To compensate for development in and around wetlands, developers are sometimes encouraged or required to create new ones. GOOD reports, however, that these restored wetlands are inferior:
…ecologists have found that restored wetlands are not as ecologically valuable as the originals—a new analysis of 621 wetland sites shows that, on average, restored wetlands regained only about three-quarters of their original biological performance. In restored wetlands, plants, insects, and animals do not reach their former abundance, density or diversity… [R]estored wetlands hold less carbon—on average, 23 percent less than untouched wetlands, according to the analysis…
“You must worry about the function that you’re losing,“ [UC Berkeley postdoctoral fellow David] Moreno-Mateos says. “It’s going to take centuries to grow back.”
See also:
“Degraded” Wetlands Can Get a Lot Worse
Photos Show: Man-Made Lakes and Stormwater Retention Systems Are No Substitute for Natural Wetlands
“A band of white pollutants and algae float at the top of a stormwater retention pond at Belle Hall Plantation. Though created to handle pollution and often full of mosquito larvae, this type of pond is considered a functioning wetland under definitions by the U.S. Department of the Interior.”