By Scott Olson Vidette Editor, The Montesano Vidette , 7/1/1999
The Grays Harbor County Commissioners passed a resolution on June 28 making it a clear statement that the county does not support Washington State Department of Ecology's (DOE) proposed amendments to the state's Shoreline Master Program Guidelines.
The resolution, which was authored by Mike Daniels, Director of Public Services for Grays Harbor County, was in response to DOE's 96 page index with proposed amendments to Chapter 173-26 to the WAC. Daniels feels that the amendment is "fatally flawed" and it could potentially cause social and economic impacts to Grays Harbor County and to other rural counties as well.
According to DOE's website, new guidelines for the Shoreline Management plan has been in the development stage for the past three years and are considered to be an essential part of the state's salmon recovery program. DOE first scheduled only three public hearings on the issue and the public comment period was to end on June 21, 1999, but public concerns on the issue has forced DOE to extend the public comment period to Aug. 4, 1999 and public hearings were scheduled for Okanogan on July 7, Pasco on July 8, Bellingham on July 14, and Montesano on July 15.
Commissioner Dick Dixon said the county feels very strongly against DOE's rule making amendments and he encouraged the public to attend a public meeting by DOE on this very issue on Thursday, July 15, at Montesano City Hall. The meeting will begin with an open house at 5:30 p,m., followed by a public hearing at 7:30 p.m.
Pacific County landowners have formed a coalition, Landowners Against Environmental Communism, to help fight for their property rights and against DOE's proposed Shoreline Master Program Guidelines. According to a press release sent by Landowners for Environmental Communism, they feel if the new shoreline rules are passed, the Department of Ecology will maintain jurisdiction 200 feet from all surface and ground water in rural Washington (with King and Pierce County exempt). The press release goes on to say that all landowners in rural Washington, including single family residents, businesses, ag and forest land, cities and towns with surface or ground water on their property will be denied any type of permit (zoning, building, etc.) unless they are in compliance with a 200 foot Vegetation Management Corridor starting at floodstage.
DOE intends to adopt amendments to the Shoreline Master Program Guidelines this fall, which will cause 39 counties and over 220 cities to update their local Shoreline Management Programs within two years to confirm to DOE's new guidelines.
Commissioner Bob Paylor said that if the amendment is passed, it will cost about $13 million for each county to redo their Shoreline Management Plans, which is money small rural county's just don't have.
"We're struggling here (in Grays Harbor County) with a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment," Daniels stated. "It is hard enough to keep up with the day to day business... To put a two year mandate on new Shoreline Management Guidelines is unrealistic."
Daniels feels that there really isn't any need to adopt a new amendment to the Shoreline Management Plan because they are being managed well already.
"We feel like we have been good stewards of the shoreline and the environment," Daniels said. "It has been our welfare."
Daniels says that Grays Harbor County has been diligent in its management of the shoreline and abiding by the Shoreline Management Act which was established in 1971. He also noted it will be expensive to implement and abide by new rules.
Daniels feels that DOE had predetermined the policy before the public actually had an opportunity to get involved, which he feels is not appropriate.
"The (new) regulations would erode the local control," Daniels stated.
Like most people reading the 96-page amended Shoreline Master Program Guidelines, Daniels has trouble with the interpretations that are generated from the document.
"The whole dialogue on this whole thing is one sided," Daniels said. The more a person thinks about it and reads the document, the more they find out the process is flawed.
"They are not in touch with the real world," Daniels said. "They lose site of that at the state and federal level."
One case in point is the terms used in the amendment to the Shoreline Master Program. The SMP requires that policies be based on Best Available Science. Best Available Science includes the opinion of a "qualified scientific expert," but does not include "Anecdotal Information," which DOE considers non-expert opinion and hearsay and is not best available science. In other words, the opinions and knowledge of land owners that have been stewards of their land for years will not be considered by the DOE and local government when making policy permit decisions.
Daniels said one thing people can count on during the July 15 meeting in Montesano is that Ecology won't have any public comment on record.
"But we're going to challenge that," Daniels added. "The county thinks the public hearing process, the SEPA process, is flawed."
Daniels says one of his biggest concerns is that by challenging DOE's Shoreline Management Guidelines, it makes the county come across as antienvironment. "That could not be the farthest from the truth," Daniels stated.
Although Daniels thinks the DOE new Shoreline Management Guidelines are a done deal, he does feel the whole thing needs to be put on hold until January when the legislature can look at it and decide if that is what they intended in 1995.
The resolution passed by the Grays Harbor County Commissioners on Monday, June 28 states:
This Resolution formalizes Grays Harbor County's position relating to the Washington Department of Ecology's proposed rule making amendments to the State's Shoreline Master Program Guidelines as defined under Chapter 173-26 WAC, as promulgated by the Shoreline Management Act, Chapter 90.58 RCW.
WHEREAS , on review of the proposed amendments, the County finds that the draft EIS is lacking in several categories to include but not limited to formal public scoping and other public process, full review and analysis of the social and economic impacts relating to not only the cost of implementation, but the economic long-term effects of the results of implementation to rural Washington State; and,
WHEREAS , it is clear that Ecology's efforts in developing the new regulations are far beyond the legislative intent of HB 1724 and therefore should require at a minimum full legislative review prior to future official action; and,
WHEREAS , this process appears to preempt the discussions of salmon restoration by including specific recovery mandates before the State as a whole has concluded a separate critical process in developing a united management strategy; and,
WHEREAS , it appears that the Department of Ecology, by its actions, has predetermined the outcome of' the public process and intends to enact these regulations substantially in the form originally published without meaningful consideration of changes as being recommended in the public hearing process.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY that while the County is in full support of' proper shoreline management and protection of our environment, we find the proposed rule making amendment process to be fatally flawed and beyond authorized scope and authority. There For We oppose implementation of these guideline amendments to WAC 173-26.
EXECUTED this 28 day of June, 1999
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON, Dick Dixon, Chairman, Robert W. Paylor, Commissioner, Bob Beerbower, Commissioner.
The Grays Harbor Chamber of Commerce has also passed their own resolution against DOE's amendments to the Shoreline Management Act as well as other cities in Grays Harbor County.
The formal public comment period has been extended to Aug. 4. Copies of the guidelines can be obtained from, and comments can be made to: Amy Johnson, Department of Ecology, Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program, P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504. The guidelines and other shoreline management information can also be viewed at DOE's website: www.ecy.wa.gov/ under "Shorelands and Wetlands."
This page created and maintained by Chehalis River Council
Send comments or questions to the: Chehalis River Council