After the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced Monday it is redefining the scope of the nation’s bedrock clean water law to limit the wetlands it protects from pollution and destruction, environmental groups are urging Illinois legislators to establish safeguards. The state has already lost 90% of its original wetlands to urban development and agriculture.
The Trump administration’s action builds on a 2023 Supreme Court ruling in Sackett v. EPA that sharply limited the U.S. government’s authority to regulate water pollution in certain wetlands, effectively stripping 72% of remaining wetlands in Illinois — more than 700,000 acres — of federal protections and leaving them vulnerable to “catastrophic” loss, according to a September analysis by University of Illinois researchers.
“We have to fight like hell for what remains,” said Lindsay Keeney, chief program officer at the Illinois Environmental Council.
Illinois has no state-level protections for these ecosystems beyond some localized county-level protections, mostly in the Chicago area.
“This is even more reason for us to pass something at the state level. I think that we were dependent entirely on federal protections,” said David McEllis, Illinois legislative director at the Chicago-based Environmental Law and Policy Center. “This new rule has even more new exclusions, and we need to think about how the state can step up and step in where the federal government is stepping back.”
Advocacy groups in the state — including the Illinois Environmental Council, Environment Illinois and Prairie Rivers Network — are renewing calls for Gov. JB Pritzker to support a comprehensive statewide wetlands protection program. Just last month, a coalition of environmental and community groups sent a petition to the governor’s office with more than 6,500 signatures from Illinoisans demanding the same.
The governor’s office could not be immediately reached for comment.
When finalized, the EPA’s new Waters of the United States rule would narrow the federal government’s jurisdiction over “relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water” such as streams, oceans, rivers and lakes, as well as wetlands “that are connected and indistinguishable from such waterbodies.” The proposed definition of “relatively permanent waters” would exclude wetlands touching or near many streams that don’t flow during dry periods.
According to Prairie Rivers Network, “The rule claims ‘clarity,’ but achieves it by excluding waters that science — and common sense — tell us are vital to the health of entire watersheds.”
Nancy Stoner, senior attorney at the law and policy center and an expert on clean water issues, said omitting mentions of the public benefits of the long-standing federal law is contrary to the Clean Water Act’s purpose. “And the purpose of the EPA, for that matter.”
“They’re taking a very successful statute, and they’re undercutting it in a way so that it will no longer be as effective in protecting public health and the environment,” Stoner said.
Developers and landowners have argued that a broader definition of federally protected wetlands infringes on private property rights. And the EPA’s decision seems to address those concerns, saying the new rule will “cut red tape and provide predictability, consistency, and clarity” regarding permitting under the 1972 Clean Water Act.
“Democrat Administrations have weaponized the definition of navigable waters to seize more power from American farmers, landowners, entrepreneurs, and families,” Trump’s EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a news release Monday.
Meanwhile, environmentalists argue for the protection of these ecosystems because of the crucial role they play in filtering out pollutants and keeping drinking water clean; providing habitat that supports biodiversity in aquatic animals, amphibians, reptiles and insects; and soaking up rainwater during heavy storms, offering millions of dollars in annual flood mitigation.
A green heron perches at Milan Bottoms Preserve in Rock Island County on Aug. 1, 2025. Milan Bottoms spans over 4,000 acres and is owned by a patchwork of state and federal agencies as well as private parties. Illinois has no statewide protections for wetlands on private land. (E. Jason Wambsgans/Chicago Tribune)
Despite the benefits they provide, half of the country’s wetlands have disappeared since the 1780s. In Illinois, wetlands are vastly outnumbered by the 26.3 million acres of farmland that cover almost three-fourths of the state.
Related Articles
Under an ambitious restoration plan, Emiquon Nature Preserve wetlands reconnecting to the Illinois River
Howard Learner: Why Illinois’ wetlands matter
Imperiled wetlands save the Midwest billions in flood damage costs, study shows, but they’re disappearing
Efforts to implement a statewide wetlands protection program have gained a foothold at the state level; Illinois state Sen. Laura Ellman, a Naperville Democrat, and Rep. Anna Moeller, an Elgin Democrat, have introduced companion bills to the General Assembly that would establish a permitting program.
“I think that (Pritzker’s) leadership here — in signaling to the state legislature and very importantly, to the Department of Natural Resources, which would oversee the program — his leadership, his green lighting, would go a long way to getting that bill done,” said Robert Hirschfeld, director of water policy at Prairie Rivers Network.
