HomeMy WebLinkAboutres2025-032Whatcom County COUNTY COURTHOUSE
311 Grand Avenue, Ste #105
Bellingham, WA 98225 4038
(360)778-5010
Agenda Bill Master Report
File Number: AB2025-603
File ID: AB2025-603 Version: 1 Status: Substitute Amended
and Approved
File Created: 08/25/2025 Entered by: KSmith@co.whatcom.wa.us
Department: Council Office File Type: Resolution
Assigned to: Council Climate Action and Natural Resources Committee Final Action: 10/07/2025
Agenda Date: 10/07/2025 Enactment #: RES 2025-032
Related Files:
Primary Contact Email: ksmith@co.whatcom.wa.us
TITLE FOR AGENDA ITEM:
Resolution receiving the Forest Resilience Plan submitted by the Forest Resilience Task Force
SUMMARY STATEMENT OR LEGAL NOTICE LANGUAGE:
none
HISTORY OF LEGISLATIVE FILE
Date: Acting Body:
Action:
Sent To:
10/07/2025 Council Climate Action and Natural SUBSTITUTE
Resources Committee RECOMMENDED FOR
APPROVAL WITH
PROPOSED
AMENDMENT(S)
Aye: 2 Donovan, and Galloway
Nay: 1 Stremler
10/07/2025 Council SUBSTITUTE APPROVED
AS AMENDED
Aye: 7 Buchanan, Byrd, Donovan, Elenbaas, Galloway, Scanlon, and Stremler
Nay: 0
Attachments: Proposed Resolution, Exhibit A - Forest Resilience Plan, Presentation, Memo - Forest Advisory
Committee, Substitute Resolution - Forest Advisory Committee, Substitute Resolution - revised in
Whatcom County Page 1 Printed on 101812025
Agenda Bill Master Report Continued (AB2025-603)
committee 10.7.2025
Whatcom County Page 2 Printed on 101812025
PROPOSED BY: GALLOWAY
INTRODUCED: OCTOBER 7, 2025
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-032
RECEIVING THE FOREST RESILIENCE PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE
FOREST RESILIENCE TASK FORCE
WHEREAS, Whatcom County has several local planning and regulatory documents with
a nexus to forests, including but not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan, Climate Action Plan,
WRIA 1 Salmonid Recovery Plan, Shoreline Management Plan, Critical Areas Ordinance,
Comprehensive Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan, and Lake Whatcom Management
Program Work Plan; and
WHEREAS, on August 9, 2022, the Whatcom County Council passed Resolution
2022-036 establishing priorities for Whatcom County's 2025 Comprehensive Plan
update, which included several strategies and actions to support climate resilient
forests and a thriving timber economy; and
WHEREAS, on October 10, 2023, the Whatcom County Council adopted Ordinance
2023-058 establishing the Forest Resilience Task Force to develop a comprehensive forest
resilience plan for Whatcom County; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance 2023-058 tasked the Forest Resilience Task Force with
reviewing county policies, engaging relevant stakeholders, incorporating community values,
and engaging science and evidence -based strategies to achieve the following priorities:
• Sustaining a prosperous timber economy,
• Restoring healthy forest ecosystems for fish and wildlife,
• Supporting robust recreation opportunities,
• Improving watershed health,
• Addressing stream high and low flow issues,
• Enhancing carbon sequestration and storage,
• Improving wildfire, pest, and disease resilience, and
• Increasing the overall resilience of Whatcom County forests to climate impacts;
and
WHEREAS, the Task Force met monthly from July 15, 2024 to September 15, 2025,
with numerous subcommittee meetings throughout that period; and
WHEREAS, the Task Force submitted the Forest Resilience Plan to Council on
September 25, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the Forest Resilience Task Force was established for a limited duration and
tasked solely with completing the Forest Resilience Plan, and, having completed its work, the
Task Force will sunset per WCC 2.170.015; and
WHEREAS, the Forest Resilience Plan outlines proposes next steps that the county,
tribes, and stakeholders can take to promote the resilience of county forests, including:
• Soliciting comments from additional advisory committees,
• Continuing government -to -government consultation with Tribes,
• Providing an opportunity for public comment,
• Seeking comments and recommendations from the County Executive,
• Establishing a committee to implement the plan, including incorporating
feedback from groups identified above, recommending governance and
management mechanisms to advance early priorities, and drafting an
implementation plan and budget for recommended early actions, and
• Publishing and distributing the plan; and
WHEREAS, Whatcom County benefits from ongoing coordination and collaboration on
all forest related issues across local, state, federal and tribal governments as well as continued
engagement and advisement from technical experts, industry, conservation organizations,
community, and other stakeholders; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance 2025-011 amending Whatcom County Code Chapter 2.123
Forest Advisory Committee was adopted by the Whatcom County Council on February 25,
2025, which expanded the scope and membership of the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC);
and
WHEREAS, Ordinance 2025-011 identified a need for FAC as a council -appointed
committee to advise the county on the ongoing work of managing forestland for multiple uses
and outcomes as determined by the Forest Resilience Plan; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance 2025-011 identified FAC as the advisory group best positioned
to provide ongoing guidance to county leaders on a wider scope of issues related to forests
and forestry and to track the progress of the county's related plans and priorities; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance 2025-011 expanded the function of the FAC to include reviewing
and providing recommendations related to forest management plans and other plans, policies,
and proposals which directly affect forest lands and forest resilience in Whatcom County; and
WHEREAS, the FAC reviewed the Forest Resilience Plan and finds: (1) the Goals and
Objectives generally acceptable, (2) uncertainty as to what ownerships fall under the Plan's
various recommendations, and (3) the Actions too broad, lacking economic, environmental, or
social cost benefit analysis, and requiring costly resources to implement; and
WHEREAS, the FAC identified outdated information, inaccuracies, and incorrect
citations in the Plan, and FAC members are committed to working with county staff to correct
these; and
WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Council recognizes the FAC may require additional
staff capacity to accomplish a body of work of this scope and scale and will work
collaboratively with the Executive's Office to try to meet those needs in good faith.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Whatcom County Council that the
Council receives Exhibit A, the Forest Resilience Plan, as submitted by the Forest Resilience
Task Force as an initial draft, and commits to supporting ongoing work related to forest
resilience in Whatcom County, which may include the provision of sufficient county staff
support; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Whatcom County Council that the Forest Advisory
Committee shall develop a proposed Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, for consideration
and formal adoption by the County and will annually propose updates to the adopted Forest
Resilience Plan, including proposed changes to, but not limited to, the following sections: (1)
Executive Summary, (2) Background, (3) Forest Assets, (4) Whatcom County Programs and
Resources, and (5) Recommended Actions; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Whatcom County Council that the Forest Advisory
Committee will provide the County with oversight recommendations for the Forest Resilience
Plan consistent with WCC Chapter 2.123 (Forest Advisory Committee), including
recommending updates at least once every five years; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED by the Whatcom County Council that the Forest Advisory
Committee shall continue to provide implementation recommendations to the County and
guidance to the Council upon request, and shall also review and update the proposed next
steps section of the Forest Resilience Plan, recommending actions to support the
implementation of ongoing work as outlined in the Forest Resilience Task Force draft Forest
Resilience Plan.
APPROVED this 7th day of October , 2025
\
ATTEST: Nj
> e �.
Cathy Halka, Clerk of the,.Councih
�, i f + r_ C im
APPROVED A5' TO FORM
Chris Quinn by email (10/7/25-ko)
Civil Deputy Prosecutor
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
K ylee CAlloway, Council Chair
Whatcorn County
Forest ResiLi
po
. ., it ` 1 i .! •' I.
,.ref_ ,,���• - ''r!%`
ence Plan
September 2025
Prepared for Whatcom
County CounciL by
Triangle Associates
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan
September 2025
Table of Contents
ExecutiveSummary................................................................................................................ 3
Background............................................. ....................... e..............................................3
Description of Forest Assets and Challenges .................. .............. ...................................10
Approach/Methodology............................................ .. .......... � j........................20
Goals, Objectives, and Actions..........................................................................................24
Existing Forest Management Resources in WV �m Coun 33
Collaboration Framework ................................ .................................................39
Proposed Next Steps ...............
References .............................
Appendices ........................ .,
Appendix A. Commu' .yVaLL
...........................................................40
............................................................42
............................................................46
............................................................46
Whatcom County , -est Resilif icy Cimmunity Survey........................................................48
Appendix B. Policy Docui, nt' ,al, iis....................................................................................55
AppendixC. Definitions ........................................................................................................57
Cover photo credit: T. Abe Lloyd
The following Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan was prepared by the Forest Resilience Task
Force, Dr. Dave Peterson, and Triangle Associates for consideration by the Whatcom County
Council.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 2
Executive Summary
The Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan (Plan) outlines a coordinated approach to
strengthening forest resilience, sustaining economic benefits, and addressing climate and wildfire
risks across Whatcom County's forested landscapes. Ordinance 2023-058 directed Whatcom
County Council to establish a multi -departmental, multidisciplinary Forest Resilience Task Force
(Task Force) to draft the Plan. The purpose of the Plan is to create a collaborative framework for
local, state, federal, and tribal governments and relevant stakeholders on issues relating to forest
management. The Plan emphasizes maintaining a viable timber industry while diversifying markets,
developing workforce capacity, and supporting sustainable recreation that benefits local
communities. In addition, the Plan identifies actions to reduce risks from wildfire, disease, and
climate impacts while conserving biodiversity, protecting watershe, ., and promoting ecosystem
services. To achieve these goals and meet the socio-economic r A ecological challenges facing
Whatcom County, the Plan recommends a collaboration fray- Iwo, `o align county, tribal, state,
federal, private, and nonprofit efforts around future fores* . ianageme, -,oats, ohjectives, and
actions. The Task Force acknowledges that some eler, ots of the Plan wt. e r, epared with limited
community input or are incomplete by necessity, prin. -ily (' --to project tame constraints, and the
Task Force encourages the County and partners to build, this work w ;iere the Task Force could
not.
1. Background
Characteristics and Value of Wt. -c-om (' — Fort. its
The management of forest-' ' ^'hatc,. 'i County has evolved overtime, reflecting shifts in market
demands and economi ,)rioritiet, nvir, mer. al understanding and conservation policies,
community desires, a, ' a changing )rest r cosystem. Historically, clearcut logging dominated
forest management, with, �vate,s Ae and federal lands producing most of the timber. Between
1965 and 2017, private fores - s P.;counted for 59% of total harvested volume, while state lands
contributed 26%, and federal Lan.,s produced 15% until stricter protections for old -growth forests
were enacted in 1993 (Whatcom County 2025).
Currently, 68% of Whatcom forestland is federal (38% U.S. Forest Service, 30% National Park
Service), 21 % is private, 11 % is Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR)/County, and
less than 1 % is Tribal (WFPA 2007). Forest ages in Whatcom County are influenced by past
disturbances, especially timber harvest with many acres in their second or third rotation. Efforts to
conserve mature and old growth forests have increased, with initiatives like the Climate
Commitment Act (Washington Department of Ecology 2021) funding the protection of 650 acres of
mature forests in Whatcom County. Community -driven projects such as the Stewart Mountain
Community Forest aim to balance sustainable forestry with watershed health and ecological
benefits. Currently, about 6,400 acres of mature forests remain under DNR timber management in
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 3
the county. This highlights ongoing efforts to preserve older forests while managing younger stands
for economic and environmental purposes.
Figure 1. Vaccinium membranaceum Bla. Llug ;per, y in rjoat Mountain. Photo credit: T. Abe Lloyd.
Whatcom County forest �,ov, an, enefits, or local communities and the region, including
timber production, of - ,00r recrea n, fu. ,ct'inal watersheds, water supply and flood control,
wildlife habitat, carbon . iuestrati i, an a spiritual/cultural values. These benefits are greater
when forest land remains a. `-reJ rrgmentation is minimal, and forests are healthy (Haddad et
al. 2015).
The economic value of forestry in Whatcom County is significant, contributing to both the local and
state economy (WADNR n.d.). In 2021, Whatcom County had 1,983 directjobs in the forest
products industry. Including indirect impacts, the totaljob count was 4,781 (WFPA 2021). The
industry paid $112,823,946 in direct wages and $254,996,195 in total wages in the County.
Whatcom County helps fund local services with revenue from timber harvests on state trust lands.
In Washington, timber harvests are subject to a 5% excise tax based on the value of the wood, and
counties generally receive 4% of that amount. This applies to harvests on both public and private
lands. For example, the Mount Baker School District gets about $1.2 million each year from State
Forest revenue, making up roughly 3 to 4% of its annual budget.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 4
Outdoor recreation in Whatcom County enhances the quality of life for residents and visitors from
the Northwest and beyond. Whatcom County residents average 72 participant -days per year
(equal to about one recreation visit every 5 days), with 14 million participant -days annually for all
recreation activities (Flores and Schwartz 2015). Extensive forest and mountainous landscapes
enhance the reputation of this area as a good place to live, work, and recreate, attracting talented
professionals to local communities.
Recreation also contributes significant economic benefits to the region. For example, residents
and visitors spend over $700 million on outdoor recreation in Whatcom County each year. This
spending supports over 6,500 jobs (3,700 in the County) across 280 recreation -related businesses
that generate a total revenue of $500 million. Recreation in public waters accounts for $132 million
in annual spending (Flores and Schwartz 2015).
Healthy forested watersheds provide a wide range of values to Wh- .;om County residents and
beyond. These values include clean water for human consume' . irrigation, and industrial use;
fish habitat in streams, lakes, and the Salish Sea; recreationG_ uses, q., boating, fishing); and
hydroelectric power. A commitment to long-term maintF ance and res. -ation ,f healthy forest
Landscapes is critical to ensuring healthy watersheds .o the c' ntext of forest resilience and
ensuring healthy watersheds and ecosystem/watershr ;F , ices, forest,. ianagement affects
summer and fall streamflow. Research condu-ted in Oreg (Moore F, al. 2004, Burt et al. 2015,
Perry and Jones 2016, and Segura 2020) and V, sr,,. ' -n (Dic.. rsF n-Lange et at. 2022, Hall et at.
2018) has shown that even -aged clearcut foreS'L m , reu_ ,e .ummer and fall streamf Lows.
Therefore, promoting forest resilienr , -� face climate ;hange should consider forest
management prescriptions and r , vest or ions th, ma,, sustain and increase summer and fall
streamflow. In addition, some res rcr ia; stream buffers in the forested environment
may not be adequate to pry-' ` ,;tre& ;from hep'. loading and temperature exceedances (Butcher
et al. 2016, EPA 2016), , .:oncern . the i, of .;limate change. Thus, buffer widths could be
considered in recomn. dations to ddres, consistent water temperature exceedances.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 5
Historical Legacy and Land -Use Changes
Managing natural resources in Whatcom County involves tradeoffs among forestry, watershed
conditions, fisheries, recreation, and
Figure 2. Whatcom County tree farm. +� ;redit. Brandy Reed.
conservation. It is widely recognized
that best practices need to be used
in resource management activities
that affect vegetation, soil, and water
to minimize impacts on natural
resources, as well as social values
and benefits (Cristan et al. 2016). In
addi' _,n, ecological restoration of
t, ;trial and aquatic systems is
now a 'ajor enterprise on public,
private, a 'tribal ands in Whatcom
''ounty, thus i,,iproving ecological
conditions across the landscape.
