While the Biden administration amended rules to comply with the Supreme Court ruling, the Trump administration recently released a new draft rule that would go further than even the Supreme Court in limiting what waters can be protected.

The Clean Water Act’s definition of “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) is core to defining what waters are protected and which aren’t. Unfortunately, the Trump Administration’s newly proposed WOTUS rule would roll back protections for vast areas of wetlands and river tributaries. It’s estimated that close to 80% of America’s remaining wetlands would lose Clean Water Act protections. As written, the rule would leave many waterways vulnerable to pollution, degradation, and destruction, threatening water quality and community resilience across the country.

Here are our top four concerns with the new WOTUS proposal

1. The rule requires streams and wetlands to have surface water “at least during the wet season” in order to qualify for protection. But it never defines what the wet season actually is.

What this means for rivers: Wet seasons vary dramatically from region to region, and without a clear, science-based definition, many healthy and ecologically important streams risk being excluded.

2. Narrow definitions and expanded exemptions shrink the scope of protected waters.

What this means for rivers: By redefining “tributary” to include only streams with year-round or steady “wet-season” flow, and expanding exemptions for wastewater and waste-treatment systems, the new rule would eliminate protections for many intermittent streams and man-made infrastructure that function like natural streams, opening the door to more unregulated pollution. Many rivers in the Southwest only flow for part of the year. This updated definition would put many of these rivers at risk.

3. The rule suggests any artificial or natural break in flow cuts off upstream protection.

What this means for rivers: Under the proposed rule, a culvert, pipe, stormwater channel, or short dry stretch can sever jurisdiction. This means upstream waters that feed larger rivers may no longer be protected, allowing pollution to still flow into nominally protected rivers and streams.

4. The rule significantly eliminates wetland protections by requiring “wetlands” to physically touch a protected water and maintain surface water through the wet season.

What this means for rivers: The new definition excludes many wetlands, which naturally store floodwater, filter pollutants, and safeguard communities. This puts the drinking water for millions at risk and increases the risks of flooding for many communities.

The health of our rivers depends on the small streams and wetlands that feed them. By discarding science, narrowing long‑standing definitions, and creating confusing jurisdictional tests, the Trump Administration’s proposed WOTUS rule risks undoing decades of progress toward cleaner, safer water. America’s rivers—and the communities that depend on them—deserve better.

These rollbacks will put our waterways and the life that depends on them in jeopardy. The public comment period to speak up and defend clean water protections is open until January 5. Please take action today and send a letter to the EPA urging them to keep the current definition of Waters of the United States in place!

The post Our Four Biggest Concerns with the Trump Administration’s Proposed WOTUS Rule appeared first on .

What is One Water? 

One Water is a holistic strategy for managing all water resources—surface water, groundwater, stormwater, and wastewater—as a single, interconnected system. This approach emphasizes collaboration among stakeholders, sustainable infrastructure, and equitable water access. Integrated Water Management (IWM) is the set of practices that turn One Water principles into action, balancing environmental sustainability, economic growth, and public health. 

North Carolina’s Neuse and Cape Fear Rivers: Where and what to know 

Stretching nearly 6,000 square miles, the Neuse River Basin connects North Carolina’s fast-growing Piedmont region to the state’s Coastal Plain before emptying into Pamlico Sound, a vital local fishery that supports both livelihoods and recreation. However, the basin is under pressure from nutrient pollution, algal blooms, and increased sedimentation—threats that endanger water quality and aquatic life. 

The Upper Neuse River Basin, home to Falls Lake, supplies drinking water to much of the Raleigh metropolitan area but faces challenges from stormwater runoff, urban expansion, and nutrient overload. Without proactive management, these pressures could compromise the region’s ability to provide clean, reliable water for residents. 

Similarly, the Jordan Lake watershed, primarily fed by the Haw River, is a crucial water resource for central North Carolina before flowing into the Cape Fear River and ultimately the Atlantic Ocean. Yet, Jordan Lake struggles with excess nutrients, stormwater pollution, and sedimentation, making it imperative to adopt collaborative water management strategies to maintain its role as both a regional water supply and an ecological treasure. 

American Rivers: Driving Nationwide Change 

American Rivers is a national leader in promoting One Water strategies. In North Carolina, we are championing policies that support green infrastructure, equitable water access, and climate resilience. By integrating science-based solutions and forward-thinking policy changes into regional water management efforts, American Rivers strengthens initiatives like JLOW and UNRBA, ensuring that communities throughout the Neuse and Cape Fear watersheds benefit from sustainable, collaborative water resource management. 

