House Bill 738, titled "Restore Wetlands Protections," would revise North Carolina law to expand and clarify the state’s treatment of wetlands as protected waters. The bill repeals two prior session-law provisions from 2014 and 2015 and amends the statutory definitions of "isolated wetlands," "waters," and "wetland" in G.S. 143-212. In particular, it restores a broader definition of isolated wetlands by recognizing wetlands previously confirmed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers before June 22, 2020, as well as certain basin wetlands and bogs identified in the state wetland assessment manual.
The bill also rewrites the definition of "wetland" so that wetlands classified as waters of the State are limited to waters of the United States under federal regulations and isolated wetlands. It expressly excludes prior converted cropland and excludes man-made ditches or ponds built for stormwater management, along with other man-made isolated ponds, from the definition of isolated wetlands. The act takes effect when it becomes law.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would change North Carolina’s environmental and water-quality statutes by restoring state-level protections for certain wetlands that had been narrowed by earlier legislation. It would affect permitting, regulation, and enforcement under Chapter 143 by expanding the category of wetlands treated as waters of the State, which could increase review requirements for development, drainage, and land-disturbing activities in or near those areas. The bill would primarily affect landowners, developers, agriculture interests, environmental regulators, and local governments involved in wetlands permitting and compliance.
Sentiment
Based on the bill title and text, the measure appears to be framed as a restoration of environmental protections rather than a new regulatory expansion, suggesting support from sponsors concerned with wetland conservation and water-resource protection. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the available materials. The overall tone of the bill is policy-driven and protective of wetlands.
Contention
The likely points of contention are the scope of wetlands covered and the regulatory burden that broader protections may impose on property owners, developers, infrastructure projects, and agricultural operations. Supporters would likely emphasize ecological benefits, water quality, flood mitigation, and consistency with prior federal or state wetland determinations, while opponents may argue that the bill reintroduces restrictions that could limit land use and increase permitting costs. The exclusion of stormwater ponds and other man-made ponds suggests an attempt to narrow the bill’s reach, but the central dispute remains how broadly isolated wetlands should be protected under state law.