BUFFERS REQUIRED FOR WETLANDS

in GEORGIA

On July 10th the Georgia Court of Appeals by a 4-3 margin decided to overturn two previous court decisions and require buffers on wetlands.  While this decision is appealed to the Georgia Supreme

Click here to view Document

Court, it's business as usual, see attached document. 

Georgia residents, many of which have a job related to construction, believe the existing buffer requirements for protecting streams, creeks and rivers are a good thing! Most people

are familiar with and support Georgia's proactive regulation that requires a preserved area of undisturbed land (Buffer) to be placed along most state waters. For years, written "guidance" from Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GA EPD) has directed buffers to be measured from the confining cut of a stream channel when "wrested vegetation" is 

determined present by a certified Local Issuing Authority (LIA) or GAEPD inspector. For salt water marshes, a recent decision this year by GAEPD Director, Judd Turner overturned the requirement for buffers measured from a "marsh jurisdictional line" as determined by Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Coastal Resources Division and 

changed the measurement requirement to that of wrested vegetation.   

Although wetlands are defined by state law as a "state water", they've not been included in the category of state waters that require a buffer since surface water doesn't move fast enough to create wrested vegetation. Today, big fines and/or stop work orders are waiting for those who get caught impacting a buffer along qualified state waters without first obtaining permission or "variance" from the GAEPD. 

Many in the construction industry believe the ever growing list of water protection laws constrain land development unnecessarily and over reach their actual value in protecting our water resources. Similarly, many land developers believe this new attempt by 

A few questions to consider regarding this issue include:

- Nationally, the Clean Water Act already protects and/or mitigates wetland impacts from construction, but NOT with

 a buffer.  Why do environmentalists believe it's necessary to add buffer protection at the state level to existing federal regulations?

- What real data supports the need to protect wetlands with a buffer also?  

- What are the environmental and economic benefits provided by preserving wetlands?

- Are wetlands with a buffer versus those without, in better condition? 

- Since buffers for wetlands is a state law and not a federal requirement, will legislators vote next year to exempt weltands from buffer protection? 

- Will the new accountability for buffer protection around wetlands on the local level result in more enforcement, thereby increasing cost?

Personally, I'm grateful for the discussions and arguments we have as a nation with issues like this one; buffers around wetlands. As we work together, let's not forget the qualities that have made our nation great....a thriving economy with a strong construction sector that plays a major role in paying for our air, water, land and wildlife resources....only in America!

EPA ENFORCEMENT
 Over WETLANDS DESTRUCTION  

August 14, 2014, SAN FRANCISCO - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Justice today announced a settlement with the owners of Anchordoguy ranch for violations of the Clean Water Act that destroyed more than 80 acres of rare vernal pool wetlands and streams in Tehama County, California. Ranch owners have agreed to pay $795,000 for wetlands preservation and $300,000 in penalties. 

Between 2008 & 2010, the owners illegally deep-ripped 872 acres of the ranch to make room for more orchards, destroying 80 acres of vernal pool wetlands and damaging two acres of Coyote Creek. The ranch owners carried out these activities without a required Clean Water Act 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 

MORE