Ch. 4— Wetland Programs That Affect ttie Use of Wetlands • 75 



species. As many such species depend on various 

 wetlands, some wetland development is restricted 

 de facto by this statute. 



National Environmental Policy Act 



The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

 of 1969 provides that EISs be prepared for Federal 

 activities and federally permitted activities that 

 would have significant environmental impacts. EISs 

 must address such things as the environmental im- 

 pact of the proposed action, any adverse environ- 

 mental effects that cannot be avoided if the action 

 is implemented, and alternatives to the proposed 

 action. While NEPA does not prohibit or other- 

 wise constrain Federal actions once an EIS has been 

 prepared, the process of EIS preparation makes it 

 more likely that project impacts and ways of lessen- 

 ing impacts will be considered. NEPA reviews have 

 been applied to many projects suspected of posing 

 substantial impacts to wetlands. 



National Pollution Discharge Elimination 

 System (NPDES) 



Section 402 of CWA authorizes a national system 

 for the regulation of point sources of pollutants into 

 the waters of the United States, with regulation by 

 either EPA or through approved State programs. 

 Some discharges into wedands have been controlled 

 through NPDES permitting. 



Assistance to States and Localities 



Development and Operation of 

 Regulatory Programs 



Several sources of Federal funding have been 

 available to assist States, and in some cases locali- 

 ties, to develop and administer regulatory programs 

 that may include wetland protection features. 



The Coastal Zone Management (CZM) program 

 is an example of a program not directed primarily 

 at wetlands in which the Federal Government and 

 the States mutually influence one another's wet- 

 land-related activities. Pursuant to the Coastal Zone 

 Management Act of 1972, the Federal Office of 

 Coastal Zone Management (OCZM) sets guide- 

 lines and provides funding for States to prepare 

 CZM programs. Approval of a State CZM pro- 

 gram after review by OCZM enables a State to re- 



ceive further funding for program implementation. 

 States have used such funding to hire personnel, 

 monitor and enforce CZM regulations, and pro- 

 vide technical assistance to localities, among other 

 purposes. Federal guidelines for State programs in- 

 clude provisions that impacts on wetlands be con- 

 sidered. Annual reviews of State programs are car- 

 ried out by OCZM and include review of how wet- 

 lands are being treated in programs. Federal influ- 

 ence is exercised through the granting or withhold- 

 ing of program approval and the concommitant dis- 

 bursement of funds. States, of course, may forego 

 Federal guidelines, review, and funding and design 

 and/or implement their own CZM programs. State 

 influence through CZM programs over Federal ac- 

 tivities, such as the granting of 404 permits, is dis- 

 cussed later in this section. 



Technical Assistance and Grants in Aid 



Federal funding and technical assistance to States 

 and localities may be used for purposes direcdy pro- 

 tecting wetlands. Conditions attached to Federal 

 aid used for other purposes may indirecdy support 

 wetlands protection. For example, through the 

 Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Act of 1937 

 (Pittman-Robertson Act), FWS provides grants to 

 States for up to 75 percent of the cost of projects 

 for the acquisition, restoration, and maintenance 

 of wUdlife areas, including wetlands. Grants are 

 drawn from an 1 1 -percent Federal excise tax on the 

 sale of firearms and ammunition. Close to $1 billion 

 has been given to States, which have acquired over 

 3.5 million acres, over 1.5 million of which are 

 waterfowl areas. 



The Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Act (1950) 

 commonly known as the Dingell-Johnson Act, pro- 

 vides Federal assistance to States for projects per- 

 taining to fish. The provisions of the Dingell-John- 

 son Act are parallel to those of the Pittman-Robert- 

 son Act. Funds derived from the Federal excise tax 

 on fishing equipment and bait are apportioned an- 

 nually among the States — 40 percent on the basis 

 of geographical area and 60 percent on the basis 

 of the number of persons holding paid licenses to 

 fish for sport or recreation. Funds so apportioned 

 to the States are available for use by them for "fish 

 restoration and management projects" or, since 

 1970, "comprehensive fish and wildlife resource 

 management plans." The Federal share in the cost 

 of such projects or plans is not to exceed 75 percent. 