Awarer'l-ss of tradeoffs, potential
:)nf:icts, and opportunities for
r,itlaboration can help meet diverse
community needs and values while
enhancing long-term sustainability.
Whatcom County faces changing
social and biophysical conditions
that are challenging the resilience of
forest lands and the ability to
manage those lands sustainably in
the future:
• The population has grown from 167,000 to 232,000 (a 39% increase) since 2000. This
creates additional pressure on natural resources, potentially leading to the conversion of
forest land to residential, commercial, and infrastructure uses (U.S. Census Bureau 2024).
• Climate change is likely to alter the integrity of forest ecosystems and watersheds,
potentially reducing the ecological and economic value of forest resources (Raymond et at.
2014).
• Traditional timber revenue sources for the County have declined because of reduced
timber harvests (Whatcom County 2024).
In addition, the historical legacy of land -use practices, primarily harvesting timber and converting
forestland to other uses, has altered the productivity, diversity, and continuity of some forest
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 6
landscapes. This reduces their capacity for resilience to additional natural and human -caused
stressors (Raymond et at. 2014).
Climate -Informed Forest Management
The potential effects of climate change on forests and other resources in Whatcom County are well
documented, including (1) a climate change vulnerability assessment for U.S. Forest Service and
National Park Service lands in the County (Raymond et at. 2014), (2) a climate change vulnerability
assessment (Morgan and Krosby 2017) and hydrologic modeling (e.g. Dickerson -Lange, et at. 2022;
Murphy 2016; Knapp 2018; and Truitt 2018) for Nooksack Indian Tribe Natural Resources
Department, and (3) Whatcom County's 2021 Climate Action Plan (Whatcom County 2021).
Additional climate change modeling in Whatcom County and its effects on watershed processes,
streamflow, and stream temperature include Butcher et at. 2016, EPA 2016, Klein 2017, and WA
Department of Ecology 2020. These scientific sources inform our 1 . aerstanding of and responses
to climate change.
Projected climate -related effects on forest resilience inch ';ng ecosy. m services over the next
few decades include the following (Mantua et at. 2010• Eckerson -Lange . :d .itchell 2014;
Raymond eta[. 2013, 2014; Morgan and Krosby 2017, 'orga, and Krosby 2j20; Dickerson -Lange et
at 2022):
• Health and vigor of native tree species 'iLL u ''ne.
• Wildfires, insect outbreaks, and some p `ho .:ns %,, ir,;rease.
Forest regeneration will becr ,� . -)re dit :ult.
• Late -summer and early-f- . strearr sows w, cor _roue to decline.
• Flooding and erosion will L ^or . mu.- nron in some locations.
• The extent of old fo- will L ,rease witr more disturbances.
• The resilience r ' . apidly rL. nerL -1g e-,en-aged forests will be most impacted by climate
change.
• Carbon storage w, -lecrea, ; wi:n more disturbances.
The complex and dynamic nat, -- o' contemporary forest management is a major challenge for
natural resource managers and ,Manners. A rapidly changing social and biological environment, as
discussed above, has motivated Whatcom County leadership to request a Forest Resilience Plan
that provides a roadmap to (1) address near -term risks to forests, and (2) identify goals, strategies,
and on -the -ground actions, including implementation and adaptive management, to help promote
Long-term resilience.
Today, many good options exist for addressing climate -change vulnerabilities and other challenges
in forests (Raymond et at. 2014, Domke et at. 2023). Current best practices for forest management
and planning provide a foundation for both public and private lands. Some practices may need to
be revised in response to recent and future changes in both society and the natural environment
(Raymond et at. 2022). Working collaboratively across different forest sectors and stakeholders in
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 7
Whatcom County will ensure that a Forest Resilience Plan will be effective, feasible, and
equitable.
1.1 Task Force Formation and County Code
The Forest Resilience Task Force was created to develop a comprehensive Whatcom County
Forest Resilience Plan to guide collaborative decision making on issues related to forest
management. The Task Force was established through Ordinance 2023-058, which directed
Whatcom County Council to establish a multi -departmental, multidisciplinary Forest Resilience
Task Force. The Task Force was directed to consider input from diverse experts, stakeholders, and
community members to develop a comprehensive Forest Resilience Plan with science -based and
evidence -based strategies and actions towards:
• A prosperous timber economy
• Restoration of healthy forest ecosystems for fish and a,
• Functional streamflows
• Maximized carbon sequestration and storage
• Sustainable recreation opportunities
• Healthy watersheds (including Lake Whatcom)
• Resilience to wildfire, insects, and dis -a_
• Overall resilience of Whatcom County i ~ests `• rsP affects of climate change
Whatcom County Council selected . ie co Sultan Triangi Associates, to support development of
the Plan, meeting facilitation, ar tribal. aUpholo a, .d public engagement. Triangle Associates
met regularly with the Project Tean. , chin aaaitir,n to staff from Triangle included the Task Force
Chair, Whatcom County r .ul ,taft, 'id a sulh;ect matter expert, Dr. Dave Peterson (professor at
the University of Wasr ,gton Scho. of Ei„irr,imental and Forest Sciences), whose research
focuses on climate cha. assessn mts .nd adaptation strategies on public lands.
To develop the Plan, the Task ;e net 16 times from July 2024 to September 2025. Meetings were
hosted virtually, with the option *i join in -person, for 90 minutes, once a month. Additionally, Task
Force members met in subcommittees monthly (sometimes more frequently) to develop the
contents of this Plan. The subcommittees included:
• Stewardship and Land Use
• Forest Industry and Economics
• Climate Informed Management
• Forest Management and Coordination
In addition, six Task Force members participated in the Review Committee, which collaborated
with the Project Team and Task Force members to review sections of the draft Plan throughout
development.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 8
The Task Force membership included:
Name
Member Type
Representing
Chris Elder (Chair)
Agency/Committee
Whatcom County
Appointed
Carl Weimer (Vice Chair)
Agency/Committee
Whatcom County Parks and Recreation
Appointed
Commission
Frank Bob
Agency/Committee
Lummi Nation
Appointed
George Swanaset Jr.
Agency/Committee
Nooksack Indian Tribe
Appointed
Trevor Delgado
Agency/Committee
Nooksack Indian Tribe
Appointed
Cory McDonald
Agency/Committee
Whatcom County Forest Advisory
Appointed
Committee
Tracy Petroske
Agency/Committee
Whatcom' , inty Forest Advisory
Appointed
Commi' ;e
Kevin James
Agency/Committee
US F ast Servict-
Appointed
Stevan Harrell
Agency/Committee
'hatco County Climate Impact Advisory
Appointed
Cu - Aee
Barry Wenger Agency/Commi+ Whai, m Counl-y Wildlife Advisory
Appointed --Nmmit. 3
Jim Hansen Agency/Committk ' .hG_ i-n'.,ounty Planning Commission
Appoin+
Ellyn Murphy App, .ited b ExpP rise in forest management and/or wood
Ck- Ity Co, pYaducts industry
Jennifer Mackey Appc + A by Expertise in owning and/or managing forest
uncil lands for conservation purposes
Brandy Reed App. itea . - Expertise in climate, salmon recovery, and
Coun Cour.;il natural resources policy
Oliver Grah Appo .te(' oy Expertise in watershed management
-�r . itv council (including Lake Whatcom) and/or land -use
planning
T. Abe Lloyd
Appointed by
Expertise in relevant science disciplines
County Council
Russ Pfeiffer -Hoyt
Appointed by
Representative from trust land beneficiary
County Council
(Mt. Baker School District)
Tom Smith
Appointed by
Representative from trust land beneficiary
County Council
(Commissioner, Whatcom County Fire
District 16)
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 9
2. Description of Forest Assets and Challenges
2.1 Forests of Whatcom County
Forests in Whatcom County occur on land owned, administered, and managed by federal, state,
county, municipal, and tribal government agencies: non -governmental organizations; industrial
corporations; and small private entities. Ownership data are from WFPA (2007) and other public
sources. Acreages listed below are approximate.
U.S. Forest Service (Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest) - 393,116 acres
The national forest contains many tree species, ecosystems, and forest zones ranging from low -
elevation coniferous and deciduous forests to high -elevation subalpine forests that reach treeline.
Age classes vary, with young trees where historical timber harvests --curred, and old trees in areas
that have not been harvested (or not for a longtime) (e.g., wilder- ss and roadless areas).
Consistent with the Northwest Forest Plan, most MBSNF Lang m, aged to increase old -forest
structure, often through active restoration. Timber harvep' while less. )mmon than in the past,
are conducted in some locations.
National Park Service (North Cascades National Park, r. , -ake Nation-,t Recreation Areal -
312,919 acres
The National Park contains many tree species L d ec -is.: anging from low -elevation
coniferous and deciduous forests to I-'- llevati subalpin . forests that reach treeline. Historical
timber harvests were rare due to ep for graphs )nd di`ricult access. As a result, the park
contains large areas of old forest 'lost' ' ' -1 is managed passively to protect ecosystem
integrity and facilitate low-imnact re ration.
Department of Natural .esources 'INR)- 36 �)00 acres
DNR forests in Whatcom ',)unty cc list if over 30,000 acres being managed for ecological value,
including natural and riparia -irr s, -.nd over 50,000 acres managed for timber value. There is a
mix of age classes across the lGnc';cape with coniferous trees dominating. Both working forest and
ecological areas contain structurally complex forests and permanently protected old -growth
stands. DNR land management takes a multifaceted approach to balance sustainable forestry,
conservation, and recreation, while generating revenue for public beneficiaries.
State Parks and other state agencies-13,105 acres
State lands have mostlyyounger age classes of coniferous trees mixed with some hardwoods at
lower elevations, although riparian buffers and steep slopes may contain some old trees. Some
older forests have recently been protected for conservation purposes, such as wildlife habitat and
carbon sequestration.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 10
Whatcom County -9,600 acres
Whatcom County lands contain younger coniferous and hardwood forests, a legacy of historical
timber harvest. The County manages its forest lands through a combination of conservation efforts,
recreational development, and sustainable forestry practices. Forest conservation is a priority,
particularly in sensitive watersheds (e.g., lands in the Lake Whatcom watershed). Non -motorized
recreation is also a priority on County lands (e.g., hiking, mountain biking, horseback riding, etc.).
Much of the forest management activity occurs through participation in collaborative efforts
associated with sustainable forest practices and regulation on state and private lands, as well as
conservation strategies and climate resilience.
City -of Bellingham - 3,500 acres
City of Bellingham forests are mostly young -growth conifers and har Jwoods within a matrix of
urban and exurban residential, business, and infrastructure deve ,pment. The City owns and
manages forest land primarily for conservation, watershed pr .ac, n, and recreation. Urban forest
management by the City encompasses active manageme, of public . -ids, while being supportive
of and consulting on residential and other lands occur' i by trees. Bellir,, ,ar. . is designated as a
Tree City, and forest cover is relatively high compares -)mo, urban areas. A State of the Urban
Forest Report (2022) and nearly complete Urban Forestr, an express,, strong commitment to
sustainable forestry.
Lummi Nation - 7, 729 acres (includes forestry � -id, Aii, . ;sP, vation
Forested land on the Lummi Natio, .ieser\ tion iE ompo,,ed of mostly hardwood species, with
some stands of western redced, qnd Dr --fir. , ,ie;e conifer species were dominant prior to
timber harvests in the early 20" cer, ,. Freshwater forest wetlands and scrub -shrub wetlands
provide habitat for terres" .ar ai qua. , wildlif:;. The Lummi Nation manages forest resources
through the Tribal Err mmental P, n, wh,ch includes protecting forests for their ecological value
and cultural importance pile allow igf(-, some development. Forested areas serve as sites for
traditional activities like gay. rin,- .nd nunting, as well as for recreation and outdoor education.
The Tribe places great value in .. ad'.Jonal-use forest lands —on trust lands and through
partnerships with agencies and organizations. Priorities are to restore riparian forest habitat,
preserve spiritual and cultural sites, maintain forest health and productivity, and increase climate
resilience.
Nooksack Indian Tribe - Reservation 2.2 acres; total land base (including trust and fee lands) 3,134
acres; 2,400 acres held in trust by the federal government
Although the Nooksack Reservation is small, the Tribe has great interest in all traditional -use forest
Lands, especially on its trust lands and through partnerships with agencies and organizations.
These lands are occupied by a mix of conifer and hardwood stands, including riparian forests.
Stewart Mountain, part of the South Fork Nooksack watershed, contains a mix of old -growth
forests, younger forests, and plantations. Restoration of riparian areas to improve fisheries habitat
is a high priority. Other priorities are climate resilience, review of proposed developments and
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 11
timber sales, and healthy forests that preserve cultural resources. The Tribe has an agreement to
co -manage lands within the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest.
Industrial forest lands (Commercial Forestry Zoned)-188,315 acres
Industrial (commercial) lands are dominated by young conifer stands, mostly Douglas -fir but with
small amounts of other conifer species and hardwoods. Owners range from large corporations to
individuals and families. Most forests are managed on 40- to 50-year rotations. Forests are
generally healthy and productive because stand density is managed to reduce inter -tree
competition (thinning). Although timber production is the primary objective, these lands also
include riparian buffers and other protected areas that provide wildlife habitat and watershed
protection, and some lands allow recreation. Areas where timber harvest has occurred are quickly
replanted to ensure regeneration and minimize erosion.
Small forest landowner lands (Rural Forestry Zoned) - 38,058 ac,
Forest lands owned by small landowners are mostly low -elegy, ation, , -ond-growth conifer and
hardwood forests and mostly in younger age classes. DID' . defines sma. `-)rest'.dndowners as
those who own less than 5,000 acres of forestland ar narves' `ewer than 2 , pillion board -feet of
timber per year on average. Small forest landowners a, `v, ;ally indivi&als and families; about
75% of their properties are 20 acres or less. F(--gst lands a manage' for a variety of objectives
including a natural setting for residence, wildh , hG._ -- watt ;hpj protection, recreation, timber
income, and carbon sequestration. Timber mar, cfer :nt _ yp;.;ally a low priority except on larger
properties. Forest health issues are conct 1 becaup-- active management is relatively
infrequent on many properties. I
tworwZ
Nongovernmental Organizations (V,, .,;om Land T,jst)— 6,700 acres
Whatcom Land Trust (W , owi,, nd r, nages :,700 acres of varying land management goals. In
addition, the Stewart' )untain Coi -nuni,y Forest (SMCF) is currently being developed through
collaboration among Wi. `com Cot ty, \P,natcom Land Trust, Evergreen Land Trust, and Nooksack
Indian Tribe to enhance wa, ,hp ,1e:tth and improve water quality and quantity, promote an
ecological forestry -based ecoi..,m; for living -wage jobs, increase biodiversity and enhance fish and
wildlife habitat, and expand con imunity access for cultural uses and non -motorized recreation. At
the time of the drafting this Plan, the SMCF was still in development, so the total acres were
unknown. In addition to SMCF and WLT, the Evergreen Land Trust owns approximately 80 acres
neighboring the SMCF.
