The definition of a word carries great power. When the definition isn’t clearly stated the power of defining regulations is in the hands of executive branch agencies. This discretion often leads to interpretations that cause confusion and lack of clarity on what the law means.

This has been the case with the Clean Water Act (CWA) since its passage in 1972. Words and their definitions have continued to lead to different interpretations of the CWA in its 50+ years. Words such as: navigable - WOTUS - ephemeral - significant nexus - relatively permanent – adjacency. The power of one word can lead to federal government overreach.

The American Farm Bureau Federation and the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation have worked for decades advocating for a clear and fair rule defining terms for regulating our nation’s water. The definition of Waters of the United States, otherwise known as WOTUS, is important because it determines which waters are subject to federal regulations. The interpretation of WOTUS has changed as often as the administration has changed. The back and forth has hung on the definition of “navigable waters.” Congress defined navigable waters as “Waters of the United States” leaving the rest of the context to the regulatory agencies to determine what’s in one word—navigable.

For years, Farm Bureau members have engaged in advocacy efforts to work for a clear rule with well-defined terms. From “Ditch the Rule” to the “Rubber Duckie” campaign, Wyoming farmers and ranchers have joined Farm Bureau members across the country to amplify their voice on this issue. These campaigns highlighted the illogicality of the federal government’s attempt to expand federal jurisdiction to ephemeral features on private land (think ditch or low spot that only holds water after rain).

So, what’s in a word(s) like “navigable” or “ephemeral feature” or “significant nexus?” A lot can be packed into these words based on the interpretation of federal agencies and the judicial system. A May 2023 Supreme Court decision in Sackett v. EPA addressed the federal overreach of the “significant nexus” term, however a lot of uncertainty has remained since this decision in how the agencies continue to implement the rule.

The Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation is pleased the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on March 12, 2025 they will revise the WOTUS definition and address the implementation of the WOTUS rule following the Sackett v. EPA rule. Protecting the nation’s water is a priority for us all. Federal government overreach of private property is not the way to protect the nation’s water. 

Farmers and ranchers deserve a rule that provides clarity and enables landowners to protect the resources with which they’ve been entrusted while growing food for our country. They drink the water, they raise food, they care for the land and its resources and work to leave them in even better condition for the next generation. 

So, what’s in a word? As we’ve seen with the myriad of WOTUS rule interpretations it can mean federal government overreach that doesn’t uphold the purpose of the Clean Water Act. We appreciate the EPA taking the steps to correct this issue by providing clarity to the rule, defining the word to follow the law and following the Supreme Court rulings that have addressed these interpretations.