OLYMPIA — The Forest Policy Board passed a rule which would protect clean headwaters in non-fish-bearing streams in Western Washington.
The rule will go into effect in August 2026, at which point harvesting trees will be prohibited within 75 feet of non-fish bearing perennial streams.
Previously, the buffer rule was that loggers and landowners were limited to within 50 feet of the waterways for half of their length.
The controversial rule is expected to place between 69,000 and 180,000 acres into expanded buffers and could reduce forestland value by $320 million to $1 billion — or about $11 million to $54 million per year when annualized — according to the Department of Natural Resources’ cost-benefit analysis.
A University of Washington economic impact analysis showed steeper losses of harvestable timber on private lands, totaling at $2.8 billion in economic impact.
The analysis showed that Clallam Counties harvestable inventory is expected to decrease from about 4.73 million board feet (BF) to about 4.53 BF, while Jefferson County would see a reduction from about 3.3 million BF to 3.2 BF.
The rule, long in the making, came down to a vote at the board’s Nov. 12 meeting, when seven board members voted in support of the extended buffer.
Five members voted against.
Jefferson County Commissioner Heidi Eisenhour, who joined the board recently, abstained.
She said she wished the board could have moved forward with more consensus and noted the difficult position she was in as a representative for counties. Counties are obliged to support economic development and to protect the environment, she said.
The board is composed of representatives from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Washington Fish and Wildlife, the state Department of Ecology, counties, the timber industry, small forest landowners, conservation interests and eastern Washington and western Washington tribes.
Department of Ecology Director Casey Sixkiller opened the discussion with a motion to extend the buffer.
“This was the deal,” Sixkiller said. “When we got started we thought, ‘We have ten years to do the studies, to show whether or not our forestry practices were having an impact on these types of water. The highest quality waters in the state of Washington. It took a little more than ten years. So here we are now, a quarter century later. Multiple studies have been designed and approved for a public process at this board that have concluded that the highest quality water in our state is being impacted. The deal that was struck was that this board would take action to address that pollution.”
Discussion leading up to the vote lasted about an hour and twenty minutes and included opposing perspectives.
“Fundamentally, what this comes down to, from the DNR perspective, we trust our water quality experts at Department of Ecology,” said board chair Katie Rose Allen, who represented DNR.
Those offering dissent criticized the process, saying that the surveys were flawed as was the process for developing the policy recommended to the board.
Small forest landowner Steve Barnowe-Meyer of Jefferson County called fixed width buffers a one-size-fits-all blunt instrument, and said it causes loss to significant usable timber which would not contribute shade to the stream.
Board member Meghan Tuttle, Weyerhauser’s western environmental affairs manager, said she supports a rule change but not a rule change of such magnitude and uncertainty.
The state Department of Agriculture Assistant Director Kelly McLain, who voted against the buffer extension, expressed concern, saying that buffers don’t get less restrictive.
“When we make changes and adaptively manage, in 22 years of working in government, I’ve never seen a buffer get less restrictive,” McLain said.
If in the future it turns out that the rule went too far, the likelihood that it will be reduced is slim to none, she said.
Ben Serr, Eastern Regional Manager at the state Department of Commerce, voted in support of the rule.
“Should this rule be adopted, the Department of Commerce asks the board to exercise its maximum authority to mitigate economic impacts on small businesses and small forest landowners, using the tools available,” Serr said.
Serr named some tools: Alternate plans, increased capacity for technical assistance from the small forest landowner office through decision package requests to the legislature, added support through the forest riparian easement program and tax incentives for small and large forest landowners through agency request legislation.
The rule is a compromise, Serr said. It is a beginning, not an end, he added.
Sixkiller said that he was unwilling to amend his motion to delay the action until Aug. 31, 2027, to allow for economic mitigation efforts to mature, but committed the work of making requests for mitigation from the legislature.
________
Reporter Elijah Sussman can be reached by email at elijah.sussman@peninsuladailynews.com
