HomeMy WebLinkAboutres1991-044WHATCOM COUNTY COUNC° AGENDA ts1LL
CLEARANCES
Initi
al
Date
Date Received in Council Office:
Agenda
Date
Assigned To:
Originator - Executive
SVZ
6/25
/91
/26/91
7/2/91
Council
Division Head-
Department Head -
Prosecutor Review -
Purchasing/Budget Du:
Executive-
J UWP- -(.1:
Resolution in the matter of endorsing the Natural Heritage Plan and Goals of Whatcom County
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution
Public Hearing Needed? Yes /_lNo/XX/
SUMMARY STATEMENT.•
The resolution officially concludes the work of the Task Force and provides a vehicle for the Council to
set into motion the necessary steps to get a Natural Heritage Plan underway. It further establishes the
goals of the Plan as county policy and authorizes the Executive to prepare an implementation plan.
ORIGINATOR'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Pass
COMMITTEE ACTION (including dates):
COUNCIL ACTION (including dates):
7/2/91: Council approved but was amended. ( EJ & DVY against)
Related File Numbers. Ordinance or Resolution Number. • R E S 91- 04 4
i
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
-1
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
57
NATURAL HERT. 6/91
INTRODUCED BY: Conscnt
PROPOSED BY: County Executive
DATE: 7/2/91
RESOLUTION NO.
91 -044
A RESOLUTION IN THE MATTER OF
ENDORSING THE NATURAL HERITAGE
PLAN AND GOALS OF WHATCOM COUNTY
WHEREAS, at the request of the County Council, the Natural Heritage
Task Force was appointed by the County Executive to formulate and
recommend strategies for the preservation of Whatcom County's
unique natural attributes: and,
WHEREAS, this volunteer citizen body has diligently pursued its
mission, the result of which are its report and recommendations,
embodied in the document of June 19, 1991 which is entitled,
"Preserving a Wav of Life: A Natural Heritage Plan for Whatcom
County;" and,
WHEREAS, the Council and Executive have received, reviewed, and
considered the subject matter of this document;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Whatcom County Council, that:
1. The members of the Whatcom County Natural Heritage Task Force
are commended for their efforts and are extended the apprecia-
tion and gratitude of County government and the citizens it
represents.
2. The following goals are hereby endorsed and should be - pursued
subject to continuing legislative review as appropriate,
as recommended by the Natural Heritage Task Force in its above -
referenced report:
All goals except those addressed in Section 3 and 4 below.
3. The following goals are hereby endorsed and should be pursued
subject to continuing legislative review as appropriate,
as recommended by the Natural Heritage Task Force in its above -
referenced report, with the following modifications:
(a.) The necessary and appropriate funding levels will be.
established through the annual budget development process
as regards Goals 3, 11, 22, and 23.
(b) The amount of the bonded indebtedness described in Goal
24 should be limited to that which can be serviced by the
conservation futures levy (Goal 21) and an as- yet- to -be-
determined dedication of funds from the existing real
estate excise tax (Goal 23).
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
1
_2
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
r-z6
58
RESOLUTION - 1
(c) The initial commitment of new staffing to begin imple-
menting the Natural Heritage Plan (especially Goals 2 and
36) should be one or two- full -time equivalent positions
beginning in fiscal year 1992, depending upon the avail-
ability of fiscal resources.
4. Action is hereby deferred as to the endorsement or adoption of
the following goals recommended by the Natural Heritage Task
Force in its above - referenced report:
Goals 26 (a) , (b) , (c) , (d) , and (e) .
5. To the extent possible, all agencies, departments, and in-
strumentalities of Whatcom County government shall advance the
achievement of the above - referenced endorsed goals in the
conduct of their duties and in their operations and plans.
6. This Resolution shall become a part of the above - referenced
report of the Natural Heritage Task Force, which shall be
.widely distributed by the Executive to the public, within
County government, to interested or affected agencies and
organizations, and retained within the official records of
Whatcom County. The goals endorsed by this action may be
generically referred to as the " Whatcom County Natural Heritage
Plan."
7. The County Executive is requested to prepare and bring forth
a plan for the imple4ientation of the Natural Heritage Goals
endorsed by this Resolution and such further resolutions,
ordinances, or actions as are necessary or appropriate to
effectuate the Whatcom County Natural Heritage Plan.
8. The County Executive shall designate a Natural Heritage (or
"Conservation ") Official, whose duties shall be as generally
described in the Natural Heritage Plan. The Natural Heritage
Official shall report to the Council and Executive at least
yearly on progress toward achieving Natural Heritage Goals and
shall cause the Natural Heritage Plan to be reviewed by the
Council and Executive at least every four (4) years.
9. In carrying out his /her duties, the Natural Heritage Official
shall have the cooperation of all officials and employees of
Whatcom County government.
10. The County hereby re- emphasizes that the Natural Heritage Plan
is to be implemented with full respect for private property
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
5�
5b
RESOLUTION - 2
rights and the avoidance of public takings, as expressed in
Goals 7 and 20. ..
PASSED this 2nd day of July , 1991.
ATTEST:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
RAMONA REEVES DANIEL WARNER
CLERK OF THE COUNCIL CHAIRMAN
APPROVED AS TO FORM: I DO HEREBY CONCUR:
RANDALL J. WATTS SHIRLEY VAN Z TEN
CHIEF CIVIL DEPUTY WHATCOM COUNTY EXECUT VE -
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
DATED:
"PRESERVING A WAY OF LIFE ":
A NATURAL HERITAGE PLAN FOR WHATCOM COUNTY
Report and Recommendations
of the
Whatcom County
Natural Heritage Task Force
June 19, 1991
1
Report to the People of Whatcom County
and to the
Honorable Shirley Van Zanten, Whatcom County Executive
and the
Honorable Members of the Whatcom County Council
Dennis Vander Yacht
Donald Hansey
Daniel Warner
Marge Laidlaw
Marvin Vanderpol
Robert Imhoff
Emily Jackson
From the
Whatcom County Natural Heritage Task Force
Craig Cole, Chair, Bellingham - South Side
Mary Kay Becker, Bellingham - Lake Whatcom
Leslie Clark - Everson
H.A. "Barney" Goltz, Bellingham - Northeast
Phyllis Graham - Birch Bay
Robert Hughes - Mount Baker Foothills
Stephen A. Jones, Nooksack - Everson
Patrick Milliken - Everson
Dot Nichols - Ferndale
Ron Polinder - Lynden
William Roehl - Bellingham
Robert Tull - Ferndale
June 19, 1991
2
\,
k
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Natural Heritage Task Force commends the county
Executive and County Council for having the foresight to
commission this effort, and we thank them for allowing us the
opportunity to serve.
This report is the result of a citizen volunteer effort. No
paid consultants were involved. What the document may lack in
polish or technical complexity, we hope it makes up for in common
sense and enthusiasm. Our goal was to produce a report that is
both visionary and practical.
Scores of citizens from the public and private sectors
provided advice, assistance and support. At the risk of missing
some names (for which we apologize!), special thanks go out to
the following individuals whose 'volunteer efforts were
extraordinary:
Merrilyn Bissell
Lorraine Bonifaci
Binda Colebrook
Ann Eissinger
Rick Fackler
Abe Johnson
Holly O'Neil
Brandy Reed
David Schmalz
Jay Taber
Dr. Sylvia Thorpe
M
j
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. The Mission
III. The Process
Phase One: Defining and Organizing the Natural Heritage
Effort
Phase Two: Citizen /Organization /Agency Participation
Phase Three: Producing the Report
Partial List of References Utilized
IV. Recommendations and Goals
Summary of Recommendations and Goals
A. Structural Goals
B. Policy Goals
C. Ways and Means
D. Initial Conservation Opportunities
1. Waterfront
2. Critical Watersheds
3. Trails
4. Open Space /Agriculture /Forestry
5. Scenic Resources
6. Habitat
V. Appendices
1. Summary Listing of Recommendations and Goals
2. Map of Initial Conservation Opportunities
(Copies of subcommittee reports are available upon request'to the
Whatcom County Natural Heritage Task Force, c/o County
Executive's Office, 311 Grand Ave., Bellingham, WA 98225; phone
676 - 6717.)
4
_.. _1y1.
=/
I. INTRODUCTION: "PRESERVING A WAY OF LIFE"
Even to the casual observer, Whatcom County appears blessed
by nature. There are verdant forests, snow- capped mountains,
gleaming lakes that spill out into dramatic rivers and streams
running through miles of serene farmland and hidden meadows as
they roll toward a magnificent ocean that provides both utility
and beauty, and which is dotted with islands . that take on an
almost magical charm. The human inhabitants seem content with a
relatively relaxed and healthy lifestyle. Almost everyone
exhibits an "outdoors orientation" in one way or another.
Wildlife, from dolphins to eagles, still abound. The observer
would wonder at how nature could have been so uneven in placing
so much.beauty on one part of the planet.
Life here is the stuff of dreams to people elsewhere. To
us, -unspoiled nature is home, it is part of who we are,
regardless of social or political standing. There is something
both comforting and invigorating about knowing that, at our will,
any of us can be almost instantly surrounded by our favorite
aspect of nature, and that our daily routine will effortlessly
cause us to confront so many pleasant environmental elements.
Nature is more than something to do or a place to visit. To
Whatcom Countians, it is a way of life.
We are grateful to the early Native American stewards of the
land and to those later residents who thought to leave or provide
for us many of the natural attributes that we now take for
granted. But it is dawning on us that there is no guarantee that
our natural heritage will survive even today's living
generations. In our discussions with Whatcom County citizens, we
have detected widespread opinion that somethings must be done.
Like those who preceded us, we must add value to our community so
that- we will not be the last to experience the Northwest way of
life . A contemporary Washington leader put it this way:
"Remember, the future is not a gift - it's an
achievement. "(Gov. Gardner, 7/18/90)
The Whatcom Natural Heritage Task Force believes that its
efforts are in furtherance of the public interest and benefit,
and hopes that this report and its recommendations will stimulate
the decisive action that is required for present generations to
achieve that which they owe to the future: preservation of the
Whatcom County way of life.
5
II. THE MISSION
At the encouragement of local citizens, the Whatcom County
Council requested that -the County Executive form a citizen group
to explore strategies for the preservation . of our natural
heritage. The County Executive endorsed this effort and on July
23, 1990 appointed a geographically and philosophically diverse
task force composed of individuals who had demonstrated a long
term commitment to natural heritage endeavors.
The Whatcom County Natural Heritage Task Force was given the
following statement of mission:
With the population of Whatcom County increasing
rapidly, ever greater pressure is arising for the
development of many of our remaining natural areas.
Now is the time, while we still have ample opportunity,
to address countywide questions about.the importance of
preserving open spaces, a variety of various natural
areas, as well as the scenic beauty of our region
We have what may be a once -in -a- generation opportunity
to preserve and protect, in the public's name, those
natural features in our landscape which are essential
to the County's identity and a sense of well -being for
the County's residents.
We need to identify irreplaceable natural and open
spaces, preserve wildlife habitats, protect unique
scenic vistas, and provide public access to waterfronts
on our lakes and.sea shores.
The establishment of this task force is the
in a process for doing this that will rely in
stages on a widespread grassroots involvement
citizens.
R
first step
its early
of county
III. THE PROCESS
The Natural Heritage Task Force met numerous times in public
meetings as a full body and dozens of additional times through
subgroups.
Phase One: Defining and Organizing the Natural Heritage Effort
The initial thrust of the natural heritage effort was to
explain the mission and to solicit early advice from the
citizenry in these initial areas of inquiry:
What are the characteristics we should look for in
identifying the natural areas of our county that should be
conserved for the benefit of present and future generations?
What are the specific places and geographic areas that
should be conserved?
- What are the strategies (both public and private) that can
be utilized to conserve these special and important places?
News media coverage was solicited. Hundreds of
questionnaires were distributed by mail and through direct
contact with individuals and groups. Over a hundred civic and
trade groups were invited by writing or personal contact to
participate in the Task Force process. A dozen public discussion
groups were hosted throughout the county to provide citizens with
an early opportunity to guide the Task Force in the formulation
of natural heritage strategies.
The Task Force, itself a volunteer citizen body, worked hard
at soliciting public opinion from many sources. In this report,
we have attempted to respond diligently to the public's interests
and concerns. We believe the process has proven to be very
successful. The validity of the information and recommendations
of this report are strengthened by the county -wide, organized
input from hundreds of fellow citizens that has served as the
basis of the Task Force's conclusions.
7
Phase Two: Citizen /Organization /Agency
Participation
The Task Force received frequent briefings from individuals,
organizations, or agencies with experience or expertise in
natural heritage efforts. The Whatcom County Land Trust, Trails
190 group, Audubon Society, King County Office of Open Space,
Puget Sounders,, Fourth Corner Development. Group, Whatcom Chamber
of Commerce and Industry, and the Trust for Public Lands were
among those contacted to provide advice to the Task Force. We
looked at what has been done here and elsewhere, and heard
opinion on what should or should not be a part of our local
efforts.
A huge library of information on natural heritage matters
was amassed and made available to the Task Force and others
through the assistance of the Bellingham Public Library. It
became apparent that there-was a great deal of good research,
much of it local, from which to draw. The Task Force broke down
its inquiry into several areas. This led to the creation of the
following subcommittees, whose efforts were guided by the Task
Force members noted:
Subcommittee
Trails
Waterfront
Scenic Resources
Habitat
Critical Watersheds.
Open Space /Agriculture /Forestry
Implementation Strategies
Task Force Members
Bob Hughes, Leslie Clark
Will Roehl, Craig Cole
Phyllis Graham, Barney.Goltz
Pat Milliken, Dot Nichols
Mary Kay Becker
Ron Polinder, Steve Jones
Bob Tull, Phyllis Graham
Interested groups and citizens were invited to become members of
these subgroups and to participate directly in the strategy
formulation process. Their efforts are referenced in the
subcommittee reports and are hereby gratefully acknowledged. The
knowledge and dedication of these citizens is impressive and
inspiring.
Much of the meat and detail of the work of the Task Force
shows up in the reports of the subcommittees, which contain the
following information:
- Description of meetings and contacts
- References and resources used
- Definition of subject area (e.g., "waterfront ")
- Background report and needs analysis
- Recommended goals and implementation strategies
- consistency with existing public policies
- Coordination with other organizations and agencies
- Application of preliminary selection criteria to
possible conservation opportunities (sites).
8
Phase Three: Producing the Report J
The final subcommittee reports served as the basis for the
overall "Report and Recommendations.of the Whatcom County Natural
Heritage Task Force." They serve as additional sources of
information and recommendations.
The Task Force solicited comments on its draft "Report and
Recommendations" from a variety of sources and the document was
the subject of a public hearing on June 5, 1991 during which. the
County Executive and several members of the County Council were
in attendance. Private landowners, especially those whose
properties became of interest; were encouraged to state interests
and concerns about conservation alternatives..
Fortunately, we were also able to build upon the good work
of others, some of which is referenced on a following page to
demonstrate the depth of information available to decision- makers
as they begin to formulate a plan of action to preserve our
natural heritage.
We believe that our "Report and Recommendations" are derived
from a base of information that should give policy - makers the
confidence they need to take action.
In many respects, the actions we suggest are restatements or
extensions of prior studies and policies of the County. It is
worth noting that, twenty years ago, the Whatcom County Natural
Resources Planning Council, a diverse citizen group, pointed the
way toward many of the subjects that we deal with in today's
report. Similarly,. the Nooksack River Study, of the same
vintage, highlighted the concerns that we now share for the
ecological and recreational future of the "Mississippi River" of
Whatcom County. Most recently, the County's Comprehensive Park
and Recreation Open Space Plan, adopted in 1989, was formulated
to provide a current assessment of needs and priorities.
So, in some ways, the Natural Heritage Task Force is plowing
little new ground. But we have collected ideas and concerns in
one place where it is easier to envision what a more
comprehensive natural heritage program might encompass. If any
one thing has become clear, it is that further studies are not
necessary prerequisites to the taking of a great deal of action.
What we now need is the resolve to take action that is
significant enough to make a difference. Decisions need to be
made now to leave a generous, genuine natural legacy for those
who inherit this part of the earth.
0�
Partial List of References Utilized
Whatcom County Comprehensive Park and Recreation Open Space
Plan (1989)
Whatcom County Comprehensive Land Use Plans (and background
documents)
Whatcom County Shoreline Program
Whatcom County Natural Resources Planning Council Report
(1970)
Marine Shorelines.Study of Public Access Recreation Sites in
Whatcom County (1976)
Nooksack River Study (for Whatcom County) (1973)
Washington Outdoors: Assessment and Policy Plan for 1990-
1995 (by Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation)
Towards 2010: An Environmental Action Agenda (1990) (State
of Washington)
Natural Heritage Plan (1987) (State of Washington)
King County Open Space Plan (1988)
Island County Open Space Administration Plan (1990)
San Juan County Land Bank legislation
"Water in Whatcom County "; a Watershed Guidebook
Whatcom County Watershed Ranking Final Report (1988)
( Whatcom County Council of Governments)
Whatcom County Comprehensive Countywide Drainage Plan, Phase
I (1986)
Whatcom County Comprehensive Flood Control Management Plan,
Draft (Oct. 1990)
Whatcom County Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plan
Lake Whatcom Subarea - Background Document (1981) ( Whatcom
County Planning Department)
Washington State Trails Planning Policy Document
" Whatcom County Wildlife," Comments to the Whatcom County
Natural Heritage Task Force (1990) (North Cascades Audubon
Society)
10
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS AND GOALS
Constraints of time did not allow us to detail every
legitimate recommendation for future action that came to our
attention. Some of these are mentioned in the subcommittee
reports and all such ideas are deserving of serious future
consideration. In many cases more detailed analysis and action
by geographic subarea will be warranted.
We have here, however, outlined plenty of work to do for the
remainder of this. decade; work that is intended to make
significant advancements toward preserving our natural heritage
and way of life, while at the same time allowing for economic
growth, the viability of our resource -based industries .(forestry,
fishing, and farming) and respecting private property rights.
Our overall recommendations are stated in this report as goals
and objectives ( all referred to for convenience as "goals") that
are intended to address many, but not all, of the very most
important issues. They do not appear in order of priority, since
they are all viewed as being critical to the success of the
natural heritage effort.
For convenience, the recommendations (or "goals ") are
segregated into these categories:
Structural Goals
Policy Goals
Ways and Means
Initial Conservation Opportunities
Waterfront
Critical Watersheds
Trails
Open Space /Agriculture /Forestry
Scenic Resources
Habitat
We reemphasize the need to begin making decisions now that
will shape the future Whatcom County way of life.
11
SIIMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND GOALS
The mission of the Natural Heritage Task Force is to figure
out how to preserve the special "natural spaces" of Whatcom.
County so that, 10, 25, or 50 years from now, our children and
grandchildren living here will still have immediate surroundings
that shape the distinctively Whatcom County way of life.
The Task Force has set forth around four dozen action goals
and objectives. (For ease of reference, these are all referred
to as "goals. ") Some can be accomplished within existing
policies and budgets. Others will require new public
expenditure, updated policies, or a change in the way that
natural heritage efforts are structured... The maintenance of a
healthy economy and respect for private property rights are
concepts that are entirely compatible with our recommendations.
The Task Force has identified an initial list of
"conservation opportunities ", parcels of land given a high
priority for public acquisition or some other form of
conservation. An aggressive program of acquiring land (or land
rights such as trail or conservation easements) is absolutely
essential to the success of any preservation strategy and is an
alternative to the adoption of generalized "anti- growth"
policies. To "reclaim" land after it has been developed is too
costly, if not impossible. And, to "take" lands with natural
heritage value can be unfair to the owner. An aggressive
acquisition program is the most practical and fair way of
progressing.
Equally important, the Task Force recommends that the
natural heritage effort be recognized and institutionalized as an
ongoing responsibility of County government, working in
cooperation with various elements of "the public and private
sectors.
The Task Force recommends a two -part bond issue to begin
acquiring public ownership or easements for shoreline access,
trails, critical watersheds, open space, and other areas which
are highly valued as part of our natural heritage and are most
threatened by development. The initial issue would include
councilmanic bonds of $5,000,000 to be serviced by designated
revenues. We believe this to be a very modest amount given the
importance of this effort and the many unattended needs. At an
appropriate time, a voter - approved bond issue to be serviced by a
special levy is recommended. The amount and timing of this
second bond issue would be determined after a further analysis of
needs. A portion of the proceeds of the voter - approved bond
issue would be shared among the municipal jurisdictions of the
County on the basis of matching grants and population.
12
The following is a fiscal summary of some of the report's
recommendations for immediate. action that have a budgetary
impact.
Immediate Recommendations Annual Cost
$5,000,000 Councilmanic bond issue $480,000
(Goal #24)
Appointment of Natural Heritage $100,000
Official, Wildlife Biologist and Trail
Coordinator positions (Goal #2, #6, #36
and Goal #41)
Fourth Corner Natural Heritage Council $25,000
funding (County Share) (Goal #3)
Trail and scenic areas identification $25,000
(Goal #44)
Maintenance and operations enhancement $145,000
(Goal #11)
TOTAL $775,000
Funding Sources - $270,000
$325,000
$25,000
$155,000
$775,000
(1$ of current expense fund
revenues) (Goal #22)
(conservation futures levy; 6.25-0
levy per thousand of valuation)
(Goal #21)
(visitor and convention fund) (Goal
#25)
(existing real estate excise tax
fund) (Goal #23)
Total
13
A. STRUCTURAL GOALS
Goal 1: By- resolution of the Whatcom County Council and
Executive, endorse the goals of the Report and Recommendations of
the Natural Heritage Task Force (with such chancres as map be
deemed appropriate) and direct that all agencies and
instrumentalities of the County advance the achievement of these
goals in their operations and ylans to the extent possible. Then
have them report on progress each year to the Council and
Executive.
Comment: It is evident that the natural heritage effort will not
succeed if it reappears in fits and starts every decade or so.
Ultimate success will involve continuous, gradual progress that
is the result of constant, uninterrupted attention to seizing
upon natural heritage opportunities. Such gradual and constant
progress will also reduce the necessity of resorting to sudden,
more drastic measures which, .however warranted, are less
respectful of private property rights.
It will also become evident that consistent efforts over
time to preserve our natural heritage will be less costly to the
taxpayers.. Attempting to reclaim lost conservation opportunities
will in all likelihood exceed the public's financial
capabilities.
For the natural heritage effort to bear fruit, it must be
continuous, ubiquitous, and institutionalized as the
responsibility of all County decision - makers. We truly are at a
crossroad. We have the opportunity and responsibility to learn
from the costly experiences of other urbanizing areas throughout
the United States who allowed themselves to be placed in a
position of having to undo actions which caused them to lose
their quality of life.
Goal #2: By Executive Order (and such Council action as may be
required by the County Charter), designate a County Natural
Heritage (or "Conservation ") Official , with the authority and
duty to encourage, foster, and ensure compliance with and
achievement of the County's natural heritage goals and policies.
Comment: This specific assignment of management responsibility
is necessary to ensure that something will actually happen. To
be effective, the Natural Heritage Official will need the support
and cooperation of the Executive and Council, together with an
appropriate level of clerical and technical assistance.
