News Journal “Imagine Series” Q&A: Wetlands

Delaware has a law that regulates filling and alteration of tidal wetlands, but efforts to adopt similar legislation to protect the state’s ecologically fragile freshwater wetlands failed to win approval more than a decade ago.

Q: Do you believe Delaware needs its own freshwater wetlands law, or should we continue to rely on federal permitting and oversight?

A: Yes, as Governor I believe safety and security would be my most important job and preserving our natural resources in Delaware is almost as important as protecting lives. You and I would be well served by enacting our own Freshwater Lands Law. To put things in perspective Delaware has lost around half of its freshwater wetlands resources to drainage and filling since the founding of the First State. Certain areas of Delaware like the Inland Bays Watershed, have lost much more. Such a loss is not an event without consequences because it is a great concern for wildlife, flood control, and water quality.
Furthermore, the freshwater wetlands that remain are not in good condition and many do not provide high levels of function for which they are so highly valued. Importantly, recent Supreme Court decisions have greatly weakened federal protections for freshwater wetlands and the capacity of the EPA and the US Army Corp of Engineers to enforce these protections has long been inadequate. Delaware should enact is its own wetlands law to protect these ecosystems which protect the quality of our rivers and bays, particularly for the most valuable wetland types, some of which have no Federal protection.

Q: If you support an effort for state regulation of freshwater wetlands, how would you build consensus among the stakeholders, especially the farm and development lobby?

A: There is no better time than now to explore a common sense and logical win-win solution for all of Delaware. Given the current housing/development slowdown there is a window of opportunity to reflect on the past and smartly move into the future. As Governor I respect individual property rights as key to economic growth but property rights are much like the First Amendment right to free speech, it is sacred but not absolute and any clarifications will be directly compensated.
The first step is education on the functions of wetlands. It is a key component because many do not realize the great importance of these areas and new economic analyses have finally begun to quantify their functions in dollars. Their functions are highly valuable and in some cases irreplaceable. Delaware will not be a place worth living if we do not protect these wetlands.
As Governor I feel those who act as good stewards of wetlands, particularly in agricultural landscapes, should be rewarded for maintaining the services that wetlands provide to all Delawareans. In addition to regulation, there should be defined incentives for stakeholders to protect and conserve freshwater wetlands. The program should also include more responsive permit decisions for developers and maintaining current agriculture exemptions for existing farming practices. Yes, consensus building it is important but we must have a bottom line on resource protection and work towards positive commitments from all stakeholders.

Q: What do you see as the strengths and/or weaknesses of restoring key pieces of degraded wetlands on state land and paying for the cost of restoration by using the property as a wetland mitigation bank?

A: Wetland mitigation banks have a greater chance of replicating the functions of wetlands damaged or destroyed through a regulatory permitting process than do piecemeal wetland restoration or creation projects. As Governor I am committed to a well thought out mitigation banking program as it would be a positive move for Delaware’s future.
However, before a program like this one should be considered its crucial that a strong freshwater wetlands law be developed that minimizes wetlands loss. There is a strong upside to using State Land: this can help to provide funds to improve the condition or restore key pieces of wetlands, many of which are owned by the State.
Still there are restrictions on using many State lands for mitigation offsets for private sector projects, particularly if certain federal funds were used to purchase the land as is the case with State wildlife areas. Additionally, use of State lands would limit private entrepreneurial wetlands banking which would be a market-based system that would promote wetlands conservation.
However, there are potential weaknesses: in using State lands relative to purchasing privately owned wetlands for mitigation, the real costs of mitigating a wetland impact greatly decrease. This use could encourage greater levels of wetland impacts. Also, by not purchasing privately owned wetlands for mitigation you miss out on an opportunity to fully protect more wetland acreage.