Month: July 2026

New Research: Maps of streams at risk in the Edisto River and Bushy Creek Reservoir watersheds

The Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that streams can only be protected under the federal Clean Water Act if they are “relatively permanent,” effectively excluding ephemeral streams that flow after rainfall or snowmelt.

The decision also greatly restricted which freshwater wetlands can be protected. An Environmental Protection Agency analysis suggests that roughly 74 percent, or 2.3 million acres, of South Carolina’s freshwater wetlands may no longer be protected.

“Clean drinking water starts at the source,” said Sara Green, executive director of the South Carolina Wildlife Federation. “For decades, the Clean Water Act helped protect the streams that provide our drinking water. Now we need to look at what we can do on the state and local level to keep these streams clean and healthy.”

The new maps of Charleston-area streams were built using models originally developed for a nationwide study of ephemeral streams published in the journal Science.

“Our research shows that small streams exert a meaningful influence on downstream, larger rivers, including systems that supply drinking water,” said Craig Brinkerhoff, a river scientist and engineer at Yale. “All of these waters are connected and if enough of these streams were polluted or damaged, it could potentially impact Charleston’s drinking water supplies over the long run.”

EPA is currently working on a formal rule outlining which types of streams and wetlands are protected by the Clean Water Act.

“Healthy streams and wetlands aren’t just pretty, they filter and remediate common pollutants like bacteria and agricultural runoff. Without Clean Water Act protections, a critical piece of our water treatment infrastructure is at risk,” said Green.

South Carolina’s drinking water infrastructure was recently rated a D+ by the American Society of Civil Engineers, which estimates the state already has $6 billion in drinking water infrastructure needs.

EPA documents acknowledge that loss of protections for these streams could increase the cost to treat raw water to drinking water standards.

“It’s a double-whammy that we are losing these longstanding federal protections at the same time the President’s budget proposes deep cuts to water treatment funding,” said Jessie Ritter, associate vice president for water at the National Wildlife Federation. “EPA should be transparent about how leaving these streams unprotected will affect Americans’  drinking water.”

Additional Resources:

• Ephemeral stream water contributions to United States drainage networks, Science

• Study Finds Small Streams, Recently Stripped of Protections, Are a Big Deal, New York Times

• Half the water flowing from US rivers is at risk of pollution due to lax federal regulation: Study, The Hill

SELC, Conservation Groups, to Sue Over ‘Disastrous’ Wildlife Rollbacks

National Wildlife Federation and five others will take FWS and NMFS to Federal Court  

CHARLESTON, S.C.—The Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), on behalf of the National Wildlife Federation, South Carolina Wildlife Federation, North Carolina Wildlife Federation, Florida Wildlife Federation, Louisiana Wildlife Federation, Association of Northwest Steelheaders, and Conservation Council for Hawaii, gave 60-day notice to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) that they intend to sue over the agencies’ reckless and illegal attempt to eliminate protection for the habitat of protected species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). For decades, habitat protections under the ESA have been critical to the survival and recovery of nearly all listed species. 

 

This unlawful regulatory shift could be a death sentence for imperiled wildlife and at-risk habitats they depend on. It could also harm common species, including iconic southern wildlife like bobwhite quail and brook trout. The agencies’ rescission violates federal laws including the Administrative Procedure Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the ESA itself. 

 

“This disastrous rescission attempts to pull the teeth out of the ESA and tries to allow widespread destruction of iconic habitats across the nation, like our treasured long-leaf pine ecosystems in South Carolina,” said Catherine Wannamaker, a senior attorney in SELC’s Charleston office. “The rescission is not just illegal, it makes no sense. To protect and recover imperiled species, you must protect their homes.”

 

Habitat loss and degradation are the main causes of extinction for listed species, meaning habitat protection and restoration are essential to imperiled species’ successful conservation and recovery. The rescission finalized today by FWS and NMFS removes the definition of “harm” from the agencies’ rules. For decades, agencies defined harm to include “significant habitat modification or degradation” that kills or injures wildlife.  This definition was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1995.  

 

“South Carolina is one of the fastest growing states, and the associated new development is really changing the landscape of our beautiful state — which is the reason a lot of people move here,” said Sara K. Green, executive director of the South Carolina Wildlife Federation. “The habitat protections that the Endangered Species Act has provided are critical to preserving endangered species populations as well as many other species of wildlife that depend on those same habitats, including game species and migratory birds.” 

 

Removing this definition will risk accelerating destruction of habitat, which is the leading cause of species decline. The stakes from any narrowing of habitat protections are higher for wildlife here in the South. We host a globally significant variety of plants and animals that are under mounting pressure because of human-made threats, including climate change and habitat loss. More than 250 species across SELC’s six-state region are protected by the ESA.

 

“To remove habitat considerations from how we conserve wildlife is simply illogical,” said Tim Gestwicki, CEO of the North Carolina Wildlife Federation. “This proposal to remove habitat protections is a death knell for species.”

 

The ESA is one of the most effective and comprehensive conservation laws in the world, preventing extinction for 99 percent of species protected by it. The ESA also has broad public support. It was signed into law by President Richard Nixon on December 28, 1973, and since then, through twenty-five congressional terms and ten presidential administrations, has regulated the destruction of habitat. This rule change risks the ESA’s legacy of successfully protecting our national heritage. 

 

Header photo credits: Debra Partridge