Between its Open Space Plan (1989), Nooksack River Study
(1973), Natural Resources Planning Council Report (1970), and the
various watershed, shoreline, drainage, water, and sewer plans
and studies, and this report, Whatcom County already has
established the factual and policy basis for action to preserve
14
our natural heritage. The Natural Heritage Task Force has
attempted to build upon, rather than duplicate, these documents.
We suggest that the Natural Heritage Official (and /others
assigned this responsibility) review all such County enactments
to develop _a coordinated. action plan. for. implementing their
various.provis.ions...
The Natural Heritage Official should also work with the land
use and development agencies of the County to ensure that the
goals. of this natural heritage plan, where applicable, ;become
interwoven with and implemented through the County's policies and
regulations.
Possible duties of the Natural Heritage Official might
include such tasks as developing a work plan and reporting
periodically to local government officials on progress;
coordinating the efforts of volunteers, conservation
organizations, and federal., state, and local governmental
agencies and ,departments; researching. and coordinating funding
sources such as writing grant proposals and managing grants;
researching sites, titles, deeds, property taxes, etc.;
negotiating purchases, exchanges, donations, conservation
easements, and other conservation measures; recommending adoption
and implementation of policies that are needed to translate the
recommendations of this report 'and future modifications into
action to meet the changing needs of the community.; and
sponsoring education programs aimed at increasing public
awareness.
The cost of fulfilling this goal is estimated at. $40,000
annually, although much if not all of this expense. could be
offset by grants that this person would seek out.
Goal #3:. Foster public- private action through the creation and
funding of a private, non - profit "Fourth Corner Natural Heritage
Council."
Comment: As has been previously discussed, there is a need to
institutionalize the natural heritage effort as an on -going
process. There is also a need to bring together .public. and
private organizations (e.g., the County, cities, Western
Washington University, Port of Bellingham, Whatcom County Land
Trust, Puget Sounders, Ducks Unlimited, major industries,
homebuilders and realtors, sporting groups, Audubon Society,
Trails 190, Chamber of Commerce, etc.) who share an interest in
the subject and a desire to "leverage -up" their ability to take
constructive action through networking and cooperation. The
efforts of many of these groups are now significant, but
fragmented.
We think an entirely appropriate model to look to in this
regard is the Fourth Corner Development Group, which is a public -
private cooperative endeavor. In fact, we envision the two
15
organizations working together under a formalized arrangement to
ensure continuing dialogue and cooperation. The "charters" of
both organizations should recognize the importance of achieving
both economic vitality and the wise stewardship of our natural
heritage.
A modest start for the organization would involve support
sufficient to fund a full -time director and a full -time support
staffer, with appropriate office space, supplies, equipment, and
operating funds. Funding would come from both public and private
sources and volunteerism could be counted on to add to the
resource pool. The County's share of annual funding (which might
represent 20 to 25 percent of the total) is estimated at $25,000.
The Natural Heritage Council would serve a different purpose
than that of a park board,although it could work cooperatively on
projects with the various park agencies. It would provide a
forum for the gathering of organizations with a conservation
interest to launch ideas and projects; it could advocate for
certain solutions or public policies; it could raise funds and
contract for joint ventures; it could encourage private sector
initiatives; depending upon the issue; it may or may not concern
itself with government or parks. Above all, it would not in fact
be a government body.
In some respects, this recommendation for the creation of an
on -going public - private conservation organization is the single
action that stands to yield the biggest payback. There are many
things that can be done if there are people. who -wake up every
morning intent upon advancing the community's natural heritage
goals. This organization could stimulate a great deal of
conservation action by private landowners for which there may be
little or no public cost. And it could facilitate
intergovernmental coordination. (For example, we envision the
County's Natural Heritage Official holding an ex officio Board or
staff position with the Council.)
The Task Force recommends that Whatcom County .government
take the lead in forming a "Fourth Corner Natural Heritage
Council."
Goal 4: Encourage governmental entities with missions other
than the achievement of conservation to utilize natural heritage
mechanisms (such as oven space acquisition) in the course of
carrying out their duties.
Comment: Open space has obvious value as "breathing space," as a
scenic resource, and as habitat for wild species. While these
are the values that most often motivate conservation efforts, an
added benefit is that open space frequently serves utilitarian
purposes as well. Water supply, flood control, and commercial
fish and shellfish supply are examples of public purposes which
are usually carried out independently of open space acquisition
16
efforts. Agencies such as water districts, diking districts,
county public.�works, and fisheries agencies, should.envision this
natural heritage program as an extension of their own efforts and
as another possible means to carry out their goals.
Some examples of how this could work come to mind: a water
district may choose to protect the integrity of its water supply
by purchasing "open space"- around its source; a school district
might wish to shield students. from nuisance or traffic noise by
purchasing "green. belts" around schools, perhaps. incorporating
natural interpretive features; the County road and-..building
officials may wish to adjust road.design or. setback requirements
to allow the. retention of a stand of trees. Additionally,: the
Lummi and Nooksack Tribes should be consulted to determine
whether their cultural heritage sites also serve a natural
heritage purpose; this could lead to joint tribal- county
projects..
"Conservation opportunities" should be given a higher
priority for acquisition if maintaining that. land as open space
plays a critical role in absorbing flood- water, maintaining
purity of water supply, or. preserving fish habitat. Agencies
concerned with these matters should be specially invited on an
ongoing basis to nominate parcels of land which, from their
special viewpoint, have economic value in an undeveloped state --
even if that value is presently hard to quantify.
Goal #5: Establish clear lines of political responsibility for
protecting critical watersheds, in cooperation with all involved
jurisdictions.
Comment: Much impressive scientific and planning work has been
done in identifying and studying critical watersheds. Protecting
these watersheds is a daunting task because it requires the
subordination of immediate short term interests to the needs of
the future which may be fifty years off or more. This is nowhere
more apparent than where drinking water is concerned. Tough
decisions cannot be made given the currently fragmented political
authority: watershed lines do not follow political boundaries.
County acquisition efforts will be most helpful where the long
range plan for water supply, and other watershed protection
goals, are clearly defined.
Goal 6: Fish, wildlife and plant habitat, whether abundant or
scarce,' should be systematically analyzed and prioritized to
assure that well thought out balances are found between
development which is not sensitive to habitat issues and
Preservation plans which are not realistic. Realizing that it
will take time and funding to implement a comprehensive system
for habitat protection, immediate action should be taken to deal
with known high priority issues.
17
Comment: As development continues in rural and urban areas,
adequate habitat for flora and fauna, once abundant becomes more
scarce and therefore more valuable. Just as waterfront lots on
Chuckanut Bay are harder to come by for people, so too is
adequate habitat for certain wildlife species. The basic
underlying premise for the objectives and specific site
recommendations that follow is that we must now intensify our
efforts to systematically implement a program of stewardship for
the habitat needs of other living things within our ecosystem.
Our human population growth is causing significant scarcities;
our responsibility and opportunity is to act now, not five or 10
years from now.
(a) Whatcom County should develop its own inventory of
selected plants and selected animals and their
habitats. The inventory should -map selected species
that warrant attention and significant habitat. areas.
An estimate of the number of each species should be
part of the inventory and should be maintained with
gains and losses noted.
(b) An action plan should be developed which prioritizes
wildlife needs and recommends steps to be taken. This
action plan should include the following:
(1) Habitat conservation goals should be developed and
periodically reviewed.
(2) An ongoing review of development policies and
ordinances should take place to assure that they
are compatible with habitat goals.
(3) All development proposals, whether rural or urban,
should include a habitat analysis and a plan of
action for protection and enhancement of wildlife.
(4) Incentives should be formulated for landowners who
make adjustments in their development plans for
the sake of habitat protection.
(5) Whatcom County efforts should be in compliance,
cooperation and consultation with federal and
state agencies. They have established much of the
methodology and baseline data needed to assure
success at the local level.
(6) A wildlife biologist(s) should be utilized on a
short term basis (one to two years) to evaluate
the findings of this report and to refine and
expand it.
(7) A Habitat Task Force should be appointed by the
County Council to work with the wildlife biologist
18
(8)
and the Planning Department staff. Their primary
responsibility would be to oversee staff efforts
and to recommend policies, ordinances and other
implementation strategies.
The public should be provided with information on
how they can contribute to the well -being of
wildlife.
19
B. POLICY. GOALS
Goal #7:. Respect private property rights while pursuing natural
heritage goals; avoid the use of confiscatory Rractices.
Comment: It is our belief that"the natural heritage effort will
be defeated if it is seen as invading private property rights.
Whatcom County residents want something done to preserve their
way of life, but they strongly prefer that whatever is done be in
harmony with their individual rights as citizens.
As a practical matter, there is enough work to be done
without expending time, resources, and goodwill in battles over
public takings which could occur directly (through assertion of
the power of eminent domain) or indirectly (through excessive
regulatory practices). Voluntary action should be the basis of
the natural heritage effort, except in the most extreme of
exceptional circumstances (e.g.., ..to acquire- the last few
essential feet of a miles -long trail system) . We believe that
Whatcom County citizens will more eagerly join in the many
voluntary actions available if their government refrains from
forced takings of property.
In summary, we recommend against public takings.
Goal #8: Systematically review county land use and taxation
policies to ensure that there are strong incentives for
landowners to pursue natural heritage goals. Promote awareness
and use of these incentives.
Comment: This task could be assigned to the Natural Heritage
Official and /or to various other appropriate officers of county
government. open space taxation opportunities should be
aggressively encouraged. (The public benefit criteria for
assigning open space designations should be examined to determine
its adequacy.) Comprehensive land use plans, zoning laws,
subdivision regulations, development standards, and the Shoreline
Management Program should all be reviewed with an eye toward
maximizing a landowner's incentives to provide open space,
greenbelts, shoreline access, trail easements, homeowner
association maintained parks, or other positive natural features.
Incentives could take many forms, including (but not limited to)
design flexibility, - transfer of development rights, creative
mixed use patterns, density bonuses and clustering. A degree of
creativity should be allowed into the land use process where it
would attract a landowner's interest in advancing natural
heritage goals. Landowners should be encouraged to make natural
heritage contributions and "trade- offs" today in return for long-
term development and regulatory predictability.
We have all seen examples of development that is nature and
scenic- sensitive. The County should encourage more of it.
20
Goal #9 (a): Maintain land use policies that will preserve our
natural, agricultural, and forestry heritage, especially in areas
that are "urbanizing." Carefully considered land.us.e planning
and structured zoning should be major tools in achieving this
goal. This should be done with full and meaningful particiRation
of the general public and those people.most affected.
Comment: Comprehensive land use plans and the zoning laws
that implement them.are basically intended to:
- provide for the various patterns of land use which are
necessary to accommodate a community's needs;
- prevent conflicting land.uses.;.
- promote.a healthy environment;
- take into account a- landowner's desires; and
- provide homeowners and investors with predictability.
Each of us surrenders complete uncontrolled use of our
property in return for the protection that land use. regulations
provide to us as individuals and as members of the public as a
whole. The same laws that restrict what I can do on.-my land.also
protect me from objectionable practices on my neighbor's land.
Once settled upon, zoning is intended to provide a. degree of
predictability and certainty to the investor and homeowner.
Arriving at what is a "proper" or "objectionable" use of
land in an area is a difficult, subjective process. The
authority to make such decisions is ultimately vested.in our
elected officials, but many others, (staff planners, appointed
planning commissioners, affected landowners, and other citizens)
participate in the formulation of policy. As a county
"urbanizes," good land use planning becomes more complicated.,
controversial, and necessary. .And, because the decisions to be
made are so important to everyone, the process, to be successful,
must exude good sense, fairness, and integrity.
