Wetlands and governance | Where do we go from here?

Wisconsin Wetlands Association has been highlighted time and again throughout my blog project.  This association works within a network of actors to help educate the public of the importance of wetlands through multiple different programs.  However, the WWA doesn't stop there; check out the goals they strive to accomplish:

• Promote and support wetland friendly legislation and prevent legislation that harms wetlands
• Expand and improve government-sponsored wetland work in Wisconsin
• Ensure wetland laws are implemented and enforced
• Promote and support local government wetland conservation efforts

Starting at a grassroots level and pushing to steer government for wetland protection certainly has strengths and limitations.  Taking into consideration Evans first hypothesis: "networks and markets are the best thing we have"; he assesses networks and markets at the global level. The WWA mainly focuses on local and state issues, but has been involved with an international (again, network) organization: Ramsar.

The WWA network allows for wider representation and deliberation but lacks political power.  They have greater flexibility than the government and tend to have strong local knowledge of specific issues which allows them to attack problems head-on.  That said, the actors involved are not accountable if their proposed solutions are put into action then run amok or have unintended consequences.  Given these limitations, networks are not the best we've got, but merely a piece to a larger puzzle. 

Wetlands of International Importance - Ramsar was part of the program or initiative I researched (see former post or check out this link for more info: Ramsar: Wetlands of International Importance) Their website outlines 9 criterion for identifying wetlands to be considered as international importance.(The Ramsar Sites Criteria)  The significance of this list cannot be debated, however; I find myself feeling all wetlands should have protection given the "ecological services" they provide to all living creatures on Earth.  It frustrates me that protection takes so long to put into place. Please don't take this as me discrediting what Ramsar does because the more I learned about Ramsar the more I was inspired by what they are accomplishing worldwide. 

Moving forward on Evans hypotheses: "Governance is about evolution, not revolution" where he highlights, arguably, the most frustrating fact of how issues are currently handled: how freaking long it takes! This is where I would disagree AGAINST revolution.  Governance has been evolving and it always will - that is the nature of life and existence.  If real change is going to happen and on a faster scale, then I personally vote for revolution.  An argument towards revolution is how my actor can circumvent bureaucratic red tape and expedite their goals. 

I'd also like to tie in another of his hypotheses to this: "governance is about learning" mainly because I feel that learning is how evolution occurs. Maybe a disastrous event needs to occur for this capitalistic society to wake up?  What a sad and traumatic thing to think of or even suggest!  It is clear my actor(s) have been learning methods to steer government for wetland protection and suspect they will continue to evolve as issues continue to arise. 

The interconnection of two more hypotheses: "governance requires political vision" and "governments matter" allows me to re-introduce the governmental policy I investigated: Wisconsin Act 118.  Under this act the Wisconsin DNR is also involved along with state legislatures.  Feel free to take a look at my former post that detailed the changes under this Act. 

I am not thrilled about the wetland changes made since I felt it offered easier destruction of our wetlands. However, given the structure of both U.S. and global governments, I agree that the public should steer political vision and that governments matter.  The public also needs to make educated, informed choices when it comes to voting on environmental matters by the candidates they support. The government needs to stop this gridlock and the science community must repair their credibility.  I truly feel that provided accurate, scientific information the voting society would vote in environmentally progressive leaders and these leaders can enter the global sphere of positive environmental change.   Traditional government is limited by ignorant voters and the hoops that need to be jumped before real change happens, but can be strengthened if our general public were to understand these issues more clearly. Many other countries can do this, so why can't we?    

I agree with Evans the last three hypotheses: "getting the mix of approaches right is critical", "duality of structure is critical", and "hybrid institutions are critical in coordinating action across sectors".  There should be more accountability and stronger progression to move towards a greener and sustainable society. WWA has been able to push towards wetland reform while our Governor, Scott Walker, worked with special interest groups to undermine wetland protection in Act 118.  The mix of approaches were clearly different, and there was no duality.  Although, I do feel as though a quasi-hybrid institution was sort of formed including local government, the peoples being impacted, and environmental agencies working against Walker and his interest groups.  

Shifting gears - here is a brief video on wetland importance provided by Ramsar.

