The Changing Tides of Leadership: A Conversation with Our VPs

rick.savage • August 14, 2024

Dear Wetland Supporters:



The Board of Directors provides guidance and oversite to the organization.  Board members serve 3-year teams and every year one-third of the board changes.  I thought it would be good hear hear from our outgoing and in coming Vice Presidents about their hopes for the organization.


Heather Clarkson has been a board member since 2018 and served as the Vice-President for the past 3 year. Luckily for us, she is going to stay as a general board member for another term.   

Heather Clarkson

I am deeply honored to have had the  opportunity to serve as Vice President of the Carolina Wetlands Association. The  opportunity to contribute to an organization dedicated to preserving and restoring such vital ecosystems has been both humbling and energizing. The wetlands of the Carolinas are not merely natural wonders; they are the lifeblood of our communities, providing invaluable services such as flood control, water filtration, and wildlife habitat. The combination of knowledge, passion, and resources within our organization is a powerful force for positive change. I am confident that Carolina Wetlands Association will continue to make a significant impact through education and restoration efforts. By raising awareness of the importance of wetlands and inspiring stewardship, we can foster a generation of environmentally conscious citizens and revitalize degraded ecosystems across the Carolinas. 

                                                   - Heather Clarkson

Emily Barrett has only been on the Board of Director for six short months, but did not hesitate to accept the nomination as Vice-President.

Emily Barrett

From a very early age, I've been fascinated by the life that wetlands hold. I've sought out as many experiences as I could to be in and learn about wetlands. Now, as a seasoned environmental professional I see Carolina Wetlands Association as a pathway to educate others about the value of wetlands and to share my joy and fascination with  others. Wetlands are special places, and I see the coming year as being an opportunity to work together as an association to protect them, bring them to life in people's imaginations, and to harness the power of community to provide more stability to the organization. I will encourage us all to "say yes" when asked to help out!


                                                     - Emily Barrett

I hope you feel as confident as I do about the leadership of the Carolina Wetlands Association. If you see Heather, please thank her service as our third Vice-President and and welcome Emily Barrett as our fourth Vice President.


So as you explore wetlands near you, please think about how you can help your organization. Wetland protection is at an all time low and we need you support to continue the fight.


Yours,

Rick Savage, Executive Director

You might also like

Celebrating Our Carolina Wetlands

By rick.savage • November 3, 2026
The U.S. Congress is poised to weaken federal protection of wetlands. To understand why these changes matter, it helps to know how wetland permitting actually works. How Wetland Permitting Is Supposed to Work Whether the permit goes through the State agency (e.g. NC DEQ or SC DES which reviews water quality impacts) and/or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and EPA (which review the physical, chemical, and biological impacts), every application is supposed to follow a three-step mitigation sequence: avoid, minimize, and compensate. Avoid. The reviewer works with the applicant to determine whether the impact can be avoided altogether. Often, it can. Minimize. If the impact can’t be avoided, the reviewer and applicant look for ways to reduce it. Compensate. If the remaining impact is large enough, the applicant must compensate for the loss using a formula provided by the ACOE. Mitigation normally takes place in the same watershed and provides the same function as the wetland that was lost. This process takes time, but it is essential. It ensures that applicants don’t overlook options that could spare valuable wetlands. What Senate Bill 5653 Would Change Senate Bill 5653 , the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (BAAJA),aims to speed up federal and state regulatory decisions on housing and other development projects. But the bill would increase environmental degradation and undermine the federal-state partnerships that protect clean water. Here is the core problem: when permitting is rushed, reviewers can’t carry out the avoid, minimize, and compensate process. More wetlands will be damaged, and there will be no way to make up for the lost wetlands and the benefits they provide. A Weak Answer to the Housing Shortage BAAJA does little to address the real causes of the national housing shortage and construction challenges. Instead, it increases pollution and works against the central goal of the Clean Water Act: to restore and maintain the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters, including wetlands. The bill is an assault on the nation’s rivers, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes. It also looks like a deflection from Congress’s inability to pass legislation that meaningfully tackles the lack of available housing. Undercutting State Authority Over Water Quality BAAJA also limits the authority states hold under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, making it harder for them to meet the water quality standards they have set for their own waterbodies. That would set back five decades of progress toward cleaner water, progress to which every sector of society has contributed, and it would affect generations to come. Fewer Wetlands Protected, and Weaker Review for the Rest This is yet another attack on wetland protection, and it affects all of us. Even those wetlands that remain regulated after recent jurisdictional retreats by EPA and the ACOE would not receive the normal permitting review. In practice, that means they aren’t truly protected either. What You Can Do Contact your representative. Ask your senators to oppose Senate Bill 5653 . You can find and contact your U.S. senators here , or look up your U.S. representative here to share your concerns with the House as well. Support Carolina Wetlands Association. We are your organization fighting to protect wetlands. The next time you explore a wetland or pour a clean glass of water, consider making a donation to help us keep up this work.
By chase.bergeson • October 16, 2026
A Decade of Celebrating Carolina's Wetland Treasures
By kim.matthews • October 7, 2026
On September 9, 2026, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) offering additional ways to define “waters of the United States” (WOTUS). Why this definition matters The WOTUS definition determines which water bodies the federal government can protect under the Clean Water Act. In November 2025, the agencies proposed revisions to bring the definition in line with the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Sackett v. EPA. After taking public comments, they have now put forward further options. The new proposal narrows federal jurisdiction even more, potentially stripping protections from the vast majority of U.S. wetlands and seasonal streams. What our comment letter says The Carolina Wetlands Association is submitting comments opposing the proposal. Our main concerns: It would undermine the Clean Water Act’s purpose. The law’s goal is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. This proposal would severely undercut that goal. The “days of water” test is a poor measure. The proposal decides jurisdiction by how many days a year water is present. That number correlates poorly with a waterway’s ability to carry pollution downstream to the rivers, lakes, and estuaries that would stay protected. Streams dry for as few as 30 days a year could lose protection, and polluters would have an incentive to discharge into them rather than into protected waters. Drinking water is at risk. About 56% of North Carolina’s stream miles feeding public drinking water systems are intermittent, ephemeral, or headwater streams. In South Carolina the figure is 51%. These systems serve 6.6 million people, who would bear higher health risks and treatment costs. Wetlands do critical work. They filter pollutants and nutrients that cause algal blooms, dead zones, and fish kills. Losing that function would also degrade groundwater, which many people drink untreated. The legal reasoning is flawed. We argue the agencies misread the Supreme Court’s language. “Relatively permanent” describes geographic features such as streams with defined beds and banks. The word “continuously” modifies “flowing” and doesn’t limit what counts as relatively permanent. It would be hard to implement. Many affected streams have no data showing how many days they lack surface water. That makes the rule difficult for agencies to administer and leaves landowners unable to tell whether the Clean Water Act applies to their property. The impacts haven’t been analyzed. The agencies should not finalize a rule before measuring the added pollution flowing from newly unprotected waters into those that supply drinking water, or projecting the resulting damage to downstream uses. What you can do Read the SNPRM Submit your comment by October 9, 2026, under Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW-2025-0322 . Personal stories about the streams, wetlands, and drinking water you depend on are especially effective. Learn more: read the comments we submitted on the November 2025 version of the rule, many of which still apply.