It should also be noted that the State Growth Management Act
is now being reviewed for implementation in Whatcom County. It
is expected to significantly affect first the long range land use
policies, and later the nuts and bolts of zoning. While the
effects of this Act will likely provoke controversy (particularly
in the nuts and bolts phase), it can also be an opportunity in
furthering our natural heritage goals. If the affected people
are made a part of the planning process from the very start (as
opposed to simply being asked to, attend a public meeting when it
is nearly cast in concrete), there will likely be a. superior end
product, and one which will have more positive acceptance in the
affected communities.
At some point in the not - too - distant future, the County
should review present zoning in the forested and agricultural
areas to see how it has been working and how it could be
improved. For example, the Foothills area was zoned about three
years ago, and the greater Acme area more recently. The zoning
21
in the Acme area incorporated a new "twist" in that it made a
distinction between commercial forestry areas and rural,
residential forested areas (i.e. those near roads with power and
telephone). The applicability of this should (and likely will)
be considered in a further review of the Foothills zoning.
We do.not suggest that the County embark upon a campaign of
"downzoning" to achieve natural heritage objectives. Instead, it
should focus its efforts in and around the "urbanizing" areas of
the County and, in those sections, be reluctant to take viable
forestry or agricultural lands out of those zoning designations.
The county should also give .careful consideration to conditional
uses in these areas where they might create nuclei from which
urban uses radiate, because these urban uses have a tendency to
infringe upon the integrity of forestry and agricultural zones.
Private covenants not to develop forestry and agricultural
lands can supplement land use policies. From private landowners
with no immediate plans to develop but who fear permanent
restrictions on their property rights, the County (or a
cooperating entity like the Whatcom County Land Trust) may be
able to obtain voluntary, written, recorded agreements not to
seek changes in zoning to more intensive uses for a finite
period, say 10, 20, or-50 years. This option should be set into
County policy and made available to the public with great
encouragement.
Land use decision - makers should rededicate themselves to the
goals of stability and predictability which zoning is supposed to
foster, and be willing. to say "no" to fragmented pockets of
urbanization outside designated. growth boundaries, when such
pockets do not make sense from the standpoint of overall
community planning. Zoning amendments need. to be carefully
reviewed to ensure that they reflect good planning principles and
natural heritage goals, and do not contribute to the piecemeal
undermining of a subarea plan's integrity. In appropriate cases,
landowners should. be offered the incentive of. providing a
"natural heritage offset" as an element in achieving favorable
consideration of a rezone request. Environmentally - sensitive
planned unit developments could be another means of accommodating
both the landowner's interests and natural heritage
considerations.
Goal #9 (b): Avoid the need for overly inflexible land use
regulations by engaging in a proactive program of yublic
investment, landowner incentives, and other actions aimed at
preserving our natural heritage.
Comment: Throughout this report, we have spelled out the
two principle courses of action that are available to Whatcom
County citizens in seeking to preserve our natural heritage:
stringent regulation or concerted voluntary action. To do
neither would be incredibly irresponsible, selfish, and short-
22
sighted, because we are rapidly using up our natural heritage. f`
We believe the job can be done either way and have recommended
the latter. But this approach will. take more than lip service
and tokenism; it will require devoting a significant investment
of energy and resources in implementing this Natural Heritage
Plan. Failure to commit these resources will provide support for
pursuing the other, less desirable approach to preserving our way
of life, for the job must get done one way or the other. Whatcom
County can, through a commitment to concerted action, demonstrate
that there is a viable alternative to confrontation and excessive
regulation. We can then, once again, show that_Whatcom County is
taking a leadership role in giving the term "Quality of Life"
true meaning, which is of benefit to developer and homeowner
alike. Future generations will.judge us on how wisely we manage
the natural heritage that we all agree we are blessed to have.
Goal #10: In allocating .scarce financial resources, give higher
Priority to acquiring natural heritage sites than to developing
them.
Comment: At this point in efforts to preserve our way of life,
the acquisition of land (or land. rights such as trail easements)
should be the primary (but not.exclusive) thrust of our strategy.
We must prevent irreplaceable natural features from being
developed or altered in a way that makes their future reclamation
impractical or impossible. Once acquired, a natural heritage
site can always be developed later. But it cannot always be
acquired later.
Since the resources that will be put to this effort are
limited, we suggest primarily focusing upon the acquisition -and
preservation of natural heritage sites, recognizing that monies
can be allotted at a future time to develop them for appropriate
public use.
Goal #11: Increase, within fiscal reason, the County' s. tolerance
for incurring the.additional maintenance and operation ( "M & O ")
costs associated with the achievement of natural heritage goals.
Comment: For sound reasons, County decision - makers &have been
reluctant to take on assets that will create on -going M & O
obligations. We do not suggest abandoning that policy. Nor are
we suggesting the immediate creation of new County parks that
require additional staffing to operate. We do recommend that
the County be prepared to recognize the unavoidable fiscal
responsibilities that go with ownership or control of undeveloped
land.
The natural heritage effort cannot succeed without adding
some stock to the County's inventory of beaches, trails, parks
and preserves. To be sure, there are cost - effective ways of
doing so. For example, conservation or use easements can
sometimes be purchased rather than land itself. Homeowner
23
association maintained parks can be encouraged. Volunteer
organizations should be recruited to "adopt" a park or trail and
provide basic upkeep. Critical natural areas can be acquired and
"banked" with the use of them being discouraged until such time
as appropriate plans and funding are available to bring them "on-
line". (This is known as a "buy and hold" strategy). The County
Natural Heritage Official should be seeking to identify and
suggest "M &O - efficient" strategies.
But, in the end, some money will have to be spent to oversee
lands or land rights acquired for public benefit. We encourage
the County to recognize the natural heritage effort as a budget
priority. For this purpose, we have included in our fiscal
impact summary an estimated $145,000 in additional annual "M & O"
costs. This figure should be refined as actual cost impacts
become known.
Goal #12: Consider the need to enact and enforce further
regulations or incentives that are aimed at preventing
unreasonable degradation of our natural - environment or the
infringement of one landowner's rights by another.
Comment: This is a delicate issue requiring the balancing of the
public's rights with those of an individual and the balancing of
individual rights against one another. Obviously, this is what
we elect policy- makers for and they have already put numerous
pertinent laws on the books. Still, we would be. remiss if we
passed over this opportunity to encourage County decision - makers
to weigh certain policy changes in areas which could greatly
impact the natural heritage effort.
Specifically, we' recommend that the appropriate County
legislative authorities consider, but with great care,
regulations or incentives governing these issues:
- habitat protection;
- view protection and scenic backdrop preservation;
- "scenic- sensitive" design and development
standards;
- tree retention standards for residential and
commercial development;
- control of signage proliferation in scenic areas;
- discouragement of view - destructive development
along major travel corridors, scenic "gateways" to
cities, and at highway intersections in designated
scenic areas;
discouragement of logging clear -cuts within view
of scenic travel corridors;
a "sensitive areas" ordinance.
Actions such as the clear - cutting of hillsides in the scenic
southerly approach to the County have been "red flags" to many
members of the public who expect their officials to be responsive
24
to what is perceived as environmental degradation.. Such events ^
have awakened the awareness of many to the fact that the natural
beauty of the county is not guaranteed without concerted efforts.
.The opinions of affected landowners on what is feasible must
be solicited. These issues are undeniably controversial, but
could be essential elements of a complete package of action items
aimed at preserving the Whatcom County way of life while showing
respect for property rights.
25
Goal #13: The survival and well being of fish, wildlife, and
plant habitat in Whatcom County should be assured through
development regulations which deal more effectively with habitat
needs.
Comment: Recent surges in growth and development in the county
require that we work harder to preserve and protect fish,
wildlife and plant habitat. It is to our short and long term
benefit to do so. Habitat protection is especially difficult
because it requires that we look beyond our more obvious human
needs to the needs of other living things. It means that we must
build the concept of stewardship into the infrastructure of our
planning and development process. This will be a challenging
task with great potential benefit for all concerned.
The Endangered Species Act has generated much controversy
and emotion. -Debate over the fate of the Spotted Owl is our most
recent example of the difficulty in balancing human needs with
the survival rights of other species. Lost in the heat of the
moment are the successes - those situations where sensitive
planning and development has allowed for an appropriate balance.
If we accept the premise that the quality and quantity of
habitat is of direct concern both for economic reasons and to
enhance our quality of .life, then there are positive,
constructive steps that can be taken. In the final analysis, the
state of our wildlife habitat is a sentinel; either - warning us or
reassuring us of our state of well being.
26
C. WAYS AND MEANS
Goal.: #14: Ensure that the County's real property assets are
analyzed and deployed for optimum natural heritage benefit.
Comment: This task should be undertaken by the Natural Heritage
Official with the consultation of other custodians of County
land. This goal could be advanced through such actions as:
retaining and . developing. road -ends with natural
heritage value (e.g.., at view sites or beaches);
examining the habitat, open space, "pocket- park" or
other natural heritage. potential of active. County
lands, surplus properties, or tax foreclosure
properties;
attaching natural heritage easements or requirements
(e.g... for access or open space) to lands auctioned at
.tax foreclosure sales; or
selling or trading County lands (especially, surplus
properties) to acquire property of greater natural
heritage value or to develop funds for this purpose.
utilizing street or road vacation monies as a source of
revenue for trails, etc.
Goal #15: Aggressively pursue voluntary and mutually beneficial
intergovernmental and Public - Private agreements, policies, and
COORerative efforts aimed at advancing natural heritage goals.
Comment: There are opportunities here for the making, but
someone with natural heritage responsibility (such as the Natural
Heritage Official) will need to take the initiative. Some
possible methods for advancing this goal are:
exploring with major industries their willingness to
grant public waterfront access;
exploring with the Port of Bellingham the potential for
optimizing public recreation access to its waterfront
properties;
exploring with the State Department of Natural
Resources, the Nature Conservancy, and the Whatcom
County Land Trust policies, agreements, or land
transfers which would protect urban wilderness areas,
create trail or beach access, preserve habitat areas,
or protect critical watersheds;
working with the cities on joint natural heritage
ventures or cost - shared projects; and
assembling consortia of interests (public and /or
private) to undertake natural heritage projects which
none of them could do alone.
Goal #16: Be willing to relieve private easement grantors of the
liability associated with providing Public access to their
properties.
M
Comment: Several private landowners indicated to the Task Force
their reluctance to grant trail, beach, or recreational access to
their properties for fear of liability for injury or accident.
It is a fact of state law (Chapter 4.24 RCW) that such easement
providers are protected by statutes which relieve cooperating
landowners of .liability, except for "attractive nuisances."
Regardless,,of the legal realities, our society suffers from
litigation paranoia, a disease that inhibits many constructive
endeavors. It makes sense for the County to indemnify easement
grantors from liability as an inducement to providing public
access. The County is in the business of dealing with public use
areas and would more than likely be involved in regulating public
access to trails, beaches, or other natural.features subject to
an easement. It is also extremely cost - effective to pursue
natural heritage goals through the acquisition of conservation or
public access easements. It may be prudent to purchase
"umbrella" or extra insurance to cover such risks.
Goal #17: Approach landowners who are taking advantage of open
space or forestry taxation designations about conservation
easements.
Comment: These designations, when, granted by the County,
restrict development rights for a defined period in return for
tax relief. Some of the landowners utilizing the open space
taxation system may be willing to extend for a longer period or
forever their commitment to abide by development restrictions
through conservation easements or other legal vehicles.
Philosophical or financial incentives for doing so could be
explored on a case -by -case basis. To achieve this goal, the
County can work with, and perhaps contract with, the Whatcom
County Land Trust, which has substantial experience in
negotiating such agreements.
Goal #18: Encourage voluntary conservation efforts.
