ST. MARTIN PARISH — Two weeks ago, Governor Jeff Landry signed Senate Bill 94 into law, reshaping how Louisiana defines wetlands and potentially changing which areas of the state qualify for environmental protections. The law incorporates language from the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling Sackett v. EPA—particularly the idea that only wetlands with a “continuous surface connection” to navigable waters qualify for regulation—and applies it to Louisiana’s own pollution discharge and coastal permitting systems.
Experts say the most significant changes introduced by SB 94 aren’t just about language—they’re about what gets excluded. One of the most debated elements of the law is a new definition for “fastlands,” a term referring to wetland areas that would typically be regulated but are now exempt if they’re surrounded by levees, berms, or similar structures that would “normally” block surface water from flowing out.
“My issue is they put the word ‘would normally,’” said Brennan Spoor, staff attorney for the Atchafalaya Basinkeeper. “Any levee blocks water—but if it's weak and water leaks through, it still impacts the ecosystem. We’re letting people avoid regulation even when those impacts are real.”
The law mirrors the Supreme Court’s Sackett decision, which narrowed the scope of federally protected wetlands. But SB 94 goes further by excluding groundwater from the state’s pollutant discharge rules altogether. Spoor said that change could undercut longstanding environmental safeguards.
“They’ve excluded groundwater entirely,” he said. “So wetlands that used to be protected—and groundwater that feeds into our systems—are now off the map when it comes to pollution oversight.”
Spoor added that the shift opens the door for increased development in ecologically sensitive areas.
“Anytime you allow more development in these areas without regulation, you raise the risk of flooding—and long-term destruction,” he said.
Mark Davis, director of Tulane University’s Environmental Law Center, offered a more measured view of the law’s potential impact. He noted that Louisiana has never had a robust wetland protection program outside of its coastal zone—and that the concept of fastlands isn’t entirely new.
“Louisiana never really had a wetland protection law outside the coastal zone,” Davis said. “And it already had something like a fastlands exception.”
Still, Davis acknowledged the new language may blur the lines between state and federal oversight, especially when agencies are left to interpret how the law applies.
“It adds confusion,” he said. “And until we know how federal agencies interpret it, that confusion is going to remain.”
Spoor argued that SB 94 promises regulatory clarity while instead introducing ambiguity, particularly because it lacks timelines or precise criteria for determining what qualifies as a fastland or a wetland.
“They say they’re creating clarity—but without timelines or clear definitions, they’re just making things harder to enforce,” he said.
With the law now in effect, environmental advocates, legal experts, and property owners are watching closely to see how the changes play out on the ground. The implications for flood control, wildlife conservation, and Louisiana’s access to federal coastal funding remain uncertain—and could ultimately be tested through both regulation and litigation.
