Wetlands

If you've ever read any of my previous posts, you know i have a thing for wetlands. Don't know why, I just do. Love the Everglades, have done several research projects on them. Have also done several research projects on wetlands in general. Fascinating stuff. If I go back to school for a PhD it will be in wetland restoration, mitigation or the like. So, on with today's worry. Wednesday the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that property owners facing potential enforcement from the EPA can take their case before a judge for a ruling. This all came about because a couple in Idaho put a gravel pad on their property to put in a house. The EPA came in guns blazing, screaming that these people would have to pay a huge fine and then put the land back the way they found it. Meanwhile, if you are an industry, you can fill all the wetlands you want as long as you say you are going to "mitigate." grrr. anyway. back to the story. This couple ended up taking their case all the way to the Supreme Court where it was decided that, yes, John Q. Public has a right to question the EPA and their enforcement of regulations. I have a couple of issues with this ruling and the way the EPA goes about its business.

Problem #1: Ever hear the phrase " It's easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission" ? yeah, this is what is going to happen. Because the EPA went in there heavy handed, the new policy for builders and developers will be to build what you want, then worry about the consequences later, because the people can take the EPA to court. It may also lead to the EPA looking the other way when wetlands are filled because they don't have the time, money or personnel to deal with the mess that someone has created. I think this may lead to an increase in the destruction of wetlands.

Problem #2: What the hell was the EPA thinking going in there the way they did? Seriously? Everyone hates them right now and then they pull this crap? Where were the brains in that office?!! IDIOTS! Ever hear the phrase, "Catch more flies with honey than with vinegar"? Seriously what frickin' idiot thought that filing charges against a couple building a home in a neighborhood that ALREADY had houses in it was a good idea?! And did they actually go out to the property and check it out? What even clued them in that this place might be a problem? I think the EPA could have gotten a little further and spent a lot less on court costs if the conversation went a little more like this....." Hey so & so, we think you might have started building on a wetland, can we look at your property and make an assessment? You know there is part of this that is on a wetland, we need to work out a way to either return to area to its natural state or you will have to pay a fine. How can we work together to get this accomplished?" I think the ordeal would have been a lot less public and the outcome a lot more beneficial to both parties involved if someone with a cooler head had prevailed. Although I think the EPA works on the policy of hammer now ask questions later.

I think the EPA has such a bad rep now that they definitely need to change the way they do things. They do lots of good for the environment and public health in the US, but their tactics have much to be desired. And I'm one of the people that like to defend the EPA, but I think they've given themselves a big black eye on this one, and I dread what is to come because of it.

Update on the drama: It seems the individuals in this case are not as honest or unaccountable as originally suspected. It seems they did know that they were about to build on a wetland and it also seems that the EPA did try to work with them on the whole project. Those documents were not allowed into evidence for some reason when this went before the Supreme Court. It's that whole ask for forgiveness thing. it sucks that people... they just suck!