2.2 Challenges (Identified by Task Force)
The following section outlines the key challenges to achieving the goals outlined in this Plan and
ultimately forest resilience in Whatcom County. These challenges include ecological and socio-
economic consequences, many of which are tied to the impacts of climate change. The Task Force
' This acreage figure does not include the acres of small forests or stands of trees in the rural residential zones.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 12
identified additional information and resources needed to address each challenge and has
provided a preliminary list of related goals, objectives, and actions in another section of the Plan.
Any "Information/Resources Needed" in this section that remain unaddressed in the Goals,
Objectives, and Actions Section can inform future development of additional actions.
1. Climate change will cause overall declines in forest ecosystem health.
Ecological Challenges
• Climate change will progress faster than forests can adapt, leading to increased
wildfires, insects, and diseases.
Information/Resources needed:
- A publicly accessible County -wide mapping system that provides detailed
information on different aspects of ecosystem health.
- Recent U.S. Forest Service Forest Health M, �itoring (FHM) and Forest
Inventory and Analysis (FIA) data on eco, item health.
• Climate change will reduce the availability of so- e t- -,system services.
Information/Resources needed:
- Estimate of annual damage toe ,system serviL ,.
Socio-Economic Challenges
• Science -based support on climate chan, fo. ,rivate lands ;s insufficient to inform
forest management and promote resilience 1d ecosystr m services.
Information/Resources nee,
- Modeling of projected . mpe, and roisture regimes under climate
change for Wha*(-om Cc r , forests (, 0- or 20-yr increments).
- Accessible, sou, �s am ncentivr s for managers to apply climate-
resilient-' estpr,, Aices.
- Increaser. ^.ie, _. ALIT at resources and forest management
exr)--igefo. )mmunicati.igwith private landowners.
• Actions th, enhai, 'ecc, stem services are lacking both interest and economic
incentiv .
Inforn. `ion/Reso, ces ,seeded:
- Fe, ral, s' ce and local funding for addressing damage to forest
ecos� ,n!,.
2. Climate change, including hotter and drier summers, will increase wildfire danger.
Ecological challenges
• Wildfires modifywildlife habitat.
Information/Resources needed:
- Synthesis of the effects of wildfire on westside wildlife habitat by animal
species.
• Wildfires cause rapid changes in forest ecosystems including landslides, water
pollution, loss of soil moisture infiltration, and lower late -summer and fall
strea mflows.
Information/Resources needed:
- Evaluation of slope stability and water quality and quantity in burned
areas to assess damage and inform reforestation.
Socio-economic challenges
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 13
• Wildfires and higher temperatures degrade air and water quality, affecting human
and wildlife health.
Information/Resources needed:
- Monitoring of annual health trends attributed to wildfires (smoke index)
and high -heat events (County Health Department).
• Wildfires destroy economically valuable timber.
Information/Resources needed:
Mapped locations of forests tentatively scheduled for timber harvest that
have high wildfire risk and are adjacent to other forest lands.
- Examples and/or economic analyses of forests affected by recent
wildfires in and near Whatcom County (e.g. 2024 Bender Fire).
3. Climate change, including warmer, wetter winters and drier summers, will increase the
risk of insect and disease damage.
Ecological challenges
• Insects and disease can reduce tree growth and ease tree mortality, resulting in
a decline in ecosystem health and a higher fue. jad.
Information/Resources needed:
- Annual forest area affected by ' ,sects and disea-_ inWhatcom County.
Socio-economic challenges
• Insects and diseases can reduce timber rt. ue, recreati%nal opportunities, and
access to cultural resources.
Information/Resources neec, d:
- Assessment of econorr, dr iagu . fo, gists at a frequency sufficient to
characterize' ',� in in: .ts and d;cease.
4. Climate change, including, Ater w' `-_._ ana dr'zr summers, will alter hydrology.
Ecological challenges
• Warmer sur "Yipek "wes, re%uced precipitation, decreased area and depth of
snowpar n the snG zonE,. ins; increased evapotranspiration will reduce
streamfL,- •s and subE quen*;y alter water availability for instream and out-of-
streamwatt.. ' ises.
Informatio. "4r Ju,.;es needed:
A syntr,as�s of stream data and recent climate impacts modeling, which
can be; nade available in a database for use by Whatcom County and
scientists.
- Periodic updates to recent hydrologic modeling of climate change
impacts on streamflow.
• Warmer summer stream temperatures and lower flows degrade habitat for fish and
other aquatic species.
Information/Resources needed:
- Provide substantial information on the effectiveness of stream buffers to
protect streams in the forested environment in Whatcom County from
increased pressures and stressors associated with climate change.
• Lower summer soil moisture during the growing season will adversely affect the soil
biome (carbon sequestration, nutrient distribution, etc.).
Information/Resources needed:
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 14
- Studies of the soil biome in multiple locations.
• More intense rainfall in the late fall and winter leads to floods, landslides, and
degradation of fish habitat (including sedimentation in spawning grounds) and
altered fluvial geomorphology.
Information/Resources needed:
- Evaluation of landslides in recently disturbed forests with respect to
recent extreme weather in Whatcom County (e.g. rainfall, floods) (Knapp
(2018).
Socio-economic challenges
• Drier summers may lead to more frequent water -rights disputes and restricted
water availability and supply.
Information/Resources needed:
- Evaluation of the current direction and implications of water rights
adjudication with respect to climate change including relevance for
Western water law.
• Lower stream flows may affect cultural and recre . nal activities such as fishing
and water access.
Information/Resources needed:
- Synthesis of trends in recreati, at activities on Ve atrim waterways (e.g.,
permits, rentals, and license, and t, at access.
• Lower summer precipitation may reduce i. growth, affe :sing ecological function
and timber production.
Information/Resources neec, d:
- Summary of key ecolog at r sari,_ :rp and timberyields over time in
response to r' _ Ingtei erature p.id precipitation patterns.
• Higher winter rainfal' .✓ill cat e more `requr nt floods and landslides, which can
increase sediment anspr - -+-lixer co streams, alter streambeds, reduce
forested land acreagt - a damage ir'.rastructure.
Informp' ,.... -our,. - needer.
--conomic, naly:. co. nparing the costs of relocating or replacing
.nfrastructL , with .ne costs of designing infrastructure to be climate-
r,- lient.
5. Climate change and other .arlors may increase population growth, raising the likelihood
of forest -land conversion tj other uses
Ecological challenges
• Pressure to expand housing developments into the wildland-urban interface (WUI)
may drive land conversion, decreasing forest canopy and increasing wildfire risk.
Information/Resources needed:
- Number of structures not in compliance with International Building Codes
in WUI areas.
- Assessment of future developments and capacity of housing based on
current zoning.
• External costs of conversion on ecosystem functions and values are not appreciated
or quantified.
Information/Resources needed:
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 15
- Summary of how land conversion reduces the forest canopy and
ecosystem functions and values, including specific geographic locations.
• Lack of canopy -friendly infrastructure in public spaces reduces the ability to expand
canopy cover.
Information/Resources needed:
- Methods and materials for communicating with planners and the public
about infrastructure compatible with trees, and the species of trees most
compatible with infrastructure.
Socio-economic challenges
• Conversions and rezones can reduce the area and quality of forested areas.
Information/Resources needed:
- Summary of area and pace of cumulative forest cover reduction due to
land conversions and rezones.
- Ways of aligning codes, zoning, and comprehensive planning to locate
additional housing in places that do not rF .ace forested area or
ecosystem services.
• Commodity -based economic pressures drive c overt. n of land from forest to other
uses.
Information/Resources needed:
- Projections of where and hoe and c version will ;potentially occur in
Whatcom County.
- Summary of policies orocessb `hat cou'a provide incentives for
retaining forest canop. coy- '- the fG -, of economic pressures.
• More effective coordination and[(. de, .iip u . needed to adaptively manage
government systems ar cesse it retains, ,g forest canopy cover.
Information/Res .,rces i eded:
- Summa., -)f opts `-- r o,.nt; government to coordinate with agencies
and organs. ` ,is with a co,omon interest in retaining forest lands. This
cr __ devt:, ned at a, ✓orkshop.
• Populatir . growth c, ites , esc,are for more access to recreation, elevates wildfire
risk, ano ^reases thr seed fir enforcement and management of forest lands.
InformG nlResc .-ce; needed:
- An G e, , nP. it of population growth and priority areas for additional or
convei -ed , ecreational spaces.
6. Climate change may affect harvest levels, timber volume, tree size, and other factors that
influence silvicultural prescriptions.
Ecological Challenges
• Uncertainty exists about the effects of climate change on forest growth and
productivity.
Information/Resources needed:
- Synthesis of scientific information on the effects of climate change on
tree species and forest ecosystems in northwest Washington.
- Summary of potential forest management strategies and silvicultural
prescriptions that support forest growth and productivity in a changing
climate.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 16
• Uncertainty exists about how forest recovery would proceed following long-term
droughts and large wildfires.
Information/Resources needed:
- Compilation of disturbance scenarios developed by scientific and
management experts, as well as pathways for forest recovery. This could
be developed in a workshop.
Socio-Economic Challenges
• Funding for forest management research is decreasing, variable, and often subject
to political influences.
Information/Resources needed:
- List of priority needs for scientific information on climate change effects
and forest management
7. Forest industry faces challenges with stability and sustainability in the long term
Ecological Challenges
• None identified
Socio-Economic Challenges
• Decreasing, inconsistent access to timber, .,es and rea. qd timhsr volumes
continues to stress an already stressed I al and regional tl as'. industry.
Information/Resources needed:
- Projections of future timber salt id timber vo'umes to improve
planning by forest ind Irv.
• Reduced forest industry infrastrt Wlt_ lack ,Zig,,mentwith supply volumes,
size of harvestable trees, and otht ch, aciu. stirs of harvested trees.
Information/Resou, __ gedec,
- Projectior of futL - timbk salep, timber volumes, and tree
charact,_ "-,tics t pra,,ning and development of infrastructure by
forest indu. -
• Forest indu, . y .0 s ch, ',mges a,,sociated with capital costs, taxes, and an
inconsisi .itavaiLab. `yof. 'es'_rywork.
Infoi. -ltion/Reso, ces n.;eded:
- A. essmer of " ,ow the forest industry in northwest Washington can
mai. sir ,ro°"lability in the short term and Longterm.
- Summary J options for retaining and growing an experienced workforce.
8. It has become increasingly difficult to balance economic objectives, management
activities, environmental concerns, and regulations.
Ecological Challenges
• Although forest roads facilitate timber harvest, active forest management, and
wildfire mitigation and response, they also contribute to increased water runoff and
mass wasting, especially along mid -slopes and adjacent to unmaintained culverts.
• Information/Resources needed:
o Updated inventory in RMAP (Road Maintenance and Abandonment
Plans) of existing roads and their conditions and assessment of priority
road relocation and improvements.
Socio-Economic Challenges
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 17
School funding tied to timber harvest levels makes it difficult to balance harvest levels
with environmental concerns.
Information/Resources needed:
- Develop alternatives to support both school funding and forest resilience.
• The limited area available for timber harvest and environmental concerns and
regulations constrains planning and economic stability.
Information/Resources needed:
- Assessment of the annual availability of timber volume on public and
private lands and likely variation from year to year.
- Summary of the effects of environmental concerns and regulations on
timber harvest, and how they can be addressed while maintaining
sufficient timber volume.
• Greater public awareness is needed about the role and benefits of the timber
industry in Whatcom County.
Information/Resources needed:
- Outline of a community education pros to increase understanding of
the benefits of active forest manage; ant a. 'its influence on forest
health.
• Whatcom County tax classifications and .;urrent use" pro6 am,, have not been
updated since the early 1990s and are, + of d- j, unbalancFa, and limited in
addressing forest management and resilit goals on pri•,ate land.
Information/Resources nee 4-
- Assessment of curren `ax -lnd cu .itv , egulations to ensure there is
an adequate classificai n fr ea, 'orr,st landowner type to incentivize
appropriate f- mana; nent.
9. Different classes of Landow irs ha, ':s{-rer , ir'.erests and needs.
Ecological Challenges
• Conservatir ana , oductior goals often conflict.
Infor, ation/Res ircez, aer' ad:
- '\ regular fo 'm for _Jalogue among different classes of landowners.
Socio-Economic L allenge,
• Classes of ow. -s ' avp different priorities and forest management goals.
Informationii . as ;urces needed:
- A reguli.r forum for dialogue among different classes of landowners.
• Law enforcement against vandalism and destructive recreation is inadequate.
Information/Resources needed:
- Assessment of the capacity of law enforcement to be effective, and of
priority setting for allocating effort.
10. Different classes of landowners have differential access to resources
Ecological Challenges
• Economic imperatives often conflict with sustainable management goals, especially
for small private landowners.
Information/Resources needed:
- Survey of Washington Farm Forestry Association members or another
sample of non -industrial forest landowner concerns.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 18
Socio-Economic Challenges
• Funding for forest management is often inadequate for smaller forest operations.
Information/Resources needed:
- Summary of current funding sources and priorities for additional funding.
• Tribes lack resources to meet goals on owned and ceded lands.
Information/Resources needed:
- List of organizations that can provide expertise and work at low cost or
provide other partnership opportunities.
• Infrastructure for timber production is inadequate or threatened.
Information/Resources needed:
- Financial analysis of logging and road contractors, mills, truckers, and
other infrastructure providers and workers.
11. Different classes of landowners have differential access to information
Ecological Challenges
• External costs and benefits of stewardship activit' t different spatial scales are
not being quantified adequately.
Information/Resources needed:
- Summary of how active mana, nent strategies G A-,;tions influence
ecosystem functions and vat. s.
• Geographic distribution of wildfire risks is, rly understrid.
Information/Resources nee, `
- Map of the geographic list, `:-)n of . 1ld°1re risks.
Socio-Economic Challenges
• Educational and techn; _.. sistar, : in forest management is inadequate for
smallerforestoperp' ins.
Information/RL -urce• -�
- List of orga, - dons and peiple who provide guidance on science -based
fr- , nags. ont that ;s relevant for non -industrial forest landowners.
• A culturr ,r irrespon, ')lust use exists in some places, including illegal or
irrespon;. le burning. ' Z
Informa. nlResc ,ce, needed:
- Pub, o- .cp pion about wildfire risks and ecosystem damage.
Geograph'distribution of "hot spots" of irresponsible use.
• Landowners perceive that County government provides inadequate support for
forest management.
Information/Resources needed:
- Consultation with relevant forest landowner groups and County staff.
- Information on how other west -side counties support their forest
landowners.
- A common repository of maps and educational and technical assistance
information in forest management that can be easily accessed online by a
diverse set of forest landowners.
- Assess and ensure parity in support for the Whatcom County forest
management sector with other important County economic sectors
(agriculture, fisheries, etc).
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 19
12. Resources for disaster response are unequally distributed
Ecological Challenges
• Danger to people and infrastructure is highest and evacuation is most difficult in
areas that are highly vulnerable to disasters.
Information/Resources needed:
- Updated evacuation plans and maps of evacuation routes.
• Fire prevention efforts are inadequate.
Information/Resources needed:
- Assessment of fire prevention needs and funding mechanisms.
• State resources for wildland fire response and resources needed to identify and
train response entities are declining.
Information/Resources needed:
- Assessment of the funding and funding mechanisms needed to improve
fire response.
