MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO
MARCELLINO/DINAPOLI S.2081, Senate calendar/A.2048, Passed Assembly, on calendar in Senate4/11/05 advanced to third reading

The subject bill would amend the ECL to expand state jurisdiction of wetlands from 12.4 acres to 1.0 acre, require wetland remapping, eliminate freshwater wetlands appeals board and many notification and procedural; safeguards for property owners.

Pushed by environmental organizations in reaction to the SWACC decision, in which Federal wetland regulation was taken away from isolated wetlands. -The argument that this bill is in response to the environmental protection gap created by the SWANCC decision is faulty. There is no real gap in New York State.

The bill does not take into account the fact that current law allows DEC to go below the 12.4 acre threshold by declaring the wetland to be of "unusual local importance" so why do we need this bill?

Hosts of local governments have enacted wetlands laws, some more restrictive than the state (i.e. buffers of 500 feet...). Enacting this wetlands proposal will add yet another layer for the development community to climb over on top of these local laws and the remaining Corps of Engineers jurisdiction on smaller wetlands that are connected to navigable waters (wetlands less than 12.4 acres that are classified as "adjacent wetlands" do not fall from federal jurisdiction so where is any measurable "gap"?).

DEC has expressed serious concerns over the past few years at being able to administer/enforce the wetlands regulations at the current 12.4 acres threshold.

The economics of this bill are dramatic and deadly. Hundreds of Long Island development applications will now be subject to DEC permitting, that duplicates local review, w/o adequate staffing. These delays will affect individual single lots as well as more sizable residential and commercial developments.

SEQRA now has a significant impact in further wetlands protection. When EIS are done DEC has required the project applicants to evaluate the impact of their project on wetlands (not an issue on its own). More recently they have added that an evaluation is not restricted to analyzing physical impacts to the regulated areas plus buffers-it now must evaluate potential impacts to regulated wetlands that might occur when developing in un-regulated upland areas that are beyond the designated wetlands and buffers. So now uplands are regulated by DEC!

The increase in civil and criminal penalties for violation of the wetland regulations is problematic. A new class of unmapped, isolated wetlands is being created; people could violate the proposed changes by working a garden

How are we to pay for the huge increase in mapping? These isolated wetlands are everywhere and they are not apparent. Some of them may be 'wet for three weeks out of the year.

The subject bill eliminates the Freshwater Wetlands Appeals Board. How will property owners achieve redress? Very few people can afford or want to go to court. Legal fees and court costs can easily exceed the value of the property impacted.

The subject bill also bill makes subdivision of land containing freshwater wetlands a separate regulated activity. Subdivision of land, without dirt being moved, does not affect wetlands. If dredging, filling, draining, constructing, or more already require a permit then anyone doing a project that impacts state wetland or buffer areas requires a permit.

We urge defeat.

Respectfully submitted,

Robert Wieboldt
Executive Vice President
Legislative Representative