JLOW exemplifies the One Water approach by bringing together local governments, industries, conservation groups, and residents to implement cost-effective, mutually beneficial water solutions. These efforts include climate-resilient infrastructure projects, stormwater management innovations, and ecosystem restoration initiatives. By fostering collaboration across jurisdictions, JLOW helps secure the region’s water future while positively impacting downstream communities, including those in the Cape Fear River Basin.

Similarly, UNRBA applies One Water strategies to address critical water challenges in the Upper Neuse River Basin. Through data-driven decision-making and multi-stakeholder partnerships, the association works to reduce nutrient pollution and mitigate stormwater impacts through an innovative joint investment-based compliance strategy that funds water quality projects with community benefits. 

By embracing the One Water approach, North Carolina’s water leaders are creating a model for other regions across the country. These efforts not only safeguard vital water resources but also strengthen communities and economies. 

One Water holds the key to solving our most pressing water challenges. By fostering collaboration and breaking down traditional management silos, we can ensure abundant, clean water for generations to come—one watershed at a time. 

The post One Water in Action: American Rivers Leads the Way in North Carolina appeared first on .

Right now, the stakes couldn’t be higher — fires are growing increasingly severe, dangerous floods are threatening communities, drought is putting water, food supplies and our livelihoods at risk, and fish and wildlife are being pushed closer to extinction as their streams dry up.  

Rivers give us so much; they support the web of life from providing our drinking water to watering our crops and so much in between. In an era of climate change, communities with clean, healthy, free-flowing rivers will be the ones that thrive. We must ensure that all communities, not just a privileged few, benefit from healthy rivers now and in the decades to come. 

To address some frequently asked questions about extreme weather and how it affects our nation’s rivers and your clean water, we put together some important information to know: 

How can healthy rivers help prevent catastrophic fire damage? 

Protecting and restoring rivers and their watersheds, including forests and headwater meadows, can both decrease the risk of catastrophic fire, and help ensure clean, reliable water supplies. 

• In a healthy watershed, rain can soak into the ground and replenish groundwater supplies. 

• We can manage fuels (excess vegetation) in a way that is sensitive to river health and fragile ecosystems.  

• Fuels management over less than 10% of a watershed can have a significant impact on water supply while simultaneously reducing wildfire risk. 

How does protecting a river ensure clean, safe, reliable water? 

Most of our drinking water comes from rivers. Healthy rivers and watersheds work as a natural filtration system, cleaning and storing water for nearby communities. 

• Pollution and habitat destruction through harmful logging, mining, agriculture or other irresponsible development contaminates water supplies with sediment and toxins. This can increase water treatment costs (and the cost of your water bill) and in extreme cases, impact public health.  

• Smart stewardship of public lands is critical to safeguarding clean, reliable water supplies. Forest Service lands are the largest source of municipal water supply in the nation, serving over 60 million people in 3,400 communities in 33 States. Major U.S. cities including Los Angeles, Portland, Denver, and Atlanta rely on water from Forest Service lands. 

How can restoring and reconnecting a floodplain protect homes and businesses? 

Floodplains (the low-lying areas along a river) are an integral part of healthy rivers, and the first line of defense when it comes to safeguarding a community from flood damage.  

• When the water level rises in a flood, that water needs somewhere to go. This is why a river needs room to move across its floodplain. It’s also why we should build smart, and keep homes and businesses out of harm’s way. 

• A floodplain can act as a sponge: when a flooding river can move into its floodplain, the water can slow down, get absorbed into the ground, and prevent damage to homes and businesses.  

• Paving over floodplains and walling off the river with levees can make flood damage worse in downstream communities. 

How helpful are dams? 

While dams can provide water storage and hydropower, they can also take a significant toll on a river’s health. Many dams are useful, but some are destructive. We must evaluate dams on an individual basis and weigh their costs and benefits when determining how to manage them, and whether to keep them in place or remove them. 

• When it comes to preparing for increasing floods, drought, and fires, different communities will have different needs. There is no “one size fits all” solution. Many communities depend on a balance of traditional infrastructure (such as dams) and natural approaches (such as river restoration). Protecting and restoring free-flowing rivers is always a smart strategy.  

• Building a dam doesn’t create “new” water, it simply stores the water that’s available. As drought shrinks reservoirs across the country, we need to increase water conservation and watershed protection to help secure our water supplies. 

