Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
"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.
It supported off-site wetland mitigation in which a permittee purchases mitigation credits from a third-party mitigation bank. This entity, private, governmental, or non-governmental, promotes the no-net-loss policy by restoring or creating an area of wetland into a mitigation bank and selling compensatory mitigation credits to permittees.
In the United States, compensatory mitigation is a commonly used form of environmental mitigation and, for some projects, it is legally required under the Clean Water Act 1972. Compensatory mitigation is defined by the US Department of Agriculture as "measures to restore, create, enhance, and preserve wetlands to offset unavoidable adverse ...
The bill would replace the state’s three-tiered system with one large ‘wildfire mitigation.’ Here’s what the change means. ... Kindergarten teacher begs parents to stop sending this 1 ...
Education in Virginia addresses the needs of students from pre-kindergarten through adult education.Virginia's educational system consistently ranks in the top ten states on the U.S. Department of Education's National Assessment of Educational Progress, with Virginia students outperforming the average in almost all subject areas and grade levels tested. [1]
The only independent government school district under Virginia law is the Eastern Virginia Medical College. All of the K-12 school districts are classified as dependent public school systems by the U.S. Census Bureau. [2]
Conservators may direct the school system’s operations as needed, but their primary role is to help the school system’s leaders, not to replace them. State education officials review ...
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]