The Ramsar Convention (or the Convention on Wetlands), signed in 1971, was one of the first international conservation agreements, promoting global wise use of wetlands. It has three primary objectives: national designation and management of wetlands of international importance; general wise use of wetlands; and international cooperation. We examined lessons learnt for improving wetland conservation after Ramsar’s nearly five decades of operation. The number of wetlands in the Ramsar Site Network has grown over time (2,391 Ramsar Sites, 2.5 million km², as at 2020-06-09) but unevenly around the world, with decreasing rate of growth in recent decades. Ramsar Sites are concentrated in countries with a high Gross Domestic Product and human pressure (e.g., western Europe) but, in contrast, Ramsar Sites with the largest wetland extent are in central-west Africa and South America. We identified three key challenges for improving effectiveness of the Ramsar Site Network: increasing number of sites and wetland area, improved representation (functional, geographical and biological); and effective management and reporting. Increasing the number of sites and area in the Ramsar network could benefit from targets, implemented at national scales. Knowledge of representativeness is inadequate, requiring analyses of functional ecotypes, geographical and biological representativeness. Finally, most countries have inadequate management planning and reporting on the ecological character of their Ramsar Sites, requiring more focused attention on a vision and objectives, with regular reporting of key indicators to guide management. There are increasing opportunities to rigorously track ecological character, utilizing new tools and available indicators (e.g., remote sensing). It is critical that the world protect its wetlands, with an effective Ramsar Convention or the Convention on Wetlands at the core.

The rights of Nature, a concept recognised by several courts, legislatures and international governance institutions, is being promoted by some non-governmental organisations, scientists, attorneys, Indigenous peoples, local communities, and others. In this article we propose a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands, consistent with the 1982 World Charter for Nature. Recognition of these rights supports the provision of ecosystem services essential to human well-being and to other life on Earth. Further, such rights could reinforce efforts to reduce wetland loss and deterioration, thereby slowing climate destabilisation and biodiversity declines. Because world scientists have warned that biodiversity loss, ecosystem degradation and climate destabilisation, which intensify wetland loss, constitute global emergencies, new approaches are required to ensure that wetlands are protected and their benefits to people sustained. The proposed Universal Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands states that wetlands possess rights to: exist; their ecologically determined location in the landscape; natural, connected and sustainable hydrological regimes; ecologically sustainable climatic conditions; naturally occurring biodiversity; regeneration and restoration; integrity of structure, function and evolutionary processes; fulfil natural ecological roles in the Earth’s processes; and be free from pollution and degradation. Recognition of these rights is seen as an essential step in efforts to stop wetland loss and deterioration.

We summarise the main findings of the Global Wetland Outlook (2018) about the status of wetlands, including their biota and ecosystem services, the drivers of change in wetlands, and the responses being adopted by the Ramsar Convention. The Outlook, which is the Ramsar Convention’s flagship publication, generally paints a bleak picture of wetland status. On the basis of these findings, we identify 10 key issues for decision makers to consider and recommend actions to implement so as to reverse the overall downward trends for wetlands. A switch from documenting the change in wetland biodiversity towards more emphasis on taking decisions is needed to implement effective responses and reverse the negative trends for wetlands. Although further data are needed, we contend that failure to place greater emphasis on effective responses could lead to the Convention becoming an irrelevant force for the wise use of wetlands.

Indicators of status and trends in wetland extent are essential for monitoring progress towards the environmental targets set by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. Here, we test the value of the Wetland Extent Trends (WET) index as an updatable indicator of trends in wetland area and its application to global and regional scale assessments and national reporting. We expand the indicator to include a regional trend for Latin America and the Caribbean and a global human-made WET index. Based on a sample of over 2000 wetland records, natural wetland extent declined on average by 35% globally, at an increasing rate from 1970 to 2015. Human-made wetlands, however, increased by 233% from 1970 to 2014. The continuing decline in natural wetland extent suggests that global targets will not be achieved without significant further efforts.

In 2008, after prompting by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) issued a regulation governing compensatory mitigation under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The agencies’ primary goal was to improve the effectiveness of mitigation projects to offset the impacts of filling wetlands and streams. The 2008 Compensatory Mitigation Rule was also designed to level the playing field for the three types of mitigation providers: mitigation banks, in-lieu fee (ILF) programs, and permittee-responsible mitigation.

After a decade of experience with this regulation, it is appropriate to reflect on its implementation. Although much has been written about mitigation banks, less attention (in the literature at least) has been paid to ILF programs and permittee-responsible mitigation. This Comment focuses on ILF programs.

The Trump administration has proposed replacing the Clean Water Rule, a 2015 regulation that defined the statutory term "waters ofthe United States" to clarify the geographic jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act. Since its promulgation, the Clean Water Rule has been subjected to numerous judicial challenges. We submitted an amici curiae brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, explaining why the Clean Water Rule, and its definition of "waters of the United States," is scientifically sound. The definition of "waters of the United States" is a legal determination informed by science. The best available science supports the Clean Water Rule’s categorical treatment of tributaries because compelling scientific evidence demonstrates that tributaries significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of traditional navigable waters (primary waters). Similarly, the best available science supports the Clean Water Rule’s categorical treatment of adjacent waters based on geographic proximity. Compelling scientific evidence demonstrates that waters within 100 ft of an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of primary waters, as do waters within 100-year floodplains and waters within 1500 ft of high tide lines of tidally influenced primary waters or OHWMs of the Great Lakes. This review article is adapted from that amici brief.

The biodiversity and high productivity of coastal terrestrial and aquatic habitats are the foundation for important benefits to human societies around the world. These globally distributed habitats need frequent and broad systematic assessments, but field surveys only cover a small fraction of these areas. Satellite-based sensors can repeatedly record the visible and near-infrared reflectance spectra that contain the absorption, scattering, and fluorescence signatures of functional phytoplankton groups, colored dissolved matter, and particulate matter near the surface ocean, and of biologically structured habitats (floating and emergent vegetation, benthic habitats like coral, seagrass, and algae). These measures can be incorporated into Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs), including the distribution, abundance, and traits of groups of species populations, and used to evaluate habitat fragmentation. However, current and planned satellites are not designed to observe the EBVs that change rapidly with extreme tides, salinity, temperatures, storms, pollution, or physical habitat destruction over scales relevant to human activity. Making these observations requires a new generation of satellite sensors able to sample with these combined characteristics: (1) spatial resolution on the order of 30 to 100-m pixels or smaller; (2) spectral resolution on the order of 5 nm in the visible and 10 nm in the short-wave infrared spectrum (or at least two or more bands at 1,030, 1,240, 1,630, 2,125, and/or 2,260 nm) for atmospheric correction and aquatic and vegetation assessments; (3) radiometric quality with signal to noise ratios (SNR) above 800 (relative to signal levels typical of the open ocean), 14-bit digitization, absolute radiometric calibration <2%, relative calibration of 0.2%, polarization sensitivity <1%, high radiometric stability and linearity, and operations designed to minimize sunglint; and (4) temporal resolution of hours to days. We refer to these combined specifications as H4 imaging. Enabling H4 imaging is vital for the conservation and management of global biodiversity and ecosystem services, including food provisioning and water security. An agile satellite in a 3-d repeat low-Earth orbit could sample 30-km swath images of several hundred coastal habitats daily. Nine H4 satellites would provide weekly coverage of global coastal zones. Such satellite constellations are now feasible and are used in various applications.