Board seeking more input

Published 9:45 am Tuesday, August 4, 2026

PORT TOWNSEND — The Jefferson County commissioners have again pushed to a future meeting their decision to send a letter in support of or against a proposed land transfer.

The commissioners on Monday discussed the latest draft of a letter regarding the proposed Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe Land Transfer Act of 2026. If Congress passes the act, it would transfer the Dungeness Spit and Protection Island national wildlife refuges into trust for the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe.

The commissioners have been hearing public comment on the topic for months and heard more comments Monday.

The newest draft of a letter to U.S. Rep. Emily Randall, D-Bremerton, was discussed, and the commissioners chose to table the topic once more.

“I think that we’re not ready for a letter yet,” Commissioner Heidi Eisenhour said.

“Well, I don’t like that second letter, so I’d rather send no letter than that for sure,” Commissioner Greg Brotherton replied.

The purpose of the letter, as stated at its start, is “to convey input” the commissioners have received regarding the proposed legislation.

“One central piece of input we’ve gotten from residents of Jefferson County is a desire for more public engagement about this proposal,” the letter states. “There are folks who still live in Jefferson County who were part of getting Protection Island, located within Jefferson County, designated as a national wildlife refuge originally in 1982 with passage of Public Law 97-383 by the U.S. Congress.”

The letter acknowledges the collaboration and respect the county and the tribe have together and recognizes the historical and cultural connections the tribe maintains with the lands and waters that would be impacted by the act.

“These sites are not only central to the tribe’s heritage but are also integral to the ecological health and quality of life for our entire region,” the letter states. “Protection Island is of particular importance as critical nesting habitat for tufted puffins, rhinoceros auklets, glaucous-winged gulls, and many other species of seabirds and raptors. The waters surrounding the island provide essential grounds for a variety of marine mammals and its shoreline supports a WA Department of Natural Resources-designated marine aquatic reserve.”

The draft letter also mentions concerns the commissioners have about the land losing protections provided with oversight by U.S. Fish and Wildlife.

“We’ve also heard concern regarding the Trump Administration’s issuance of an order in late 2025 for a ‘comprehensive review’ of all wildlife refuges including Protection Island,” the letter states. “Given the current proven model of collaborative management, we’ve been asked whether maintaining or expanding this agreement could serve as a viable, permanent alternative to a transfer into trust status, ensuring continued federal oversight while honoring tribal expertise.”

People who spoke during the public comment period urged the commissioners support the continuation of the co-management agreement the tribe currently has with Fish and Wildlife.

Concerns have been stated about the tribe removing public access to the land if it goes into trust. People also have said they fear the public will lose a voice in the management of the land if it goes into trust.

In the new letter, many people who commented took issue with a particular paragraph.

“Furthermore, we have observed a recurring argument among some opponents who use the phrase ‘public lands in public hands’ to justify federal retention,” the letter states. “Within the context of our region’s history, there is a certain irony and arrogance in this framing. It overlooks the historical reality of colonization and the systemic dispossession of Indigenous peoples from their ancestral lands. To claim these areas are only ‘public’ when under federal control ignores the thousands of years of stewardship practiced by Tribes prior to European arrival.”

One commenter, Al Bergstein, said it is not arrogant or ironic to try and save what is a national wildlife refuge.

“There is a clear and urgent need for a more comprehensive and transparent dialogue on these topics,” the draft letter states. “Before proceeding with such a significant legislative change, it is essential that all stakeholders have a thorough understanding of the historical and ecological stakes involved.”

The draft letter “urges the delegation to carefully consider these complexities before advancing the act.”

“This is essentially a letter not to do anything, is how I read that second letter,” Brotherton said.

The commissioners concluded they need more information before deciding on how to write a letter either in support of or against the proposed legislation.

________

Reporter Emily Hanson can be reached by email at emily.hanson@peninsuladailynews.com.