New wetlands permits draw criticism - Environmental Science

New wetlands permits draw criticism. Janet Pelley. Environ. Sci. Technol. , 1998, 32 (17), pp 396A–396A. DOI: 10.1021/es9836949. Publication Date (W...
0 downloads 0 Views 3MB Size
wetlands, officials with EPA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Marine Fisheries Service The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ing and difficult. But environwere concerned that NWP-26 was issued a draft of six new wetlands mentalists and others charge that allowing more destruction than is permits in July that for the first NWP-26 allows excessive destrucprescribed by the Clean Water Act, time could bring the Corps' nation of sensitive environmental said Greg Peck, acting director of tional permitting program into resources for parking lots, malls EPA's Wetiands Division. Pressure compliance with the Clean Water and sprawling housing developfrom these agencies and environAct, government officials said. But ments. NWP-26 was used 34,000 mental groups led to the Decemthe proposed permits, designed times in 1995 to destroy 8,500 ber 1996 announcement that the to replace the Corps' most widely acres of wetlands, said Drew CaCorps would eliminate NWP-26. used and most controversial wetputo, senior attorney of the Natulands permit, drew criticism from ral Resources Defense Council But the proposals have drawn developers and environmentalists. (NRDC), citing Corps data. the wrath of both environmentalists and builders. Brenda Mallory, The new permits, along with The proposed new permits, with Beveridge and Diamond, a modifications to six existing wetwhich appeared in die July 1 Fedlands permits, would replace Naeral Register r1998, 66(126), 36,039- law firm representing builders, said the proposals move away tionwide Permit 26 (NWP-26), the 36,078) expand the geographic from the original objective of most frequently used of the range by including all nontidal streamlining the permitting proCorps' 39 wetiands permits. NWPwetlands in addition to the headcess and that they "now take 26, a generic permit which authowaters wetlands covered by the old rizes the filling or destruction of permit. While NWP-26 permitted more bureaucratic steps almost headwaters and isolated wetlands any type of development activity, as many as getting an individual three acres or less in size, is prothe proposed permits specify limits permit." The proposed sliding posed to expire on March 28 for 12 different activities including scale for acreage limits means 1999. The objective of this permit residential construction stormwould need to have a. very is to allow developers quick water management and agricullarge development site as big as ap. tural activities. The maximum 500 acres to iron-act 10 acres of cess to permits for projects that of wetlands tlifit can be wetlands Mallorv said have minimal impacts on wetfilled ranges from one-third to 10 "To our great dismay, the relands said David Olson biologist depending on the activitv placements are just as bad or widi the Corps Developers have worse than NWP-26," declared Because of the large-scale delong argued that seeking a permit NRDC's Caputo. He said that raisstruction of sensitive headwaters to fill a wetland is time-consuming the cap on the maximum acres of wetlands destroyed is "a step backwards." He also blasted the regional conditioning process whereby the regional offices of Strong winds push back "dead zone" in Gulf the Corps may attach additional limits to the nationwide permits. Preliminary results from measurements taken in July show that this year's "If the Corps wasn't willing to atdead zone in the Gulf of Mexico has shrunk, according to Nancy Rabalais, a tach good environmental condiscientist at the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium (LUMC). However, tions at the national level there is the smaller size seems to be more a result of unusual weather patterns than no reason to expect the regions will of better management of nutrients flowing into Gulf waters. do a better job since thev are Scientists have been studying this lifeless, oxygen-starved area, commonly influenced by developers " he said referred to as a region of hypoxia, since 1985, and Rabalais is considered one of the leading experts. The entire area is devoid of marine life, such as fish, Government officials still have shrimp, and crabs, that leave or die when oxygen levels become insufficient concerns about the proposed perto support them. mits. Mark Miller, a biologist with the Fish and Wildlife Service, exThe recent results show that the hypoxic area now extends 4800 square plained that NWP-26 was out of miles. In the previous five years, this zone covered between 6100 and 7000 compliance with the Clean Water square miles. (ES&T, Oct. .197, ,p .54A.) Normally, ,he hhpoxic zzne sspeads Act because it wasn't activity speout along the Gulf from the Mississippi River to the upper Texas coast, but cific. Although this violation has persistent west winds, unusual for this time of year, have pushed the dead been addressed bv the new perzone up against the Mississippi River delta and out into deeper waters, said mits, Miller said die Fish and Quay Dortch, also a LUMC scientist. She cautioned, however, that the dead Wildlife Service remains conzone probably has not permanently shrunk. cerned about the increase in Hypoxia often starts with dense surface algae blooms caused by excess scope to include all nontidal wetnutrient inputs, Rabalais said. Low summer winds and warmer surface waters lands "because more waters could allow these microscopic plants to flourish. Eventually they die, and bacteria potentially be impacted" decompose the organic matter that falls into the lower waters through a process that depletes the water of oxygen. These conditions persist until a tropical The Corps plans to publish the storm pushes across the Gulf and disturbs the water column. —KRIS CHRISTEN final permits in December in the Federal Register. —JANET PELLEY

New wetlands permits draw criticism

HYPOXIC ZONE

3 9 6 A • SEPT. 1, 1998/ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY/NEWS