By KERRY BENEFIELD
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Local environmentalists expressed concern Wednesday that the Supreme Court's decision to hear three wetlands protection cases could have wide-ranging negative effects on the North Coast's ecosystem.
The nation's highest court said this week it would hear cases that could dramatically reduce protections established in the Clean Water Act of 1972. Property rights advocates hail the decision as a precursor to ending federal regulators' intrusion onto private property.
Among the questions raised in the debate are whether federal regulators have the power to prevent discharges into "navigable waters" and whether their power extends to ponds and wetlands if they do not have a "hydrological connection" to larger waterways.
"If all of a sudden wetlands aren't wetlands anymore ... land could suddenly become developable," said Richard Charter, co-chairman of Friends of the Esteros.
Wetlands have been protected for three decades because of the diverse wildlife and plant population they attract, said Denny Rosatti, co-founder of Sonoma County Conservation Action.
"Wetlands are one of the most amazing environmental protectors we have in the natural world," he said.
Any ruling that requires wetlands to have hydrological connections to other bodies of water could affect isolated, or pocket, wetlands, according to Mike Sandler, program coordinator at the Community Clean Water Institute. Disconnected pools or even dry land around the Laguna de Santa Rosa can become lush wetlands in the winter, depending on the rainfall, he said.
"In the winter, all these wetlands form around it. It's all connected, it's like a lake," he said.
But property rights advocates have long contended that environmental regulations have unfairly limited what land owners can do on their own property, even if they are miles from the nearest creek or river.
M. Reed Hopper, principal attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation, said environmentalists' concerns are unfounded because regardless of what role the federal government plays, state agencies will still have some regulatory powers.
"Their war cry is always the same - any modification of environmental law is going to be the end," he said. "We are really there to make sure the federal structure is observed."
The Sacramento-based group defends property rights and will be arguing one of the cases, contending elements of the Clean Water Act are a federal intrusion on state powers.
Hopper expects the case will be heard in February or March.
© The Press Democrat. For copyright information view our User Agreement