|
Decision Threatens 80% of Wisconsin’s Wetland Inventory |
| 1/19/01 |
By a single vote, the U.S. Supreme Court has virtually
eliminated federal authority protecting wetlands. The 5-4 decision
by the Court on January 9 blocks the Army Corps of Engineers from regulating
any wetland not associated with a navigable waterway – lakes, streams or
rivers. The Corps, not exactly known for its vigilance in protecting
wetlands, had been using the federal Clean Water Act as its regulatory
guidepost.
The loss of wetlands to development and other uses has been astonishing. According the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 58,500 acres of wetlands have been annually disappearing in recent years. And Wisconsin DNR officials believe the Supreme Court’s ruling threatens 80% of Wisconsin’s 5.3 million acres of wetlands.
In some state counties wetlands are particularly vulnerable. For example, in Ashland County, 94% (156,797 acres) of its wetlands are now unprotected; Price County’s 257,052 wetland acres number more than any other county and 94% of these are now at risk; in Brown County, 90% (25,495 acres) are unprotected; and 3633 wetland acres in Milwaukee County (83% of the total) have been deregulated.
Charlie Luthin, the head of the Wisconsin Wetlands Association, says the DNR’s phones began ringing following the court ruling with calls from developers and their attorneys seeking to push their pet projects ahead. Wisconsin’s regulatory framework had been tied to federal authority.
Notes Luthin: “There are now NO PERMITS required to fill isolated wetlands.” And the decision, he adds, is retroactive. “Where permits may have been required - and denied - in the past, no permit is needed today.”
Wetlands perform several valuable functions:
“There are now NO PERMITS required to fill isolated wetlands.” And the decision is retroactive. “Where permits may have been required - and denied - in the past, no permit is needed today.” - Charlie Luthin
While calling the now gaping hole in wetland regulation “a crisis,” Luthin says he sees a solution. “We need bipartisan support for a strong wetland protection law in Wisconsin. Let’s really have a state wetlands law.” Any legislation must, he cautions, “at least maintain what was the status quo. And we must move very quickly.”
What Luthin characterizes as the status quo are the state's water quality standards for wetlands that were developed by the DNR in the 1990’s (NR 103 in the state statutes). The DNR rules slowed loss of state wetlands to an average of 320 acres a year during the 1990's compared to average annual destruction of 1400 acres in the 1980’s.
Luthin admits he’s been encouraged by the reaction of key legislators to the need for a state wetlands law. Senator Rob Cowles (R-Green Bay) intends to introduce a wetlands bill as soon as the state’s legislative session begins this year. Representative Spencer Black (D-Madison) is someone he expects will work hard for legislation in the Assembly.
The likely new Wisconsin governor, Scott McCallum, has also pledged to fight for Wisconsin’s wetlands. “Under no circumstances will I allow Wisconsin wetlands to be endangered by this ruling,” McCallum said. The Governor-to-be has said he will bring interested parties together for a discussion but has not indicated whether or not he will support new legislation.
Luthin knows passing a law will not be easy. The homebuilders have battled wetland controls for years and the state’s cranberry growers have been similarly antagonistic towards wetland protections. “The door,” observes Luthin, “is wide-open right now. Any new legislation will not pass without a fight.”
Still, he remains undiscouraged and perhaps even a bit optimistic.
The court ruling “has pumped a little adrenaline into our systems," Luthin
says. “It might even inspire our leaders.”
