An analogy I like to use is to compare wetland regulations to taxes. I open this up for other comments.

Regulating certain activities is like taxing those activities. Regulations make those activities more expensive because you have to deal with the regulations. Regulations, similar to taxes, attempt to alter behavior.

If you have a legal tax deduction for, say, mortgage payments, do you have "ulterior motives" when you try to applying these deductions and cheat the government out of money? I may disagree with certain exemptions, but it is everyone’s right to try and take as many exemptions as they can when doing their taxes.

Similarly, if I have 10 acres of land, 9 of which is an unregulated wetland under section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (as confirmed by the US Supreme Court), I should not have to act as if they are regulated. 10 acres of usable land is more valuable than 1 acre; you could say that greed is affecting my actions. We may disagree with the law and think that the law should be changed to regulate the wetland on my property, but I would be in my right to do whatever is legal on that property. To say I need to treat my wetland as if it were regulated just because some think it should be regulated would be like not taking tax deductions because the government has a budget deficit and we should all pitch in and pay our share.