Socio-Economic Challenges
Disaster -associated communications are most diff ` in areas that are most
vulnerable to disasters
Information/Resources needed:
Plans for improving access to Internet and ce, prr,iider services in
Eastern Whatcom County.
Plans for emergency response are inadequa.
Information/Resources neer' --
Updated hazard respr- se (Shop : b ; completed in late 2025.)
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 20
3. Approach/Methodology
3.1 Plan Development Approach
GOALS THREATS
"What we hope to achieve" "What factors have led to
Describe what the plan is current conditions"
. Identify and prioritize
The goal set the
intended to accomplish. threats that need to be
fou ndational purpose of addressed to achieve
future actions. objectives.
• Identify the sources and
Impacts of threats.
Jg`�gaAaptive maaago,�,,ehr
Step I Siep�2 Step 3 Step 4
DEFINE IDENTIFY IDENTIFY
SET GOALS OBJECTIVES CRITICAL ACTIONS
THREATS
OBJECTIVES
"How we define success"
Develop based on planning
targets and include
information about the
current and desired status
of that target.
• Objectives include
associated measurable
indicators so they can be
evaluated and tracked.
Figure 3. The five steps to develop the c
used adaptive management princi to Inf
"Whatac aI
and adc. rit
. Identi
threats
objectives.
Develop the
. ed tP in
Step 5
IWVELO
FINAL
PLAN.
Get our goals
stoaddress /
and
that
OW with;A Whatcom Forest Resilience Task Force
ls,Vbje,0ives and Critical Threats iteratively.
The Whatcom County Fores6PPsiliW , Task Forcr was primarily responsible for developing key
components of the Plar ctudii., het; Is, Objectives, Actions, and Challenges identified in the
following sections of, documem. 'he Tap;. Force received facilitation support from the Project
Team, including a subjec, Matter e, ,ert,,,/ith knowledge in forest management and climate
resilience. Through monthly sk or ;e meetings and regular subcommittee meetings, Task Force
members developed the contei It r I this Plan (see Figure 1).
In addition, the Project Team led community engagement to inform the Community Values section
of the Plan. The Project Team led two phases of community engagement, which included 11
assessment interviews with key stakeholders and a county -wide online survey completed by 372
respondents. The purpose of this outreach was to incorporate community values into the Plan and
solicit input on the process to develop the Plan. The results of this outreach are summarized in
Appendix A.
To guide the background and conceptual framework of this Plan, the Project Team reviewed
scientific literature and federal, state, and local policies and regulations; this review is detailed in
Appendix B.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 21
3.2 Conceptual Framework
Definition of Forest Resilience
For the purposes of this plan, the Task Force defines forest resilience as the capacity of a forest
ecosystem to adapt to and recover from natural and anthropogenic disturbances (e.g.,
temperature and precipitation changes, wildfires, insect and pathogen outbreaks, logging,
economic development, policy changes, and changes in cultural perception) and retain basic
ecosystem structures, functions, and services. Structures are horizontal and vertical distribution of
Layers of trees, shrubs, and ground cover, including living and non -living elements (vegetation,
woody debris, soils). Functions are ecological processes provided by forests, including vegetative
productivity, nutrient (including carbon) cycling, hydrologic cycling water supply, and habitat
provision for biodiversity. Ecosystem services are benefits prow* . i to people, including timber,
food, water supply and purification, flood control, soil conse. ✓ation, 'imate regulation, carbon
sequestration, clean air, recreation opportunities, and s, .itualvalues.
Importance of Forest Resilience
Forest resilience is a key component of long-i istainat, foresi resource management,
ranging from short -rotation even -aged harvest. restr _ -gser% dtion (Innes and Tikina 2017, Falk
eta[. 2022), especially as the effects(,-' ';mate c , age becor. ie more prominent (Thompson eta[.
2009). The continual presence of fr --sted ndscL es an(' the ecosystem services they provide
can occur across a broad range mana, _- -^* nb,_-c*;ves (Churchill eta[. 2013). Both public and
private forests are subject to laws a . egulations V iat support resilience and sustainability.
Several scientific prinr .,tes are re, ant d �veloping a strategic approach to forest resilience:
• Due to climate ch, -fe, fut, a rr,silient forests will differ from pre -colonial Pacific
Northwest forests.
• Forests are dynamic — Species abundance and distribution, age classes, structures, and
spatial patterns change over space and time (Churchill et at. 2013, McDowell et at. 2020).
• Ecological disturbance is an inherent component of forest ecosystems — Droughts, native
insects and pathogens, and (occasional) wildfires are a normal occurrence in forests on the
west side of the Cascade Range (Halofsky et at. 2020).
• Biophysical stressors are an inherent component of forest ecosystems — Low soil
moisture, extreme temperatures, high winds, and inter -tree competition can reduce tree
vigor and growth at various temporal scales. Non-native insects, pathogens, and plant
species that are well -established can exacerbate stress.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 22
• Connectivity promotes integrity and resilience — Continuity of forest habitat across the
landscape is beneficial for native vegetation, wildlife, and hydrologic function.
Fragmentation of forests by timber harvest, urban development, agriculture, and
infrastructure (e.g., utilities) has reduced resilience at both large and small spatial scales
(Haddad et al. 2015).
• Diversity and complexity are prominent features of forests — Multiple tree species (and
other flora and fauna) across topographically and hydrologically diverse landscapes are the
norm. Genetic diversity within native species has facilitated survival over thousands of
years, contributing to current levels of biodiversity.
• Functional diversity may be more important than species diversity— Variability in forest
structure (age classes, stem density, canopy patterns) prorr tes resilience to stressors.
Although ecological restoration often focuses on specie, structural characteristics are
often the key habitat features for flora and fauna, regr ales -if dominant species (Domke
et at. 2023, Chen et at. 2025).
Forest resilience can be maintained and improved tI, -agh c, .nervation of aiodiversity in protected
areas (Thompson et at. 2009), restoration of degraded tt L landscape,,, application of less -
damaging forest management prescriptions, �f best pi, +ices it Limber harvest (Cristan et at.
2016), implementation of agroforestry and urb, i fort_- gvsttm ;, and community -based forest
management (Innes and Tikina 2017). Thp benel ; . resilienr _- include preservation of biodiversity
(Thompson et at. 2009), productior . wog prods Is and ,ther resources (Nabuurs et at. 2007,
Malmsheimer et al. 2011, WADI`' n.d.), s J and w� .ar .onservation (Domke et at. 2023), water
supply, carbon sequestration and,. — .ce changc rr;tigation (Ganguly et al. 2020, Nabuurs eta[.
2007, FCDV n.d.), sustair .-eat. , opport,,nities (Sgroi 2020), and financial support for local
communities (Allen et 2025).
O/F
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 23
Figure 4. A view of Baker River in Whatcom County. Photo edit• " .,_ �yd.
Goals, Objectives, - . id A Aio
4WV
The following goals, objecti%/-Q ana . :ions identify a range of priorities to address the challenges
identified in this Planar jtreng, nth, gsitie, ice of Whatcom County forests. Recommendations
include providing eco, mic benefii maintaining ecological health while facing climate change,
helping land managers s. ^iard forr ts, and expanding wildfire risk management and emergency
response activities. Due tot, 9, ,ns:raints, the recommendations included here are not
prioritized, nor are they exhaus,.ivr. Some challenges identified in the Challenges section have not
been addressed in this section. The Task Force encourages the County and partners to build on this
work by prioritizing these and other recommendations that may come later.
Goal 1: The Whatcom County forest management community works to strengthen forest
resilience and provide direct and indirect economic benefits.
Objective 1: Maintain a prosperous timber industry, working forest land base, and associated
socioeconomic benefits.
1. Action: Conduct assessments to characterize the economic sustainability of Whatcom
County's timber industry and implement sustainability-focused policies and incentives.
Assessment elements include the state of the timber base in Whatcom County,
understanding and responding to forest land -conversion pressures, and building a vision
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 24
for a sustainable Whatcom County forest industry that is innovative and comprised of
traditional and non-traditional forest products.
2. Action: Identify and recommend investments to maintain a robust and competitive forest
industry, including diversified opportunities for workforce development and timber industry
infrastructure. (Also see Goal 1, Objective 3, and Goal 4.)
3. Action: Explore and implement creative approaches to diversifying the harvestable forest
land base, including non -industrial lands, to sustain Whatcom County forest industry.
4. Action: Consider emerging wood -product technologies by partnering with Skagit and
Snohomish Counties and the Darrington Wood Innovation Center to develop and
implement value-added wood products. Set an example by using locally -sourced lumber
for all County building projects and, where appropriate, repl, ^e steel with mass timber.
5. Action: Hire forest -industry vendors, consultants, and I . messes to inventory timber, plan
forest treatments, and assess associated infrastructL., a (e.g. -oads) on Whatcom County
public lands. Explore and support industry divert ,cation to pr(, le theae services to
landowners and communities managing non dustrip' `orest land.
6. Action: Assess how proposed changes to forest inagement r. iay negatively impact
school funding, and work with other e -and leg, -1tors ti find methods to equitably
address those impacts.
Objective 2: Maintain, improve, and :v, p sus enable rP.:reation opportunities that deliver
economic and health benefits to' ,cal co nunitie/
1. Action: Assess current and , ,posed recreational opportunities dependent on forest
lands, the spiritLI , neat. a, onomi,. benefits they provide, and potential conflicts with
other, forest-r, Aed benefit
2. Action: Assess cu. nt imr otF if allowing open access on forest lands for recreation
(dumping, fires, unau, ze A trails and encampments) and identify possible solutions and
actions in collaboration ith local tribes and stakeholders.
3. Action: Partner with tribes on identifying and reducing impacts of recreation to tribal treaty
rights in usual and accustomed grounds and stations, including shared increase in
enforcement and planning, developing a social media campaign, and identifying priority
public recreational areas across the county.
4. Action: Identify and create funding mechanisms and invest in recreational development
and maintenance to manage the growing demand for recreational access in Whatcom
County in a sustainable way.
5. Action: Develop a long-term management plan for recreational use and impacts, including
a framework for continued coordination, establishing milestones, adapting to changes, and
ensuring transfer of knowledge during staff or landowner changes.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 25
Objective 3: Support economic development that benefits both industrial forest and small forest
landowners by attracting investments, maintaining a skilled workforce, and supporting ecological
sustainability and human well-being.
1. Action: Assess the economic sustainability of forest management on all forest land in
Whatcom County that is subject to industrial forestry. Assessment should focus on short-
term and long-term industry sustainability outcomes.
2. Action: Diversify forest economic and cultural benefits, including non -timber forest
products such as harvesting by the floral industry.
3. Action: Develop and fund community forests on private forest lands that can be
specifically managed for forest resilience, economic activity, and innovative forest
products.
4. Action: When appropriate, promote and expand the us, . Focal forest management and
logging businesses on Whatcom County land and on ..on -ins ;trial forest lands.
5. Action: Explore and develop forest -industry ca, ers through trair. g, iternships, job -skills
development, and other employment opportL 'ties.
Goal 2. Whatcom County forest landowners :tive, -.1age .orest land for resilience to
climate -related impacts to provide h 'thy fog , .s and sustainable ecosystem services.
Objective 1: Prioritize and incen*' Sze fore c healtl*eat: nents on landscapes with the highest risk
from wildfires, insects, and diseaa r/
1. Action: Identify: ,as cu -n% -)mage: by insects and diseases and develop a
management an to addre, them.
2. Action: Develop v� 'fire rip m,-ps for the County using advanced modeling techniques on
fire behavior that inch ' ;Li,. late forecasts for Whatcom County, in addition to site -specific
information such as soil type, fuel load, aspect, etc., to identify areas of high risk of wildfire
initiation and spread. Provide an updated risk map to forest land managers and residents
every 10 years.
3. Action: Design harvests and reforestation to increase diversity in tree species and age, and
to create natural firebreaks to reduce wildfire spread and damage.
Objective 2: Conserve biodiversity and enhance the habitats of native fauna, flora, and fungi in
Whatcom County forests.
1. Action: Create and maintain wildlife -corridor connectivity.
2. Action: Incorporate greater diversity in forested riparian and wetland habitats to allow for
shifts in species distribution and ensure ecosystem resilience.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 26
3. Action: Minimize impacts on forest soil resources to promote a diverse and healthy fungal
community during harvest, slash management, and replanting.
4. Action: Reinvest staff time and resources in the County's Wildlife Advisory Committee so
they can regularly meet and advise.
Objective 3: Manage forest structures to promote adaptation to climate change.
1. Action: Manage the structure of Whatcom forests as appropriate to increase resilience to
climate change and maintain production of ecosystem services.
a. Tailor reforestation plans to the specific climate risks of Whatcom County, focusing on
the use of species and populations that can withstand local future conditions.
b. Use predictive climate modeling to select specific genetic strains of trees that are
better suited for future warmer and drier conditions.
c. Where possible, move away from monoculture plan . '-)ns and toward diverse, native
species that are naturally better suited to changh,b cone Ins.
d. Where appropriate, accelerate natural regro, .,i by thinning d remiving competing
invasive species and preparing the site to . icoura- � native tree seedlings to thrive on
their own.
2. Action: Designate high -value habitat. r:orridoi `hat enable climate -induced species
migration, and critical areas of habitat )nner to m; ;ntain larger, undisturbed tracts of
intact ecosystems and conner' -ns beh them.
3. Action: Include carbons; , age, sr luestra, )n capacity, and key ecosystem services when
considering climate resilic ,e .a ace ,ink management plans for specific forest tracts.
Objective 4: Enhance fo, ,t wa. -9heL ealth t,, (1) maximize soil moisture and dry -season stream
flows and (2) reduce c-season pt. k strearflows and floods.
1. Action: Conduct G asibili' stp.dyto evaluate the economic costs/benefits and climate
resiliency of silvicultu ' ,ys;ems that can increase late summer and fall streamflows.
Examples may include st,,,dying rotation ages based on site quality and species, conserving
mature and old -growth stands, and using uneven -aged management, thinning, and/or gap
cuts in the snow zone. Include an analysis of the economic value of increased water
availability for instream and out -of -stream water uses.
2. Action: Develop forest policy and silvicultural and harvest practices to promote dry -season
stream flow and reduce impacts from winter peak -flow events.
3. Action: Use tools including thinning and gap cuts in the snow zone, and uneven -aged
management to facilitate late -season streamflows.
4. Action: Maintain mature forest cover on and around wetlands and headwater areas and
significant watershed features that promote climate resiliency.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 27
5. Action: Monetize (and/or provide economic incentives) to increase summer streamflow
actions through a payment for watershed services (PWS) program to provide incentives for
the forest landowners to adopt changes in forest harvests that are less damaging to
ecosystem services. (Also see goal 3, objective 3, action 4. Consider applying financial
incentives to other ecologically beneficial practices.)
6. Action: Where possible, reconnect floodplain areas to reduce peak flows.
7. Action: Promote management of lowland and upland forested areas and road
infrastructure to minimize the impacts of increased frequency and magnitude of winter
flood events and mass wasting. Reconnect floodplain areas to reduce peak flows.
8. Action: Work with landowners to install and manage effective stream buffers -to offset the
increased heat loading and temperature exceedances cau- ,d by climate change,
considering factors such as buffer width, tree height, et
Objective 5: Create a Whatcom County forest manageme '.-program.
