Brenna Bird, among 24 Republican state attorneys general suing President Biden's Environmental Protection Agency over a rule to protect U.S. waterways, says the measure is a "power grab" that would place much of Iowa's land under federal oversight.

Bird said EPA's "Waters of the United States" rule, commonly referred to as WOTUS, would put significantly more Iowa farm, housing and commercial development land under the federal agency's control.

"Instead of just regulating major interstate waterways like Great Lakes or the Mississippi River, the federal government is trying to regulate as much of 97% of Iowa land, including even small lakes or ponds," Bird said in announcing the multistate lawsuit.

While the Clean Water Act seeks to protect “navigable waters," it defines them only as "waters of the United States and territorial seas.” The statute directs the EPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to further define the waters of the U.S., an effort that's sparked legal challenges and debate for four decades.

The administrations of both former presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump sought to clarify the WOTUS definition, both of which garnered legal challenges. In December, Biden's EPA finalized a WOTUS rule that the agency says would restore "fundamental water protections" for "traditional navigable waters … as well as upstream water resources that significantly affect those waters."

The agency said the rule, which is slated to become effective March 20, would shield drinking water sources while supporting farming, local economies and downstream communities.

An EPA spokeswoman declined to comment Friday, citing the pending litigation.

Bird said in a statement the AGs are “taking the Biden Administration to court to protect the rights of farmers and other Iowans. A farmer shouldn’t have to hire a lawyer to farm their land."

Jennifer Zwagerman, director of the Drake University Agricultural Law Center, said it's misleading to say the new EPA rule will affect 97% of Iowa land. The rule has exceptions that include land converted to farming before Dec. 23, 1985.

That's important in a state where farmers use about 30 million of the state's 36 million acres to grow corn, soybeans and other crops as well as raise cows, pigs and other livestock each year.

Zwagerman said farm groups are mostly concerned with a provision that calls for assessing whether a tributary, stream or wetland has a significant connection to a navigable river like the Mississippi or Missouri.

"We do have so much land that … in some shape or form, connects permanently or seasonally at some level to the Mississippi or the Missouri," she said. "But something much less than 97% will fall under the regulations of the EPA rule."

Even if it's a small percentage of Iowa land, opponents to the rule are concerned about "opening the door" to any federal oversight of Iowa waterways, Zwagerman said.

The multistate lawsuit says if the final rule is left in place, "ranchers, farmers, miners, homebuilders and other landowners across the country will struggle to undertake even the simplest of activities on their own property without fear of drawing the ire of the federal government."

Bird said the rule uses "vague and unmanageable standards that will be difficult to comply with, for both individuals and the state."

"Many Iowa regulations, and even some conservation efforts, will be impossible under the new rule," Bird said. "Farmers and other landowners will struggle with lengthy and expensive processes for their lands or face legal penalties. And that is if they are even aware they need to comply with the rule. The new standards create vast amounts of uncertainty by subjecting unexpected lands to regulation and significant permitting costs."

In addition to the multistate lawsuit, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to consider an appeal from an Idaho family that was notified by EPA that they could not place fill on their lot because wetlands on the property were a water of the U.S. and fell under the Clean Water Act.

In addition to Iowa, the states joining the lawsuit against the EPA: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Donnelle Eller covers agriculture, the environment and energy for the Register. Reach her at deller@registermedia.com or 515-284-8457. 

This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Iowa joins Republican AGs fighting Biden EPA rule to oversee US waters