Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Lawmakers OK proposed exception to wetlands permitting requirement

By: Erika Strebel, [email protected]//October 19, 2017//

Lawmakers OK proposed exception to wetlands permitting requirement

By: Erika Strebel, [email protected]//October 19, 2017//

Listen to this article

A proposal that would make it easier for developers to build in places with so-called artificial wetlands received a preliminary approval from a panel of lawmakers on Thursday.

If adopted by the full Legislature and signed by the governor, Assembly Bill 388 would expand the exception to permitting requirements that now exists for artificial wetlands. Such wetlands are generally already exempt, but not if the DNR has deemed them to have significant functional value.

AB 388 would define an artificial wetland as one that was inadvertently created by someone’s modification of the landscape or the land’s hydrology and that lies in a place where no wetland or stream existed before. The definition would exclude wetlands subject to federal jurisdiction and wetlands that are either places where fish spawn or that lead to places where fish spawn.

The Assembly Committee on Environment and Forestry voted 8-0 Thursday to recommend the bill for adoption.

Committee members also approved an amendment to the bill that would both provide a more precise definition of an artificial wetland and lay out a process the state DNR would have to follow when deciding if a particular wetland counts as being artificial.

The process would require developers to notify the DNR 15 working days before they start a project that would fill a wetland. It would also give the DNR 15 days to issue a decision on whether a wetland falls into the artificial category.

Separately, the amendment would stipulate that wetlands formed to mitigate the loss of a natural wetland somewhere else would not be exempt from the permitting requirements.

Proponents say the change would eliminate various roadblocks that are now hindering development in the state. Lawmakers on Wednesday heard public testimony on the Senate version of the bill, Senate Bill 320. A hearing for the Assembly version took place Oct. 3.

Many organizations have lined up in support of the bill, including groups representing developers, road builders and environmental groups.

Polls

Should Wisconsin Supreme Court rules be amended so attorneys can't appeal license revocation after 5 years?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests