Tennessee House Bill HB1072

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/25
• Refer: 2/10/25
• Failed: 2/4/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 11, Chapter 14, Part 4 and Title 69, relative to wetlands.

Summary

HB1072 would prohibit the Tennessee Department from applying wetland classification criteria in a way that would designate certain real property as a wetland if the property is already classified as prior converted cropland and is exempt from wetland classification under federal law. In practical terms, the bill creates a state-law limitation on how wetlands determinations are made for a specific category of agricultural land. The measure appears aimed at aligning Tennessee’s treatment of prior converted cropland with federal wetlands exemptions, reducing the chance that land already exempt under federal rules would be reclassified as wetlands at the state level. The bill is narrow in scope and does not broadly rewrite wetlands law; instead, it adds a targeted restriction to the Department’s authority in this area and takes effect immediately upon becoming law.

Impact

The bill would amend Tennessee Code Annotated Title 69 by adding a new section limiting state wetlands classification for prior converted cropland, and it references Title 11 in the caption as part of the broader statutory context. Its main legal effect is to constrain the Department’s wetlands criteria so they cannot be used to classify federally exempt prior converted cropland as wetlands, thereby affecting landowners, farmers, and state environmental regulators involved in land-use and wetlands determinations.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill faced significant resistance in committee, as it failed in the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Subcommittee by a 2-6 vote. No committee transcript is available, so the record does not show detailed debate, but the vote outcome indicates the proposal did not have broad support at that stage. The bill’s framing suggests support from agricultural interests and likely concern from members wary of limiting wetlands protections or state environmental discretion.

Contention

The central point of contention is whether Tennessee should be barred from using its own wetlands criteria to classify prior converted cropland as wetlands when federal law already exempts that land. Supporters would likely argue the bill protects farmers and prevents duplicative or inconsistent regulation, while opponents would likely worry it could narrow wetlands oversight and reduce environmental protections. The subcommittee defeat indicates that concerns about wetlands regulation, agency authority, or environmental impacts outweighed support in that committee.