|
Post by freedomhunter on Feb 9, 2021 16:09:20 GMT -5
I've worked with an environmental firm to do the mitigation easements for "wetlands". It is usually a developer forced to mitigate due to a broken tile area or local flooding that is labeled a "wetland" by some environmental person that ends up making money in the process. Hardly ever what I would consider a true wetland. Then every one gets paid by the developer including an environmental company to pick floodway ground in crops in completely other location and design a new area, then that landowner gets paid for the easement (in excess of 15k an acre usually). The plantings then go in by the environmental company, they promptly all die and usually native vegetation takes over that they come and burn every few years if ever. Just my take on how well it works. The noblesville snafu was a broken tile/ clogged pipe. I have no problem doing away with it and starting a better program that properly identifies and protects true native wetlands. Just my 2 cents
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on Feb 9, 2021 17:23:40 GMT -5
I've worked with an environmental firm to do the mitigation easements for "wetlands". It is usually a developer forced to mitigate due to a broken tile area or local flooding that is labeled a "wetland" by some environmental person that ends up making money in the process. Hardly ever what I would consider a true wetland. Then every one gets paid by the developer including an environmental company to pick floodway ground in crops in completely other location and design a new area, then that landowner gets paid for the easement (in excess of 15k an acre usually). The plantings then go in by the environmental company, they promptly all die and usually native vegetation takes over that they come and burn every few years if ever. Just my take on how well it works. The noblesville snafu was a broken tile/ clogged pipe. I have no problem doing away with it and starting a better program that properly identifies and protects true native wetlands. Just my 2 cents I don't have issues with having better programs that work properly, but shouldn't those be developed and implemented as the old ones are removed?
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Feb 9, 2021 18:22:41 GMT -5
I think some of the programs that work to create new wetlands might be retained. Like wetland banks. I dont know for sure I hear everything second hand. I do agree.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Feb 18, 2021 21:52:08 GMT -5
FYI - Bills will switch Houses next week. Senate bills go to House and House bills go to Senate.
|
|
|
Post by jman46151 on Feb 19, 2021 14:02:21 GMT -5
I've worked with an environmental firm to do the mitigation easements for "wetlands". It is usually a developer forced to mitigate due to a broken tile area or local flooding that is labeled a "wetland" by some environmental person that ends up making money in the process. Hardly ever what I would consider a true wetland. Then every one gets paid by the developer including an environmental company to pick floodway ground in crops in completely other location and design a new area, then that landowner gets paid for the easement (in excess of 15k an acre usually). The plantings then go in by the environmental company, they promptly all die and usually native vegetation takes over that they come and burn every few years if ever. Just my take on how well it works. The noblesville snafu was a broken tile/ clogged pipe. I have no problem doing away with it and starting a better program that properly identifies and protects true native wetlands. Just my 2 cents I've been staying quiet on this because I haven't had time to research it but I was wondering if that what is what it was. That was the main reason I could think of for them putting IDEM through the ringer on this. Same thing happened to me once. Had to put in a wetland due to what we assumed was a broken tile. It was like 3 acres of new wetland for every acre of old wetland. If you looked at sat views of the property from 10 years ago it was just an ag field but now suddenly had a wetland on it. You can drive down 37 south of Indy and see where they've put up snow fence that I assume is to "protect wetlands" that are really just wet ditches.
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Feb 19, 2021 20:55:11 GMT -5
You got played, happens all the time.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Feb 25, 2021 20:14:01 GMT -5
If IDEM needs to be fixed, we should fix it. I think it needs fixed. That said I don't think you throw out the entire wetlands rule. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Feb 25, 2021 20:14:56 GMT -5
If IDEM needs to be fixed, we should fix it. I think it needs fixed. That said I don't think you throw out the entire wetlands rule. Just my opinion. Bill will be assigned to House Environmental Affairs next week.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Mar 6, 2021 0:00:37 GMT -5
SB389 has been introduced in the House and assigned to the House Environmental Affairs Committee. No hearing has been scheduled yet.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Mar 15, 2021 17:50:11 GMT -5
Meeting of committee held today but no action on SB389.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Mar 19, 2021 23:31:45 GMT -5
Looks like another committee meeting has been scheduled for SB389.If it passes the House and Governor signs it , it would remove all state protections from wetlands. This a bad bill for a lot of people. Contact your state representative and ask them to vote against this bill.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Mar 22, 2021 11:26:36 GMT -5
House Environmental Affairs Committee took testimony on SB389 today. No vote. They will meet next week to vote.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Mar 24, 2021 18:22:52 GMT -5
Everybody needs to contact your state representative and ask them to vote against this bill.
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Mar 24, 2021 18:47:29 GMT -5
Everybody needs to contact your state representative and ask them to vote against this bill. Too many property rights have been infringed upon by puddles in fields being designated wetlands. It would seem doomed to me due to mismanagement. And that has nothing to do with true wetlands.
|
|
|
Post by duff on Apr 1, 2021 12:03:14 GMT -5
I missed all this.
I will say if a field no longer drains because a tile is plugged or broken...the wet spot used to be a wetland before it was a farm field. That is the story of Goose Pond. Failure after failure to drain and farm converted back to some very important wetlands. Same with Jackson Co wrp lands between Seymour and Austin.
|
|
|
Post by freedomhunter on Apr 1, 2021 12:28:57 GMT -5
I agree somewhat. Some tiles that break were used just to better drain a slow draining field. Too much left up to interpretation.
|
|
|
Post by esshup on Apr 1, 2021 13:10:31 GMT -5
Then it all depends on how far back you take it. Look at how many farms would be wiped off the face of the earth if all the ground that was the Grand Kankakee Marsh in the 1870's and is now farmland would be declared a wetland now...........
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Apr 2, 2021 8:29:20 GMT -5
The House Environmental Affairs Committee meeting scheduled for Monday has been cancelled. Republican lawmakers are trying decide what the next step should be (prediction: summer study).
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Apr 8, 2021 16:36:36 GMT -5
It appears that a compromise has been reached. The wetlands program will stay in place but reductions in some protections are being proposed (as they should be).It's not over yet but some level of compromise is acceptable. Ducks Unlimited and other conservation groups still will be watching. ALL the tree huggers will be unhappy with compromise. It passed the House committee 12-0.
|
|
|
Post by hatchetjack on Apr 9, 2021 12:39:52 GMT -5
From Ducks Unlimited Regional Rep:
Just wanted to let everyone know that as expected Amendment 24 passed the House Environmental Affairs committee yesterday unanimously 12-0. The amendment is much more reasonable than any yet we have seen and strikes a better balance of providing some regulatory relief while still maintaining natural resource protections. The new amended bill will now go to second reading on the House floor on Monday and we fully expect that there will be problematic floor amendments offered in attempt to bring it back closer to the original bill, which would have fully repealed the isolated wetland protection program. It is therefore critical that members of the House hear from constituents to OPPOSE any additional amendments to SB 389 that would further expand wetland impacts. DU and many others are issuing action alerts to that effect.
The window of opportunity to influence this situation is closing quickly and so it is my professional opinion that it’s in our collective best interest to rally around this newly amended bill. I think that letting the perfect become the enemy of the good at this juncture will hurt us and increase the likelihood that we end up with something far more damaging in law.
|
|