Requiring developers who destroy wetlands to offset the loss by restoring them elsewhere is critical to the environment -- especially for a state like Louisiana, which is fighting to rebuild its imperiled coast.
But U.S. Rep. Jeff Landry wants a one-year ban on the so-called Modified Charleston Method that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has been using to determine how developers must mitigate losses. He offered an amendment to the $32.1 billion water and energy bill that was adopted by the House Tuesday -- his amendment passed by a voice vote.
If the final version of the bill is adopted with the ban in place, the corps will have to come up with an alternate method or go back to its previous way of deciding how much mitigation is required, a judgment call that was less precise. Col. Ed Fleming, commander of the corps' New Orleans district, said that approach resulted in an underestimate of damage.
That's simply not in Louisiana's best interest, even though a Louisiana lawmaker is pushing it, with the support of local officials. U.S. Rep. Peter Visclosky of Indiana pointed out the inconsistency when he argued against Rep. Landry's amendment.
"If it doesn't work, I do not know why in 2006 and 2007 the New Orleans District worked with its federal and state partners to modify the Charleston Method so it better reflected the unique conditions found in southern Louisiana,'' Rep. Visclosky said.
What's driving the proposed ban is an effort to avoid the higher cost of more robust mitigation. While that affects private development, it also affects public projects, including those designed to protect people from storms. That's why people like Jefferson Parish President John Young and other Louisiana officials agree with what Rep. Landry is doing.
But the state's Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority is unhappy that the corps hasn't used the new method in determining mitigation to offset damage caused by rebuilding the New Orlleans area's levee system after Katrina.
"The New Orleans District Corps of Engineers office is going to cripple our ability for Louisiana to protect itself from dangerous hurricanes by introducing a standardized method of wetlands mitigation,'' Rep. Landry argued. "This method is driving up the state and local mitigation costs of hurricane protection in Louisiana by 300 percent.''
Col. Fleming, who spoke about the issue at a town hall meeting hosted by Sen. David Vitter in March, said that the difference isn't as great as critics claim. He pointed to a survey of permit applications between May and December of last year that showed the old method resulted in an average of 1.6 acres of mitigation for every acre of damage compared to 2.4 acres to every 1 under the new method.
But underestimating wetlands destruction, even if done in the name of storm protection, is a mistake. Louisiana is more vulnerable to storms because it has lost so much of its natural shield: coastal wetlands that slow the approach of storm surge. Those losses are devastating whether land is lost to a new shopping center or a hurricane protection project. And the one-year moratorium would affect commercial development, too.
It's understandable that Louisiana officials are concerned about the cost of hurricane protection and coastal restoration. But shortchanging wetlands mitigation is not the answer.