If passed, the Wetlands Protection Act would empower the Illinois Department of Natural Resources to regulate private land use around the state’s remaining wetlands. Going into the next legislative session, Ellman hopes the Monday news will encourage other lawmakers to push the bill through, especially for the sake of communities prone to flooding.
“As those (federal) protections disappear, and (wetlands) are paved over or filled in or developed, those relief valves for communities on flood control will start to disappear,” Ellman told the Tribune. “So I’m hoping that I can help make that clear to my fellow legislators and get their support.”
The Monday decision from Trump’s EPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers follows the conservative-majority Supreme Court’s ruling in 2023, which stripped protections from freshwater and inland wetlands, allowing private property development in wetland areas that don’t have a “continuous surface connection” to permanent bodies of water.
“I think it’s also important to point out that even Justice (Brett) Kavanaugh didn’t agree with the Sackett decision,” McEllis said, referring to one of three Trump appointees on the country’s highest court. “He’s not necessarily a defender of the environment, but even he thought that this went too far.”
Wetlands at the Milan Bottoms Preserve in Rock Island County on July 31, 2025. Milan Bottoms spans over 4,000 acres and is owned by a patchwork of state and federal agencies as well as private parties. Illinois has no statewide protections for wetlands on private land.(E. Jason Wambsgans/Chicago Tribune)
Environmentalists and scientists say wetlands are rarely truly “isolated” from a watershed, no matter how inland they may appear to be. According to Prairie Rivers Network, for instance, the standard established in Sackett v. EPA “excludes countless wetlands that are hydrologically connected below the surface, through seasonal flows, or through wetland complexes that function as a unit — even though science shows they are essential to water quality and flood control.”
The federal agencies’ new proposal doubles down on what environmentalists call a “flawed logic” in the Supreme Court decision.
It’s now up to the states to decide on the ecological value of wetlands, Hirschfeld said, which to him is most clear as effective flood control measures.
“We have to have these areas that are not holding water permanently protected, so that when you get these big floods, they can soak up that water like a sponge and keep it out of your basement,” he said.
Ultimately, if wetlands are destroyed, rainwater will still find a place to go during heavy downpours intensified by climate change — likely into roads and homes.
Hirschfeld said policymakers and legislators should consider the implications of no federal or state protections for wetlands in the broader context of emergency funding availability, or lack thereof, under the Trump administration. Just last month, the president denied a disaster declaration for the city of Chicago, Cook County and the state that would have unlocked federal financial assistance after heavy rains and flooding in July and August.
“So when we have these floods, the state is going to be even more on the hook financially,” he said. “And so we should be doing everything we can now to mitigate against not only just the severe human cost of having your community and your roads and your basement, your homes flooded, but the actual financial cost of cleaning that mess up.”
Chicago Office of Emergency Management and Communications Director Francisco Velez talks with residents whose basements were flooded following two days of heavy rain in the 5700 block of South Campbell Avenuen on Aug. 19, 2025. (Antonio Perez/Chicago Tribune)
While state and taxpayer money normally covers the costs of floods, comprehensive legislation in Illinois would require developers to pay for protecting wetlands. A statewide permitting program, Ellman said, would not be taxpayer-funded but rather self-funded as applicants pay associated fees.
“The budget conversation is, really, how the seed money to create the (program),” she said. “Once that’s set up, it really should be self-funded.”
According to U. of I., unprotected wetlands in Illinois provide an estimated $419 million in residential flood control benefits.
“That’s an astounding number annually, and so that would dwarf whatever it would cost for the state to run and administer a wetlands program,” Hirschfeld said. “If cost is the issue, I think we’ve got to be smart, right? Don’t be penny-wise and pound-foolish here.”
McEllis said budget concerns have come up, but for the most part, the state’s Department of Natural Resources has had difficulty determining the scope of needed protections for such a program.
“Unfortunately, now we know that that scope is going to be larger, and (the IDNR is) going to need to figure out potentially what wetlands are in play,” McEllis said.
According to the EPA, the new proposed rule “recognizes that states and tribes know their local land and water resources best” and would strengthen their decision-making authority, “at last (fulfilling) that commitment to real, shared federal and state responsibility.”
The EPA will open a 45-day public comment period during which it will host two public meetings with virtual and in-person options to gather feedback on the proposed changes. Details about commenting either in writing or during a public meeting can be found on the EPA’s Waters of the United States website at epa.gov/wotus.
The Associated Press contributed.