Comment: There are many generous, public- spirited citizens and
businesses in Whatcom County who share a concern for preserving
our way of life. The County, through its Natural Heritage
Official, could work with the Whatcom County Land Trust and
others to publicize and cultivate the things that can be done
voluntarily by farmers, industrialists, developers, heirs, and
ordinary citizens to preserve and add value to the community's
natural heritage.
Goal #19: Utilize and encourage as appropriate the full range of
options in pursuing natural heritage acquisition, stewardship,
and public benefit goals.
Comment: There exists no single formula
accomplishing natural heritage goals. A
28
for success in
combination of
approaches may be appropriate even in regards to a single site or
conservation opportunity. For ease of reference, we list many of
them below:.
Fee Simple Acquisition
- Conservation Futures Funding
- Wash. Wildlife and Recreation Coalition Funding
- I. A. C. for Outdoor Recreation Funding
- Real estate excise tax funding
- Conservation futures tax funding
Councilmanic bonds
Voter- approved bonds
Private donations
Land swaps
Use or Purchase of Property Rights (less than full
ownership)
- Conservation easements
- Public access easements
- Trail easements
- Natural heritage use of utility corridor or diking
easements
- Purchase or transfer of development rights
- Open space taxation incentives
- Obtaining trail or river access easements in return for
government river improvement or flood control
contributions
Private gifts
Incentives for dedication of open space, public access,
and other natural heritage features in developments
Purchase of property with natural heritage value for
resale with conservation or public access easements
Regulatory Actions
Development and design standards
Development impact fees
Zoning .
Shoreline Management - Program
Comprehensive land use plans
Subdivision approval process
Density and design incentives
Transfer of development rights
Goal #20: Avoid public takings, except in the most extraordinary
of circumstances.
Comment: This is a restatement of goal #7, which is repeated
here for re- emphasis and convenience of reference. The Task
Force encourages reliance on voluntary and non - invasive action in
pursuing natural heritage goals.
Goal #21: Levy the conservation futures property tax, as
authorized by RCW 84.34.230.
29
Comment: This tax of 6.25 per $1,000 of valuation ($6.25 per
year on a $100,000 home) was authorized by the. Legislature for
precisely this purpose. It is one of the few new revenue sources
that can be employed to advance natural heritage goals. It can
be used to acquire open space, land, or development rights and
would yield approximately $325,000 per year. The tax can be
applied by legislative act of the County. Without raising needed
additional tax revenue, it is likely that the natural heritage
effort will be well- intentioned but ineffectual. And without a
proactive plan and funding to preserve our natural heritage,
public pressure will increase to "take" natural areas from
landowners through the regulatory process.
Goal #22: Determine, as a matter of budgeting policy, the
percentage of the current expense fund that should Qo toward
rAtnrA7 AaritARa or�ann_amort "Pat_ fnr agAmr7o_ nro
percent.
Comment: Preservation of our way of life will not come free.
Today's generations are "using up" Whatcom County's natural
heritage, so it is only fair that we pay- as -we -go to maintain the
livability of our communities for present and future generations.
Natural heritage preservation must be declared a budget priority
so that it does not get neglected in the annual scramble to meet
the near -term `needs of the various departments of County
government. It would be reasonable to devote one percent of
general fund revenues to new natural heritage efforts. This
would currently yield approximately $270,000 per year.
Goal #23: Allocate from the current real estate excise tax fund
approximately 20 .25% of its annual revenues to fund natural
heritage acquisition.
Comment: This is an existing tax that is collected to support
development- related infrastructure. Greenways, parks, trails,
and beaches. are part of the natural infrastructure of a growing
community, as are streets and sewer lines.
Over the past four years (1987- 1990), tax collections for
this fund have averaged around $650,000 per year. Current on-
going commitments from the fund total $135,000 per year to
service existing bond debt. Therefore, the fund appears capable
of absorbing an additional contribution to natural heritage
acquisition efforts in the neighborhood of $150,000 per year.
If dedicated on a percentage basis, more dollars would be
allocated when real estate activity and, presumably, threats to
our natural heritage, are high. During a slack economy, less
money would be made available. This economy- sensitive approach
seems attractive and logical.
30
Goal 124: As soon as is practical, issue approximately $5,000,000 F
in councilmanic bonds to finance the Initial Conservation
Opportunities outlined in this report, utilizing local revenue
sources to service the debt.
Comment: This is well within the fiscal capabilities of the
County. A 20 -year, 7.25% bond issue of this size would require
annual servicing of $480,000. The following (previously
discussed) sources of revenue could be utilized to meet the
annual payment obligations without tapping the County's fund for
current operations (known as the "Current Expense Fund ") :
$155,000 existing real estate excise tax fund
$325.000 conservation futures property tax levy
$480,000 TOTAL
This fund (and subsequent additions) would enable the County
to proactively protect our natural heritage while still
encouraging a viable and healthy economy. It will enable the
County to pursue a balanced approach as opposed to adopting a
general predisposition against growth.
It should be noted that bonding is an entirely appropriate
mechanism to pay for important matters of present and future
benefit to Whatcom Countians. Bonding is likely to be the only
way to achieve anything of real significance in preserving our
way of life. And it will never get cheaper.
Prior to making expenditures from this bond issue, the
County executive and legislative authorities should cause to be
prepared and approved a map and plans showing an inventory of
existing natural heritage sites together with those that are
targeted for some form of acquisition, also taking into account
sites targeted for action by other entities (such as the City of
Bellingham in its "Greenways" program).
We know that $5,000,000 will be too little to meet the
trail, shoreline, open space, and habitat needs' of the County..
But it is a meaningful, if modest, start. This money will enable
the public to see what can be accomplished.
Goal #25: Tap the visitor and convention tax to support natural
heritage efforts that are related to tourism development.
Comment: Tourism and nature in our area are closely
interrelated. Without natural attractions, our tourism industry
would suffer. And, frankly, tourism is a good source of County
revenue. The amount of tax available from this fund, based upon
the current level of revenues, could be in the neighborhood of
$25,000 annually. The expenditure of these funds is restricted
to certain uses, one of which could be the inventorying and
signage of trail, recreation, and scenic resources, the purpose
31
of which would be to publicize their availability for tourism
development and for the benefit of the local population.
Goal #26(a): .(Future funding sources) Give future consideration
to the need for additional sources of funding for natural
heritage efforts.
Comment: In prior goals, we have recommended natural heritage
expenditures and sources of funding that are easily justified.
In fact, we are confident that the recommended $5,000,000 initial
bond issue for.natural heritage acquisition will be only a start
in meeting the long range needs of the County for open space,
beach access, trails, habitat areas, and the other elements of
this plan.
The Task Force is certain that more monies will be needed
for acquisition in the future. But, we are not able to delineate
and justify those additional dollars at this time. More homework
will first need to be done by those who are in charge of the
County's natural heritage program. We are certain that further
expenditures will be warranted; but as a matter of integrity and
credibility, we do not specifically recommend them here.
In order that the County may be aware of some of the
alternatives, and so that its officials may express policy
preferences for future action, we include the following for
consideration:
At an appropriate time and after a further
Comment: This is a prudent and appropriate mechanism by
which today's generations can do their part to preserve our
way of life. A 20 -year bond issue would cost the homeowner
annually about 20 cents per thousand of assessed valuation
for each million dollars raised. Rather than seeking an
immediate voter - approved bond issue,. we suggest that the
County see what can be accomplished with the initial
$5,000,000 Councilmanic bond issue recommended previously.
With this experience, and further analysis, the remaining
needs can be better assessed and presented to the public.
Goal #26(c): Reserve, for up to five years, one quarter to
one -third of voter - approved bond monies for allocation by
the cities on a population and matching basis for natural
heritage projects in and around the urban areas of the
County.
Comment: Approximately 54% of the County's population live
in incorporated areas, although all residents are free to
enjoy city and county parks 'and 'natural areas without
discrimination. This method of allocation will ensure
equitable distribution of the benefits of the bond issue and
encourage the expansion of natural heritage efforts
throughout the County, while preserving local control. This
approach will also promote intergovernmental cooperation and
coordination, as has been the experience in other areas
where it has been employed.
Grant criteria should be developed to ensure that the
bond monies are properly used for natural heritage purposes
(open space, trails, waterfront, habitat, scenic resources,
or critical watersheds). But, a great degree of flexibility
in terms of timing should be allowed the Cities to more
easily enable them to achieve their match within the usual
fiscal constraints.
Goal #26(d): Consider seeking one -time voter approval to
lift the 106% ,property tax levy lid for one or more years,
with the additional revenue to be dedicated 1to natural
heritage efforts.
Comment: Counties are currently limited to raising 106% of
the previous year's property tax collections. A one -time
lifting of the levy base could generate the additional
dollars needed to finance natural heritage opportunities.
Each one cent of additional levy rate per $1,000 of
valuation would yield $52,000 annually.
Goal #26(e): Seek voter approval to levy an additional 1%
real estate excise tax, vursuant to Senate Bill 6639 (1990
Legislative Session
Comment: Again,. this is one of the few new sources of
revenue available for natural heritage efforts. It can be
utilized for natural heritage acquisition upon. voter
approval.
Goal #27: Obtain matching monies and grants from local, state and
federal govern.
Comment: There are a number of sources of funding that could be
tapped to augment County efforts. It is likely that for every
local tax dollar raised at least one additional matching dollar
could be secured from other sources.
Goal #28: Take advantage of practical opportunities to raise
revenue from non - county users of our parks and other natural
heritage sites.
Comment: Our economy is greatly influenced by tourism and it is
reasonable to ask that those who take advantage of our facilities
contribute toward their upkeep.. It is not always practical to
collect "user fees" from non - County residents; but where possible
a non - punitive, reasonable contribution should be sought.
33
Goal #28(a): Legislative approval for new broad -
hact�� 7 ne�a 7 nnti ar rQVarva cavre�pc to fvre9 ratvra 7 i�pri Lana
efforts.
Comment: Counties have few alternatives available to them to
devise revenue plans that best serve local needs. What will work
in one locality may be impractical or unpopular in another.
Conservation will cost money and counties need the authority -.and
latitude to raise revenues in ways that are acceptable to their
constituents.
Goal #29: The Executive and Council, should continue to solicit
the public nomination of conservation opportunities (or sites)
that will advance natural heritage goals.
Comment: This could occur with or without the aid of the Natural
Heritage Task Force. The Initial Conservation Opportunities
identified in this, report are obvious and should be pursued in
any event. While other opportunities are identified in the
subcommittee reports, our inventory is not exhaustive. The
public should be given further opportunities, at appropriate
times, to identify their "special places." These can then be
examined and, as appropriate, added to an overall inventory of
existing and proposed natural heritage sites.
Goal #30: Secure formal, authorized, managed public use of "de
facto" public trails, parks, and beaches.
Comment: We have included this goal under "Ways and Means"
because of its general applicability to natural heritage efforts,
especially those that involve recreation, but it could also be
viewed in conjunction with "Initial Conservation Opportunities."
This strategy is simple: follow the people to popular natural
areas which are in fact used by the public. In circumstances
where the ownership is private (or non - recreational public) an
attempt should be made to secure by purchase, trade or other
voluntary means the public's continued right to access.
Liability concerns should also be addressed, as should aid to the
property owner in managing the consequences of allowing public
access (litter control being an example).
It should be noted that many of the County's popular. spots
(Cherry Point beaches, Teddy Bear Cove, numerous mountain trails)
are on private land and subject to being withdrawn from public
usage. The public, by their usage, has already "voted" on the
importance of these natural areas.
34
D. INITIAL CONSERVATION OPPORTUNITIES
Perhaps the most difficult and exciting .aspect of the
natural heritage process is attempting to prioritize the actual
geographic sites that are deserving of attention. Where does one
start in a County so blessed by nature?
