Dear President Obama, Wetlands are among the most productive habitats on earth; however, over half of the

wetlands in the lower 48 states have been lost to development and agriculture. They perform a variety of functions that benefit the pubic such as water purification, flood prevention, sea level rise buffers, recreational opportunities, and serve as important plant, fish, and wildlife habitats. The main problem is that about 82 percent (92 million acres) of wetlands are privately owned.1 While Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is slowing decelerating the destruction rate, the benefits of wetlands to society are astronomical and supplementary action must be taken immediately. Wetland conversion and degradation generates negative externalities for the public that are not deducted from the marginal benefit to wetland owners. The owner of a wetland does not take into account that preservation may reduce flooding on downstream properties. As a result, there is no incentive for private owners to conserve, and it is more profitable to convert the land for agriculture use and urban development. This may be costly for society as a whole, but the marginal cost for private landowners does not take into account the marginal social costs. As President, you have a responsibility to balance the landowners interests in converting land for economic profit, and the publics interest in preventing current destruction and demanding a future increase in the wetland resource base. In order to approach the destruction of wetlands there needs to be a shift in the private incentives for conservation. Currently, the only benefits of wetland conservation for owners include private scenery, hunting and fishing, recreational

Wetlands and Agriculture: Private Interest and Public Benefits. Economic Research Service/USDA. Http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer765/aer765b.pdf

opportunities, and economic returns from haying, grazing or timber harvesting. There needs to be efforts by the federal government to enhance the returns that private landowners receive from wetland protection and conservation. These incentives need to be greater than the landowners opportunity cost of converting the land or else the individual landowners will most likely keep converting the land for alternative uses. Currently the federal government protects wetlands through Sector 404 of the Clean Water Act, but not all methods of wetland destruction are covered in the legislation. Unregulated methods include: wetland drainage, the lowering of groundwater levels in areas adjacent to wetlands, permanent flooding of existing wetlands, and deposition of material that is not specifically defined as dredged and fill materials by the Clean Water Act.2 While state authority over the Federal Section 404 program is a goal of the Clean Water Act, few states have chosen to embrace the program because there are limited Federal resources available to assist them. Regional wetland conservation plans that give states the framework to protect, restore, and create wetlands are essential for the sustainability of wetlands, but they need improved funding from the federal government. States such as Maine have already implemented state-level plans, but there is not enough funding to either buy the land from private owners or provide them with economic incentives to conserve the wetlands. Maines remaining wetlands have an estimated economic value of $31 billion, so they understand how vital this ecosystem is to their state.3 Therefore, funds are needed to provide economic incentives for private landowners to conserve their land. If
2

Votteler, Todd. National Water Summary on Wetland Resources. United States Geological Survey. Http://water.usgs.gov/nwsum/WSP2425/legislation.html Winter, Lois. Protecting Maines Wetlands: Linking Maines Past with its Future. National Wetlands Newsletter. Vol. 29, No. 6. 2007.

landowners could be compensated more substantially then the potential for long-term wetland sustainability would rise. Another economic incentive is to give landowners tax deductions for selling or donating wetlands to a qualified organization that works to protect the land. Since individual landowners own most of the wetlands, they have in a key position to determine the fate of wetlands on their properties. Economic incentives and disincentives are the best policy solutions to decelerating the conversion rate of wetland in the United States. While focusing on private landowners is important, public education on the values of standing wetlands can also result in conservation. If the public does not recognize the benefits of wetland preservation then there will be no support for conservation policy. The only way protection can be secured is through the cooperation efforts of citizens. Changes in public awareness would fundamentally increase public pressure on landowners to conserve their land because there would be decreased demand for alternative uses such as urban development. Since there are significant public benefits for protecting wetlands, the use of eminent domain may needed as a last resort to stop the destruction of this ecosystem. The government has the right to take property for public use as long as the landowner is properly compensated. The use of this right would be the most effective in protecting wetlands, but it is not very cost effective. The federal government would have to dramatically increase their budget for wetland conservation in order to ensure their protection. With a greater understanding that the long-term benefits of conservation are

more then worth the present costs of compensation, then the safety of our countrys wetlands can be achieved. The federal government must choose to delegate funds to compensating private landowners, educating the general public or choose to implement economic incentive policy to slow the wetland destruction rate because no federal action will result in the lose of a key ecosystem that provides countless benefits to the public. Instead of relying on individual states to preserve the longevity of this ecosystem, the federal government has a responsibility to take more extensive action. Educating the public may be the cheapest approach, but prices should not be the driving factor when there are so many benefits to wetland preservation.

Sincerely,