• There are already hundreds of thousands of dams across our country. We must optimize the operations of existing dams, and remove the ones that no longer make sense. 

• Reservoirs also lose a significant amount of water each year through evaporation – in some regions up to 15% of the water is lost each year to evaporation. 

How can removing a dam improve public safety? 

Outdated, unsafe dams can fail, with devastating consequences to downstream communities. Dams can also harm water quality, and can be drowning hazards. 

• Flood protection: Floodwaters can overwhelm aging dams and cause them to fail, taking lives and destroying property as has recently happened. Many dams have exceeded their design life and require costly maintenance or upgrades to remain safe. Taking down an unsafe dam eliminates the risk of catastrophic failure and can improve flood protection. 

• Clean water: Dams can encourage the growth of toxic algae, by slowing and warming the water. Toxic algae harms water quality and can be lethal to wildlife and pets. Dam removal can restore a river’s flow and water quality, and help eliminate this public health risk without removing the potential of the river as a drinking water source for local communities. 

• Drowning risk: Low-head dams can create a recirculating hydraulic at the base of the dam. These hydraulics can trap and drown and drown swimmers, boaters, and anglers who get too close. There have been more than 1,400 fatalities at low-head dams across the U.S. 

The post Extreme Weather, Fire, Flooding, and Your Clean Water appeared first on .

That’s why we need a responsible national energy strategy that is considerate of our water resources. Responsible energy development means meeting the needs of people without damaging the environment that our health and water wealth depend on.  

No matter who you are or where you live, we all need clean, safe, reliable drinking water. Most of our country’s water comes from rivers. Public opinion research shows that Republican, Democrat, and Independent voters of all ages and races overwhelmingly support protections for clean water.  Clean water is a basic need, a human right, and a nonpartisan issue we can all agree on. 

The details and implementation of these executive orders will matter as we pursue the dual goals of energy and water security. 

We cannot return to days where polluters were allowed to devastate rural and urban communities and their natural resources. But these executive orders eliminate efforts to safeguard communities from environmental harm, putting their drinking water at risk.  

In addition to protecting Americans from pollution, we also need to help families and businesses prepare for increasingly extreme weather. As Asheville, North Carolina and other communities in the Southeast continue to recover from Hurricane Helene, and thousands in Los Angeles are without homes following recent catastrophic fires, we should be bolstering policies to fight climate change and working to strengthen communities in the face of severe floods, droughts, and fires.  

Declaring a National Energy Emergency executive order:  

• Directs agencies to use their authorities under the National Emergencies Act (“NEA”) to speed the development of fossil fuels on federal lands and elsewhere. Using the NEA authorities, agencies may use emergency regulations and waivers under the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act and eminent domain to fast-track energy projects, including hazardous materials, pipelines, fossil fuels extraction, and hydropower dams, lessening protections for free-flowing rivers risking increased watershed impairment from leaks, spills, and industrial accidents while further exacerbating the climate crisis.  

Unleashing American Energy executive order:  

• Establishes the policy of the United States “to encourage energy exploration and production on Federal lands and waters.” Under this order, agencies are tasked with identifying “burdensome regulations” and implementing action plans to address these burdens. In many cases, regulations that may slow down project development also serve to protect communities from the impacts of energy development. Fast-tracking permitting for oil, natural gas, coal, hydropower, biofuels, critical minerals, and/or nuclear energy can leave public health and environmental protections behind. This order also undoes appliance efficiency policies. Securing enough water quantity is a significant problem for many communities, particularly in the West, and this new policy could further deplete rivers of their waters.  

Putting America First In International Environmental Agreements executive order: 

• Withdraws the United States from the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The 2015 Paris Agreement is a voluntary global climate accord agreed to by almost all countries to progressively reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change impacts water quality, water quantity and severity of catastrophic floods, droughts, and fires. 

Rescinding of Executive Order 14030 Climate-Related Financial Risk   

• Revokes the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard (FFRMS). The FFRMS was developed to improve the resilience of communities and federal assets from flooding. It addressed flood risk and limited flood damages by focusing on the protection and restoration of wetlands in addition to the recognition of an expanded floodplain at risk of future flooding. Without the FFRMS in place, communities nationwide will be less prepared and more vulnerable to hazardous weather. 

Rescinding of Executive Order 14094 Modernizing Regulatory Review  

• Will reduce opportunities for public participation in regulations and meetings with decision-makers, particularly for underserved communities.  

