When most land developers think of wetlands, they envision unattractive swamps better suited to condominium development than to alligator breeding. But wetlands occupy a unique and important position in the global ecosystem not only do they house many interesting species of plants and animals, but they have also proven effective in controlling pollution and floods in the areas that surround them.

Former President George Bush probably realized wetlands" important ecological roles in 1989, when he instituted the "no net loss" plan to conserve the areas. The plan in operation since 1993 mandates that for every acre of wetlands a given developer destroys, he or she must construct 1.8 new acres of wetlands elsewhere. Ideally, the plan would allow construction to continue while preventing any "net loss" of scarce wetlands.

It sounded great on paper.

But a recent study by the National Academy of Sciences reminds us that when something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. With a lack of enforcement, funds and manpower, compliance with this decade-old plan has been poor at best. In order to ensure that we don"t lose an invaluable portion of the ecosystem, the United States Army Corps of Engineers the organization responsible for issuing permits to developers and enforcing the plan needs more discretion and more money. And who better to provide this than President George W. Bush, the son of the program"s implementer?

While the original President Bush promised "no net loss" of wetlands, The NAS report indicates that this promise has not been fulfilled. Along with a May report from the General Accounting Office, it points to internal problems in the Corps of Engineers responsible for approving projects involving wetlands destruction. Without the resources to make the correct decisions and track the results, the Corps has often failed to confirm that developers actually rebuilt the requisite 1.8 acres.

But the wetlands problem extends beyond mere numbers. When wetlands are artificially constructed, the benefits they may provide pale in comparison with those of the original wetlands. According to the NAS, the new wetlands fail to control pollution or floods or to support wildlife nearly as well as the naturally-occurring variety.

When developers move to re-build wetlands, they often fail to consider extenuating environmental conditions former President Bush"s plan does not require them to do so. Under the plan, it is be perfectly acceptable to build the 1.8 acres of replacement wetland anywhere developers can find an extra 1.8 acres of land. It is essentially worthless to build a patch of wetland, say, next to a city industrial fumes, harmful chemicals and even certain types of fertilizers can easily upset the wetland"s balance of life. If the standards remain this low, U.S. wetlands will soon become things of the past.

If the Corps of Engineers was afforded ample funding and adequate power, it could better ensure that developers did not continue to deplete the ever-shrinking wetlands in the United States. Developers could be made to provide quality land in return for the opportunity to develop on the surroundings they desire. George W. Bush, who campaigned as an environmentally friendly president yet shown himself to be anything but eco-friendly, would be wise to make this a first step in making the United States more ecologically sound.