NATIONAL DEBATE ON WETLANDS ADDS TO STUDY CLOSE TOP HOME

A chairman of the joint legislative committee studying wetlands issues in the state says he supports implementation of new rules that would scale back the federal government's definition of wetlands.

State Rep. Larry Thomason, D-Kennett, said he also supports efforts by U.S. Sen. Christopher Bond and U.S. Rep. Bill Emerson to pass legislation that will reduce the number of federal agencies involved in making decisions on wetlands from four to one.

Caught in the middle of the federal wetlands debate are the states, who have agencies that must enforce frequently conflicting federal guidelines to preserve wetlands.

Thomason and Sen. Jerry Howard, D-Dexter, are chairing a joint committee to look into wetlands problems in the state and to study possible state legislation.

The committee's fourth meeting, and second field hearing, will be conducted today in north Missouri at Trenton. Three weeks ago, the panel held a hearing at the University of Missouri Delta Center in Portageville.

President Bush had promised to support a wetlands policy that would preserve existing wetlands believed to be slightly over 100 million acres. But after coming up with a definition and applying it, there turned out to be 250 million acres of wetlands. The Bush administration decided to redefine wetlands so that the initial 100-plus million acres would be preserved.

That has drawn criticism from environmental groups, but Thomason said scaling back the definition is appropriate because the previous definition was far too broad.

"When the first guidelines were set, four federal agencies said, `Hey, this is a good way to increase our bureaucracy,' and all four got involved in trying to get more money by expanding their bureaucracy," said Thomason.

"But the problem with having competing agencies each trying to become bigger at the expense of the others, is that the property owner suffers."

The new guidelines being proposed by the administration "restore a little sanity to the program," Thomason said.

"I think the new rules are right on target to get us back to 105-110 million acres of wetlands, which is what it was in the beginning. There are mudholes in yards that qualify for wetland status under the old rules; that's stupidity."

Four federal agencies are responsible for federal wetlands policy: the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency, and the Soil Conservation Service. But Thomason points out one of the problems is that the agencies are not working together and are only confusing the public.

Several landowners who testified in the hearing at Portageville, told of problems getting approval from the different agencies to farm land designated as wetlands and problems due to a lack of coordination between agencies.

Bond introduced legislation Friday to give the Soil Conservation Service exclusive jurisdiction over determining agricultural wetlands. Bond said the SCS has a long history of working with agricultural producers to protect soil and water resources, and will be the best authority for farmers to turn to with questions on laws governing wetlands on their property.

Thomason said he agrees that one group should focus on wetlands only. He noted that misuse of wetlands can result in heavy fines for farmers, including the loss of federal farm subsidies.

"To make it simple and effective we need one group setting the rules, one group interpreting the rules, and one group enforcing the rules to make it the same for everybody," said Thomason. He added that wetlands policy must be coordinated at the federal level to insure there is consistency between states.

From the testimony gathered by his committee so far, Thomason said it is clear three changes are needed:

property owners should have to deal with just one federal agency instead of four;

there should be a clear definition of wetlands so it cannot be misinterpreted between agencies;

and no one should have to give up the use of their property, designated as a wetland area, without compensation.