Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wetlands topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee rejects bill to bar TDEC from reclassifying prior-converted cropland as wetlands
Summary
The House Agriculture & Natural Resources Subcommittee voted 2–6 to reject HB1072, which would have prohibited the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation from applying wetland criteria to land designated federally as prior-converted cropland. TDEC warned the change could tie state law to shifting federal WOTUS rules and accelerate farmland conversion.
The House Agriculture & Natural Resources Subcommittee voted down House Bill 1072 on a 2–6 roll call, rejecting Representative Warner’s proposal to bar the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) from applying wetland criteria to property designated as prior-converted cropland under federal law.
“Tennessee does not have and does not need a PCC designation because agriculture is very broadly exempted from regulation under the Water Quality Control Act of 1977,” Stephanie German, deputy general counsel for TDEC, told the committee in opposition. German warned the bill could “make it easier to lose more farmland” by tying state implementation to the federal WOTUS definition, which she described as subject to frequent change.
Members questioned the bill’s scope and consequences. Legal counsel Doug Garrett read the operative statute for the committee and explained the bill would amend Title 69 (the Water Quality Control Act) definitions. Members asked whether drained or tiled cropland could later revert to wetlands if farming ceased and whether the bill would prevent TDEC from reclassifying such land. Representative Warner said the bill’s purpose was to prevent TDEC from reclassifying cropland that no longer meets the statutory wetland definition.
Several members voiced concerns about ceding too much to shifting federal rules and about protecting wetlands: Representative Fritz pressed counsel on takings authority and German replied she could not point to a specific constitutional provision but cited established takings case law. The clerk recorded 2 ayes and 6 nays after a motion for the previous question, and the bill failed in committee.
The vote leaves the existing Water Quality Control Act definitions in place; proponents of the bill argued it would protect farmers’ land values and sales prospects, while opponents said it risked undermining wetland protections and would import an unstable federal standard.
What’s next: with the committee vote failing, HB1072 will not advance from this subcommittee unless refiled or reconsidered.