1. Action: Describe the capabilities and limitati, ,s of the —.ountytorn,-, )age forest lands
under climate change and recommend how thc. 'o ,ty can addrr ss climate impacts.
2. Action: Develop a revenue stream fro . -;try pra, '-�es or recreation on County -owned
Lands to support a forest ecologist/fore mar fr, pro-,ide stewardship activities of
these forests and advise small' ---st Lan - ,ners. Thy,, person will work closely with
watershed planning and cli ate at ion ac pities.
3. Action: Use science-basecnr , teag,� _. A p, ojections of climate change for Whatcom
County as a basis f- -nagi, County fo, fists.
4. Action: Seta, a some Coy ty-ownr d forestlands and community forests as laboratories
to explore innov�. e manag mer, strategies that facilitate forest resilience and ecosystem
services.
Objective 6: Increase active management of forests across Whatcom County to promote climate
resilience.
1. Action: Protect and conserve forested areas with structures and ecosystem services that
support forest and community resilience to climate change.
2. Action: Fund community forests on private forest lands that can be specifically managed
for forest resilience.
3. Action: Where appropriate, encourage managed forests with older average tree ages.
4. Action: Discourage clearcut harvests in the forested areas associated with development
actions such as short plats and long plats.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 28
Goal 3: All sectors of forest landowners manage forests for resilience while meeting their
individual needs and priorities.
Objective 1: Develop a framework for engagement and coordination across all sectors —local,
state, federal, and tribal governments; industry representatives, including foresters, harvesters,
and producers; and other stakeholders on forestry issues. The framework will include protocols
and guidelines for implementing active forest land stewardship, management, and resilience
strategies.
1. Action: Coordinate forest stewardship activities with Nooksack Indian Tribe and Lummi
Nation and support their priorities associated with treaty rights and ongoing access to
usual and accustomed areas and stations.
2. Action: Coordinate forest stewardship activities with the WP DNR Forest Health Advisory
Committee and implement actions aligned with recomm, ,dctions from the Western
Washington Forest Resilience Division.
3. Action: Collaborate with state and federal forest .nd manager, -it age"cies, large forest
landowners, and tribes to align land manager ,nt poli, *es for large-p ale forest resilience
and ecosystem services.
4. Action: Coordinate additional shared ^ement , landr wners to manage and mitigate
negative human impacts on forests anc iavig• . •,ater%,.ays adjacent to forest lands.
S. Action: Develop a study to a, ,dz,, otent � impacts of cumulative pesticide use on forest
health.
Objective 2: Build an alliance betty, VVhatco��unty and the Nooksack Indian Tribe and
Lummi Nation to align th prior,, of L , Plan t , honor treaty rights and support ongoing access
and use of usual and customed gas and stations.
1. Action: Convene G I facili; ce rA annual summit with forest landowners and tribes to
ensure access to usu. *.d accustomed places and coordinate land management
activities. /
2. Action: Ensure a communication framework for regular and ongoing coordination and
timely responsiveness on critical resource management issues.
3. Action: Integrate science -based knowledge and indigenous knowledge (i.e. two -eyed
seeing) in Whatcom County -led forest management programs and projects to support and
protect cultural landscapes for biodiversity, including fish and wildlife corridors, open and
forested wetlands, spawning and nesting areas, and foraging and canopy habitat.
4. Action: Coordinate and develop a shared Plan to ensure appropriate enforcement of rules
and regulations across jurisdictions.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 29
Objective 3: Retain forest land in a forested condition and increase forest cover through
stewardship and incentive programs and by reducing conversion and rezoning to other uses.
1. Action: Reduce conversion and rezoning of forested areas that result in cumulative loss of
forest cover in Whatcom County.
2. Action: Explore and develop a diverse range of incentive systems to broadly encourage
stewardship -focused practices and promote long-term sustainability and resilience across
the Whatcom County forested landscape
3. Action: Promote and provide education, technical assistance, and cost -share services to
forest landowners on retaining and managing forests and increasing forest cover where
practicable.
a. Partner with the Whatcom Conservation District and V\' Oept of Natural Resources
Small Forest Landowner Office to deliver stewardsF . rogramming and assistance to
forest landowners.
b. Identify high -priority areas for small forest i .downer technic, as ;istance and financial
incentive programs and market services i, 'nnd(,- ,iers not already accessing currently
available programs.
c. Bring Washington State University igc. ind Ea ns',)n Forestry programming to
Whatcom County landowners.
4. Action: Update the Whatcr . 1 Cou y Ope Space policy and Criteria and Public Benefit
Rating System (PBRS 19,. ` to inr --nrc,trrant of non -industrial private forest land,
small -acreage forest land, G small-acrea;;e wooded open space in Whatcom County
PBRS.
a. Add new " i-., -)roval" anc Basir \/alue" criteria to the Whatcom County PBRS Open
Space/Open 5, ce cat for; for "forest stewardship land" and "rural open space."
r/
b. Create a new fee fo, ch ;se new categories. The fee will be lower than the current PDS
fee for "Open Space and Farm & Ag Conservation Land," and the fee for "Open Space
and Farm & Ag Conservation Land" will be lowered for parity.
c. Add new "Public Benefit Value Criteria" to award points for "conservation easement",
"contiguous parcels under separate ownership", and "resource restoration."
d. Add other PBRS categories, as needed, to promote enrollment of more small -acreage
resource lands and forested land that are not eligible for "Agricultural" or "Designated
Forest Land" current use.
e. Modify the Whatcom County Public Access Policy to encourage broader enrollment in
PBRS, such as including a range of public access options that earn points, and where
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 30
the range could be "unlimited" access with the maximum points, to "limited" access or
"education" access with lower points, to "no" access with zero points.
5. Action: Develop and make available local, state, and federal ecosystem -service and
carbon -market programs and empower forest landowner participation. Explore building on
current pilot projects, such as the Janicki Logging/Carbon Lock Down Carbon Vault Project,
and Bonneville Environmental Foundation/Whatcom Conservation District City Forest
Credits project.
6. Action: Provide educational materials and incentives to landowners who Plan to develop
their properties to preserve forest cover on the developed properties (e.g., short plats, long
plats, residential development on single lots in rural -zoned areas).
7. Action: Assess, describe, and mobilize private -sector indus*-y expertise and assets to
support non -industrial forest land management.
Goal4: Wildland-fire responders, managers, and se, ice providers cL ab%rate to direct
community wildland-fire prevention, risk reductio, and,, . iergency response.
Objective 1: Assess and summarize the roles ^nd respon- ilities of i ,cal wildfire responders and
identify information gaps that affect public sai ly.
1. Action: Identify information ga- �o impr wildfire rjsponse and public safety.
2. Action: Build on existing' , idownr assistE ce :.id other programs to support at -risk
communities to improve i 1, crirdinate risk reduction and emergency -action
planning. /
3. Action: Asse: describe, a 1 mouil��e private -sector industry expertise and assets to
prepare for and i oond to � ldfir�s
4. Action: Complete any ,j[F,, nent the Whatcom County Wildfire Response Plan.
5. Action: Continue developing a Whatcom County Community Wildfire Prevention Plan for
implementation.
Objective 2: Reduce the risk of more frequent and widespread wildfires.
1. Action: Educate forest landowners on treatments that buffer forests and aquatic
ecosystems from wildfires, increasing vertical and horizontal separation where possible,
reducing fuels around homes and other structures and along roads and stand edges, and
managing riparian zones.
2. Action: Review county ordinances involving building setbacks and lot sizes to ensure
compliance with defensible -space best practices and to ensure alignment with the
FireWise USA program. Ordinances should be updated where appropriate.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 31
3. Action: Ground -truth new Whatcom County DNR WUI maps for accuracy when applying
the latest International Building Codes for WUI.
4. Action: Use County wildfire risk maps to prioritize stewardship and fire -resilience planning
and wildfire resources to decrease response times and minimize economic damage.
5. Action: Implement forest stewardship and community wildfire resilience planning on all
forested lands in Whatcom County. Coordinate planning across different land uses and
ownership boundaries.
6. Action: Inventory and analyze road access on Whatcom County public lands and in WUI
areas for fire response readiness and potential firebreaks in vulnerable and priority areas.
7. Action: Utilize forest industry businesses to plan and implement fire risk management
practices on Whatcom County public lands and explore ar promote similar industry -
delivered fire risk management services to small forest' 'owners and high -risk
communities.
8. Action: Explore using proceeds from forestry a, ,vities on Whatc,- i C aunty -administered
public land to implement fire -risk assessmer, and i est in risk-rr.dnagement
infrastructure.
9. Action: Update the Whatcom County
wildfire risks.
Figure 5. Understory tree planting. Photo credit: Brandy Reed.
include maps that address
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 32
Existing Forest Management Resources in Whatcom
County
Existing forest management in Whatcom County depends on collaborative management among a
wide range of programs and landowners to sustain the ecological health of local forests, respond
effectively to emerging management concerns and support the commercial timber industry. The
County forest management landscape is shaped by a wide range of resources and partners,
including programs and services provided by Whatcom County government, tribal governments,
municipal governments, state and federal agencies, other government agencies and entities,
private landowners, and nonprofit organizations. Together, these entities bring diverse expertise,
tools, and strategies that help balance ecological, cultural, economic, and recreational priorities in
stewarding the region's forested lands.
5.1 Whatcom County Departments and Ad Committees
• Forestry Advisory Committee —The Forestry A, . isory Commit. , (FAr,) provides review
and recommendations to the Whatcom Coup Coun, . on issues that affect the forestry
industry. The Forestry Advisory Committee also, ides a forum for all sectors of the
forestry community to contribute to d; -ssions oi. '-,e futurr of forestry in Whatcom
County. There are 17 FAC members. T(. me.. - are .ipr ointed by the County Council,
representing citizens with forestry exper nr , com, ne, cial forest landowners, forest
product manufacturers, har ,ste, ands )all fore, c landowners. The remaining seven
members represent ager .es. Olftw,z
• Planning Commissi-n —Th. tanning Cor.mission works with County Planning and
Development SF ces to -ovic, -ecorr.,nendations on implementation of the
Comprehensi Plan. The C -nmiss;in includes representatives from the development,
environmental, b. mess ar ind,.Astry, agricultural, forestry, mineral and/or aquatic
resources industries
Wildlife Advisory Committee —The Wildlife Advisory Committee advises County Planning
and Development Services on topics related to wildlife and habitat management as they
relate to the Comprehensive Plan. The goal of the committee is to integrate wildlife
management and protection into existing planning processes. The committee last met on
February 9, 2024.
• Climate Impact Advisory Committee —The Climate Impact Advisory Committee advises
the Whatcom County Council and Executive on topics related to climate impacts,
adaptation and mitigation strategies, and educates the public about climate change and
climate action. Committee representatives include those with educational and/or
professional expertise in subjects related to climate change, renewable energy
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 33
development, energy conservation, human health, forestry, farming, fisheries, food
security, land -use planning, and flood mitigation and planning.
• Lake Whatcom Management Interjurisdictional Coordinating Team —The Lake
Whatcom Management Interjurisdictional Coordinating Team (ICT) is a collaborative group
that coordinates activities and programs among the three jurisdictions responsible for
managing Lake Whatcom: the City of Bellingham, Whatcom County, and the Lake
Whatcom Water and Sewer District. The ICT plays a critical role in the implementation of
the Lake Whatcom Management Program (LWMP), which aims to protect and enhance the
Jake's water quality, manage water quantity, and address environmental challenges in the
watershed. The ICT roles and responsibilities are coordination across jurisdictions,
development of work plans, monitoring and progress review, policy implementation
support, and promotes consistency across agency program, and public engagement
efforts.
• County Parks and Recreation —The Whatcom Cour,.y Park 'ind Recreation Department
is actively involved in forestry issues, particularh, i the manage cnt ar i stewardship of
thousands of acres of forested parklands and atural r eas. Key role, and activities include
forest management planning, stewardship of fL 's+ ,reserves, ari providing a balance
between recreation and conservation rn forest lai,
• Conservation Futures Fund —The Coi ervai Mures Fund, managed by the County
Executive's Office, plays a sigr:'*-qnt rot, addressi,,gforestry issues by funding the
acquisition, preservation,,- a mai geme, of forestlands. Primary forestry -related
activities include protec, q work" Lang s, supporting conservation easements,
enhancing climate resilient, omoting pcI'Jlic use and recreation, and balancing
economic and cr ,erv,, n (e., restor.cion) goals.
• Conservation. sement Pi gram —The Whatcom County Conservation Easement
Program (CEP) pry its tar s, including working forestlands and wildlife habitat. The
program reduces the er;ion of forestlands to non -forestry uses, supports forestry
enterprises, enhances erisystem integrity and health, provides compensation to voluntary
participants based on the appraised value of the easement, and works with partners, such
as the (e.g., Whatcom Land Trust) to annually conduct monitoring that ensures compliance
with terms.
5.2 Whatcom County Regulations and Policies
• Comprehensive Plan —The Forest Resource Lands section of the Resource
Lands chapter covers a broad planning context relative to forest lands in Whatcom County,
including designation and conservation of forest resource lands, long-term commercial
significance of different lands, historical information, current -use taxation programs,
trends in the forest land base, diverse management goals by different owners, county goals
for retention of forest lands, and opportunities to promote working forest lands and timber
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 34
production. The chapter includes many goals and policies intended to maintain the diverse
character of forest lands in the County.
• Critical Areas Ordinance —This ordinance is a set of regulations designed to protect
environmentally sensitive natural resources within the County. It is enacted under the
Growth Management Act (GMA) and codified in Whatcom County Code (WCC) Title 16.16. It
applies to geologically hazardous areas, frequentlyflooded areas, critical aquifer recharge
areas, wetlands, and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. The ordinance aims to
preserve the ecological functions and values of natural environments while protecting
public health, safety, and welfare. It regulates land -use and development activities that
occur within or near designated critical areas to prevent adverse environmental impacts.
• Shoreline Management Program —This is a set of local policies and regulations, codified
as Whatcom County Code Title 23, that governs the use, dr .:lopment, and protection of
shorelines within the County. It implements the goals a• . 9quirements of the Washington
State Shoreline Management Act at the county level.. oe pru, am aims to protect and
preserve the ecological functions and values of irelines, inci, 'ing mr..Jne, lake, and
stream shorelines as well as associated wetl- As and 'oodways. it ,zeks to balance
environmental protection with public access, i. rp .ion, and res,,,onsible economic
development along shorelines. The prriram is des -ied to prF ✓ent unregulated or
inappropriate development that could 9r,.4N' )relint :sr irces and public welfare.
• Class IV Conversion regulati,-----Th 's IV Cor✓ersion process in Whatcom County
involves obtaining a permit , corn rt fore and tr, non -forestry uses, such as residential or
commercial developme. This r is rk.&'Ated under the Washington State Forest
Practices Act (Chapter 76.b, - ,W) and Wh :ccom County local codes. Key steps in the
process are appl; ,ortiL., errr, -equire, rents, critical area regulations, and coordination
with agencies
• Climate Action P. � — Thr �lir ,ate Action Plan guides the County government and
informs stakeholders - ch ; public about measures that need to betaken to mitigate
greenhouse gas emissiors and adapt to current and projected climate change. The Forests
chapter of the Plan provides specific information about how forest practices can store and
sequester carbon and about how forests can be managed to adapt to climate change.
