Thread by @ArielWittenberg

The framing of #WOTUS in this @nytimes news alert is off. This is about what waters the Clean Water Act applies to. Yes, that results in changes to whether polluters need permits. But we're talking about polluting (or destroying) actual water bodies/wetlands.

@nytimes Also, no version of #WOTUS actually mentions pollutants. Yes, the implication is that pollution control will change, but that's not *technically* what the rule is about.

@nytimes h/t to @geofkoss for sending this to me.

@nytimes @geofkoss Actually, this @nytimes story is worse than I thought. It inaccurately says that farmers need permits if runoff from farm fields containing pesticides reaches a #WOTUS. Not true. They would only need permits to spray pesticides *directly* on a #WOTUS

@nytimes @geofkoss This inaccuracy appears to be the root of the headline problem. Not the first time the Times has relied on inaccurate Farm Bureau talking points in #WOTUS stories.