Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Major wetland types that potentially would not be regulated include prairie potholes of the Upper Midwest, wet meadows, river fringing wetlands along small non-navigable rivers and streams, lake fringing wetlands for smaller non-navigable lakes, many forested wetlands, playas and vernal ponds of Texas and other areas of the west, seeps and ...
The Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) is a 1990 United States federal law that provides funds for wetland enhancement. [1] The law is implemented by federal and state agencies, focusing on restoration of lost wetlands of the Gulf Coast , as well as protecting the wetlands from future deterioration.
"No Net loss" is the United States government's overall policy goal regarding wetlands preservation. The goal of the policy is to balance wetland loss due to economic development with wetlands reclamation, mitigation, and restorations efforts, so that the total acreage of wetlands in the country does not decrease, but remains constant or increases.
In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court limits federal protection for wetlands in a property rights case, saying the Clean Water Act does not usually apply to the marshy areas.
Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, 598 U.S. 651 (2023), also known as Sackett II (to distinguish it from the 2012 case), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that only wetlands and permanent bodies of water with a "continuous surface connection" to "traditional interstate navigable waters" are covered by the Clean Water Act.
The controversial 2021 law that stripped protections for many Indiana wetlands also created a task force. Its final report said the state needs to do more. In bill gutting wetland protection ...
Where a wetland is described as "manipulated", this might mean that it has been drained, dredged, filled, levelled, or altered in some other way to allow agriculture or development to take place on the site. [8] If manipulation of wetlands results in unavoidable adverse impacts, compensatory mitigation measures are used to offset these impacts.
Rapanos did not file for a permit when he pulled the trees, but the government claimed that his land was a wetland because it was adjacent to a drainage ditch. [2] Rapanos argued that the land was not a wetland and that he was not breaking the law. He claimed that his land was up to 20 miles (32 km) from any navigable waterways. [3]