Last May Governor Dayton issued an executive order instructing the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) to evaluate Minnesota’s wetland laws.
Any changes stemming from this evaluation have the potential to affect your wetland bank and how you do business, for better or for worse. This is part II of III of our review of what we believe are some of the more important “Discussion Issues” for your review and input here, especially since wetland bankers weren’t included as a stakeholder group.
Issue #3 on the BWSR Stakeholder Discussion Issues:
“Consistent Review, Approval, and Implementation”
Background: Regulatory simplification and eliminating needless duplication has been a discussion topic for years. For bankers this typically relates to redundancies between BWSR and the Corps. Both agencies use similar application materials, but the review and approval processes can be quite different.
On the Table: Discussion issues for this item include streamlining regulatory oversight, identifying inconsistencies between regulators, and achieving consistency within and between agencies. Most wetland bankers have been exposed to this inconsistency during the application and deposit phases of their project(s). You clear the WCA hurdles only to find out that the Corps of Engineers has a different answer or crediting system. A single review, approval, and crediting system for wetland bank projects would be a benefit to all wetland bankers and would inject some investor confidence into the current system. How do you think the banking system could be made more streamlined and consistent?
Now is a great time to speak up to help ensure wetland banking remains a healthy and viable business in Minnesota. Because wetland bankers in Minnesota lack a single cohesive voice we urge you to contact BWSR directly, or give us your input by leaving a reply below.
To review the Governor’s order and BWSR’s discussion issues click on this link:
To contact BWSR you can call or e-mail David Weirens:
David Weirens, Land and Water Section Manager
Comments are open below. We’d love to hear from account holders and consultants for their perspectives.