Virginia Stands Firm: Protecting Wetlands Despite Federal Rollbacks

Virginia’s State Water Control Board recently rejected a petition that would have limited local officials from regulating certain wetlands within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. This decision comes over a year after the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed the range of wetlands the federal government can protect. The board’s decision, following a recommendation by Virginia’s Department of Environmental Quality, indicates the state’s commitment to maintaining its historically protective wetlands rules.

DEQ Director Mike Rolband emphasized that Virginia regulates all wetlands within its borders, unlike the federal government, which only regulates a portion of wetlands. The petition, filed by David Schnare, a retired EPA scientist and member of the 2016 Trump transition team, raised questions about the impact of the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Sackett v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on the state’s wetlands regulations.

Schnare’s petition questioned whether local officials should still be able to limit development in areas around wetlands no longer under federal jurisdiction. However, Virginia’s DEQ and State Water Control Board unanimously voted against opening a regulatory review in response to the petition. They maintained that the Sackett decision only affects federal jurisdiction, not the state’s powers or the scientific definition of wetlands.

The value of preserving wetlands lies in their ability to improve water quality, store carbon, and reduce flooding. Virginia’s strict wetlands rules, particularly in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, aim to protect these vital ecosystems. The state’s bipartisan support for wetlands conservation is evident in the rejection of Schnare’s petition, despite political differences on other environmental issues.

The Supreme Court’s Sackett decision, which limited the EPA’s authority to regulate wetlands, had significant implications for nontidal wetlands. Virginia’s robust wetlands protections, established under the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, have long been in place to safeguard these ecosystems. Local governments in the Chesapeake Bay watershed have strict rules governing development near water bodies and wetlands to protect water quality.

Schnare’s petition, sparked by a local dispute over a hockey court built in a resource protection area, raised concerns about the state’s wetlands regulations. He argued that the Sackett decision created ambiguity in how certain wetlands should be regulated by state or local authorities. However, Virginia’s environmental agency and the State Water Control Board rejected Schnare’s proposed changes to the state’s wetlands definition, citing inconsistencies with state law.

Conservation organizations in Virginia remain vigilant against attempts to weaken wetlands protections in the state. The rejection of Schnare’s petition signals the state’s commitment to preserving wetlands and maintaining strong environmental regulations. The ongoing debate over wetlands regulation highlights the importance of balancing development with conservation efforts to protect these critical ecosystems.