40 



eates wetlands on agricultural land. And that is a broad definition 

 of agricultural land to include rangeland, silvicultural, and peren- 

 nial crop land. 



Given the highly technical, but sometimes subjective, nature of 

 wetlands delineation. Congress should establish a training and cer- 

 tification program for all wetlands delineators. This coupled with 

 an appeals process that is subject to judicial review would force 

 more integrity and accountability into the wetlands delineation 

 process. However, we are opposed to third party involvement in ap- 

 peals proceedings as contained in H.R. 3465. 



We believe that national wetlands policy must include a classi- 

 fication system for wetlands functions and values. All wetlands do 

 not share the same ecological value or perform the same functions. 

 The degree of regulatory protection should be determined based on 

 the values and functions present. 



We are encouraged by language in H.R. 3465 that exempts prior 

 converted cropland from permitting requirements and that recog- 

 nizes that they are not navigable waters. However, it is incomplete 

 in its current form. Congress should specifically exclude all prior 

 converted cropland from both section 404 regulation and waters of 

 the United States, regardless of the type of crop grown. 



We also recommend that so-called "farmed wetlands," land 

 cropped or intensively managed for agricultural production a ma- 

 jority of the time, should not be labeled jurisdictional wetlands. 

 Farmed wetlands are areas that are wet so infrequently that they 

 can be farmed without ditching, tiling, or draining. Clearly, these 

 lands are more suited to agricultural purposes and there is little 

 to be gained by regulating these areas as wetlands. 



There is a need for Congress to strengthen and clarify that nor- 

 mal farming, ranching, and silvicultural activities will continue to 

 be exempt from permit requirements. We are concerned with recent 

 developments, specifically limitations on mechanized land clearing 

 and reforestation, that could lead to a narrowing of this exemption. 

 Several years ago, there was a similar attempt to exclude the con- 

 struction of rice levees from the exemption protecting normal and 

 routine farming activities. And being a rice producer, I was very 

 concerned about that. H.R. 3465 moves favorably in that direction. 

 In addition to the exemption of water management activities relat- 

 ing to cranberry farming, we also urge you to include similar activi- 

 ties used in the production of rice and aquaculture. 



Mr. Chairman, we also have serious concerns about the expan- 

 sive definition of dredged or fill material in H.R. 3465. Specifically, 

 it appears that this legislation would lead to the regulation of any 

 land use activity in or even near waters of the United States. We 

 believe that this is excessive and unnecessarily broad. 



In conclusion, we believe that these suggestions will greatly im- 

 prove the wetlands regulatory program and reduce many of the in- 

 equities and difficulties faced by farmers and ranchers. We look 

 forward to working with you in this effort. 



[The prepared statement of Mr. Stallman appears at the conclu- 

 sion of the hearing.] 



Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Stallman. 



Now we will go to Mr. Moyer. 