Rescinding of Executive Order 14096, Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment to Environmental Justice for All  

• Eliminates the government-wide approach to environmental justice and equitable access to nature for all communities. 

Executive orders impacting specific rivers: 

• Certain executive orders have a direct impact on individual rivers, including the San Joaquin, Sacramento, Rio Grande and the rivers of Alaska. In California, agencies are directed to route more water out of the rivers. In the Rio Grande, border wall construction could impact water flow and flooding. In Alaska, thousands of miles of rivers in the Tongass National Forest could lose protections. 

Water is a shared resource, and all life depends on healthy rivers. For more than 50 years, American Rivers has been successful in bringing people together for river and water solutions. We remain committed to working with our elected leaders to ensure that this shared resource is protected. American Rivers and our affiliate, the American Rivers Action Fund have a blueprint for the Trump administration and Congress, which includes proactive steps to protect clean water and rivers. 

Read the blueprint and voice your support. 

The post How do President Trump’s Executive Orders Impact Your Clean Water? appeared first on .

Thankfully he recovered, but his experience with getting sick from manure or pollution getting into the water is more common than one would think. This past June, over 20 people swimming in Lake Anna, in Virginia, became ill due to E. Coli (the most common bacteria found in feces).  

The irony is, many of our rivers are great places to recreate and swim in. Rivers are generally much cleaner than they were 50 years ago — prior to the Clean Water Act being passed — but a lack of investment in wastewater and stormwater infrastructure, and a growing rollback of clean water laws continues to prevent progress in cleaning up our rivers and streams;  And in many cases actually making them worse.  

The solution to cleaner water is a simple one — maintain and enforce common sense, scientifically supportable clean water laws, and invest in maintaining and modernizing America’s clean water infrastructure. Both of these solutions can only happen when we have elected officials who care about protecting our communities and want to invest in the infrastructure needed to ensure we have clean water. That’s why it’s important to #VoteRivers this November. 

There are lawmakers, on both sides of the aisle, who understand the need for clean water. There are others who need to hear about why it needs to be a priority. We need more elected officials to stand up and champion the laws and the funding to keep our water clean.  

It’s only when we all #VoteRivers that we can guarantee there will be clean water when you turn on your faucet, boat on your river, or, like the Scout I was with,  swim in a stream.

The post Vote for Clean Water appeared first on .

Over 50 years ago, Congress enacted the Environmental Protection Agency and federal regulations, like the Clean Water Act, to safeguard our communities from the harmful effects of pollution and to restore our urban rivers back to health. Today, more than 80% of rivers remain unsuitable for fishing, swimming, or drinking, and less accessible natural places are near Black, Latino, and Asian American communities. Decades of broken promises from federal agencies and local governments to reduce pollution and restore rivers ignited the next generation of advocates to speak out – loudly – on behalf of their communities. 

 A new generation of climate leaders is tackling local environmental challenges through culturally centered solutions, community-led science, and genuine conversations. Young environmental leaders are harnessing the power of new technology and social media to ignite a global movement for change. By leveraging these platforms, they are effectively mobilizing communities, raising awareness about pressing environmental issues, and advocating for innovative solutions. This new generation of activists is uniquely positioned to address environmental challenges through a holistic lens, recognizing the interconnectedness of ecological, economic, and social well-being. Their digital prowess enables them to build strong momentum, foster collaboration, and drive impactful change on a local and global scale. Nancy, a multidisciplinary artist in metal, ceramics, jewelry, and plants, shows up for community with nurturing love and support. Erica enjoys being outdoors and hiking, and with a contagious enthusiasm, she motivates action.  

Recently, I had the privilege of catching up with a few of my local climate sheros in Grand Rapids over lunch in a nearby cafe. Erica Bouldin and Nancy Morales advocate for equitable access to natural spaces, investment to remediate brownfields alleviation, and inclusive participation in local decision-making.   

Driven by a desire to connect with the community and bridge the gap between local issues and climate change, they created the Green Rapids podcast. Erica and Nancy wanted to create a fun and engaging platform to share not only the urgency of the climate crisis but also practical solutions and actions. Passionate about climate and environmental fairness, they bring the community access to critical information on environmental issues in our city and state and connect listeners to activism across the globe.  

