Wetlands
From Envirowiki
Contents |
[edit] Definition of a Wetland
There are many different ways of describing what a wetland is. According to the Clean Water Act (an Environmental Protection Agency Regulation), wetlands are “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas.”
Another definition given by the EPA is “wetlands are lands where saturation with water is the dominant factor determining the nature of soil development and the types of plant and animal communities living in the soil and on its surface [1]. Wetlands vary widely because of regional and local differences in soils, topography, climate, hydrology, water chemistry, vegetation, and other factors, including human disturbance. Indeed, wetlands are found from the tundra to the tropics and on every continent except Antarctica.”
Generally, it is agreed that wetlands are areas that are both terrestrial and aquatic – where the land is saturated with water, often with fresh water, and a wide variety of unique species have adapted to live in these ecosystems. Because there is such a broad definition for wetlands, it is easy to find them throughout the world. Wetlands also have very “hydric” soils, which means that some, if not all, of the oxygen is absent in the soil.
[edit] Locations of Wetlands
Wetlands are located in many different regions on Earth. They can be found on six continents: North America, South America, Africa, Europe, Asia, and Australia; and they make up close to six percent of the land on Earth. Not only are wetlands located in a great many places, but if rice paddies were also considered as wetlands - and they are by some definitions - they could be said to feed about half of the human population in the world.
[edit] The Importance of Wetlands – Utility as Well as Ethics
Wetlands are environments rich in biodiversity, which means that there a large variety of species within each of these ecosystems. Due to the fact that much of the soil in wetlands is lacking the proper nutrients required by most organisms, the species that do inhabit these environments have found ways to adapt and are very different to organisms found in other ecosystems.
One can realize the significance of wetlands in a variety of ways, but specifically through one of three ways: absolute value, intrinsic value, or utility.
[edit] Absolute Value
Something that has absolute value is something that cannot be harmed in any way – there is no justification for harming something with absolute value.
Some environmentalists and activists would argue that wetlands have absolute value: that it would be absolutely wrong to harm these areas in any way. These people could justify this belief by explaining that to destroy these areas is to destroy innocent, rare, and often endangered species. Often, though, it is easier to justify the intrinsic value of wetlands rather than the absolute value.
[edit] Intrinsic Value
Intrinsic value is inherent value – something with this type of value has value for “its own sake.” This means that it is usually considered wrong to harm something with intrinsic value, but not necessarily unjustifiable.
Wetlands have intrinsic value for many different reasons. The biodiversity of wetlands could be considered important for other ecosystems as well as simply beautiful, and therefore, wrong to destroy or damage.
One philosopher and environmentalist who does an amazing job describing the intrinsic value of wetlands – from a mostly aesthetic point of view – is Holmes Rolston III. He goes into depth explaining the beauty and functionality of wetlands as well as describing how the species there have adapted and each has its own niche. This natural beauty should be preserved due to its intrinsic value described by Rolston.
Wetlands can be also said to have intrinsic value because they have a major impact on the species which inhabit them as well as other species (through connections such as the food chain). Another intrinsic value is that humans want to preserve these areas for future generations – they should be conserved so that future generations can see their beauty or still be able to value them for their utility.
[edit] Utility
Not only do wetlands have intrinsic value and can be said to have absolute value, but they also are pertinent from a utility point of view. This means that they are useful for humans and should be preserved so that they will continue to be useful in the future. This is the same concept as sustainability. Sustainability is the concept of using materials that can be replenished, so that they can be used for generations to come. We can make regions of biodiversity sustainable by not using the resources they provide too often and by allowing them to be replenished.
Wetlands are very useful: they provide such things as “improved water quality, groundwater recharge, shoreline anchoring, flood control and...a diverse variety of fish, wildlife, and plants.”[reference needed] The utility of wetlands is another important reason for them be preserved or at the very least be allowed to remain sustainable.
[edit] Development On or Near Wetlands
[edit] The Issue of Development
Despite the recognition of wetlands’ importance, they are still disappearing – being used, developed on, etc. Although land is always wanted and developers try to find open places to build, one needs to realize that wetlands have values that are reasons for not developing on near them. The construction has a deep impact on the surrounding land – many species native to wetlands die out due to the loss in wetlands over time.
Some economists and developers have accounted wetlands as “disamenities” due to the fact that they sometimes cause unpleasant odors and annoyances from species living there – particularly from insects and other animals. However, economists realize that wetlands have many amenities – probably more than disamenities – as well. Such amenities include providing a nice view for home owners and creating a “buffer” zone from pollution and noise as well as providing wildlife enjoyed by homeowners.
The issue of development still remains, however. Many companies do not care about the amenities the wetlands provide – they often simply want a large amount of land to build on and often this is too near to a wetland. Arguments and issues of how close one can build near a wetland also come into play: how close is too close? Is there a way to develop and still not impact these biodiverse areas too dramatically?
[edit] Example of a Measure against Development: Measure K for Coyote Hills in Fremont, California
For the 2006 elections, a new Measure was proposed in Fremont, California: Measure K – the measure to “protect Coyote Hills.” Measure K proposed to designate much of the land (520 acres) between Coyote Hills Regional Park and the developed Ardenwood Farm area into Agriculture – so that a limited amount could be developed on this land. The land in this area includes undeveloped wetlands, farmland, and creeks. Measure K would have limited development in this area – allowing the wetlands, farmland, and creeks to still be sustainable land.
The issue: Opposition to this Measure was mostly supported by Patterson Ranch and Cargill Salt. It is proposed by these companies to build a subdivision with up to 1,200 houses and at least a 900,000 square foot warehouse or industrial development.
The development proposed by Cargill Salt and Patterson Ranch would bring many negative impacts on the wildlife in Fremont – particularly to the species inhabiting the wetlands there. Unfortunately, this was not as well advertised to Fremont residents as Cargill Salt’s and Patterson Ranch’s side. The opposition to Measure K claimed that Fremont would lose up to 50 million dollars if Measure K was passed. This is not mentioned anywhere in the description of the initiative, however, but many in Fremont still believed that they would lose a large amount of money.
Despite the fact that many people – especially Californians – claim that they realize the importance of biodiversity, they are often still more concerned with economics and efficiency than with being environmentally friendly. Measure K did not pass.
[edit] Hope for the Future
Fortunately, many people are realizing the importance of preserving regions such as wetlands, whether it is for ethical reasons or reasons of utility. If we continue to become more aware of why it is important to conserve and what actions can be taken to do so, we can perhaps sustain the environment for the future. Hopefully we can all learn the importance of protecting the wetlands and environment as a whole and find a way to keep wetlands around for our descendants.
[edit] Sources
- ↑ (Cowardin, December 1979)
- EPA definition of wetlands
- Rolston III, Holmes. “Aesthetics in the Swamps.” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine vol. 43,
no. 4(Summer 2000): 585-586.
- Mahan, Brent L.; Polasky, Stephen; Adams, Richard M. “Valuing Urban Wetlands: A Property Price Approach.” Land Economics vol. 76, no. 1(February 2000): 100
- Protect Coyote Hills