5.3 Tribal Governments in Whatcom County
• The Lummi Nation and Nooksack Indian Tribe are the original stewards of Whatcom
County lands. The Point Elliot Treaty of 1855 ensures the tribes the right to participate in
regional forest planning, restoration, and climate adaptation. As sovereign nations, the
tribes should be engaged as Co -Managers in forest -related decision making. Tribes outside
of Whatcom County can engage in decision making based on their interests.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 35
5.4 Other Government Agencies and Entities
• City of Bellingham —The City of Bellingham (City), which manages over 9,000 acres of
urban forest canopy and over 3,500 acres of forest canopy in the Lake Whatcom
Watershed, is a proud Tree City USA. The City recognizes the importance of forests in the
Comprehensive Plan as well as goals set in Bellingham's Climate Protection Action Plan.
The City participates in the Lake Whatcom Watershed Management Program, and in 2001
began the Lake Whatcom Land Acquisition and Preservation Program to purchase and
steward available land in Lake Whatcom Watershed. The levy -funded Greenways Program
started in 1990 to acquire, protect, and steward City greenways. Several other City
programs support forest resilience, including the Restoration, Stewardship, and Mitigation
Programs. In 2021, the City began creating an Urban Forest Plan to manage the City's urban
forest and has initiated early actions, including creating a L- Amark Tree Ordinance and a
Community Tree Program. https://cob.org/
• Port of Bellingham —The Port of Bellingham man: ies propr. 'es with street trees,
wooded parks, and forested open spaces. The r it's Climate A,- -,n St. ategy includes
supporting healthy natural systems in and ar nd Por jroperties. T' ie Port's recent
partnership with the Whatcom Conservation Di;. ' .,with fundirg from the WA DNR Urban
and Community Forestry Program, co- `,=�ted a tre, -anopy assessment and tree
inventory, which the Port will use to de glop, ' ,nfor . nay gaging the long-term health and
maintenance of these green infrnstructu , - eis l—�://www.portofbeIlingham.com/
• US Forest Service (USFS) adNa- )nal P, k Se►✓ice (NPS) —The USFS and NPS manage
the largest sections of fog %in ^uu, ity. https://www.fs.usda.gov/ and
htt s://www.n s. e
Fm
• USDA Natural source onse ✓a+:on Service (NRCS)—The NRCS provides technical
support and co share to s sport conservation of natural resources on agricultural and
forest lands. https. �ww ,asda. ov/
• WA Department of Ecology —The Department of Ecology evaluates whether forest
practices rules protect fish, wildlife, and water quality by conducting effectiveness
monitoring studies on industrial timberlands, delivers science -based recommendations
and technical assistance to the Forest Practices Adaptive Management Program, monitors
air quality, and forecasts wildfire -associated smoke levels. https://ecology.wa.gov/
• WA Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) — WDFW actively manages healthy forests
to ensure Washington's natural resources continue to support wildlife populations and
local communities for generations to come. Through local partnerships and with support
from the state legislature, WDFW uses different management tools to restore forests to
historic conditions. https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/wdfw-lands/working-lands/forest-
management
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 36
• WA Department of Natural Resources (DNR)—DNR manages nearly 89,000 acres of
forested state land in Whatcom County for multiple objectives, such as habitat
conservation, water protection, and providing recreation opportunities while maintaining
sources of sustainable revenue in perpetuity. On private, tribal, and public (non-federal)
lands throughout Washington, DNR administers the Forest Practices Rules (e.g., timber
harvests, road building). DNR supports small landowners through multiple avenues
including the Small Forest Landowner Office, Family Forest Fish Passage Program,
Urban and Community Forestry program, and a riparian easement program. DNR also
serves as the state's largest on -call fire department, collaborating with landowners, fire
districts, and the public to prevent and respond to wildfires. https://dnr.wa.gov/
• WA State Parks —WA State Parks comprises over 2,900 acres of land in Whatcom County
that are managed for outdoor recreation and public enjoyr Ot. https://parks.wa.gov/
• WA State University Extension Forestry (WSU Extension)- `NSU Extension provides
science -based education and resources for owr . s of forested , d worded property in
participating counties. The program offers fo, stry cfacres
,es, publicat'ins, and online
resources that are designed for people with jus, f of wr� oded property as well
those with larger forested properties a, -a tree far tt s:// est wsu.edu/
• Whatcom Conservation District (What or .;D) — W' iatcom CD helps jurisdictions,
landowners, and residents ova, their i -ests, st,aet trees, and open space to foster
long-term forest health, r Anage v Afire ris rer;uce stormwater runoff, steward wildlife
habitat, and improve hum,-. hr .in anu .. AI- tieing. WCD Forest Stewardship and
Community Wildfi- ''ienc,, programs �)rovide technical assistance, forest stewardship
plans, and wilt4' e safety t )luat, is: ;mplement forest health projects, fuels reduction
projects, and g, n-infrastrt ture projects; and help land managers secure other
implementation rE. Farcet ://whatcomcd.or / ro rams.
5.5 Private and Non-p.,4
Entities
• Kulshan Carbon Trust (KCT) — KCT is a Bellingham -based 501(c)(3) nonprofit that
advances natural climate solutions through collaborative carbon conservation and
sequestration projects in Northwest Washington. KCT forestry efforts center on its
Community Biochar Program, which promotes wildfire hazard fuel reduction thinning and
the use of biochar as a safe, low -emission method for woody debris disposal. The program
also supports the integration of biochar in replanting efforts, improving soil health, water
retention, and seedling survival. By turning excess biomass into a long-lasting soil
amendment, KCT helps reduce wildfire risk, sequester carbon, and regenerate local forest
ecosystems https://www.kuLshancarbontrust.org/
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 37
• Nooksack Salmon Enhancement Association (NSEA) — NSEA creates partnerships with
landowners, tribes, local businesses, volunteers, agencies, and other non -governmental
organizations to lead the Whatcom County community in successful restoration,
education, and monitoring projects. NSEA is a 501 c(3) community -based, non-profit
organization focused on reversing the trend of declining salmon runs in Whatcom County.
Salmon are essential to our environment, culture, and economy, nourishing ecosystems
and supporting communities for generations. NSEA enhances rivers, creeks, and riparian
habitat while educating people of all ages to provide Pacific salmon and steelhead the best
chance at survival. https://www.n-sea.org/about-nsea
• RE Sources — RE Sources is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit working with community members and
decision makers to advance regionally -focused policies and partnerships that build
community and climate resilience. RE Sources forests and v atersheds programs provide
grassroots advocacy tools and technical and legislative P .,port, convene collaborative
efforts, and secure funding for community -driven pilo' ,ro, ts related to watershed and
forest resilience, a sustainable living -wage econor ;, and waa diversion and
reuse. www.re-sources.org//program/forests-a&orwatersheds/
_Z
• Sierra Club, Mt. Baker Group (MBG)—The Sit- q r .,jb, started i,. 1892, is the country's
oldest grassroots, volunteer -based environmental 'otection -irganization. The Washington
State Chapter includes seven local grc os. , Mt. BG :r (7roup (MBG) encompasses San
Juan, Skagit, and Whatcom Counties. M -7 NP ,rks ...n r-gional Sierra Club members and
supporters to encourage reg; focus i policiep and activities that build community,
environmental awarenes, and cli, ate res snc ;, including endorsing elected office
candidates that work with 'err, -LUu Adr.;ss local environmental concerns. Recent
forestry efforts incl, ' ^'MBG e Yking with ,ther concerned organizations to protect legacy
forests, urban f, ests, an.- ake . '1atram drinking water while maintaining trustee funding
from localtiML -sales (e.g. Nhatrim schools). MBG also engages in community
education efforts, Bch as , ar. ival documentary film festival at Bellingham's Pickford
Theatre, which in 20�_ Ocu,ad "Forests in Focus," four short films regarding forest
preservation. https://ww�ierracLub.org/washington/mount-baker-whatcom-skagi
sanjuan
• The Nature Conservancy (TNC) —The Washington Chapter of TNC partners with local
groups to conserve forests and other natural areas throughout Washington.
https://www.nature.org/en-us/
• Whatcom Land Trust (WLT) — Whatcom Land Trust is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and nationally
accredited land trust working to conserve and care for Whatcom County's wild and working
Lands forever. WLT protects vulnerable lands, preserves intact working farmland, forests,
and functioning habitat; restores degraded habitat; adaptively manages lands; and engages
community members and partners in conservation actions and stewardship.
https://whatcomLandtrust.org/
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 38
• Whatcom Million Trees Project (WMT) — WMT spurs positive action for trees and forests
that will enhance community health, equity, biodiversity, and resilience in this era of rapid
climate change. WMT plants native tree seedlings in public -purposed land and at -risk
neighborhoods that other entities do not restore. WMT protects mature trees in urban
neighborhoods and key watersheds via advocacy, awareness, and removal of invasive
species. https://whatcommilliontrees.org/
Collaboration Framework
The success of any forest resilience strategy will depend on strong, sustained collaboration across
all sectors. The Task Force recommends that the County establish a collaboration framework to
Leverage and effectively engage all partners with an interest in sustainable and resilient forest
management. This Plan recommends several actions for collabor, ,ng across the many partners
involved in forest management in Whatcom County. (See Goal , '-)jective 2, Action 3; Goal 3,
Objective 1, Actions 1 through 4; and Goat 3, Objective 2, P^Mons 1 t, -)ugh 2.)
Collaboration is most effective when it builds upon ex; .ing exnertise, aut..or pies, and community
infrastructure. All partners described under the Existi,. Rey arces in Why .com County section of
this Plan can play an active role in the on -the -ground imp -nentation ra collaboration framework.
By leveraging existing County programs and b 'Lu
County is well -positioned to lead a collaboratic
management that supports people ar -)syste
strong i. 'iti-sector partnerships, Whatcom
fray in forest resilience planning and
,for the tang term.
The Task Force recommends usi ; adapt' a manaL mF,it processes such as regular evaluation of
progress, opportunities to revise s, tr ,,es, anu ite6ration of new data and stakeholder input to
ensure successful cc
6.1 Mechanisrr
me.
The following are some of the a\ia;:able mechanisms to effectively collaborate across the partners
described under the Existing Resources in Whatcom County section of this Plan.
1. Forest Resilience Working Group:
Organize a cross -sector forum with representatives from diverse forest interests such as
private forestry, recreation development, and conservation to align goals, share
information, develop joint funding proposals, and coordinate implementation efforts.
2. Formal Agreements and MOUs:
Develop legal agreements among governments, tribes, and organizations to formalize roles
and collaborative commitments.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 39
3. Technical and Capacity Support:
Utilize County staff, advisory committees, and programs to support implementation,
permitting, monitoring, and landowner outreach.
4. Community Forest Partnerships:
Evaluate, and when appropriate, promote and expand models like the Stewart Mountain
Community Forest to provide accessible, co -managed forest lands with shared social,
ecological, and economic benefits.
5. Data Sharing and Monitoring:
Strengthen monitoring networks and transparency in reporting to support adaptive
management and public accountability.
6. Integrated Planning:
Align forest resilience goals with climate, water, hazard r, _,gation, species recovery,
recreation, and land -use plans to maximize synergy a, , a\, .I conflict.
7. Public Engagement and Outreach:
Ensure residents, landowners, and communi' groupp re informed ,nd invited to
participate in shaping forest futures.
Proposed Next Steps
Figure 6. View of Douglas Fir forest understory habitat at Blanchard Mountain. Photo credit: T. Abe Lloyd.
The Forest Resilience Plan is designed as a guide to future steps that the County, Tribes, and
Stakeholders can take to promote the resilience of Whatcom County forests. Additional input and
collaboration are recommended to implement the recommendations in the Plan. The Task Force
suggests the following steps to begin that work:
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 40
• Solicit comments from interested commissions and advisory committees that have not
commented so far, including the Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission,
Wildlife Advisory Committee, and Climate Impacts Advisory Committee.
• Continue government -to -government consultation with the Lummi Nation, Nooksack Tribe
and other Tribes with interest in Whatcom County forest management practices and
planning.
• Establish a mechanism and time frame to receive comments from the public on the Plan.
• Seek comments and recommendations from the County Executive's Office.
• Establish a new committee focused on Plan implementation. Committee composition
should include representatives from County Staff, the Task Force, and the Forest Advisory
Committee. Subject to the availability of funds, the committee should:
1. Review and incorporate appropriate comments from commissions and committees,
Tribes, the public, and the Executive's Office.
2. Identify and prioritize early actions that will contrib, �gnificant progress toward
implementation of the plan.
3. Complete a review of available staffing and f ding resourCL *o ad',ance
recommended early actions. ' Z
4. Recommend governance and managemem. , , ianisms to P avance early -action forest
management priorities by County - —ernment.
5. Draft an implementation Plan and , idgv- the rk- -or mended early actions.
• Formally adopt the Plan through a Coun I. r, ,olutiu.i.
• Publish and distribute the P' , i an, any a- )ciated reports.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 41
References
Craig R. Allen, Nelson Grima, Viola Belohrad, and Brendan Fisher (eds.), 2025. Forests as Pillars of
Social and Economic Resilience. A Global Assessment Report. IUFRO World Series Volume 45.
Vienna. 224 p.
Burt, T., N. Howden, J. McDonnell, J. Jones, and G. Hancock. 2015. Seeing the climate through the
trees: observing climate and forestry impacts on streamflow using a 60-year record. Hydrologic
Process 29,473-480.
Butcher, J. B., M. Faizullabhoy, H. Nicholas, P. Cada, AND J. T. Kennedy. Quantitative Assessment
of Temperature Sensitivity of the South Fork Nooksack River under Future Climates using
QUAL2Kw. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-14/233, 2016.
Chen, C., Bongers, F.J., Schmid, B., Ma, K. and Liu, X., 2025. Eco stem consequences of
functional diversity in forests and implications for restore' -in.. w Phytologist (2025) 247:
1081-1097.
Cristan, R., Aust, W.M., Bolding, M.C., Barrett, S.M., I insell, ' and Schilli 1g, E., 2016.
Effectiveness of forestry best management practic, i, _,ie United States: Literature
review. Forest Ecology and Management,-"O. O. pp.133- -1.
Churchill, D. J., Larson, A.J., Dahlgreen, M. C., "anki, , ^ He,sburg, P. F., & Lutz, J. a. (2013).
Restoring forest resilience: From r- " -once s, " at patter,.s to silvicultural prescriptions and
monitoring. Forest Ecology anr' ianaF anent, 11(201,3), 442-457.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foi, n.201' ' - -*`rz
Dickerson -Lange, S. E., & " it, R. , '014). Mor'eling the effects of climate change projections on
streamflow in the P' iksack k. �r ba, Nirthwest Washington. Hydrological Processes,
28(20), 5236-5250. `tps://doi.c :/10.'J02/hyp.10012
f Z
Dickerson -Lange, S., Grah, , J,-And R. Mitchell (2022). Modelingthe Effects of Forest
Management on August Sti,;ar,fLow: South Fork Nooksack River Pilot Research Study. A report
prepared for The Nooksack Indian Tribe Natural Resources Department, April 2022.
Domke, G.M., C.J. Fettig, A.S. Marsh, et at. 2023. Forests. In A.R. Crimmins, C.W. Avery, D.R.