Wetlands need to be protected because of the services they provide to all living creatures, flora and fauna:

• Wetlands are a natural defense mechanism when dealing with floodwaters
• Wetlands are a natural filtration system and help restore underground water levels
• Wetlands act as natural buffers for rivers and help maintain the overall health of the river system
• Wetlands are integral to migrating birds and are home to many endangered species
• Wetlands store carbon and help mitigate climate change
• Wetlands also impact global weather patterns

I suspect the issue we face in Wisconsin regarding wetlands is most of this land is privately owned.  Landowners must be educated of the importance of wetlands.  When I was conducting ALTA survey review in my former career, I always made an exception regarding wetlands on both the commitment and policy unless the underwriter allowed it to be insured over.  I don't think it should be insured over.  Wetlands should be documented as endangered landscapes.  Protective laws and regulations must be put in place and more importantly - enforced.  I was really hoping I'd have an epiphany and come up with the best way to manage wetlands, but sadly, I haven't.  It all circles back to environmental issues being wicked problems.  Reform is needed in all aspects of governance. Educating the young on environmental issues in primary school would aid with better understanding of the importance of our ecosystems, including wetlands! 

My family and I at Cedarburg Bog | Fall 2015

Sources:

Environmental Governance by J.P. Evans

Wisconsin Wetlands Association

WI DNR - Wetlands

Ramsar

WWA Wisconsin Ramsar Committee | A look into Door County wetlands

My chosen actor, Wisconsin Wetlands Association, collaborates with multiple NGOs, several levels of government, home and land owners, and every day people to promote advancement in wetland protection, reclamation, and sustainable recreation.  The network is comprised of, but not limited to:

• Wisconsin Wetlands Association
• Ducks Unlimited
• the Healing our Waters Coalition
• the Association of State Wetland Managers
• the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands 
• the U.S. National Ramsar Committee 
• the Wisconsin Bird Conservation Initiative
• the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program 
• and other regional or nationwide initiatives 

The WWA has multiple programs, advocacy groups, educational workshops, and many other initiatives; however, I wanted to highlight the progress made in Door County.  

"Joe-pye weed blossoms in a sedge meadow along Mink River shoreline in northern Door County. The Mink River drains to Lake Michigan at Rowley Bay." (Picture courtesy of Clint Farlinger/Journal Sentinel)

The network of organizations involved with this project, headed by WWA, included The Nature Conservancy, USFWS, USDA-NRCS, and Wisconsin DNR. Working together they accomplished a "Wetlands of International Importance" (also referred to as Ramsar site) designation on over "11,440 acres of pristine sedge meadows, lowland forests, marshes, groundwater springs and fens in northern Door County that harbor rare plants and animals..." (Don Behm of the Journal Sentinel)

The WWA has an underlying program entitled Wetland Gems which was created in 2009 to gain public attention and highlight the benefits of wetlands. This particular program helped guide site nomination for the WWA Wisconsin Ramsar Committee.  Wetland Gems

In order to understand the significance of being a Ramsar site, it is important to learn a brief history of the Ramsar Convention.  It is an international treaty, now including roughly 90% of UN member states, that targets wetland and habitat loss. During the 1960s this movement sprang to life, but the treaty wasn't ratified until 1973 in Ramsar, Iran and finally was put into place in 1975.  (Ramsar Fact Sheet)

Knowing the players involved and a general idea of the outcome of this program, let's breakdown how the program works. Ramsar's governing body controls the nomination process and requires scientific, historical, and cultural information for the site.  Maps, letters of support from the community, local or state wildlife/natural resource agencies, at least one member of congress and all adjoining landowners of the site must approve of the designation. Before Ramsar reviews this documentation, the US Fish & Wildlife Service reviews and approves it.  


The benefits of being classified as Ramsar site has significant benefits such as increased funding, stronger protection, and more potential for science and recreational opportunities. 

The Journal Sentinel article written by Don Behm included a fantastic picture of the areas in Door County that are the designated Wetlands of International Importance.

According to Behm, over 150 bird species rely on these wetlands for their yearly nesting and migrations. Among the bird species, 23 of them are warblers.  This habitat is crucial to the common goldeneye diving duck. 

Within these wetlands reside the largest known population of an endangered species, the Hine's emerald dragonfly. 







Another endangered species found here, is a rare plant - the dwarf lake iris.  This particular plant is only found on the shores of Lakes Michigan and Huron.

I'd like to conclude this blog post on a more personal note.  Doing the research on this topic and learning the scale of interest and protection for wetlands is thrilling.  The Ramsar website is super cool - if you have time check out the pictures and videos.  There are over 2000 Ramsar sites to date.  (Ramsar site map)


WWA Issues and News
WWA Ramsar Committee
JS Article - Door County wetlands
International Treaty Group Recognizes Door County Wetlands
Ramsar website

Cedarburg Bog - November 7, 2015 | Family fun

This post is just for fun.  My husband and our two kids went to Cedarburg Bog on Saturday.  Here are a few pictures from our hike.  It was a beautiful day to enjoy nature.  Knowing that Cedarburg Bog is the southern-most string bog in North America and we can explore it any time we want is pretty cool! 

Wetlands Reform Bill: 2011 Wisconsin Act 118 | The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Governor Scott Walker signed into law the Wetlands Reform Bill; the 2011 Wisconsin Act 118 on February 29, 2012. (Find the Act here!)   

This Act has been highly controversial - hence the title of this blog: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly.  (Photo credit)

The Good

According to Paul G. Kent and Jordan K. Lamb of Wisconsin Lawyer, Act 118 was devised to address certain goals (Full publication):

• Develop a uniform and comprehensive state system for reviewing and potentially permitting activities in all wetlands, regardless of whether they are subject to federal jurisdiction or just state jurisdiction;
• Develop a system of state permits that more closely corresponds to federal permits, including the use of "general permits";
• Use a process for reviewing and potentially granting approvals that is consistent with the process used for permitting activities in and near navigable waters under Wis. Stat. chapter 30;
• Provide greater clarity in the permit standards and require the DNR to consider a holistic "net-gain" analysis of the environmental impacts of a project; and
• Allow for greater consideration of wetland mitigation measures to address effects on wetlands.

Prior to this Act the means of obtaining permits to fill wetlands was based upon Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, under by which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had top authority to issue or decline any or all discharge of material into waters, including wetlands.  Due to wetlands often being isolated from navigable waters, Wisconsin, under the 2001 Act 6 shifted the control of permit authorization to the DNR.  The Corps are only involved with Wisconsin's wetlands if they issue the Section 404 which demands a water-quality certification.  This is one way Act 118 was trying to streamline wetlands permit approvals.

General Permits were also introduced to Wisconsin under this Act.  This was implicated to make Wisconsin's laws more parallel with federal law for water discharges and the filling of wetlands.  It imposes size-based wetlands permits which can be streamlined on a much faster pace (30 day approval) then having to go through the process described above.  However, if you don't qualify under the general permits, one can apply for individual permits. (DNR Permits) The General permits are authorized by the DNR without being subject to "public hearings or a detailed case-by-case basis" as noted in Kent's and Lamb's dissection of Act 118.  Individual permits are subject to further scrutiny before being approved. 

The "net-gain" or otherwise called "Net Environmental Impact" is closely tied into both the new mitigation and practicable alternatives allowing the DNR much more flexibility when dealing with wetland decisions.  

Mitigation of wetlands was non-existent before Act 118 and it sort of reminds me of the Clean Development Mechanism ("CDM") in the Kyoto Protocol (Annex I must build green technology in developing nations in exchange for carbon credits). Basically, the DNR will allow wetlands to accept nasty discharge OR be filled in so as long as new wetlands are created in its place: For every 1 acre of wetlands filled/ruined; 1.2 acres of wetlands must be established or enhanced to compensate for the loss, thus creating the (eventual) "net-gain".  

Practicable alternatives takes the scope of the project and attempts to balance out economic benefit, necessity to build, and environmental impacts to determine if the project should be moved to a non-wetland location or remain as-is.  

That is what I was able to deduce from the various articles I reviewed which moves me to the next subheading:

The Bad - Let the controversy commence!

This particular Act has been meticulously reviewed and commented on by various non-state actors, including the NGO I previously introduced: Wisconsin Wetlands Association.  

Linda H. Bochert of Micheal Best & Friedrich LLP did a great job at capturing sentiments from both sides of the argument in her assessment in The National Law Review (Link to full article):

From the Governor, upon signing the bill:
“Preserving and protecting Wisconsin’s valuable natural resources while encouraging sustainable economic growth is an important task,” said Governor Scott Walker. “The bill I signed into law today balances these two interests and reforms the way the state regulates wetlands. I am confident this pro-growth, pro-environmental law will allow the state to protect our resources while providing a pathway to economic development. I would like to thank State Senator Neal Kedzie and Representative Jeff Mursau for providing leadership on this issue.”

From the Wisconsin Wetlands Association (2/29/12 press release):
“This bill passed without the endorsement of a single leader from the wetland professional community or any major statewide sportsmen's or environmental group,” said Executive Director Tracy Hames. “People need jobs, but they need wetlands too,” he added, “that is if they want flood protection, clean water, and more and better ducks.”Hames also emphasized that Wisconsin citizens could no longer rely on the state to protect the wetlands in their community. “It’s now up to the people of the state to get involved, speak up, and look out for the wetlands where they live."

From Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (2/15/12 press release):
Wetland regulation reforms that passed the state Senate early today will protect the environment, foster expanded wetlands, and promote job creation, WMC said Wednesday.  “The wetland reforms are common sense legislation that will protect our environment while promoting job creation,” said Scott Manley, WMC director of environmental policy.

From 77th Assembly District Democrat State Representative Brett Hulsey (2/29/12 press release):
The Governor signed Senate Bill 368, called the “Flood our Families Act” because it will increase flood risks to Wisconsin families, home and business owners.
“The Flood our Families Act means more Wisconsin homes and families will be at risk from flooding,” said State Rep. Brett Hulsey. “Allowing more people to build in wetlands today creates more flood victims and disaster costs tomorrow.”

From the Dairy Business Association (DBA) (2/29/12 press release):
DBA praises Governor Scott Walker for signing Senate Bill 368, commonly referred to as the Wetlands Bill. This new law streamlines the wetland permitting process for dairy farmers expanding their operation by creating statutory timelines and allowing better use of wetland mitigation.

“This new law greatly enhances the wetlands permitting program by providing dairy producers consistency, and assures that the environment will remain protected while growing Wisconsin’s $26.5 billion dollar industry,” commented Laurie Fischer, DBA Executive Director. “In the past, wetland permits have taken years to obtain, resulting in lost business opportunities and jobs for the State of Wisconsin.”

Substantial opposing viewpoints!  What this shows is the extent of people and actors are involved when dealing with this new Act.  

• The State: signing and passing legislation. 
• Various NGOs: opposing and protesting new regulations.
• State representatives: also opposing the Act.
• Agricultural entities: approving the Act.
• DNR: issuing permits and enforcing regulations.
• Homeowners/people impacted: Where do you stand on these changes?

Now that General Permits are automatically approved after 30 days, wetlands have been removed from the statutory list "Areas of Special Natural Resource Interest - ASNRI", and the mitigation aspects don't always force wetland creation where wetlands are lost, we can move towards the ugly aspect of this Act. 

The Ugly

Case Study: Open Pit Mining in the Penokee Hills/Bad River Watershed - Iron County, Wisconsin.

Check out what my actor, Wisconsin Wetlands Association's involvement is on this project: Go WWA!

Maureen Matesuwic and Barbara With put together a comprehensive timeline of events regarding this destructive mining project HERE.   Our lovely governor, Scott Walker and Bill Williams (President of Gogebic Taconite) worked together on both wetlands and mining reform bills for their own special interests.  Once the wetlands were removed from ASNRI, streamlining the 30 day General Permits, and allowing questionable mitigation practices, wetlands barely have a leg to stand on for protection.  Not to mention all of the other negative impacts to the groundwater, flora and fauna, or how it affects the Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians.  Check out their video in protest to this mining project:

The devastation created to the land, water, and wetlands is catastrophic and the jobs created do not even come close to being an economic benefit to our state, resources, flora, fauna, or citizens. GTac has been going back and forth on whether to proceed, but at least for now, more scientific research is being done on that area before this project has commenced.  Wisconsin Public Radio - More Research Please!

LINKS GALORE!