The Natural Heritage Task Force didn't have time to
catalogue every contributing feature of our way of life that
deserves preservation. That would be an impossible task k, so we
have focused on the premier ones. We state again that there are
many other sites which will be deserving of attention in an on-
going natural heritage process. Only those of obvious importance
are addressed here.
In most cases, the conservation opportunities have -been
named by general area (e.g., "Chuckanut Mountain "). It is
intended that the appropriate sites within these areas which are
to be the subject of attention will be further studied and
defined, taking into account the wishes of landowners.
To aid in prioritizing sites or "conservation
opportunities ", the Task Force utilized a set of characteristics
and functions ( "criteria ") to apply against the various
geographic candidates. The criteria is as follows and addresses
whether sites are:
threatened or endangered by development;
not now being adequately preserved.or protected;
the appropriate distance. from population centers
(nearby for public use, or not so if public. use is to
be discouraged for environmental reasons);
accessible, and /or close to major travel corridors;
interconnected with other natural areas;
- unique, scarce, or irreplaceable;
- mitigating, managing, or avoiding an environmental
problem or impact;
- associated with.cultural or historical attributes;
- serving.a multiplicity of natural heritage functions.
These criteria were applied to the examination of
conservation opportunities in a qualitative, non- numerical
manner. We suggest their refinement and continued use as natural
heritage efforts progress.
35
Goal #31: Achieve public use of at least 15% of Whatcom County's
saltwater shoreline.
Comment: Increasing public access to the shoreline was defined
as a priority need by the Whatcom County Natural Resources
Planning Council back in 1970. It was also the focus of an
extensive County report in 1976, entitled Marine Shorelines Study
of Public Access and Recreation Sites in Whatcom County.
Currently the subject is receiving the attention of the Whatcom
County Shoreline Management Program Public Access Committee.
While 15% seems like a reasonable goal, only 3 to 6 %* of the
County's 134 miles of marine shoreline is currently in public
ownership, as .contrasted with 17% for the shorelines of the.state
as a whole. , A further refinement of the targeted percentage
should be.considered as plans are implemented for the acquisition
of additional public access so as to ensure the appropriateness
of this goal. When compared to states like Oregon and
Ca= lifornia, we suspect the 15% goal will prove to be truly
modest.
Additional public usage of marine shoreline lands should
include points of access to tidelands, "tideland trails" of
several miles of continuous access along county beaches, access
points for small boat launching, viewpoints, and opportunities
for interpretive /educational facilities. This goal is consistent
with that which was also established as a goal in the Whatcom
County Comprehensive Park and Recreation Open Space Plan of 1989
( "Open Space Plan "), and is consistent with the County Shoreline
Management Program and subarea comprehensive land use plans. It
also reflects the public's sense of priorities as expressed in
the random household survey for the Open Space Plan, wherein
66.8% of respondents said that obtaining marine public access was
"very important" and 24.0% said it was "somewhat important ".
Public access can be achieved through a combination of
property acquisitions, easement agreements, donations, and
trades.
Possible Sites
- Little Squalicum Beach (including beach trail to mouth of
Nooksack)
- Cherry Point /Neptune Beach area
- Teddy Bear Cove
- Point Whitehorn /Birch Point /Semiahmoo region
- Governor's Point
*This number varies depending upon the mapping methodology used.
36
North beach access and Lover's Bluff on Lummi Island
Lily Point
Drayton Harbor
Eliza Island Lighthouse Reserve
Other sites named in the Whatcom County Comprehensive Park
and Recreation. Open Space Plan, the Natural Resource
Planning Council Report . (1970), and the Marine Shorelines
Study of Public Access and Recreation Sites in Whatcom
County (1976).
Goal #32: Conserve large,. undeveloped saltwater shoreline
parcels.
Comment: There are a small number of large undeveloped parcels
along Whatcom County's marine shoreline which, if not preserved
soon, may be forever lost for public benefit and appreciation.
These sites have unique shoreline, habitat, and .recreational
qualities and are among the highest priority waterfront sites for
preservation. Conservation efforts will need to be coordinated
with the Whatcom. County. Comprehensive Plan's intended uses for
such property.. Private landowners should be consulted about
mutually beneficial cooperative efforts and provided with
incentives to advance natural heritage objectives.
Possible Sites
- Cherry Point
- Teddy Bear Cove
- Governor's Point
- Lily Point
- Point Whitehorn /Birch Point /Semiahmoo region
Other sites named in the Whatcom County Comprehensive Park
and Recreation Open Space Plan (1989)., the Natural Resource
Planning Council Report (1970), and the Marine Shorelines
Study of Public Access and Recreation Sites in Whatcom
County (1976).
Goal #33: Develop a system of conveniently accessible trails
along the Nooksack River shoreline.
Comment: The Nooksack River is the primary drainage system in
western Whatcom County, passing near many towns and population
centers. Trails for walkers, non - motorized cyclists, fishers,
and horse riders can be located along the River on dikes and on
adjacent nearby abandoned railroad beds in many areas. These
trails would serve many different parts of the County and would
serve as a backbone for a future possible larger network of
trails that could be integrated with the trail systems of the
"river cities."
Possible Sites
The entire Nooksack system offers different and unique trail
experiences, as elaborated upon below.
M6
From Everson downstream: open agricultural lands, river
extensively diked, near population centers, appropriate
for mixed -use (bicycle, walking, horses)
From Everson to South Fork confluence: river is more
braided, with less adjacent development, more
primitive, better suited for horse and hiking trails
From confluence of South Fork to Kendall: river is
somewhat braided, narrower floodway, primitive, prime
eagle viewing, appropriate for hiking and day -use.
Goal #34: Increase well managed points of recreational access to
the Nooksack River.
Comment: Demand for recreational -use of the Nooksack is high.
These sites would serve as points of access for a Nooksack trail
system, for fishermen, bird watchers, small boat access, and for
viewing the river and surrounding areas. A system of well
managed recreational access would also help resolve chronic
problems associated with public misuse of private riverfront
property.
Possible Sites
That part of the Nooksack trail system which is downstream
from Everson is most likely to receive heavy recreational use.
Points of entry should be provided to accommodate access by local
residents along that part of the river, with a few more sites
with parking and possibly restrooms. Potential points of access
on this portion of the river include:
- Marietta
- Rayhorst Road
- Slater Road
- Ferndale Road
- Newkirk Road
- Trigg Road
- Lattimore Road
- Harksell Road
- Ritter Road
- River Road at
- Guide Meridian
- Blysma Road
- Polinder Road
- Timon Road
- Abbott Road
in Ferndale
Bertrand and Fishtrap Creek confluence
Everson - Riverside Park
There are fewer opportunities for points of access on much
of the Nooksack River upstream from Everson. Other than proposed
large parcels listed under Goal #6 of the Waterfront Subcommittee
report, potential points of access are primarily related to
38
boating access to the river and unique areas on the river.
Potential sites include:
- Hopewell Road
- Martin Road /Roberts Road
Goshen Road
Nugent's Corner
Deming
South Fork confluence
Potter Road
Strand Road
- Acme
- Nesset Homestead
- Saxon Road (upstream from bridge)
Clearwater Creek (on the middle fork)
Welcome Bridge (Mosquito Lake Road) (eagle viewing
area)
North Fork Road (eagle viewing area)
Maple Falls gorge
Note: Although not identified as "Initial Conservation
Opportunities," other important goals and sites are contained in
the report of the Waterfront Subcommittee; see appendices.
0
39
CRITICAL WATERSHEDS
Goal #35: Increase public ownership or control of forested land,
sloping land, shorelines and wetlands in critical watersheds.
Comment: Virtually every acre in Whatcom County is part of a
watershed. obviously, therefore, preserving all watersheds from
urban growth is not an appropriate goal. The goal here is to
find out which particular parcels of rural or undeveloped land
are most critical for maintaining the beneficial uses of
watershed for water supply, flood control, fish habitat, and
other practical human needs. Any "conservation opportunities"
located within the critical watersheds listed below are to be
given extra weight in the initial selection process.
Critical Watershed Areas
Drayton Harbor
Lake Whatcom
Squalicum Creek
Silver Creek
Kamm Creek
Tenmile Creek
Lower Nooksack
Fish Trap
Birch Bay /Terrell Creek
Whatcom Creek
Middle Nooksack
North Fork.Nooksack
Padden Creek
Samish River
Nooksack South Fork Valley
Note: Other important goals and information are contained in
the report of the Critical Watersheds Subcommittee; see
appendices.
40
TRAILS T
,
Goal #36: Provide the County with an extensive trail system that
is:
interconnected with communities, parks, natural areas;
within easv reach of the Countv's voiDulation centers;
exvanded by the end of the 190's to meet the 1988
demand estimates identified in the Comprehensive. park
and Recreation Open Space Plan plus the 36% increase in
demand projected by the Washington State Trails plan;
and
coordinated by a designated County staff - person.
Comment: People in Whatcom County are active users of the out -
of- doors. Activities which can involve trail use include walking
for pleasure, bicycling, hiking or backpacking, horseback riding,
and cross - country skiing. According to the Whatcom County
Comprehensive Park and Recreation Open Space Plan, "An impressive
52.9% of the population uses trails and if all trail related
activities were combined it would be the #1 recreation activity
in Whatcom County. Walking for pleasure was by itself the third
most popular activity ." Statewide, trail use is projected to
grow 36% between 1988 and the year 2000.
Trails not only offer sites to pursue outdoor activities but
they can also serve as greenbelts or linear parks linking
communities and providing non - motorized transportation routes and
relatively low maintenance (as compared with a developed park)
recreation sites. The cross - country routes identified in the
Comprehensive Park and Recreation Open Space Plan form the
backbone to which most other trails connect. Two cross - country
projects are currently being pursued by the Whatcom County Trails
Committee:
#1: The Bay to Baker Rail - Trail, on the abandoned railbed
of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, and Pacific right -of-
way combines the Dewey Valley Connection, the Sumas
Connection, and the Saar Creek Trail, and part of the
Nooksack Trail between Maple Falls and Glacier which is
already owned by the county. This route would connect
Squalicum Beach on Bellingham Bay and the City of Bellingham
with Everson, Lynden, Sumas, Kendall, Maple Falls, Glacier,
and Silver Fir Campground in the National Forest.
#2: The Nooksack River Trail which could become a reality
as diking districts are formed if public easements are made
a condition of using public funds for dikes and flood
control.
41
These two trails would significantly improve recreation
opportunities for a wide range of outdoor activities such as
bicycling, walking, hiking, horseback riding and fishing. Most
importantly, they would bring parks to people instead of people
having to drive to parks.
Despite the strong interest in trails, unincorporated
Whatcom County presently has only 31 miles of formally designated
trails of which only 14 miles are regularly maintained for public
use. There is a total of 635.7 miles of publicly used owned
trails in Whatcom county, but 90% of those are found in the Mt.
Baker Snoqualmie National Forest, Pasayten Wilderness Area, and
North Cascades National Park, and as a result are far from
population centers and are inaccessible during the snow- season
making them available only three to four months of the year.
There are about 250 miles of "unofficial" user trails in the
County. These are found primarily in the lowland hills (e.g.
Chuckanut Mountain, Lookout Mountain, etc.) generally across
state and private lands that are managed for timber production
and subject to logging. Because these trails already exist, are
located in primitive settings or semi - primitive settings close to
the majority of the population of the county, and are accessible
year -round they constitute the greatest untapped recreational
resource available to the county. However, because of the lack
of formal public access and the potential for conversion of
forest lands to other uses as pressure for development increases
they are also in the greatest danger of being lost.
