To clarify the last sentence:
Environmentalists fear the bill will mean the loss of untold acres of swamps.

I've got some swamp land...I mean "wetland" in Florida I like to sell to these environmentalists.

Walker and the Wisconsin Realtors Association. I think that says it all about this bill.

actually there was a lot of issues over that one. But wislady only comes out to throw salt everywhere anyway.

In CA the duck hunting spots are over populated with hunters and you have to take a number and get lucky just to get on the refuges. That would suck for WI considering it's completely unnecessary to develop these wetlands. It's not China or India where there is no where else to build!

wislady, I believe that was a topic of discussion at the time and some did take issue if I remember right.

Did anyone take issue when the pond that used to be where Menards is now, got "relocated"?

Sometimes the DNR acts too much like the EPA.

Wetlands are the "kidneys" of an ecosystem, you can't fill one in and "mitigate it" by building a retention pond next to a WalMart parking lot...the restored wetland will most likely never achieve the full function of the one that was filled in. See below for more:

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%...

I believe adding the mitigation plan was a good thing. Much ado about nothing, again.

The key words here, "Environmentalists fear". All liberals live in fear. Many under their blankets or still in their parents basements.

Don't see the difference in what is already in place. Familiar with a company that had to purchase 2 acres of wetland and give it to the state because they filled in a puddle smaller than an average house to build on. The puddle was 100' from an existing building.