[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 102 (Thursday, July 11, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1260]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   CONCERNS ABOUT WETLAND REGULATIONS

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. DOUG BEREUTER

                              of nebraska

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 11, 1996

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member commends to his colleagues the 
following letter to Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman concerning the 
increased amount of proposed wetland regulations.
                                    Congress of the United States,


                                     House of Representatives,

                                                     July 9, 1996.
     Hon. Dan Glickman,
     Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.
       Dear Dan: While visiting with my constituents, I have been 
     advised of several concerns about wetland regulations, 
     particularly a concern that actions by Federal Agencies with 
     wetland responsibilities and jurisdiction are proposing 
     actions that amount to ``regulatory creep'' by proposing to 
     expand the amount of lands defined as Federally protected 
     wetlands.
       I am told that three changes are being considered by the 
     four Federal agencies with wetland responsibilities (USDA, 
     Corps of Engineers, EPA and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) 
     that would expand the criteria used in the Federal 
     delineation process by making changes to the 1987 delineation 
     manual and by adopting a functional assessment process known 
     as the hydrogemorphic (HGM) approach.
       One of the specific concerns has been that NRCS, without 
     public notice and comment, is expanding its list of field 
     indicators of hydric soils, which in turn would result in an 
     expansion of areas and sites that would meet the hydric soil 
     criteria. Mr. Secretary I want to ask whether it is the view 
     of NRCS that all hydric soils are wetland soils? (I 
     understood that wetland soils are a function of wetland 
     hydrology, and that wetland delineation requires the 
     independent verification of all three wetland criteria--
     soils, water, and plants.)
       Secondly, I am told that the Fish and Wildlife Service is 
     about to enter into an agreement to expand the hydrophytic 
     plant list, also without the benefit of public notice and 
     comment. Is the interagency wetland team recommending that 
     Federal agencies be allowed to delineate wetlands based only 
     upon two criteria (soils and plants) instead of the three 
     essential wetland criteria? Such an action would seem to 
     allow regulators to `assume' hydrology based on the presence 
     of an expanded list of hydric soil indicators and an expanded 
     list of hydrophytic plants. It is already very difficult for 
     many of my constituents to accept wetlands defined under 
     present rules without wetlands being defined without the 
     apparent presence of water for a significant period of time 
     during the year.
       Finally, I am curious about the interagency wetland team's 
     implementation of a new methodology for the functional 
     assessment of wetlands using the hydrogemorphic (HGM) 
     approach. There is a concern that this method would 
     arbitrarily assign functions to various types of wetlands 
     located within a watershed or ecological region by combining 
     the subjective nature of wetlands science with the ambiguity 
     of professional judgment.
       Mr. Secretary, I am particularly alarmed by the appearance 
     that no one in the Administration nor the Congress is 
     currently in charge of wetland delineation. With no one 
     designated for a leadership role on this subject I fear that 
     the bureaucracy is once again free to initiate regulatory 
     creep. That would leave the most important regulatory 
     decisions to be accomplished behind the political scene by 
     interagency fiat without public input.
       Dan, I would appreciate it very much, and feel more 
     comfortable, if you would take a personal role in overseeing 
     the activities of the interagency wetland group to insure 
     that the general public, including those which would be 
     subject to these regulations, have adequate opportunity for 
     involvement in any changes in wetland regulations.
       Thank you very much for your consideration and assistance 
     on this matter.
           Best wishes,
                                                    Doug Bereuter,
     Member of Congress.

                          ____________________