The general goal here is to provide the county with a
convenient and pleasant network of trails that will ultimately
function to promote public appreciation and good stewardship of
the County's natural heritage; offer opportunities for physical
fitness, recreation, and spiritual renewal; and reduce congestion
And pollution by establishing a simple and expedient
infrastructure for petroleum -free mobility.'
There are many truly excellent opportunities for preserving
trails and areas in the less populated eastern portion of the
County and there may be some long range threats to those areas.
Nevertheless, we recommend placing initial focus on those areas
that are more convenient to population centers and,
coincidentally, more threatened from the standpoint of
preservation.
Section V of the County Park and Recreation Open Space Plan
identifies the 1988 user demand for trails for walking for
pleasure as 134 miles. With the projected growth in use of 36%
there will be an additional 48 miles needed by the year 2000 for
a total of 182 miles. Because there are presently only 50 miles
of trails formally designated (20 miles of urban hiking trails
and 30 miles of rural hiking trails) there will need to be 132
more miles of trails for walking for pleasure formally designated
42
by the year 2000 to meet the projected demand. Using the same.
formula there will need to be 50 more miles of bicycle trails and
108 more miles of horseback.riding trails formally designated by
the end of the 1901s. In appropriate locations and with
appropriate design it is possible that one trail can meet the
needs of all three user groups. I We recommend the mileage
enhancement goal formula described above in order to respond to
the present .unmet public demand along with the anticipated
increase in demand for the 1901s.
To implement this and related goals, a full -time trails
coordinator is strongly recommended. This person. can contact
landowners regarding gifts, easements, or purchases; pursue grant
opportunities;. oversee. mitigations, easements, and permit
conditions; recruit and coordinate volunteers to construct and
maintain trails; coordinate with relevant agencies; and undertake
other such important responsibilities. We estimate the annual
cost of this new position at $40,000.
Goal #37: Develop a system of horse, hiking and bicycle trails in
the lowland hill and forested areas, to provide year -round
recreational opportunities in semi - primitive settings accessible
to the majority of the population of the County.
Comment: These areas offer truly significant opportunities for a
network of hundreds of miles of trails over areas that would
offer year -round hiking opportunities. Many of our better known
trails are in the higher mountain areas and thus are closed off
by snow during a good part of the year (except some for cross -
country skiers) .
However, most small hills and mountains in our foothills
areas already have a.network of informal or "semi - formal" trails.
The land over which these trails pass are mostly owned either by
private logging companies, state government, or some other
governmental entity. It has been an informal policy that hiking
and horseback riding are permitted over these areas, with the
exception that in those instances where there is fire danger, or
other management problems, certain areas might be closed off.
This existing network of trails is in danger as further
development continues in the County. An important goal is,
therefore, to secure public access to as many existing trails in
the county trail plan as possible and to expand that system to
the degree feasible.
Possible Sites
Chuckanut Mountain
Lookout Mountain
Sumas Mountain
King Mountain
Lummi Island
43
Stewart Mountain
Squalicum Mountain
Vedder Mountain
Goal #38: Develov a system of pedestrian, nature and; bicycle
"waterway trails" in and around.yopulation centers.
Comment: There are many opportunities for trails along
shorelines within or near the County's cities and towns. (Many
of these could be interjurisdictional cooperative ventures.)
Several of -these water- oriented trails could provide access to
the larger Nooksack River Trail system, as well as providing
close -to -home recreational opportunities along interesting
shorelines. . This type of quickly accessible natural experience
is important to maintaining the quality of life enjoyed by
Whatcom County residents.
Neighboring landowners will need to be consulted as to their
views and concerns and must be assured that the trailways will be
well managed and policed and that they (private landowners) will
not incur liability.
Possible Sites
Nooksack River through Lynden, Ferndale, Everson, Nooksack,
Deming, Acme, etc.
- Wiser Lake
- River Trail (south of Lynden,
southwest along the Nooksack)
- Fishtrap Creek
- East Lake Whatcom
- Blaine to Birch Bay
- Along dikes
from Dutch Mill Mall and
Along minor waterways within urban areas.
Goal #39: DevelOR nature .trails within the County's population
centers.
Comment: It should be remembered that any "nature trail" (i.e. a
trail that leads through forest or other vegetation that remains
substantially in its natural state) can develop into a truly
delightful trail for those who travel it regularly, see the
changes during the seasons, notice new developments in the plant
life, see what sort of major or minor damage was done in a recent
windstorm, the sequence in which the plants bloom, etc. So it
should not be overlooked that even a short trail of only a
hundred yards, or even a hundred feet, can be worth preserving,
particularly if it is in the middle, or very close to a populated
area. Trails should be designed so as to sustain urban wildlife
and add to a network of urban wilderness and habitat corridors.
44
Possible Sites
within developments
along street or utility easements
connector links between trails and parks
along. industrial parks
through publicly -owned lands
Goal #40: Develop a network of bicycle, pedestrian, and horse
trails in, around, and between population centers.
Comment: Careful consideration should be given to corridors
where non - motorized travel into and out of our cities and towns
could be implemented, as well as paths extending in a network
throughout our County. It is recommended that a study be done of
what could be accomplished with all existing roadways, roads yet
to be built, as well as other corridors (e.g.., abandoned rights -
of -way). It is much cheaper and easier to acquire and develop an
intact trail corridor than it is to acquire. one in which the
ownership is piecemeal, so it is vital. to be proactive. and to
ensure that corridors are not abandoned or interrupted without
first considering trail opportunities.
Bicycling (and other non - motorized travel) is healthful and
something of a public service in reducing petroleum usage,
pollution, and traffic jams. It should be encouraged and
accommodated as a practical transportation alternative for people
of all ages.
Possible Sites
existing roadways
roadway, utility and railroad easement,- corridors or
rights of way
along trail systems
Goal #41: Secure and formalize public access to trails now
informally made available to the public.
Comment: Many trails which need to be preserved are already in
existence on. an "informal" or a "semi - formal" basis. Public
access should be secured through formal easements or other legal
agreements. There should also be some plan for on -going
maintenance, and consideration should be given to parking areas
at the trail terminals.
As was discussed in the subcommittee report, it may be
possible, without any direct expenditure for easement or
ownership, to establish long -term public access to most of this
existing network of trails and possibly network with other
trails. However, this will take a substantial amount of detailed
staff and contact work to identify ownership, contact owners, go
through the formalities of obtaining rights -of -way, establish
continuing communications to identify when any changes of the
area are going to take place, such as logging an area, etc. To
45
perform this work, the subcommittee suggests.the employment of a
County trails coordinator as an extremely prudent investment in
preserving our natural heritage.
Note: Other important goals and information are contained in
the report of the Trails Subcommittee.
46
OPEN SPACE /AGRICULTURE /FORESTRY
Goal #42: Conserve large tracts of forest, agricultural, or
natural lands (all referred to for convenience as "open space ").
in, around, and between population centers.
Comment: The Whatcom County lifestyle assumes effortless visual,
if not physical, contact with open space in the course of a day.
It has a great deal to do with our sense of place and well- being.
For many, such as the farmer, it represents a way of life, a
relationship with the earth, and a sense of values. To all it is
important.
What would Chuckanut or King Mountains be like without
trees? How would it look to travel between Blaine and Ferndale
without long stretches of open field and a miraculous view of
Mount Baker? What would living in Lynden be like without the
"feel" of agriculture surrounding us? How about Lake Whatcom
without forested hillsides? What would one's overall impression
of Bellingham be if the approach from the south by Interstate 5
was not so beautiful at virtually all times of the year? Let us
hope we never know answers to these questions, because then we
will have lost our natural heritage and our way of life.
To accomplish this goal, policy mechanisms are available, as
has been previously discussed. In addition, we believe effective
approaches would be to encourage the donation of open space by
private parties to governmental or conservation trusts, or to
purchase long -term or perpetual conservation easements from
landowners. This latter mechanism is done elsewhere (for
example, in King County) and is a good way to achieve maximum
impact for the tax dollar.
An excellent illustration of how to pursue this goal would
be a "tree preservation strategy" for urban forestry areas. A
modest fund could. preserve individual trees or individual stands
of trees in sections being harvested. Timber owners may be
willing to leave trees if they are compensated for their economic
value. This strategy would preserve a multi - storied canopy
(which is environmentally important) and also lend some important
aesthetics.
Possible Sites
- King Mountain
- Chuckanut Mountain
- along I -5 south of Bellingham
County and its communities
- along major travel corridors
- Lake Whatcom
- Other sites suggested in the
Subcommittee
and at other "gateways" to the
report of the Open Space
47
Goal #43: Take an active role in conserving and managing the
Recreation Resource Management Areas (RRMAs) identified in the
Whatcom County Comprehensive Park and Recreation Open Space Plan
Comment: Recreation Resource Management Areas (RRMAs) are
defined-as open space areas containing "large undeveloped parcels
of land having unique.or attractive natural features that should
be planned and preserved for public use." The nine specific
RRMAs identified include: Chuckanut Mountain, Lookout Mountain,
Sumas Mountain, Lummi Mountain, Stewart Mountain, Squalicum
Mountain, Nooksack -South Fork, Van Zandt Dike, and the Vedder
Mountain /Black Mountain /Red Mountain areas.
The RRMAs play a major role in the natural heritage of
Whatcom County and serve many important functions. The large
undeveloped tracts of land provide vital wildlife habitat in a
diversity of settings and are good resources for environmental
education programs. They are where the vast majority of the
year -round trail networks are located and provide recreational
opportunities for a majority of the population of the County.
The large forested hills are important scenic resources giving
the lowland resident the effortless visual contact with the
natural world which makes Whatcom County such an attractive place
to live. Finally, some of the RRMAs are also critical
watersheds. The multitude of functions they serve, including
needed commercial forestry, their uniqueness, size and their
undeveloped state make the RRMAs vitally important to manage
wisely.
Ownership in the RRMAs' includes both private and public
holdings. Much of this area is commercial forestry and within
the jurisdiction of the Department of Natural Resources under
programs that permit a variety of uses. Our Natural Heritage
Goals should be pursued in active cooperation with foresters, the
DNR, and other involved governmental agencies. The need for the
viability of commercial logging should be fully recognized.
It is not intended that Whatcom County acquire all of the
land in the RRMAs but it is important to work cooperatively with
landowners to secure conservation easements for public access and
to preserve unique scenery. It is also important for the county
to take an active role in the management of these areas to ensure
that their recreation and open space values are maintained. 'It
is recommended that the County take the lead in bringing together
the land owners, any appropriate agencies, and the public to
inventory, plan and prepare recommendations regarding the
management of these areas. It is also recommended that
everything possible be done to keep the RRMAs intact and free
from insensitive development or conversion to inappropriate uses.
As on person said, "These hills that cradle us are the soul
of Whatcom County."
48
RRMA Sites
Chuckanut.Mountain
Lookout Mountain
Sumas Mountain
Lummi Mountain
Stewart.Mountain
Squalicum Mountain
Nooksack -South Fork
Van Zandt Dike
Vedder Mountain /Black Mountain /Red Mountain
Note: Other important goals and information are..-contained in
the report of the Open Space Subcommittee.
49
SCENIC RESOURCES
Goal #44: Conduct a scenic resources. inventory, develop and
implement a plan for providing access to them, and publicize and
post their availability.
Comment: It is entirely appropriate that the Whatcom County
Natural Heritage Task Force has seen fit to include as a separate
resource category "scenic views and vistas." Whatcom County,
with its mountains, marine waters and shorelines, alpine meadows,
fresh water lakes, rivers. (in their non - flooding states), rural
landscapes and other visual delights, is one of the most
beautiful places in the country to live, work and visit. These
natural, visual assets are a significant contributor to our
quality of life.
