An Analysis of Nontidal Wetland Regulation in Maryland
By Stephen R. Rubin
INTRODUCTION
Wetlands are among nature's most diverse and productive ecosystems. Yet the United States has allowed, and until recently encouraged, destruction of over half of the lower forty-eight states' original 221 million acres of wetlands. In recent decades, the nation has come to recognize the importance of wetlands as habitat for a multitude of plant and animal species, as natural systems for water quality improvement and flood control, as havens for recreational activities, and as providers of other economic and ecologic benefits. These benefits are even more pronounced in Maryland where wetlands are critical to the vitality of one of the state's key economic and natural resources, the Chesapeake Bay.
While wetlands provide a high proportion of our nation's biodiversity, most wetlands are on private property. Therefore, regulatory wetland protection measures are controversial because of the limits they place on property owners. Compromises reached through the democratic process have led to a regulatory scheme in Maryland that attempts to protect the remaining wetlands without unduly burdening the private owners of those lands.
This Note assesses the success of and makes recommendations to improve Maryland's wetland regulatory program. Part II describes the nature and importance of wetlands, introduces the contenders in the wetland regulation debate, and outlines their stakes in the conflict's outcome. Part III explains federal and Maryland wetland laws, and their interaction in shaping an overall wetland protection program. Part IV sets out the author's research findings regarding the on-the-ground results of Maryland's wetland program. The findings are based mainly on wetland data maintained by the State of Maryland, but also draw on other materials, including interviews and informal conversations with federal and state officials, scientists, wetland consultants, and environmental advocates. Part V notes that Maryland's wetland protection is better than that of most other states, but still fails to provide the protection envisioned by the state legislature. Finally, this Note proposes and analyzes various alternatives to the status quo and concludes by suggesting improvements to effectively protect wetlands in Maryland without overburdening the regulated community.
Wetlands are among nature's most diverse and productive ecosystems. Yet the United States has allowed, and until recently encouraged, destruction of over half of the lower forty-eight states' original 221 million acres of wetlands. In recent decades, the nation has come to recognize the importance of wetlands as habitat for a multitude of plant and animal species, as natural systems for water quality improvement and flood control, as havens for recreational activities, and as providers of other economic and ecologic benefits. These benefits are even more pronounced in Maryland where wetlands are critical to the vitality of one of the state's key economic and natural resources, the Chesapeake Bay.
While wetlands provide a high proportion of our nation's biodiversity, most wetlands are on private property. Therefore, regulatory wetland protection measures are controversial because of the limits they place on property owners. Compromises reached through the democratic process have led to a regulatory scheme in Maryland that attempts to protect the remaining wetlands without unduly burdening the private owners of those lands.
This Note assesses the success of and makes recommendations to improve Maryland's wetland regulatory program. Part II describes the nature and importance of wetlands, introduces the contenders in the wetland regulation debate, and outlines their stakes in the conflict's outcome. Part III explains federal and Maryland wetland laws, and their interaction in shaping an overall wetland protection program. Part IV sets out the author's research findings regarding the on-the-ground results of Maryland's wetland program. The findings are based mainly on wetland data maintained by the State of Maryland, but also draw on other materials, including interviews and informal conversations with federal and state officials, scientists, wetland consultants, and environmental advocates. Part V notes that Maryland's wetland protection is better than that of most other states, but still fails to provide the protection envisioned by the state legislature. Finally, this Note proposes and analyzes various alternatives to the status quo and concludes by suggesting improvements to effectively protect wetlands in Maryland without overburdening the regulated community.
