No net loss wetlands policy facts for kids

"No net loss" is a big goal for the United States government when it comes to protecting wetlands. The main idea is to balance out any wetlands that are lost due to new buildings or farms. To do this, the government tries to create new wetlands or fix old ones. This way, the total amount of wetlands in the country stays the same or even grows.

Wetlands are super important because they help with many things. They can control floods, clean water, provide homes for animals, and offer places for fun activities like fishing. Sadly, over half of the wetlands in the U.S. have been lost in the last 300 years. This is why local, state, and federal groups, along with the public, are very concerned about protecting them.

A beautiful wetland in Everglades National Park.

Why We Need "No Net Loss"

Since the 1700s, the area of wetlands in the lower 48 states has shrunk a lot. It went from about 220 million acres to only 107.7 million acres by 2004. Since the 1950s, more than half of this loss happened because wetlands were turned into farmland. Other reasons for wetland loss include building new areas and cutting down forests.

The idea of "no net loss" for wetlands was first suggested in 1987 at a meeting called the National Wetlands Policy Forum. President George H.W. Bush's government officially adopted this goal in 1989. This policy was a way to find a balance between building new things and protecting nature. It focused on protecting wetlands by creating new ones and restoring damaged ones. The United States isn't the only country that cares about wetlands. Many countries work together through an agreement called the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands.

What "No Net Loss" Means

"No net loss" is a policy that aims to stop wetlands from being destroyed or damaged, and to make up for any damage that does happen. This policy has support from both major political parties. It means that existing wetlands should be saved if possible.

Achieving "no net loss" involves several steps working together:

• Protecting wetlands that are already there.
• Creating new wetlands where they didn't exist before.
• Fixing, improving, and managing wetlands that have been damaged.
• Educating people, doing research, and sharing information about wetlands.

"No Net Loss" Under Different Presidents

The goal of "no net loss" for wetlands was first made a national goal by President Jimmy Carter in 1977. President George H. W. Bush's government strongly supported it in 1989. He promised to make wetland protection stronger, update how wetlands are defined, and make the rules for wetlands easier to follow. All these actions aimed to keep the amount and quality of national wetlands the same.

President Bill Clinton's Efforts

During his time as president, Bill Clinton also promised to continue and update the "no net loss" policy. His government wanted to make the rules fairer, more flexible, and faster for permits related to adding materials into water, as part of the Clean Water Act. They also wanted to clear up confusion about how wetland areas are defined. Finally, the Clinton administration committed to spending more money on wetland restoration. This included programs like the Wetland Reserve Program and other voluntary efforts. In 1998, Clinton's Clean Water Action Plan aimed to gain 100,000 acres of wetlands each year.

President George W. Bush's Efforts

President George W. Bush's government also supported the "no net loss" goal in December 2002. They released a plan called the National Wetlands Mitigation Action Plan. This plan suggested improvements for wetland protection and fixing by several government groups. These included the Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency. The Bush administration also tried to make the definition of wetlands clearer under the Clean Water Act. A proposal in 2003 suggested that some isolated wetlands might not need permits under the Clean Water Act.

President Barack Obama's Efforts

Like the presidents before him, Barack Obama also promised to support "no net loss." His government increased money for the North American Wetlands Conservation Act to help with this goal. However, funding has been cut in recent budgets. Obama also wanted to change the Clean Water Act and expand a program called Swampbuster. His government also worked with Congress to change the Clean Water Act so that isolated wetlands would be protected.

How the Policy Works

To meet the goals of the Ramsar Convention and the national "no net loss" goal, many different rules and programs are used. These involve the federal government, state governments, local governments, and even private companies. Since 70% of wetlands are on private land, it's very important for government groups to work with landowners.

Federal Government Actions

Rules Under the Clean Water Act

The federal government has the power to control pollution in U.S. waters if it affects trade between states. The Clean Water Act (CWA), especially Section 404, controls what can be put into "waters of the United States," which includes wetlands. If you want to dig or fill in these areas, you usually need a permit. This permit program tries to avoid harming the environment. If harm can't be avoided, it must be reduced and fixed. Permits usually last up to five years and involve public review. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers gives out the permits, but they share the job of making sure rules are followed with the EPA.

The definition of what counts as a wetland under the Clean Water Act has changed over time. Two important Supreme Court decisions have affected this definition:

Rapanos v. United States (2006)

• This case said that the definition of "waters of the United States" for wetlands was not unlimited.
• Wetlands next to waters that can be used by boats are considered "waters of the United States."
• The court didn't give a clear definition of "navigable waters." So, a wetland falls under the Clean Water Act if one of two things is true:
  • Justice Kennedy's Test: There must be a "significant connection" between the wetland and traditional navigable waters.
  • Plurality Test: There needs to be a "continuous surface connection" between the wetland and navigable waters.

Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (2001)

• This case rejected the idea that places where migratory birds live automatically count as waters within a state.
• It decided that the Migratory Bird Rule, which the Army Corps of Engineers used to include migratory bird habitats under their power, was outside the rules of the Clean Water Act.

Other Important Federal Programs

Other federal efforts include working with private groups, like educational programs, conservation easement programs (where landowners agree to protect their land), and many voluntary programs.

State Government Actions

State governments also have ways to protect wetlands. These include:

• Using their police powers to control how water and land are used.
• Setting up zoning rules for land use.
• Creating plans for how land should be used.
• Setting goals for how much wetland should be gained or lost.
• Developing State Wetland Conservation Plans.
• Using wetlands mitigation banking, where new wetlands are created or restored to earn "credits" that can be bought or sold to make up for wetland loss elsewhere.

Local Government Actions

Local governments also play a part in protecting wetlands. Their tools include:

• Getting local people involved in decisions.
• Creating Local Wetland Strategic Plans, which outline ways to protect, research, and manage wetlands.
• Passing local rules about protection, zoning, and development.
• Setting up local wetlands mitigation banking.

Challenges to "No Net Loss"

Even with all these efforts, there are challenges to making "no net loss" work.

• Political Issues: Sometimes, special interest groups or people can try to influence politicians to get exceptions or change wetland rules. Politicians might also change rules to please voters.
• Money Issues: There's a cost to not using wetlands for farming or building. It's also hard to put a money value on the benefits wetlands provide, like flood control or clean water. There isn't one agreed-upon way to value wetlands.
• Other Challenges: Restoring a wetland to its original healthy state can take many years and be very expensive. For example, a study in Kentucky found that it takes 42 years for a restored wetland to store 95% of the carbon that a natural wetland would. This makes people wonder if the cost of restoring wetlands is always worth the quality gained, especially when trying to meet the "no net loss" goal for the total area of wetlands.