As increases in population put pressure on the land for
housing and commercial activities, these scenic resources may
themselves be sacrificed or threatened unless they are deemed
valuable public assets and thus protected. Furthermore, as the
density of population increases and society's pace quickens, the
spiritual and physical renewal offered by our natural heritage
resources (including scenic views and vistas) will become
increasingly important. And not everyone can own view property.
Many states, like Massachusetts, Oregon, and Vermont, are
working seriously and deliberately to develop ways and means to
protect their resources without stopping development at the same
time. Because we have so much, we may not feel the urgency, but
there is no better time than now to bring. Whatcom County
conservation and development into a harmonious process. The
Scenic Resources Subcommittee report outlines how this effort
might commence in a way that will create little cost to the
taxpayer. The effort could also include a study of unique
geologic. features, a worthy topic that the Natural Heritage Task
Force was unable to explore because of time constraints.
To fund this effort, which is closely related to tourism
development, we suggest an annual contribution from the visitor
and convention fund of $25,000.
50
HABITAT
Goal #45: Acquire or otherwise protect the highest priority
habitat areas.
Comment: Previous goals have delineated the need for
systematically inventorying and identifying critical habitat
areas. The highest priority areas should then be targeted for
protection .through land use regulations or through the purchase
of land or land rights (e.g., conservation easements).
Possible Sites
Highest Priority Overall (not in priority order.)
North Fork Nooksack River (Nugents Corner to Maple Falls):
This portion of the Nooksack is important Bald Eagle
habitat, having 2 currently unprotected communal night
roosts. It is also wintering range for Nooksack Elk
and supports fisheries.
Arlecho Creek (Southeast South Fork Nooksack Valley):
Since this drainage contains a large contiguous mid-
elevation old growth stand. It is also winter range
for Nooksack Elk and habitat for a rare butterfly
specie.
Dailey Prairie (W.E. South Fork Nooksack Valley).:
This unique plant community, located near Bald Mountain
is the only summer range for Nooksack Elk. Washington
Department of Wildlife has identified the prairie as
important wildlife habitat.
Athearns Pond:
Athearns Pond is located S. E. of Acme, including the
Skookum and Edfro Creeks grainages. It is year round
range for Nooksack Elk, and supports bear, aquatic
furbearers osprey, bald eagles, wintering waterfowl
(such as cavity nesting ducks), salmon, sea -run
cutthroat, steelhead trout, and Dolly Varden.
Washington Department of Wildlife has identified this
drainage as important wildlife habitat.
Lake Terrell /Terrell Creek:
This area is an important component of the Pacific
Flyway, providing habitat for migrating, wintering,
nesting and resident birds. Washington Department of
Wildlife has designated this area and a surrounding
buffer as critical wildlife habitat.
Drayton Harbor:
Drayton .Harbor is an important fish feeding ground
marine mud flat for shellfish and migrating, wintering
and resident marine birds. Washington Coastal Zone
51
Atlas has identified this area as a critical faunal
area for migratory birds.
Fishtrap Creek:
This drainage is plant and animal habitat adjacent to
urban area.
King Mountain /Spring Creek:
This area is.an intact habitat system with a variety of
mammal, bird and plant species.
Chuckanut Mountain:
This mountain range is an outstanding natural resource
that provides habitat to a variety of common and rare
mammal, bird and plant species.
Lily- Point:
This stretch of saltwater shoreline is habitat to a
variety of bird species, including near shore
waterfowl.
S.W. Lummi Island:
Lummi Mountain is an important terrestrial and marine
habitat for a variety of plants and marine and
terrestrial animals, including two endangered species.
N.W. Sumas Mountain:
This portion of Sumas Mountain is habitat for a variety
of plant and animal species.
Governors Point:
This point is a large, unprotected, undeveloped natural
shoreline that provides habitat for marine mammals and
migratory and resident bird species. Washington.
Coastal Zone Atlas has designated this area as a
critical faunal for migratory birds.
(Please note that further technical and scientific work is needed
to confirm and /or expand the above listing.)
Note: Other important goals and information are contained in
the report of the Habitat Subcommittee.
52
APPENDIX ONE
Summary Listing of 7?Ae�nmmAt►AAti n�c arA [_ns� l a
(Please refer to text on previous pages of report for
justification and rationale.)
A. STRUCTURAL GOALS
Goal #1: By resolution of the Whatcom County Council and
Executive, endorse the goals of the Report and Recommendations of
the Natural Heritage Task Force (with such changes as may be
deemed appropriate) and direct that all agencies and
instrumentalities of the County advance the achievement of these .
goals in their operations and plans to the extent possible. Then
have them report on progress each year to the Council and
Executive.
Goal #2: By Executive Order (and such Council action as may be
required by the County Charter), designate a County Natural
Heritage (or "Conservation ") Official , with the authority and
duty to encourage, foster, and ensure compliance with and
achievement of the County's natural heritage goals and policies.
Goal #3: Foster public - private action through the creation and
funding of a private, non - profit "Fourth Corner Natural Heritage
Council."
Goal 14: Encourage governmental entities with missions other
than the achievement of conservation to utilize natural heritage
mechanisms (such as open space acquisition) in the course of
carrying out their duties.
Goal #5: Establish clear lines of political responsibility for
protecting critical watersheds, in cooperation with all involved
jurisdictions.
Goal #6: Fish, wildlife and plant habitat, whether abundant or
scarce, should be systematically analyzed and prioritized to
assure that well thought out balances are found between
development which is not sensitive to habitat issues and
preservation plans which are not realistic. Realizing that it
will take time and funding to implement a comprehensive system
for habitat protection, immediate action should be taken to deal
with known high priority issues.
B. POLICY GOALS
Goal #7: Respect private property rights while pursuing natural
heritage goals; avoid the use of confiscatory practices.
Goal #8: Systematically review County land use and taxation
policies to ensure that there are strong incentives for
landowners to pursue natural heritage goals. Promote awareness
and use of these incentives.
53
Goal #9 (a): Maintain land use policies that will preserve our
natural, agricultural, and forestry heritage, especially in areas
that are "urbanizing." Carefully considered land use planning
and structured zoning should be major tools. in achieving this
goal. This should be done with full and meaningful participation
of the general public and those people most affected.
Goal 19 (b): Avoid the need for overly inflexible land use
regulations by engaging in a proactive program of public
investment, landowner incentives, and other actions aimed at
preserving our natural heritage.
Goal #10: In- allocating scarce financial resources, give higher
priority to acquiring natural heritage sites than to developing
them.
Goal #11: Increase, within fiscal reason, the County's tolerance
for incurring the additional maintenance and operation ( "M &,O")
costs associated with the achievement of natural heritage goals.
Goal #12: Consider the need to enact and enforce further
regulations or incentives that are aimed at preventing
unreasonable degradation of our natural environment or the
infringement of one landowner's rights by another.
Goal #13: The survival and well being of fish, wildlife, and
plant habitat in Whatcom County should be assured through
development regulations which deal more effectively with habitat
needs.
C. WAYS AND MEANS
Goal #14: Ensure that the County's real property assets are
analyzed and deployed for optimum natural heritage benefit.
Goal #15: Aggressively pursue voluntary and mutually beneficial
intergovernmental and public - private agreements, policies, and
cooperative efforts aimed at advancing natural heritage goals.
Goal #16: Be willing to relieve private easement grantors of the
liability associated with providing public access to their
properties.
Goal #17: Approach landowners who are taking advantage of open
space or forestry taxation designations about conservation
easements.
Goal #18: Encourage voluntary conservation efforts.
Goal #19: Utilize and encourage as appropriate the full range of
options in pursuing natural heritage acquisition, stewardship,
and public benefit goals.
54
Goal #21: Levy the conservation futures property tax, as
authorized by RCW 84.34.230.
Goal #22: Determine, as a matter of budgeting policy, the
percentage of the current expense fund that should go toward
natural heritage enhancement. We suggest, for example, one
percent.
Goal #23: Allocate from the current real estate excise tax fund
approximately 20 - 25% of its annual revenues to fund natural
heritage acquisition.
Goal 124: As soon as is practical., issue approximately $5,000,000
in councilmanic bonds to finance the Initial Conservation
Opportunities outlined in this report, utilizing local revenue
sources to service the debt.
Goal #25: Tap the visitor and convention tax to support natural
heritage efforts that are related to tourism development.
Goal #26(a): (Future funding sources) Give future consideration
to the need for additional sources of funding for natural
heritage efforts.
Goal #26(b): At an appropriate time and after a further
delineation of unmet needs, seek voter approval of a bond
issue to.finance additional conservation opportunities.
Goal #26(c): Reserve, for up to five years, one quarter to
one -third of voter - approved bond monies for allocation by
the cities on a population and matching basis for natural
heritage projects in and around the urban areas of the
County.
Goal 126(d): Consider seeking one -time voter approval to
lift the 106% property tax levy, lid for one or more years,
with the additional revenue to be dedicated to natural
heritage efforts.
Goal #26(e): Seek voter approval to levy an additional 1%
real estate excise tax, pursuant to Senate Bill 6639 (1990
Legislative Session).
Goal #27: Obtain matching monies and grants from local, state and
federal governments.
Goal #28: Take advantage of practical opportunities to raise
revenue from non - county users of our parks and other natural
heritage sites.
55
Goal 128(a): Seek state legislative approval for new broad -
based local option revenue sources to fund natural heritage
efforts.
Goal #29: The Executive and Council should continue to solicit
the public nomination of conservation opportunities (or sites)
that will advance natural heritage goals.
Goal #30: Secure formal, authorized, managed. public use of "de
facto" public trails, parks, and beaches.
D. INITIAL CONSERVATION OPPORTUNITIES
WATERFRONT
Goal 131: Achieve public use of at least 15% of Whatcom County's
saltwater shoreline.
Goal #32: Conserve large, undeveloped saltwater shoreline
parcels.
Goal 133: Develop a system of conveniently accessible trails
along the Nooksack River shoreline.
Goal #34: Increase well managed points of recreational access to
the Nooksack River.
CRITICAL WATERSHEDS
Goal 135: Increase public ownership or control of forested land,
sloping land, shorelines and wetlands in.critical watersheds.
TRAILS
Goal #36: Provide the County with an extensive trail system that
is:
interconnected with communities, parks, natural areas;
- within easy reach of the County's population centers;
expanded by the end of the 190's to meet the 1988
demand estimates identified in the Comprehensive park
and Recreation Open Space Plan plus the 36% increase in
demand projected by the Washington State Trails plan;
and
coordinated by a designated County staff - person.
Goal #37: Develop a system of horse, hiking and bicycle trails in
the lowland hill and forested areas, to provide year -round
recreational opportunities in semi - primitive settings accessible
to the majority of the population of the County.
56
Goal #38: Develop a system of pedestrian, nature and bicycle
"waterway trails" in and around population centers.
Goal. #39: Develop nature trails. within the County's population
centers.
Goal #40: Develop a network of bicycle, pedestrian, and horse
trails in, around, and between population centers.
Goal #41: Secure and formalize public access to trails now
informally made available to the public.
OPEN SPACE /AGRICULTURE /FORESTRY
Goal #42: Conserve large tracts of forest, agricultural, or
natural lands (all referred to for convenience as "open space ")
in, around, and between population centers.
Goal 143: Take an active role in conserving and managing ithe
Recreation Resource Management Areas (RRMAs) identified in the
Whatcom County Comprehensive Park and Recreation Open Space Plan
(1989) .
SCENIC RESOURCES
Goal #44: Conduct a scenic resources inventory, develop and
implement a plan for providing access to them, and publicize and
post their availability.
HABITAT
Goal #45: Acquire or otherwise protect the highest priority
habitat areas.
57
z
O>�
z
�rn>
�>o
0=0
0
z
MM3 0
�o
O>C
Z
0 p<
=
zrrl
owl
11=4
rri
W
w