e., geographically isolated wetlands, GIWs). Yet it remains unclear how this continuous surface test will work in reality, where ecological connectivity often extends beyond physical connectivity. Here, we calculate the number of US wetlands that could be considered geographically isolated depending upon the distance threshold used to define isolation (ranging from 1 m to 100 m from the nearest hydrological feature). Overall, we estimate that 27–45% of wetlands, at minimum, could be considered geographically isolated using this range of distance thresholds. Over 3 million wetlands are within 1–100 m of the nearest hydrological feature, making them most vulnerable to losing prior protections from the Clean Water Act. The Midwest and Northeast have the largest share of potential GIWs within this range. Freshwater emergent wetlands and forested/shrub wetlands make up the majority of these vulnerable wetlands, though this varies by state. Roughly 47% of these wetlands are located in states without state-level protections for GIWs. Our analysis highlights the heterogeneity of risk to wetlands across the country and the scale of the uncertainty imposed by the updated Sackett definition. State-level protections that are robust to changes in federal protections are urgently needed to secure the country’s wetlands from further pollution and destruction.</p>","PeriodicalId":23640,"journal":{"name":"Wetlands","volume":"2012 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wetlands","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-024-01801-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For decades, federal protections were extended to wetlands adjacent to “waters of the US” by the Clean Water Act. In its Sackett v. EPA ruling, however, the US Supreme Court redefined the meaning of “adjacent,” eliminating protections to wetlands without a continuous surface connection to these waters (i.e., geographically isolated wetlands, GIWs). Yet it remains unclear how this continuous surface test will work in reality, where ecological connectivity often extends beyond physical connectivity. Here, we calculate the number of US wetlands that could be considered geographically isolated depending upon the distance threshold used to define isolation (ranging from 1 m to 100 m from the nearest hydrological feature). Overall, we estimate that 27–45% of wetlands, at minimum, could be considered geographically isolated using this range of distance thresholds. Over 3 million wetlands are within 1–100 m of the nearest hydrological feature, making them most vulnerable to losing prior protections from the Clean Water Act. The Midwest and Northeast have the largest share of potential GIWs within this range. Freshwater emergent wetlands and forested/shrub wetlands make up the majority of these vulnerable wetlands, though this varies by state. Roughly 47% of these wetlands are located in states without state-level protections for GIWs. Our analysis highlights the heterogeneity of risk to wetlands across the country and the scale of the uncertainty imposed by the updated Sackett definition. State-level protections that are robust to changes in federal protections are urgently needed to secure the country’s wetlands from further pollution and destruction.

Abstract Image

一项模糊的裁决威胁着美国数百万湿地的命运
几十年来,《清洁水法案》将联邦保护延伸至与 "美国水域 "相邻的湿地。然而,在 Sackett 诉 EPA 案的裁决中,美国最高法院重新定义了 "毗邻 "的含义,取消了对与这些水域没有连续表面连接的湿地(即地理上孤立的湿地,GIW)的保护。然而,目前仍不清楚这一连续表面测试在现实中将如何发挥作用,因为在现实中,生态连通性往往超越了物理连通性。在此,我们根据用于定义隔离的距离阈值(从距离最近的水文特征 1 米到 100 米不等),计算了可被视为地理隔离的美国湿地的数量。总体而言,我们估计至少有 27%-45% 的湿地可在此距离阈值范围内被视为地理隔离湿地。超过 300 万块湿地距离最近的水文特征在 1-100 米范围内,这使得它们最容易失去《清洁水法案》的先前保护。中西部和东北部在此范围内的潜在 GIW 所占比例最大。淡水萌发湿地和森林/灌木湿地占这些脆弱湿地的大多数,但各州的情况有所不同。这些湿地中约有 47% 位于没有州级 GIW 保护措施的州。我们的分析凸显了全国各地湿地所面临风险的差异性,以及更新后的 Sackett 定义所带来的不确定性规模。为了确保全国的湿地免受进一步的污染和破坏,我们迫切需要能够抵御联邦保护措施变化的州级保护措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Wetlands
Wetlands 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
108
审稿时长
4.0 months
期刊介绍: Wetlands is an international journal concerned with all aspects of wetlands biology, ecology, hydrology, water chemistry, soil and sediment characteristics, management, and laws and regulations. The journal is published 6 times per year, with the goal of centralizing the publication of pioneering wetlands work that has otherwise been spread among a myriad of journals. Since wetlands research usually requires an interdisciplinary approach, the journal in not limited to specific disciplines but seeks manuscripts reporting research results from all relevant disciplines. Manuscripts focusing on management topics and regulatory considerations relevant to wetlands are also suitable. Submissions may be in the form of articles or short notes. Timely review articles will also be considered, but the subject and content should be discussed with the Editor-in-Chief (NDSU.wetlands.editor@ndsu.edu) prior to submission. All papers published in Wetlands are reviewed by two qualified peers, an Associate Editor, and the Editor-in-Chief prior to acceptance and publication. All papers must present new information, must be factual and original, and must not have been published elsewhere.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信