November 1998

The Growth Management Act Is Not Protective Of Salmon

Dave Iverson, Hillary Lauder, Randy Scott, Christine Winkelman

 

Executive Summary

In 1990, new state legislation was adopted requiring local governments to address land use concerns. This legislation, the Growth Management Act (GMA), requires Washington cities and counties to take a comprehensive, coordinated approach to land use planning that will guide development in their jurisdiction well into the future. The GMA requires all jurisdictions planning under the Act to have adopted critical areas ordinances on or before September 1, 1991, after considering minimum guidelines developed by the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED). Adoptions or amendments made after 1995 are subject to the requirement to use Best Available Science and give special consideration to the protection and enhancement of anadromous fish.

While the legislature did authorize CTED to establish minimum guidelines to assist cities and counties in protecting critical areas, these minimum guidelines are not mandatory. The legislature said only that the guidelines shall be considered by counties and cities when dealing with these lands. At this time, there are not specific standards that local governments must adopt.

Further, there must be consistency in local government programs. The decisions made by local governments regarding land use planning and development significantly affect fish and wildlife habitat. No consistency makes it difficult to manage critical areas across the state. Consistency can only be achieved by developing some specific, minimum standards to which local governments must adhere when developing protection programs.

Our goal is to require local governments to adopt policies and regulations that will follow statewide riparian management recommendations developed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.

These changes will effectively protect critical areas from land uses incompatible with fish and wildlife. The incompatible approaches and variations applied by Washington’s cities and counties in land use planning and development have immense impacts on fish and wildlife habitat. These differences make it difficult to manage critical areas on a statewide basis. Establishing specific, minimum standards that cities and counties must follow would lead to statewide consistency and protect salmon habitat. The must is related to the voluntary effort that the Governor and the Joint Natural Resources Cabinet is taking in developing "Extinction is not an Option". If counties and cities want to continue to use their land use controls they need to view the above recommendation as a minimum requirements.

Fish and wildlife concerns have been considered only as an afterthought in land use planning for too long. The recommendations made above will ensure planning policies are consistent across political boundaries and will reduce fragmentation of important habitats.

The recommendations of this proposal have been incorporated into the "Linking Land Use Decisions and Salmon Recovery" chapter of "Extinction is Not an Option" strategy document and submitted as input from the team.

These changes in the will provide an incentive for counties and cities to re-assess their current policies regarding fish and wildlife habitat and will ensure consistency across political boundaries in the manner fish and wildlife habitats are managed.

Most importantly, these goals will not be achieved if the state is not willing to step up and set the example by providing for coordination between state agencies to simplify the needed program guidelines. The state agencies that have an interest and responsibility in establishing the program for state and local protection of salmon habitat for the benefit of salmon recovery need to coordinate those interests into a single state guideline for local governments.

 

Supporting Documentation:

Knutson, K.L. and V.L. Naef. 1997 Management Recommendations for Washington’s Priority Habitats; Riparian. Wash. Dept. Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 181 pp.

July 1998 Critical Areas Review Matrix Project. Dept. Community, Trade and Economic Development, Growth Management Program

 

Program Page

Return to
Program Page

Fall Research Page

Return to
Fall Research Page

Research Page

Return to
Research Page