The Bog Lifts
After months of internal debate, the Bush administration has proposed new federal wetlands-protection policies. (See "The Swamp Thing," Apr.) If the proposals survive, property owners will breathe a bit easier. Among the proposals:
• A distinction between wetlands that perform environmental functions, which will be protected, and random puddles, which won't. Also, irrigation ditches, wet spots in corn fields, and other normal consequences of farming and ranching will no longer be considered "wetlands."
• A system to classify wetlands and set priorities, so that land with the greatest ecological value would merit the most aggressive protection.
• A simpler process for obtaining permits to alter wetlands. Currently, the Army Corps, the Soil Conservation Service, the EPA, and the Fish and Wildlife Service can deny land owners permission to alter wetlands on private property. The new policies make the Army Corps the final arbiter in any wetlands dispute.
• A more-restrictive definition of wetlands. The current definition allows land that is flooded for as little as seven consecutive days a year—the normal run-off period during a spring thaw—to be deemed wetlands; under the new policy, standing water has to be at the surface for 15 consecutive days and the soil must be saturated for 21 straight days.
John Hosemann, senior economist at the American Farm Bureau Federation, cautions that the proposals don't include schedules to compensate land owners when their property is declared wetlands and don't define "saturation" clearly. The Farm Bureau prefers legislation to protect wetlands instead of bureaucratic edicts. Still, Hosemann says the group "appreciates [the administration's] movement towards common sense" in wetlands policy.
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "The Bog Lifts."
Hide Comments (0)
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post commentsMute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?