A proposed change in the rules governing the Clean Water Act has farmers in a tizzy, both in Oregon and across the United States. They worry, perhaps with good reason, that if the Environmental Protection Agency has its way, farming will become a far more difficult proposition.

The EPA, joined by the Army Corps of Engineers, has proposed a rule that would, its supporters say, make it easier to protect the nation’s water by clarifying protection for streams and wetlands. Farmers’ groups note that the rule is so broadly written that it could, they believe, apply to just about any man-made irrigation ditch or occasional stream or wetland in the country.

Worse, opponents say, the rule is a clear attempt by EPA to make an end run around both Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court.

Currently EPA’s jurisdiction is limited to “navigable waters,” rivers such as the Deschutes, and associated wetlands. Dave Dillon, executive vice president of the Oregon Farm Bureau, believes the proposed changes are contrary to at least two U.S. Supreme Court rulings and earlier agriculture legislation approved by both houses of Congress that limited the agency’s power over such things.

The world would not come to an end if the rule were approved, no doubt. But life for farmers could become far more difficult. That’s because broadly written rules such as this one can be interpreted in a variety of ways, some of which would dramatically increase red tape and the number of permits farmers would have to get for such things as irrigation projects.

The U.S. House of Representatives has already taken up the subject with a measure that would bar the EPA from going forward. It passed last month 262-152, with 35 Democrats joining Republican supporters. Oregon’s Kurt Schrader, D-Canby, and Greg Walden, R-Hood River, both voted for it. Thirteen Democrats simply did not vote at all on the measure.

The bill is now on the calendar in the U.S. Senate, though nobody really expects it to go anywhere this year. That’s unfortunate. Having the issue resolved sooner rather than later makes sense.