The Green Rapids podcast takes a refreshing approach to serious environmental issues, engaging its audience in pressing topics like flooding, air quality, pedestrian safety, and food access. With a mix of humor and expertise, the show delves into pressing ecological challenges while keeping the mood light. By interviewing local experts in a fun and engaging manner, Green Rapids makes complex environmental topics accessible and enjoyable for any listener. Our local partners, the West Michigan Environmental Action Council and the Lower Grand River Organizations of Watersheds, were featured on the podcast to share insights on the collaborative efforts, environmental practices, and river restoration. Carlos explains watershed on “Soak it All In” or catch the LGROW Flow and learn about the importance of Urban Waters Network for communities. Are you curious about the threats we can’t see? Listen to the Green Rapids conversation about More Than Water Under the Bridge.   

As women of color, they emphasized their role as advocates for their communities, working to dismantle unfair policies and practices. However, they also highlighted the immense pressure they face to address the community’s needs. They shared the difficulties they face in a white-led environmental movement and the desire for traditional knowledge and cultural perspectives to be prioritized in land and water management.  

Like any good tea, take a sip for yourself.  

Green Rapids podcast is available on your favorite streaming app and social media platforms. 

Green Rapids podcast is part of the Urban Core Collective. If you’re in the area, you can catch the Green Rapids podcasters at the Urban Core Connect event on August 22nd and learn more about the amazing work UCC does for the Grand Rapids community.  

The post Inspiring Change in West Michigan appeared first on .

In addition to broad cuts within the Department of Agriculture, the Forest Service, and the Department of Energy, among other agencies, there are specific changes called out that will have significant repercussions for rivers.

1. Within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), it suggests eliminating the

• Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights
• Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance
• Office of Public Engagement of Environmental Affairs

The plan also recommends to “review grant programs to ensure that taxpayer funds go to organizations focused on tangible environmental improvements free from political affiliation.” Project 2025 also recommends a “day one executive order” to stop all grants to advocacy groups. And on water specifically, Project 2025 recommends codifying a “navigable water” clause to “respect private property rights.”

What this means for rivers: This means that federal funding currently going to conservation organizations, like American Rivers or those on the ground removing dams to restore rivers, could be held up or eliminated. Weakening federal safeguards for clean water means that it will be up to the states to decide, meaning access to clean water will be depend on the politics of one’s state, not necessarily what is needed for healthy communities or ecosystems. And because rivers don’t stop at state borders, pollution could increase everywhere. Many federal safeguards currently in place to protect rivers and clean water, especially in communities that have traditionally been under-served due to their race, cultural, or income makeup, will no longer be enforced.

2. Project 2025 suggests lifting the ban on fossil fuel extraction on federal lands, which would put countless miles of rivers and streams at risk.

What this means for rivers: Putting climate change concerns aside for the moment, with any new fossil fuel extraction, the risk of accidents, leaks, and spills goes up considerably. And as we have seen numerous times before, one accident can damage a river and clean water supplies for decades. Further, the headwaters of many rivers in the U.S. are found on national public land. More pollution, means more risk to the literal places where rivers are born, and that will have impacts to everyone who uses it as a water source.

3. Project 2025 calls for the dismantling of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) by moving some responsibilities to other agencies and privatizing other duties. The National Marine Fisheries Service would be streamlined and some duties transferred to the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the “America the Beautiful” and “30×30” programs withdrawn.

What this means for rivers: The NOAA website says it best:

“From daily weather forecasts, severe storm warnings, and climate monitoring to fisheries management, coastal restoration and supporting marine commerce, NOAA’s products and services support economic vitality and affect more than one-third of America’s gross domestic product. NOAA’s dedicated scientists use cutting-edge research and high-tech instrumentation to provide citizens, planners, emergency managers and other decision makers with reliable information they need, when they need it.”

Without a central agency monitoring our climate and weather, and informing the many parts of our government that need that data, we run the risk of being unprepared for the next hurricane, storm, flood, or drought. We already know that climate change impacts every drop of water in our lives. Ignoring this fact threatens our safety and way of life on Earth.

4. With the Department of Energy (DOE), Project 2025 reinforces support for fossil fuels by encouraging more extraction and streamlining public safeguards.

What this means for rivers: We already know that a reliance on fossil fuels will continue to warm our world and intensify floods and droughts. With more drilling and fewer safeguards, threats to rivers and their wildlife and communities will increase.

5. The plan recommends moving the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to the Department of Interior or Department of Transportation, and suggests phasing out programs like the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to private insurance. Disaster preparedness grants would be changed to only go to states – NGOs, Tribal governments, and localities would need to go through State governments for funds.