Tom Larson - WRA | Review of Act 118

Kent/Lamb Wisconsin Lawyer | Act 118 Review

Wisconsin Wetlands Association Wetland Bill Recap

The National Law Review | Bochert of Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
Do Created Wetlands Replace the Wetlands that are Destroyed?
UPDATE Timeline of Shame: How a Mining Company Got State and Local Governments to Allow Destruction of Wetlands
The facts about Wisconsin wetlands | Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Wisconsin Eye Conference 2011

Wisconsin Wetlands Association | Wetlands: The sponge of our aquifers

Wetlands play an integral role in our ecosystem and being from Wisconsin there are plenty of reasons we should be very familiar with the benefits provided and concerns with their depletion.  When areas receive significant rain, wetlands are useful in collecting excess rainwater to help avoid flooding.  Wetlands also act as a natural water filtration system and help restore underground water levels - that lots of people rely on for drinking water! They are natural buffer zones for rivers and assist with maintaining the overall health of river water.  Wetlands are an important ecosystem for migrating birds. Some are used as sustainable fisheries (watch the TedTalks video linked below - it's awesome!).  Given our global climate change crisis, wetlands also aid with storing carbon.  Wetlands are amazing, but what is happening to them isn't.  According to Actionbioscience, "between 1780’s and 1980’s, the lower 48 states have lost 53% of the original wetland habitat, or about 104 million acres." (Actionbioscience) In the last 200 years over 50% of our national wetlands have been lost.  We need to change our negative impact on wetlands.  So, who is doing something about this?

Now having a brief introduction to the importance of wetlands, allow me to present a NGO that has been protecting Wisconsin's wetlands since 1969: Wisconsin Wetlands Association ("WWA").  They are based in Madison and work closely with our Wisconsin DNR.  Members include a broad spectrum of minds from expert scientists and educators to local and regional organizations to concerned individuals like you and me.  Whether you are troubled about your local ground water quality or rely on wetlands for a successful hunting season, you can work with WWA to learn more or to take action. 

WWA has 33 of our 72 county fact sheets - Check them out!.  Their focus area is restricted to Wisconsin's borders.

Look at these maps comparing historical wetland data to current wetland data for Milwaukee County. 



 

Now allow me to draw your attention to WWA's Milwaukee map that breaks-down what they've mapped and the areas that could potentially be restored.

The WWA defines their areas of work into these categories (Our work) :

• Promoting widespread understanding of and engagement in wetlands.
• Encouraging policies and programs that promote wetland conservation and ensure wetland laws are implemented and enforced.
• Advancing wetland science and practices.
• Ensuring a healthy organization that can work for the long haul to protect, promote, and restore wetlands.

Education is an important method in addressing wetland issues.  The WWA has multiple outreach programs working with the general public, Wisconsin landowners, local governments, and also provide other forms of education through various publications, workshops and field trips.  

They also host and organize an annual wetland conference that began in 1995; although their last conference was held in 2012.  Their targeted attending audience is listed on their website as:

Scientists from colleges and universities Federal and state agency scientists Federal and state agency regulators Local government officials Tribal staff Natural resource managers (public and private) Private consultants Graduate and undergraduate students in the natural sciences Staff of local, statewide and regional non-profit conservation groups Volunteer leaders of non-profit conservation groups Wetland enthusiasts and concerned citizens Members of the media

It is important to get everyone on the same page when addressing and finding solutions to our depleting wetlands.  They want local citizens involved in protecting current wetlands (Protecting Wetlands). 

By working with local governments they were able to get the 2001 Act 6 passed which got all 72 counties on board with implementing wetland protection. 

The WWA and 4 other environmental organizations have gone to court against Ashley Furniture and won against this large corporation that was pushing to fill in a wetland without a permit. 

They are fighting airport expansion in West Bend and are keeping tabs on permit enforcement along the natural gas pipelines.

For more information about their goals and aspirations, I invite you to check the link below for the comprehensive 2013-2017 Strategic Plan. 

Wetlands are being addressed from all angles by the WWA.  Wisconsin citizens and all organisms should be proud that this diverse NGO is protecting our wetlands.

Here is a 3 minute video from their website that reaffirms what I've laid out for you here and makes me want to go visit our very own Cedarburg Bog!  My ecology professor said the fall colors are phenomenal right now.  If we can swing some free time to get there I'll post any pictures I take.  

Want to know more?  Check out these websites:
Wisconsin Wetlands Association
Why are wetlands important? 
TedTalks: How I fell in love with a fish 
Wetland Restoration Handbook for Wisconsin landowners 
2001 Wisconsin Act 6  
Cedarburg Bog
WWA 2013-2017 Strategic Plan