Celebrating 10 years of Protecting Wetlands!

rick.savage • November 10, 2025


A Look Back: From Humble Beginnings to Statewide Impact

It’s hard to believe how far we’ve come since that first meeting in June 2015, when a small group of us gathered at a Starbucks on Lake Boone Trail to form our very first Board of Directors.  I was elected President, with Steve Rebak as Vice President, Kristie Gianopulos as Treasurer, and John Dorney as Secretary. Our founding board also included Kim Matthews, Stratford Kay, Laura England, and others who helped shape the foundation of our organization. Ginny Baker (Daniel) and Robert Truesdale became co-chairs of the Science Committee, and later Amin Davis stepped up to lead the Program Committee. Together, we drafted our bylaws and registered as a nonprofit corporation in North Carolina.  In 2016, with the invaluable help of Chad Guthrie and the UNC School of Law, we achieved our 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status — a huge step in establishing ourselves as a recognized nonprofit.


Growing Our Reach

Our early years focused on building visibility and partnerships. I met with leaders across environmental and conservation organizations, and we participated in countless community and environmental events.  With Laura England’s leadership, we launched the Wetland Treasures of the Carolinas Program, which has become our flagship initiative — celebrating 36 Wetland Treasures to date (23 in North Carolina and 13 in South Carolina).


Expanding Our Mission

In 2019, we took a bold leap by applying for our first EPA Wetlands Program Grant in partnership with NC State University and RTI International. This effort led to the creation of a Volunteer Wetlands Monitoring Program, which became a model for restoring the state’s wetlands monitoring efforts.


Building on that success, a second EPA grant in 2024 allowed us to expand into Hendersonville, NC, Horry County, SC, and Columbia, SC — broadening our network and community engagement. We’re now seeking a third grant to continue this important work.


Supporting Vulnerable Communities

Our mission has also grown to include working with vulnerable and flood-prone communities along our coastal rivers. Through collaboration with the North Carolina Office of Resilience, Working and Natural Lands initiatives, and Executive Order 305, we’ve focused on using natural infrastructure to reduce flooding and restore ecosystems.


Thanks to support from the North Carolina Land and Water Fund, we’ve completed flood mitigation planning in Harnett County (Dunn, NC) on Stony Run, and are thrilled to have received a new grant to begin restoration work there.

We’ve also received funding to:

  • Assess flooding at Parker Creek (Pitt County) in a historically underserved community,
  • Work with the Lumbee Tribe to restore wetlands near their Cultural Center, and
  • Collaborate with the Bucksport community — with support from Defenders of Wildlife, the Betterment of Bucksport, and two Duke Accelerator grants — to address flooding linked to increased development.


Looking Ahead

We’ve come a long way in ten years, but there’s still much to do. Grants make much of our work possible, but they don’t cover everything. We rely on the generosity of our supporters and volunteers to help us sustain and grow our programs.

Please consider celebrating this milestone with a donation — large or small — to help keep our mission thriving for the next decade and beyond.


Join us on November 16th to celebrate our journey, reconnect with old friends, and look forward to the future of wetlands conservation together.


Thank you for being part of our story,

Rick Savage

Executive Director

Carolina Wetlands Association

You might also like

Celebrating Our Carolina Wetlands

Federal Rollbacks Threaten Wetland Protections: What You Need to Know About Senate Bill 5653

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.

Celebrating 10-years of Wetland Treasures Program

By chase.bergeson • October 16, 2026
A Decade of Celebrating Carolina's Wetland Treasures

Federal Rule Would Strip Protections from Many Wetlands and Streams

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.