What this means for rivers: As floods become more frequent and severe, FEMA and the resources it provides become more and more vital. Moving these critical emergency response tools away from an agency that already has the national infrastructure set up to respond when needed would be unnecessarily putting lives at risk. Eliminating federal support programs in favor of state or — even worse — private, control, assures the same vulnerable communities that historically have suffered the most will continue to be under-served, and will have a harder time recovering from the next disaster.

Interested in doing more for rivers? Download our election guide to better understand the threats rivers face in this election. Or join us right now in taking action for clean water by asking Congress to increase federal protections for all streams and wetlands. This is our chance to make a difference!

The post 5 things to know about Project 2025 and your clean water  appeared first on .

Toxic algae isn’t just unsightly; it’s a serious threat to our economy, drinking water supplies, and fisheries. That’s because it releases toxins into the water that can harm people and animals. Blooms can be toxic if consumed or touched, causing headaches, stomach pain, dizziness, vomiting, diarrhea, and liver damage. Inhaling the bacteria can cause skin and respiratory irritation. It can be fatal to dogs that swim in or drink the water. As the algae decomposes, it uses up the oxygen in the water, leading to fish kills.

Toxic algae outbreaks have been growing in intensity and frequency, thanks to the increased use of fertilizers and rising temperatures associated with climate change. In 2023, heat waves as a result of El Niño made for a particularly bad year. A toxic bloom off the coast of California left hundreds of sea lions and dolphins sick or dead. In Utah, blooms in the Virgin River and Utah Lake killed two family dogs and sickened more. Toxic algae covered half of Lake Okeechobee’s 730 square miles in Florida and 312 square miles of Lake Erie. Other severe outbreaks appeared in Kansas, Texas, and Oregon.

In past years, toxic algae outbreaks in drinking water supplies have resulted in advisories for children, pregnant women, and nursing mothers to avoid drinking the water; and left hundreds of thousands of people in urban areas without drinking water for multiple days. A Center for Disease Control report from the 2021 toxic algae season recorded 117 cases of human illness and nearly 3,000 animal cases.

There are ways to reduce pollution into waterways, particularly on the local level. When we alter natural landscapes, we change the way water moves over the land and what it carries: think rainfall washing fertilizer off lawns and farmlands to contaminate local streams, or parking lots and rooftops preventing rain from soaking naturally into the ground. But we can reduce our use of fertilizers, update our infrastructure to eliminate sewage overflows, and increase green infrastructure in cities and towns — like installing green roofs, planting more trees, creating rain gardens, and making space for more natural areas — to naturally absorb and minimize pollution that flows into our waters. 

“At the national level, it’s essential that we strengthen clean water safeguards. All waters are connected, and pollution anywhere threatens our communities and our drinking water. We need Congress and the administration to make clean water and healthy rivers a top priority.”

– Gary Belan, Senior Director, Clean Water Supply, American Rivers

And remember to check local advisories, including park alerts, local news, and public health websites, for toxic algae blooms before heading out to play in your public waters this summer.

The post What’s the Deal With Toxic Algae? appeared first on .

Donna Myers, Associate Director of Southeast Conservation, with North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper (Left) and EPA Administrator Michael Regan (Right)

This was an important day for affected citizens who’ve rallied their communities across North Carolina for years to address the serious health risks posed by the permitted dumping of PFAS, notably into the Cape Fear River by Chemours Fayetteville Works Plant. However, the concerns are not only downstream of this discharge.  To learn more about the proliferation of these substances, The State of North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality began sampling for PFOS and PFOA in drinking water sources across the state. Citizens can find the results of those studies here or by contacting their local water utility.  

American Rivers supports this monumental movement toward clean drinking water standards of PFAS contaminants. While this is a huge step forward, we and our partners remain concerned over contaminants still in the Cape Fear River and the State of North Carolina’s ability to regulate the polluters responsible for these releases. American Rivers supports our partners including Haw River Assembly and Cape Fear River Watch who continue to call for the polluters to be held accountable by cleaning up years-long permitted discharges of PFAS and end the discharge of these harmful chemicals into the river.   

The post New Drinking Water Standards Introduced to Protect Against “Forever Chemicals” appeared first on .

Thank you for standing by our mission to protect wild rivers, restore damaged rivers, and conserve clean water for people and nature.

American Rivers is thankful for…

The post 50 Things for 50 Years appeared first on .