If you don't like carbon credits, would wetland credits be more to your liking?

the state of minnesota offers developers credit for damaging or altering wetlands by allowing them to pay for construction of 'new' wetlands at a different location. this is a last resort if existing wetlands can't be preserved. here is a look at the mitigation program...

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/wetl...

effective? acceptable? why or why not?

Answer:
While carbon credits may reduce consumption of valuable resources or lessen reliance on fossil fuels, wetland credits are nothing other than a bureaucratic boondoggle. Creation of "new" wetlands ignores the ecology violated to do so, on the presumption that development which damages present ecosystems is somehow warranted by "needs" or property rights of the developers who violate the prevailing value of the land in its original state. This is how sink holes develop in Florida and the everglades continually shrink, are they going to create wetlands in Death Valley?

I Quote from your source 'Functional Assessment Methodology. A functional assessment methodology and performance standards are still being determined for the new agreement, although wetland type and the Cowardin classification system have been used' I believe they should analyze such phrases regarding Wetland Credits. Idiots.

It's all about extracting money from the private sector..

No, it is a good example of misguided misuse of a good idea, just like el banco de lengua. Or hax: someone breaking the rules, using programs to alter the skills of a player in a video game.

It is just another way of cheating.

The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.

FunQA.com

If you don't like carbon credits, would wetland credits be more to your liking?

Topic