The WOTUS rule is back in the spotlight, and this time the changes could reshape how much of your land the federal government considers its business. On Sept. 4, 2026, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers released a pre-publication Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that leans toward a much narrower reading of federal water jurisdiction. For farmers, ranchers and rural landowners, the WOTUS rule has always mattered, but this proposal could matter more than most.
The document supplements an earlier proposal the agencies published on Nov. 20, 2025. It does not start over. Instead, it adds new options on two specific ideas that generated confusion during the last comment round. Because roughly 220,000 comments poured in on that November proposal, the agencies decided to sharpen a few key definitions before moving toward a final rule.
What the New WOTUS Rule Proposal Actually Changes
At its core, the WOTUS rule defines which waters fall under the Clean Water Act. This supplemental proposal focuses on two phrases that carry enormous weight: what counts as a “relatively permanent” water and what counts as a “continuous surface connection” between a wetland and a jurisdictional water. The agencies also propose a formal definition of “perennial.”
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin framed the effort plainly. “The EPA’s goal is a durable WOTUS definition that follows the law and ends burdensome regulatory uncertainty,” Zeldin said. The agencies say they are building on the Supreme Court’s 2023 Sackett v. EPA decision, which rejected broader federal wetland tests and pointed toward a more literal standard.
Why “Relatively Permanent” Is the Big One for Farmers
The most consequential change involves the definition of “relatively permanent.” Under the November 2025 proposal, that meant water flowing year-round or at least during the wet season. That wet-season language could have swept many seasonal streams into federal control.
The new alternative is far narrower. The agencies now consider defining “relatively permanent” as perennial waters, and “perennial” as water that stands or flows every day of the year under ordinary conditions. Consequently, the question shifts from “does this stream flow in the wet season?” to “does it hold water essentially all year?” As a result, many intermittent and seasonal waterways could drop out of federal jurisdiction.
The proposal builds in a 30-day exception. A perennial water could dry up for one stretch of no more than 30 consecutive days from a normal, predictable event, such as a regular dry spell, and still qualify. However, two separate 10-day dry periods would not qualify, even though the total is only 20 days. The agencies admit the 30-day figure is not a precise scientific threshold; instead, they picked it to create a clear, workable line.
How Drought and Western Streams Fit the WOTUS Rule
EPA also carves out a separate drought exception. An ordinarily perennial stream that dries during an extraordinary drought would not automatically lose its status. The agencies distinguish normal conditions from anomalous events, and they are weighing Extreme Drought (D3) and Exceptional Drought (D4) on the U.S. Drought Monitor as qualifying conditions. Furthermore, that drought exception could last up to five years before those conditions become the new normal.
This matters most in the arid West. A stream that runs dry from June through August every year, roughly a 90-day recurring gap, would not count as relatively permanent. Therefore, western ranches and farms with seasonal waterways could see the largest reductions in federal jurisdiction. EPA itself expects that outcome.
What the WOTUS Rule Means for Wetlands
The second major change tightens the wetland test. The proposal says a continuous surface connection exists when perennial surface water in a wetland connects continuously to a jurisdictional water, so it is hard to tell where one ends and the other begins. That phrase comes straight from Sackett.
The practical effect is significant. Simply sitting next to a river or lake may no longer be enough. The wetland itself would generally need perennial surface water connected at the surface year-round. EPA states plainly that most wetlands currently regulated as adjacent wetlands would not meet this standard, because most do not hold perennial surface water. In many cases, a landowner could judge the connection “by the naked eye,” which the agencies see as a feature, not a flaw.
States, Section 404 and the Road Ahead
Losing federal WOTUS status does not mean a stream or wetland goes unregulated. States and Tribes can still protect those waters under their own laws. So a farmer in a state with strong water rules may notice little change, while a farmer in a state that mirrors federal jurisdiction could see a lot.
The agencies expect the biggest effects on Clean Water Act Section 404, which governs dredge-and-fill work like grading, drainage and construction. They anticipate fewer permits and less required mitigation. EPA classifies the action as deregulatory under Executive Order 14192, while acknowledging some forgone environmental benefits and admitting it cannot yet quantify exactly how many acres or stream miles would change.
It is important to be precise. This is still a supplemental proposal, not a final WOTUS rule. Once published in the Federal Register, the public will have 30 days to comment through docket EPA-HQ-OW-2025-0322. For farmers, ranchers and rural landowners, the WOTUS rule remains a story worth watching closely, because the difference between “perennial” and “seasonal” could soon redraw the map of federal water jurisdiction across American farmland.
Readers can learn more at the EPA’s WOTUS topic page (epa.gov/wotus) or submit comments through docket EPA-HQ-OW-2025-0322 on Regulations.gov once the proposal publishes in the Federal Register.