Easterling, et at. (eds.), Fifth National Climate Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research
Program, Washington, DC.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2016. Qualitative Assessment: Evaluating the Impacts of
Climate Change on Endangered Species Act Recovery Actions for the South Fork Nooksack
River, WA. EPA/600/R-16/153. Western Ecology Division, National Health and Environmental
Effects Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 42
Falk, D.A., van Mantgem, P.J., Keeley, J.E., Gregg, R.M., Guiterman, C.H., Tepley, A.J., Young, D.J.
and Marshall, L.A., 2022. Mechanisms of forest resilience. Forest ecology and
management, 512, p.120129.
Flores, L., and Schwartz, A. 2015. Economic contribution of outdoor recreation to Whatcom
County, Washington. Earth Economics, Tacoma, WA.
Forest Carbon Data Visualization. n.d. https://forestcarbondataviz.org.
Ganguly, I., Pierobon, F. and Sonne Hall, E., 2020. Global warming mitigating role of wood products
from Washington state's private forests. Forests, 11(2), p.194.
Haddad, N.M., Brudvig, L.A., Clobert, J., Davies, K.F., Gonzalez, A., Holt, R.D., Lovejoy, T.E., Sexton,
J.O., Austin, M.P., Collins, C.D. and Cook, W.M., 2015. Habitat fragmentation and its lasting
impact on Earth's ecosystems. Science advances, 1(2), p.e1500052
Hall et al. 2018: McKane, Bob, J. Halama, A. Brookes, K. Djang, F Sarnhart, P. Pettus, G. Blair, J.
Hall, J. Kane, AND P. Swedeen. Nisqually Community Fo, A VL AA modeling. Region 10 Forest
Team monthly meeting, NA, OR, January 28, 2020.
Halofsky, J.E., D.L. Peterson, and B.J. Harvey. 2020.' anginf ,ildfire, charging forests: the effects
of climate change on fire and vegetation in the Paci, ' irthwest. Fir- Ecology 16:4.
Innes, J.L., and Tikina, A.V. 2017. Sustainable )i,-—anage, ant: f, om concept to practice.
Routledge, London and New York.
Klein, S. 2017.EPA Region 10 Clima4 �,;hd ,e anc -MDL Pilit Project- South Fork Nooksack River,
Washington. US Environmer ,t Prote, .inn Agei ,y, Cincinnati, OH, 2014.
Knapp, K. 2018. The Effects-' Forec, ed Climate .;hange on Mass Wasting Susceptibility in the
Nooksack River Bas' WWI, •adu =! SChioL Collection. 807.
https://cedar.wwL du/wwuet/ 17.
Malmsheimer, R.W., Bowy. J.L..' ier', J.S., Gee, E., War, R.L., Miner, R.A., Munn, I.A., Oneil, E.
and Stewart, W.C., 2011. 1 iar ing forests because carbon matters: integrating energy,
products, and land manager. ient policy. Journal of Forestry. 109 (7S): S7-S50, 109(7S), pp.S7-
S50.
Mantua, N., Tohver, I., & Hamlet, A. (2010). Climate change impacts on streamflow extremes and
summertime stream temperature and their possible consequences for freshwater salmon
habitat in Washington State. Climatic Change, 102(1-2), 187-223.
https://doi.org/l 0.1007/s10584-010-9845-2
Marion, J.L. 2019. Impacts to wildlife: Managing visitors and resources to protect
wildlife. Interagency Visitor Use Management Council, 1, pp.1-18
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 43
McDowell, N.G., Allen, C.D., Anderson -Teixeira, K., Aukema, B.H., Bond-Lamberty, B., Chini, L.,
Clark, J.S., Dietze, M., Grossiord, C., Hanbury-Brown, A. and Hurtt, G.C., 2020. Pervasive shifts
in forest dynamics in a changing world. Science, 368(6494), p.eaaz9463.
Moore, G., B. Bond, J. Jones, N. Phillips and F. Meinzer. 2004. Structural and compositional
controls on transpiration in 40- and 450- year -old riparian forests in western Oregon, USA. Tree
Physiology 24, 481-491.
Morgan, H., and M. Krosby. 2017. Nooksack Indian Tribe natural resources climate change
vulnerability assessment. University of Washington, Climate Impacts Group, Seattle, WA.
Morgan, H., M. Krosby. 2020. Nooksack Indian Tribe Climate Change Adaptation Plan. A
collaboration of University of Washington Climate Impacts Group and Nooksack Indian Tribe
Natural and Cultural Resources Department. University of Washington.
Murphy, Ryan D. 2016. "Modeling the Effects of Forecasted Clir _ , Change and Glacier Recession
on Late Summer Streamflow in the Upper Nooksack Rive. Basin '016). WWU Graduate
Schoo[Cottection.461.https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwu, ,461.
Nooksack Indian Tribe Natural Resources Departmei. (201- . South Fork'aooksack River
Watershed Conservation Plan(Draft 5.17.17). Demin, VA.
Perry, T.D., and J.A. Jones. 2016. Summer stre, Mn, 4-ficits orr regenerating Douglas -fir forests
in the Pacific Northwest, USA. Ecohydrolog� '01 .1--i— J(", 10.1 002/eco.1 790.
Raymond, C., H. Morgan, D. Peterp ,i, anc . Halo ky. 20'-2. A Climate Resilience Guide for Small
Forest Landowners in Weste Wash' _ _ I In,✓eYsity of Washington, Climate Impacts Group,
Seattle, WA.
Raymond, C.L., D.L. Pp ,rson, an, ?.M.. chr,ort. 2013. The North Cascadia Adaptation Partnership: a
science-managerr, 't collaborE on fo, responding to climate change. Sustainability 5:136-159.
Raymond, C.L.; Peterson, L. : R, .ne;ort, R.M., eds. 2014. Climate change vulnerability and
adaptation in the North Ca, a%es region, Washington. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-892.
Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research
Station.
Segura, C., K. Bladon, J. Hatten, J. Jones, C. Hale, and G. Ice. 2020. Long-term effects of forest
harvesting on summer low flow deficits in the Coast Range of Oregon. Journal of Hydrology
Volume 585, June 2020, 124749.
Sgroi, F., 2020. Forest resources and sustainable tourism, a combination for the resilience of the
Landscape and development of mountain areas. Science of the Total environment, 736, p.139539.
Thompson, I., Mackey, B., McNulty, S. and Mosseler, A., 2009. Forest resilience, biodiversity, and
climate change. In Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal. Technical
Series no. 43. 1-67. (Vol. 43, pp. 1-67).
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 44
Truitt, Stephanie E., "Modeling the Effects of Climate Change on Stream Temperature in the
Nooksack River Basin" (2018). WWU Graduate School Collection. 642.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2024. Quick Facts.
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/whatcomcountywashington/POP010220
Washington Department of Ecology. 2021. Climate Commitment Act.
Washington Department of Ecology. 2020. South Fork Nooksack River Temperature Total Maximum
Daily Load Water Quality Improvement Report and Implementation Plan. Publication No. 20-
10-007.
Washington Department of Natural Resources (WADNR). n.d. Washington's forests, timber supply,
and forest -related industries. https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/em_fwfeconomiclow1.pdf.
Washington Forest Products Association (WFPA). 2007. Forest fac , and figures. Olympia,
Washington. htt s://data.workin orests.or /doc/Forest°/ is%20and%20Fi ures%20200
7.pdf
Washington Forest Products Association (WFPA). 202' ;ontribution of ki,,g forests to the
Washington State economy. Olympia, WA.
https://data.workingforests.org/doc/WFPA_Industry :on _Impact, 2021_b.pdf.
Whatcom County. 2021. Climate Action Plan. 9lLI;
Whatcom County. 2024. Fourth quartr - )23 fin. , .al repor
Whatcom County. 2025. Resourr Lands r ,apter. &ft
"w
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 45
Appendices
Appendix A. Community Values:
This appendix documents the key findings of the two -phased, community engagement approach,
which included 11 assessment interviews with stakeholders and partners, and a county -wide
online survey completed by 372 respondents.
Situation Assessment Interviews
The purpose of the situation assessment interviews was to collect input on core values and
interests related to Whatcom County forests and solicit feedback on the process for developing the
Plan. Triangle staff completed interviews with 11 stakeholders identified by County staff, Task
Force members, and interviewees. These results from the intervie- nelped shape the questions
for the Forest Resilience Community Survey.
Values and Interests of Interviewees
Interviewees noted that the values and purposes of fr ;st in V' ,atcom Cour'.y include supporting
employment through the timber industry, contributing h, .,thy ecosystems, including wildlife
habitat, conservation of healthy ecosystems, ^nd providir,,-ecreatior opportunities for residents.
Some interviewees spoke specifically of a "lo\, to. - land" , d t , multi -generational
management of private timber land in the Coun Ir .JCIIL, sime interviewees spoke about the
importance of forests to Tribal memo . 'io hay, oeen present in the Whatcom County region
from time immemorial.
'/
"We invest r time a, ' moi. -in tl-a farm on trees that we will never seethe
financial t • im on in mj *enera4,on. lam not doing it forme, 1 am doing it for
future gen,-tions, jus , my own but for the benefits to society too. "
/ Assessment Interviewee
Challenges to Achieving Forest Resilience
When asked about how to achieve forest resilience in Whatcom County, interviewees highlighted
key challenges, including fragmentation of forest land, recreation misuse, lack of adaptive
management, and climate change impacts and risks. Some interviewees also expressed concern
about the role of the County in forest management in general, given the County's limited capacity
and expertise. Interviewees identified fragmentation and changes in land use as threats to
preserving existing forest land and increasing canopy cover. With the growing interest in forest
recreation (hiking, biking, running, walking, gathering, etc.), interviewees noted that land managers
need to proactively regulate these activities to reduce potential harm to forest ecosystems. Some
interviewees expressed support for adaptive management to help manage the impacts of climate
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 46
change, noting that strategies such as diversification of plantings and longer rotation periods are
tools to build resilience to fire risk, drought, and rising temperatures associated with climate
change.
In general, interviewees supported maintaining a sustainable timber industry in Whatcom County.
Interviewees spoke of challenges facing the timber industry, including a lack of local mill capacity,
skilled workforce, and transportation infrastructure.
"The `timber basket' of our region is limited by mill capacity[not] by raw
materials. "
- Assessment Interviewee
Recommendations for Policy and Management Solutions
Interviewees lacked consensus on their recommendatior icy a management solutions to
the challenges noted above. Generally, interviewees - .,roached policy r, .;or. emendations
differently based on how they engage most with fores. 'orir .rily, professi ,nally, recreationally,
culturally/spiritually, etc.). For example, some interviews • highlighte(' a need for shorter timber
rotations (35 years) to maintain profitability ai ) . -t mark(-- 'ema,.d. Alternatively, interviewees
who did not work in industrial timber were mort 'ikeh• ncwe for longer rotations (70 years or
more) to support ecosystem benefits ' carbo aquestra*;on.
Similarly, interviewees in the tim' .;r indup y were . ore Jkely to note that the existing
environmental regulations in Was. L5* , i are r, the strongest in the world and are
successfully supporting h, 'cos, `ems. Spr,;ifically, interviewees spoke of DNR Forest
Practices Rules, whi& -gulate tip )er h, rep, in Washington state. Other interviewees expressed
a desire for additional r_ tection to eser.e old -growth forests, reduce clean cuts, and encourage
structural complexity.
Interviewees suggested potent,al ;olicy solutions including:
• Financial incentives such as conservation easements or carbon credits to landowners who
adopt management practices such as delaying harvests or preserving mature forests.
• Tax incentives or subsidies for landowners who commit to longer rotations to (e.g., 70+
years) to improve timber quality, increase carbon sequestration, and promote forest
health.
• Policies that encourage investment in local timber infrastructure, including mills,
transportation, and skilled workforce training. This will reduce costs and increase local
processing capacity.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 47
• Policies that manage recreational access, including off -road vehicles, mountain biking, and
trail building.
• Policies that encourage thinning, controlled burns, and insects/disease management to
enhance forest resilience to climate change, insects/disease, and wildfire.
Many of these themes are consistent with, and further supported by, the results of the Community
Survey. The following section elaborates on the results of the Community Survey.
Whatcom County Forest Resiliency Community Survey
The purpose of the Community Survey was to expand the scope of input on the development and
contents of the Plan beyond the assessment interviews and recommendations of the Task Force
members. The online survey was open for 32 days and received 372 total responses. Survey
questions were informed by the results of the assessment intervie, , and drafted in collaboration
with Task Force members to incorporate their expertise. The si - • relied on a convenience
sample, relying on publicity and personal networks to recruit .any wi, ,g participants. A
convenience sample does not rely on probability or rand n selection o. articir ants and thus is
not demographically representative of Whatcom Col, y's por elation or of P.akeholders in the
County's forests.
Survey Demographics
Overall, the demographics of the surv, -,sponc ..s skewed older, whiter, and more female -
identifying than the population. Re ,onde :s wert also asked about the general area of the county
they live in (suburban, rural, urb, or ot'016_' ",znc,id;nts were nearly equally divided among
suburban, rural, and urban areas.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 48
13 How old are }you?
Prefer not to spec i1
85 or older 1.41%
75-9411.31% (32)
65 - 74 27.92% (79)
Figure 7. Most respondents, 59%, were 65 years old or
old. The remaining20% of respondents were 54 oryou
12 How do you i
3)
- 34 7.07% (20 )
35-44 6.83% (25)
45 - 5411.66% (33)
dents were between 55-64 years
PldValact all that apply.
100% IV
9 0%
8 0%
70%
60% 48.06%
V/
5 0% 38.1iB%
4D%
30%
20%
10% 1.77% 0.35%
0%
Female Male Non -binary Gender(s)
not listed
here
12.37%
Prefer not
to specify
Figure 8. Of the respondents who choose to specify, most identified as female, 48%. 12 % of respondents chose not to
specify theirgender identity.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 49
Q14 How do you identify? Please select all that apply.
Race(s) or ethnicity not � Asian or Asian American 1.77%(5)
listed here (please specify): American Indian or Alaska
4.24% (12) Native 1.06% (3)
Prefer not to specify13.43%(38)
Black or African American
0.35% (1)
Hispanic, Latinojalx, or
Spanish origin 1.05%
(3)
RV 1**w
White 78.r =)
Figure 9. Of the respondents who chose to specify, most identified a te, 78%11391respondents choose not to
specify their race%thnicity.
Q11 Which of the fallowing best de--ribes
❑ther(pLease
S. tan (a residential
area 'ski rrs of a city)
31.80g1 ')
alcommunity you currently live in?
Rural (a countryside or
farmingarea, away from
city life) 28.27%(80)
Urban (a city or densely
populated area) 34.98%
(99)
Figure 10. Respondents were nearly equally distributed among suburban, rural, and urban areas when asked where they
live in Whatcom County, with the most in urban areas (35%).
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 50
Q10 How do you typically engage with the forest in Whatcom County?
100%
9 0%
s 0% Ss.579E
70%
s Ors
50%
40%
25.Bio%
30% 19.089E
18.739E
18.259E
20% 10.959E
_
10%
3.899E -
0%
Work in Ownand Recreate
Hunt and Practice
of Other
commercia manage on forest
gather on spirit,}
pically (please
Iforest forest land
forest cultur
gage specify)
industry land
land tra
e%pnel)followed
N/
Figure 11. Most respondents engaged with the forest through
recr by 'punting and gathering (26%).
