INTRODUCTION 



Wetlands have been of high interest in Congress, as measured by the number 

 of bills introduced in the recent past. This interest can be traced to growing 

 conflict between two viewpoints about wetlands. The first viewpoint is that 

 wetlands are of high value, if left unmodified, and typically perform numerous 

 desirable services, from providing habitat to water purification and flood con- 

 trol. The second viewpoint is that many wetland areas could be better-used for 

 other purposes, but alteration is hindered by inflexible management at the Fed- 

 eral level, sustained and augmented by judicial decisions. Some believe that 

 the regulatory program unfairly limits personal property rights and usurps the 

 traditional prerogatives of land use planning at the local level. Seen from 

 this viewpoint, the potential values of natural wetlands are usually outweighed 

 by benefits to be derived from alteration to support other uses. 



Both viewpoints have been strengthened since the most recent protracted 

 debate on wetlands that accompanied reauthorization of section 404 of the 

 Clean Water Act in 1977, and have generated growing controversy. The first 

 point of view has been reinforced by scientific research projects and pub- 

 lications about different functions of all types of wetlands; the second has 

 been reinforced by agency and court decisions that continue to support a broad 

 definition of wetland areas, and at the same time provide little latitude for 

 direct or indirect modification once an area has been defined as a regulated 

 wetland. As a result of the increased support for both of these two positions, 

 a large number of wetland-related bills have been introduced, many having 



(XI) 



