PORT ANGELES — The Washington Forest Practice Board and the state Department of Ecology will host a public hearing next week to collect comments on a new proposed forestry rule.
The meeting is scheduled for 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. Monday at the Vern Burton Gym, 308 E. Fourth St., Port Angeles.
The rule, known as the Np Rule, would dictate how much buffering is required around non-fish-bearing streams, said Cindy Mitchell, senior director of public affairs for the Washington Forest Protection Association.
“There’s a current buffering in the rules that protects 60 percent to 65 percent of the stream,” she said. “The current rule says a minimum of 50 percent of the stream needs to be protected. The rule is flexible, so in some cases, even 100 percent of streams are protected because of add-ons.”
The rule was established in 2001.
The new rule from Ecology would require 100 percent buffering of the streams, and it’s not flexible, she said.
“They’re coming up with this based on what we think is misapplying the Clean Water Act standards,” Mitchell said. “It really creates a whole bunch of safety issues and operational issues in working forests. You end up with private trees that can’t be managed.”
Mitchell said she expects about 50 people to attend the meeting based on similar meetings July 23 in Longview and Tuesday in Sedro-Woolley.
“The Sedro-Woolley meeting had 50 people show up and 35 testified,” she said. “Only one supported the rule. The rest said the rule doesn’t make common sense, and if you really want to protect streams, you need to look at the whole system.
“We’re really trying to tell the Forest Practice Board and the Department of Ecology that it’s too much. It’s an overreach and it’s making operating timber lands very difficult.”
Joe Murray, a forester who lives in Clallam County, plans to attend the meeting and speak against the rule.
“We need to take a step back and reconsider this rule and not pass it at this time and maybe continue doing research on the issue further,” Murray said.
Murray has been a forester for 50 years and has spent the last 25 years as a member of the Riparian Scientific Advisory Group, which does research on the impacts or benefits of forest practice regulations as they relate to public resources, he said.
“I’ve worked with the science groups that have contributed to the science behind the proposed rule,” Murray said. “I feel there’s a number of problems with it.”
Among them are that the studies used too small of a sampling area, he said, and they didn’t take into account the uniqueness or diversity of the streams.
“Some of the economic impacts are that it’s estimated there will be 200,000 acres of forest land removed from the commercial forest base without compensation,” Murray said. “That’s enough acres to run two saw mills on an annual basis and 12,000 jobs in the state of Washington. It’s going to reduce tax revenue and take enough out of production to build 15,000 houses per year.”
For more information, go to www.wfpa.org/forest-facts/one-page-issue-papers-and-data.
To submit comments, email forest.practicesboard@dnr.wa.gov by 5 p.m. Aug. 12. Comments also can be mailed to Attn. Patricia Anderson at P.O. Box 47012, Olympia, WA 98504. Mailed comments must be postmarked by Aug. 12.
________
Reporter Emily Hanson can be reached by email at emily.hanson@peninsuladailynews.com.
