WFB applauds Supreme Court ruling

The Washington Farm Bureau (WFB) applauds the State Supreme Court for its 8-1 decision on Sept. 13 that upheld growth hearings board rulings declaring that Skagit County could consider the impacts on agriculture in its critical areas ordinance.

In essence, this ruling provided two important clarifications. First, mandatory buffers are not required by the Growth Management Act (GMA) and second, the requirement to “protect” environmental conditions does not mean “enhancement” of those conditions.

“We’re very glad to see that the court finally recognizes the need for balance in the GMA,” said Washington Farm Bureau President Steve Appel. “Among the GMA goals are a healthy agricultural economy, protection of private property rights, and a thriving overall economy. This ruling makes it clear that local governments can consider all of the goals and concerns and then make decisions that make sense for their communities.”

The court held that the county’s requirement to avoid any new harm to critical areas meets the requirement to protect critical areas.

In the near-unanimous majority opinion, written by Chief Justice Gerry Alexander, the court declared the GMA “does not require the county to establish mandatory riparian buffers.” Buffers are strips of land that are generally restricted from productive uses. Proposed GMA buffers have been as large as 450 feet in some areas. In the case of one 900 acre farm (one acre is about the size of a  football field), if a buffer of 200 feet had been imposed, the farmer would have lost 61 acres of usable land. Even smaller buffers could put farms out of business, depending on ground conditions.

The court noted that agricultural uses and infrastructure are as much as 100 years old in some areas.  “A requirement to develop buffers would impose an obligation on farmers to replant areas that were lawfully cleared in the past, which is the equivalent of enhancement. Without a duty to enhance being imposed by the GMA, we cannot require farmers…to replant what was long ago plucked up. The county need not impose a requirement that farmers establish riparian buffers.”

The court used the analogy that protecting a friend’s dilapidated car does not require one to also refurbish the car before returning it.

The court noted that the GMA’s “goals are not listed in order of priority” and should guide the development of local plans. Local governments must consider “best available science,” but may depart from scientific ideals when balancing the goals of the GMA, the court held.

Under the GMA, said the court, “counties and cities have broad discretion in developing regulations tailored to local circumstances.”

“Mandatory buffers would have done in our farms and turned them into more development. If you want to save farmland, you need to let farmers use their land,” said Ron Wesen, president of Skagit County Farm Bureau. “This ruling makes it easier to consider what is truly needed by local agriculture. I want to thank the Skagit County commissioners for protecting our farms.”

“Washington Farm Bureau is committed to working with local government, tribes, and environmental advocates to find truly voluntary programs that will benefit agriculture and the environment,” said Appel. “Passing more regulations that drive farms out of business is the wrong approach. This ruling shows we are on the right track with the voluntary approach and seeking a balance that will allow our farms to survive across the state.”

Washington Farm Bureau and other agricultural organizations are participating in GMA-related discussions at the Ruckelshaus Center , a policy resolution center jointly operated by WSU and U of W. Washington Farm Bureau is a 35,000-member advocacy organization representing family farmers and ranchers across the state. For more information about the Washington Farm Bureau go to www.wsfb.com or call 1.800.331.3276. To view the complete Supreme Court ruling and opinion visit http://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions.