This study analyzes a dispute between Hart Enterprises Inc., a medical device manufacturer located north of Grand Rapids, and the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. The department alleges that Hart Enterprises’ property contains a nearly one-acre wetland — an area that lies in the way of the company’s proposed expansion of its parking lot. Because of the DEQ’s ruling, the department expects the company to request a wetland permit — request that might be denied, or that might be granted only with significant conditions attached.

Readers may view a supplemental video of Russ Harding interviewing Alan Taylor of Hart Enterprises.

	(Click to enlarge)

Contents

• The Start of the Dispute
  
  
• Hart Enterprises' Viewpoint
  
  
• The DEQ's Viewpoint
  
  
• The Impact of Definitions
  
  
• 'Contiguous' to a 'Stream'
  
  
• 'Wetland'
  
  
• From a Vague Statute to Expansive Regulations
  
  
• An Ineffective Wetland Inventory
  
  
• The Hart Dispute Since the 'Wetland Fill'
  
  

• Exempt Wet Areas Incidental to Human Activity
  
  
• Stipulate That Intermittently Flowing Ditches Are Not Streams
  
  
• Define Key Terms in the Statute
  
  
• Require a Binding State Wetland Inventory