Respondents were able to select more than one option.
Primary Purpose and Personal Values of Fo,
s.-
Survey respondents were asked to rank the prirr, — ,urpose o; forests in Whatcom County, with 1
being the most important and 9 bei- the, ast irr, nrtant. r-jverall ecosystem services were ranked
as the most important (1) purpo, by the nst resl..ncI.Ints (28%) followed by climate resilience
(20%) and fish and wildlife habitat � 11 ,. The tol.tuw;,lg comparisons area result of filtering the
responses based on the r ,N�, tents nical mrie of engagement with forest in Whatcom
County. A
• Of the respon, its whr ,ter ,lfied themselves as engaging with the forest through work
in commercial fo, ,t di �stry: 25% ranked sustainable forest industry the most
important purpose of `crests in Whatcom County followed by lumber production (23%)
and climate resilience (18%).
• Of the respondents who identified themselves as engaging with the forest through
recreation: 31 % ranked ecosystem services as the most important purpose of forests in
Whatcom County, followed by fish and wildlife (21 %) and climate resilience (20%),
which aligns with most of the total sample of survey respondents.
Survey respondents were asked to rank what they personally value most about forests in Whatcom
County, with 1 being the most valuable and 9 being the least valuable. Overall, ecosystem services
were ranked as the most personally valuable (22%) to respondents, followed by recreational
opportunities (19%) and habitat for fish and wildlife (18%), which were ranked almost the same.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 51
• Of the respondents who identified themselves as engaging with forest through recreation,
21 % identified recreation as the most personally valuable. More of these respondents
identified ecosystem services as the most personally valuable (23%).
• Of the respondents who identified themselves as engaging with the forest through work in
commercial forest industry, about aqua rter(25.93%) identified lumber production as the
most personally valuable (1), followed by sustainable timber (25%). 8% of these
respondents identified ecosystem services as the most valuable aspect of forests in
Whatcom County.
Threats to the Goals of the Plan and Challenges to Achieving Forest Resilience
The largest number of respondents (43%) identified changes in land use, increased development
and conversion of forest land to other land uses as the biggest thre'.' when asked to rank the
biggest threats to reaching the goals of the Planas identified in th Jrdinance.
Q8 Given the following definition, what do you ar Jpate are . 9 biggest challenges to
achieving forest resilience? (Select the t j 3) Forest Res,. an.e: Capacity
of forest ecosystems to adapt to change inclta. "ig n- Aral, anthrojogenic, and climate -
associated disturbances while retaining, recoverinc .
structure, and function and ad^ `;nq to cha
700�
sow
A enhancing ecosystem composition,
-ing an�a future conditions.
Invasive Forest Pollution
species land
conversion.
develop.
23.34 %
other
(please
specify)
Figure 12. Overall, the majority of respondents (76.66%) identified conversion of forest land and development as the
biggest challenge to achieving forest resilience.
No matter what they indicated as their primary connection with forests, between 73 and 81 % of
respondents identified forest land conversion and development as one of the three biggest
challenges to achieving forest resilience.
• 74% of respondents who work in the commercial forest industry identified forest -land
conversion and development as one of the three biggest challenges to achieving forest
resilience.
• 74% of respondents who own and manage forest land identified forest land conversion
and development as one of the three biggest challenges to achieving forest resilience.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 52
• 81 % of respondents who recreate in forest land identified forest land conversion and
development as one of the three biggest challenges to achieving forest resilience.
• 76% of respondents who hunt and gather on forest land identified forest land conversion
and development as one of the three biggest challenges to achieving forest resilience.
• 73% of respondents who practice spiritual or cultural traditions and/or harvest
activities on forest land identified land conversion and development as one of the three
biggest challenges to achieving forest resilience.
Climate change was the second most identified challenge, although it was not consistently
identified across engagement identities. For example, only 23% of respondents who work in the
commercial timber industry identified climate change as a challenge, whereas 75% of respondents
who practice spiritual or cultural traditions and/or harvest activities n forest land identified it as a
challenge to achieving forest resilience. Wildfires were also iden' ,ed as a challenge, especially to
those who work in the commercial timber industry (64%) and' .os, 1ho own and manage forest
Land (44%).
Management Priorities
Respondents were asked to rank forest management pri, ies, given lir. sited resources and the
impacts of climate change. Overall, increasek tment ii. iture ,cquisitions of timber land
and/or conservation easements by public ager, yes it . "-a WV atcom County and/or partners to
implement resilient forest manageme- -Yactice - as most f. equently ranked as the highest
priority (49%). None of the listed pr' ,rities ere ra. ed as :ne highest priority by a majority of
respondents, and responses va, l wide' L ~-,i oi, hf.vv respondents identified they engaged with
forests.
For example, 26% of re ,ondents how k it she commercial timber industry identified increased
investment in future aL iisitions of mber ;and as the highest management priority. 57% of these
respondents identified co. - inatio vvit' i the timber industry to support sustainable timber harvest
and maintain a robust forest% �'ry,my as the highest priority.
Although there was no clear consensus on the highest management priority, Opromoting and
supporting programs that provide technical assistance to non -industrial private forest
Landowners/managers and financial incentives for forest stewardship ranked as the second -
highest priority among respondents. Technical assistance was ranked as the second -highest
management priority by 40% of respondents who work in the commercial forest industry, 38% of
respondents who own and manage forest land, 30% of respondents who recreate, 26% of
respondents who hunt/gather on forest land, and 19% of respondents who practice spiritual or
cultural traditions and/or harvest activities on forest land.
Consistent Themes and Issues Lacking Consensus
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 53
Among survey respondents and interviewees, there were several overarching themes as well as
issues that lacked consensus. When asked about the purpose and personal value of forests in
Whatcom County, responses varied based on how respondents engage with the forests. In general,
those who worked in commercial timber or owned and managed forest land identified the purpose
and value of forest land to support a sustainable timber industry and timber production more than
respondents who recreate, hunt/gather, or practice spiritual or cultural traditions on forest land.
Alternatively, respondents who did not work in the timber industry identified ecosystem services as
the primary purpose of forests in Whatcom County.
The results of the assessment interviews and community survey reflect the different values and
priorities of survey respondents to help inform the prioritization of actions in the Plan.
-Mr
r�
1\
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 54
Appendix B. Policy Document Analysis
Existing policies, guidelines, and regulations provide a context for forest resilience planning in
Whatcom County, ranging from the federal to local level.
Federal agencies manage a large portion of land in the county. The U.S. Forest Service has
oversight of National Forest System lands in Whatcom County, specifically Mount Baker-
Snoqualmie National Forest. Guidance for forestlands is provided primarily by the National Forest
Management Act and Northwest Forest Plan. In addition, the 2012 Planning Rule mandates
inclusion of climate change in planning documents, including national forest land management
plans.
The National Park Service has oversight of national park lands in Whatcom County, specifically
North Cascades National Park. With minimal active forest management, the park is guided by
authorities such as the Wilderness Act and by the agency's Clim, , Change Response Program.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency provides regulato. , over. °ht for a wide range of issues,
such as water quality, air quality, and pesticides. Whatcr County is t, ated w;'hin EPA Region 10
whose regional office and associated field offices adr ,lister r-ograms ar.d rational regulations
within Whatcom County. The Natural Resources Cons ',at' i Service (Nr',CS) state office provides
technical and financial assistance to private forest Lando, qrs throug:, programs and initiatives
aimed at promoting sustainable forest manag mom. -nd cor. rva*;on. NRCS works with other
USDA agencies and state agencies to improve 1 'est ' ad,_ Nil afire resilience, water quality,
wildlife habitat, and climate change r ,._ -ice.
At the state level, the Washingt- Depar' cant of N aural Resources (WADNR) owns and manages
a large amount of forest land in Wt. ,n County. WADNR also regulates forest management on
private lands through adr 'on Va3hin '.)n State Forest Practices Rules and the Forest
Practices Habitat Cor .;rvation Pli The ,Ve,nington Department of Ecology (WDOE) has
oversight of monitoring, ,d regulato / iss'.es including Forest Practices rules compliance, the
Forest Practices Effectiver, s Mr ,Cor:ng Program, the Washington State Climate Resilience
Strateg and water quality any ,ur,itity.
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife provides oversight of how forest management
may interact with the State Wildlife Action Plan, Priority Habitats and Species, and at -risk species.
Washington State Parks is engaged in climate change adaptation planning.
Whatcom Conservation District is directly involved with several aspects of management and
planning on private forest lands including its Forest Stewardship Program, technical and financial
assistance for management, and climate and wildfire resilience. The Washington Climate
Commitment Act, administered through the Washington Department of Commerce, is a cap -and -
invest program with cross -cutting implications for the use of state and private forest lands to help
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 55
Whatcom County government provides a critical local context for the management of private forest
Lands and County Parks and Recreation lands:
• The Comprehensive Plan (currently under revision) and Climate Action Plan provide
guidance for many aspects of natural resource planning and practices, including resilience
objectives. The 2017 Ecosystem Report supports the Comprehensive Plan with an
inventory, characterization, and assessment of current ecosystem conditions, including an
analysis of risk, initial management recommendations, and landscape planning
considerations.
• The Open Space and Designated Forest Land programs help ensure the persistence of
forest cover on private lands.
• The County advises on forest practices permits (including Class IV conservation practices)
issued by the WADNR and ensures compliance with the Crit',al Areas ordinance.
• The Comprehensive Parks, Open Space, and Recreation ' .an guides the County and
Whatcom County Parks and Recreation Department i adu sing future needs of the
community and progress towards achieving them' sion of the apartment.
• The Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan identifies n, .oral hazards that 1fe.,t a jurisdiction,
assesses vulnerability to those hazards, and i -nulr ;s mitigatior strategies that will
Lessen the severity of natural hazards by protects, human life r.nd property
• The Forestry Advisory Committee, cor ,,Iof dive -� sta�aholders, provides review and
recommendations to the County CounI ' on i, 'hat-.rfect the forest industry. The
Forestry Advisory Committee •yell as ',rum for Pa sectors of the forestry community to
contribute to discussions r . theft are of , -estry ;n Whatcom County.
Tribal consultation on forest mane, err . a issu ,_ ,s facilitated by authorities such as Executive
Order 13175, the 2022 Prp ;al M. -lorandur- on Uniform Standards for Tribal Consultation,
and the Tribal Forest P, ection A,. Trib, `ors st management plans and agreements with other
parties help provide NG a Americ persr ectives on natural resource issues.
Standards and certification. - fr ,st . nanagement and forest products are provided by non-
governmental organizations. Ti,a F.,nerican Tree Farm System encourages sustainable
management, including forest resilience, through stewardship plans written by small forest
landowners. The Washington Farm Forestry Association provides statewide support for these
efforts. The Sustainable Forestry Initiative and the Forest Stewardship Council provide detailed
standards for sustainability, climate change, and other components of forest management.
Certification by these organizations encourages forest resilience and elevates the marketability
and value of wood products, especially those produced from industrial forest lands.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 56
Appendix C. Definitions
Best Available Science is scientific information that meets specific criteria to ensure its quality,
objectivity, and reliability for use in planning and decision making. The use of best available
science has been a priority in natural resource management for over 30 years and has been
particularly relevant for environmental assessment (e.g., in environmental impact statements).
Best available science is characterized by:
Quality and integrity —The quality, objectivity, and integrity of scientific information,
including statistical analyses, are a priority.
Peer review— Relevant information is subjected to peer review, ensuring it has been
critically evaluated by other experts in the field.
Replicable methods — The scientific process uses clearly-s+-)ted methods that can be
replicated by researchers and practitioners.
• Logical conclusions— Conclusions are logical, using ,as, able inferences based on data
(including statistical inference).
• Quantitative analysis— Data analysis employe .gorous statistic6 _in(' analytical
techniques.
• Proper context — Appropriate assumptions, anatgal technia-.es, data within an
appropriate context (e.g., geographic . re core-lerec' prior to application.
• Transparency— Uncertainty, confiden levF' a -�ata gaps are documented and
communicated.
Best available science can be dF ✓ed fror .
rM� �/
Peer -reviewed artich— in sci, ific journalp and similar publications.
Reports, govern, --nt dot, -ienL etc. *' tat have some level of peer review.
Scientific judg. ant elicited trough expert opinion and documented appropriately.
• Traditional ecolot, nl know ,dgr, and local knowledge, in appropriate contexts.
Best available science can be, .&ctive. When different sources contain divergent inferences,
expert judgment may be require A to evaluate the relative quality of those sources. The preferred
scientific information —including a justification —can then be used in an assessment, plan, or
management action. Decision makers must stay updated and adapt their approaches based on the
most current scientific information.
Best practices: Science -based management guidelines and procedures designed to ensure that
forests are managed sustainably, protecting environmental values while supporting social
objectives.
Carbon sequestration: The process of capturing atmospheric carbon dioxide and storing it in solid
(e.g., plants, soil) or liquid (e.g., oceans) form, thus helping to mitigate climate change.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 57
Climate change: Long-term alterations in the average weather patterns and conditions on Earth,
including changes in temperature, precipitation, wind patterns, and other atmospheric
phenomena. These shifts can occur naturally over geological timescales but are currently being
driven primarily by human activities, particularly the emission of greenhouse gases.
Climate change adaptation: The process of adjusting to actual or projected climate and its
associated effects, including with human intervention to facilitate the adjustment.
Climate change mitigation: A human intervention to reduce emissions or enhance the storage of
greenhouse gases (e.g., carbon dioxide).
Ecological restoration: The process of assisting the recovery of ecosystems that have been
damaged or destroyed. It aims to reestablish the structure, function, and biodiversity of
ecosystems, enabling them to provide benefits such as clean water end animal habitat.
Forest health: This subjective term refers to the ability of a forF . -) maintain biophysical
processes in a highly functional state, enabling it to be resilie.It to sL. �sors such as low soil
moisture, insects, and diseases.
Industrial forest landowners: Individuals, companit- or or anizations that own large tracts of
forestland primarily for the purpose of producing timber, iducts for prifit. These landowners
often manage their forests with a focus on su. -hle timb, harvesting, wood manufacturing,
and maximizing economic returns.
Small forest landowners: Individup' u, tities at own r;tatively small parcels of forestland and
manage them for diverse purpos, ,, inclur ig ecolk 'ical, recreational, aesthetic, and sometimes
economic benefits. The Washingi. DV uein„_ rrAl forest landowners as those who own less
than 5,000 acres of forests- -d h�, ist fewer*: ian 2 million board feet of timber per year on
average.
Sustainability: The rest, sible ma 3ger lent and use of natural resources —including forests,
water, soil, and biodiversity +o r ,et .:urrent human objectives without compromising the ability
of future generations to meet t. Jir iwn needs. It emphasizes maintaining a balance among
environmental health, economi.: viability, and social equity.
Traditional ecological knowledge: Cumulative body of information, practice, and belief about the
relationships between living beings (including humans) and their environment. It is developed by
Indigenous and other communities through direct contact with the land and natural resources and
is passed down from generation to generation.
Whatcom County Forest Resilience Plan, 58