How will the Supreme Court decision to ease wetlands regulations impact Whatcom?

A recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that loosened regulations for wetlands on the federal level is not expected to have much of an impact in Whatcom County.

Wetlands do exist in Washington State, and there is a large variety — from coastal bays, rivers and lakes, said John Rybczyk, professor of marine and coastal science at Western Washington University.

“Pretty much every kind of separate wetland you can have, we have right here in Whatcom County,” Rybczyk told the Bellingham Herald in an interview.

Wetlands provide habitat for a diverse collection of organisms, along with birds, fish and wildlife.

Wetlands near Lake Whatcom can clean the water, which saves money and time for the city when they need to purify it into a drinkable state, Rybczyk said. Lake Whatcom, and this purification process, provides water to 100,000 people or nearly half of Whatcom County.

“Think of wetlands being a natural dam,” Rybczyk said. “When it rains a lot, wetlands are a place that absorbs all of that water and releases it slowly over time, instead of it being a giant pulse that floods out everything in the surrounding area.”

On May 25, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency severely limiting the federal government’s ability to protect wetlands and its tributaries. Specifically, wetlands that don’t have a continuous surface connection with a navigable water are not protected under the Clean Water Act, the high court ruled.

While the decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency impacts federal regulations on the national level, local and state laws in Washington will continue to keep wetlands well protected.

Most of the dry land we know today was once wetlands. Development is one of the largest threats to wetlands in the modern day, Rybczyk said.

“Take a look at a couple years back when the Nooksack (River) flooded pretty dramatically,” Rybczyk said. “Part of the problem there was that we had built on floodplains, where wetlands used to exist, so when we have big storms that’s where the water goes.”

The protections provided by the city of Bellingham itself are still being reviewed.

“The City of Bellingham affirms its commitment to environmental protections, including wetlands. The degree to which the Court’s ruling on the federal authority of the EPA under the Clean Water Act affects the regulations promulgated by the State of Washington and the City of Bellingham is uncertain and will require time to review,” Eric Johnston, Bellingham Public Works director said.

At the state level, Washington’s Growth Management Act of 1990, the 1972 Shoreline Management Act, and the Water Pollution Control Act of 1945 all provide greater protections for wetlands than the federal regulations ever did, according to the Washington State Department of Ecology.

“Wetlands are critical for protecting water quality, reducing the impacts of flooding, and providing safe havens for endangered and threatened species,” Laura Watson, ecology’s director, said in a news release. “It’s important for people in Washington to know that state laws continue to provide the review and oversight needed to evaluate the impacts of proposed development.”

However, there are many wetland regions across the nation that do not have the same local protections as exist in Washington.

“My main concern are places that don’t have any other protection in place other than at the federal level,” Rybczyk said. “We might come into situations where wetlands start to get developed that really shouldn’t get developed.”