170 * Wetlands: Their Use and Regulation 



ity not involving disposal of dredged or fill material 

 in a wetland may take place above the headwaters 

 or be part of an existing farming operation and 

 therefore be excluded from individual permit review 

 under the nationwide general permit or be exempt- 

 ed from 404 jurisdiction entirely under 404 (F)(1). 

 These exemptions are discussed below. 



Exempted Activities 



Some development activities are exempted specif- 

 ically by CWA from coverage by the Corps: normal 

 farming, silviculture, and ranching activities such 

 as plowing, seeding, cultivating, minor drainage, 

 harvesting for the production of food, fiber, and 

 forest products, or upland soil and water conserva- 

 tion practices; maintenance of "currently service- 

 able" structures such as dikes, dams, levees, and 

 transportation structures; construction or mainten- 

 ance of farm or stock ponds or irrigation ditches, 

 or the maintenance of drainage ditches; and con- 

 struction or maintenance of farm roads, forest 

 roads, or temporary roads for moving mining 

 equipment where such roads are constructed and 

 maintained in accordance with best management 

 practices (BMPs).^ 



According to Edward Thompson, Jr. (11), 

 "Congress clarified its original intention to exclude 

 routine earth-moving activities of agriculture, for- 

 estry, and related industries . . . from case-by-case 

 review under section 404, with the understanding 

 that their water-quality effects will be controlled by 

 the States through the prescription of BMPs, under 

 section 208 of the act." However, during the con- 

 gressional deliberations on this point, Senator 

 Muskie explained, "It is not expected that section 

 208(b)(4)(c) exemptions (from sec. 404) will be 

 available for whole classes of activity, such as silvi- 

 culture (i.e., forestry)." Activities would have to 

 be "appropriate" for BMP regulation. Congress 

 decreed under section 404(f)(1)(E) that farm, forest, 

 and mining roads required BMP control apart from 

 many other exempted activities, such as construct- 

 ing irrigation ditches. 



Normal Farming, Silviculture, 

 and Ranching Activities 



Some routine or normal activities,* can lead to 

 wetland conversion or deterioration. Agricultural 

 activities were identified by the National Wetland 

 Trends Study (NWTS) as being responsible for 

 about 80 percent of the conversions of inland wet- 

 lands from the mid-1950's to the mid-1970's; case 

 study information indicated that normal farming 

 activities were responsible for some of these con- 

 versions. For example, in the Central Valley of Cal- 

 ifornia, many farming practices actually contribute 

 to the maintenance of some wetlands (3). Changes 

 in these farming practices may impact wetlands. 

 For example, rice cultivation provides a major 

 source of water to wedands. Conversion of the land 

 to other crops, such as orchards, could eliminate 

 this water source and alter timing of water availa- 

 bility. More efficient farming practices, such as 

 land-leveling techniques and herbicide use, can re- 

 duce wetlands acreage and available food for 

 waterfowl. 



Normal agricultural activities may also lead to 

 wetland conversions and to other adverse impacts 

 on remaining wetland areas. For example, in the 

 prairie-pothole region, changes in farming meth- 

 ods, increased specialization in crop production, 

 decreased number of farms with livestock, and in- 

 creasing machinery size were identified as major 

 causes of wedand drainage. These changes in farm- 

 ing methods have decreased the relative value of 



^Clean Water Act, sec. 404(0(1). 



'The definition of normal activities is ambiguous and, depending 

 on its interpretation, may result in wetland conversions. The Corps 

 regulations issued on July 22, 1982, state that "to fall under this ex- 

 emption, activities . . . must be part of an established (i.e., ongoing) 

 farming, silviculture, or ranching operation" (33 CFR 323.4 (a](l][i|). 

 Many wetland areas in the Rainwater Basin of Nebraska and similar 

 areas throughout the prairie-potholes region, for example, are peri- 

 odically cultivated and farmed before they are more permanendy drain- 

 ed. The regulations are not clear as to whether alteration of this sort 

 (even if a discharge of fill material was involved) would come under 

 the normal farming exemption. Another example of this ambiguity 

 problem is whether clearing wooded ponds for aquaculture is an ex- 

 empted activity. 



Ambiguity in the term "normal" has been recognized by the forestry 

 industry in at least two Corps districts. Local forestry associations are 

 working with the Corps' Vicksburg and Wilmington districts and EPA 

 to define normal silviculture activities and to clarify which practices 

 require review under section 404. Forestry practices of concern in- 

 clude conversions of mixed bottom land hardwood stands to hardwood 

 plantations and conversions of pocosins to pine plantations. 



