At a workshop I was conducting on wetlands for professional land surveyors a civil engineer commented that “since many wetlands are naturally filling up aren't wetlands just defects in the landscape that need to be fixed"? Kind of like a case of acne that needs to be cured? If they’re going to fill up anyway, why not just go in there get it done and benefit society. Stimulating discussion followed!

I found this to be a very interesting (and disturbing) perspective that indicates continuing education for engineers and surveying professionals re: wetlands is a critical need.

Institutional change has not been and will not be possible absent a method of full accountability. When the costs to society that have historically gone unpaid by those filling or draining wetlands can be accounted for, and that cost passed on to the development phase, then things will change.

More and better education is one way of approaching that issue. However, in the meantime, you can always reply that they are in error regarding wetlands as defects in the landscape. Natural processes keep eroding uplands, so clearly the uplands are the true landscape defects.

Most amazing ...
especially so when you consider this thread
http://forum.sws.org/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=7936008642&f=2756008642&m=5191076301

Don't worry! If we run out of wetlands, Congress will develop a new law to keep us all gainfully employed and equally confused.

Smoke on this: There's been a certain "bait and switch" quality to the so-called "education" of the masses...er, ah,..public, including engineers and surveyors, about wetlands and their value. The federal wetlands protection apparatus, for years, has shown us pretty pictures of egrets and herons cavorting in freshwater and tidal marshes, pleading for their protection, all the while expanding their regulatory reach to every depression, puddle and ditch on the landscape. No doubt Mr. Spencer's engineer hero has been the beneficiary of the government's environmental education program, but has no doubt also confronted the de facto federal land-use regulation program that seems to expend a great deal of effort protecting that which even the "educated" may refer to as "defects in the landscape".

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Matt Reed,

I hope the history buffs are not offended with this little bit of levity.

Three score and 2 years ago, our government brought forth upon our citizens a new law, conceived in confusion and dedicated to the propagation of bureaucracy.
Now we are engaged in a great civil education, testing whether that law, or any law so il-conceived and mis-managed can long endure. We have met on the great battle-field of regulations,litigation, and subsequent interpretations. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a federally regulated wetland because somebody wants to use it.
The world will little note, nor understand what we say here, but it can never forget the frustrations we have labored hard to develop and perpetuate; and that government of the bureaucrats, by the bureaucrats, and for the bureaucrats shall not perish from the budget.

Mr. Bonner,

Brilliant parody. I assume you are referring to the Clean Water Act of 1972. Just for the record, that would be one score and 12 years ago. Carry on.

Thank you Mr. Reed.
Yes I was referring to the 1972 act. My math is poor. I guess I have developed a typical environmental syndrome. I can't keep track of the score!

This attitude is the result of educational efforts that only feature the "top models". Have we perpetuated wetland stereotypes with photo contest of pristine wetlands that are more uncommon than common to the neighborhoods in which we live? There is a perception that a wetland either does everything or nothing at all. Wetland education needs to show how many wetlands are dying a slow death near our neighborhoods. We are ignoring real educational opportunities to show cause and effect relationships that point back to planning and development issues, and "teaching to the test". The simple message that needs to be conveyed more is that physical changes in the landscape cause biological changes (i.e., usually degradation). However, professional priorities and practices render this more routine area of wetland education to an inferior position.