|
The Toledo Blade
www.toledoblade.com
High court ruling exposes wetlands
Swampy sites in area may be affected
BY TOM HENRY
January 15, 2001
A U.S. Supreme Court ruling could have a profound effect
on efforts to manage development and enhance wildlife habitat
in northwest Ohio, including at the historic Oak Openings
region of western Lucas County.
By a 5-4 vote, the high court ruled Tuesday that swampy
areas known as wetlands can no longer be protected by restrictive
provisions set forth in the federal Clean Water Act unless
they are connected to a lake, river, stream, or other type
of navigable waterway.
That means thousands of acres set aside nationally for wildlife
habitat could be vulnerable to development.
Many are in northwest Ohio, a historically swampy region
that has been drained for agriculture, industry, and road-construction
projects over the years.
The case centered on a Chicago-area landfill that would
be built atop abandoned gravel pits filled with water and
used by wildfowl.
The ruling is a blow to those trying to protect remaining
wetlands and sites in the process of reverting to their
natural state. Ohio is second only to California in percentage
of wetland destruction.
"I could see it being very devastating," said
Mark Shieldcastle, a state wildlife biologist in Ottawa
County who oversees Ohio’s bald eagle recovery program.
"We were told a long time ago the state needs to get
its own wetlands protection laws in place," he said.
"The main federal law is benign now."
The historic Oak Openings region, known for its globally
rare plants and animals, comprises 130 square miles of Lucas,
Henry, and Fulton counties.
Western Lucas County, in particular Springfield, Spencer,
and Monclova townships, have been booming with residential
and commercial development. As development pressures pushed
harder into the Oak Openings region, efforts were stepped
up to protect natural areas.
Environmentalists have long viewed U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’
cumbersome and costly wetland permits as tools to guard
against uncontrolled growth.
John Marshall, Ohio Division of Wildlife environmental administrator,
said the court could have inadvertently encouraged more
sprawl by removing the biggest barrier for land-locked wetlands.
Mr. Shieldcastle agreed. He said the Oak Openings is in
danger because of the way it has been chiseled up by development
over the years, leaving wetland acreage scattered.
"The one big tool they [the Oak Openings] had is gone,"
he said. "None of those are connected. They’re all
isolated wetlands."
Terry Seidel, Oak Openings project manager for the Nature
Conservancy, a worldwide conservation group with an office
in western Lucas County, hasn’t analyzed the ruling but
fears its potential.
"It certainly could have an impact on protection of
wetlands in the Oak Openings," he said. "I think
we’d be taking a step back."
Mr. Marshall said state officials are waiting to see how
the Corps interprets the ruling.
A spokesman for the Corps’ district office in Buffalo, which
oversees much of the Great Lakes region, was not available.
The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency regulates wetlands
on the state level, but looks to the Corps as the lead agency
in such matters, Pat Madigan, Ohio EPA spokeswoman, said.
She said the Ohio EPA has not analyzed the ruling enough
to predict its effect.
In addition to providing valuable wildlife habitat, wetlands
- often called marshes - are buffers that serve as natural
flood-control devices. They help improve water quality by
filtering out chemically tainted waste that gets washed
off roads and land, officials have said.
Mr. Marshall said he fears the ruling will hurt attempts
to restore wetlands, by reducing the burden developers face
when they fill in swampy land for their housing and business
projects.
The so-called wetlands mitigation banking program requires
developers to either donate enough land or money so that
the state Department of Natural Resources comes away with
1.5 acres of wetlands for every acre of wetland that is
destroyed.
"If that’s no longer required, we go from gaining a
half-acre [for every acre that’s destroyed] to losing an
acre," Mr. Marshall said.
|
