This is one of those instances where I have a lot of cognitive dissonance between my individual feelings, and the desires for ease and expedience when doing projects that are even within sight of a wetland. In my opinion the existing mitigation techniques are laughable and the permitting process is onerous. At the same time, I'd have liked to see even better wetland mitigation or stricter rules from an ecological standpoint and it being the baby thrown out with the bathwater is a massive understatement.
this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2023
7 points (100.0% liked)
Civil Engineering
119 readers
1 users here now
A community for discussion of Civil Engineering and any of its sub-disciplines, including but not limited to:
-Structural Engineering
-Geotechnical Engineering
-Environmental Engineering
-Transportation Engineering
-Construction Management
-Water Resources Engineering
-Surveying
The intent is to create an open and welcoming community from prospective students and enthusiasts, to Professional Engineers, researchers, and others working in the field.
Rules:
-Maintain civility and treat others with respect.
-Posts should be more-or-less directly related to Engineering.
-Humour is very welcome, just please refrain from low effort memes or posts that do not foster discussion.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It feels like one of those things you need to handle at the state level, but I know that some states aren't going to tolerate the level of protection provided in other states.
I guess it does ultimately come to that for the strictest protections, and probably local EPAs are more in tune with the local hydrology so far as making regulations. However, it could raise a big question of "why bother?" if one state has stricter wetlands protections but has major tributaries discharging into the jurisdiction of states that do not have nearly as strong protections and thus have degraded water quality.