Growth rules may apply to farmers, ranchers

COLVILLE — Farmers and ranchers may soon have to prove they’re not harming environmentally sensitive areas in Stevens County, as county officials struggle to avoid crushing economic sanctions.

The Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board has given the county until July 9 to adopt a new “critical areas” ordinance. Among other changes from an ordinance the board overturned last year, the new ordinance must apply to farmers and ranchers.

To force compliance, the growth board has asked Gov. Gary Locke to withhold tax support from the county — a step he presumably won’t take if the county satisfies the board’s requirements.

Those requirements were expanded in February to include elimination of an exemption for farming and ranching in environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands and around certain streams. That policy began with the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board and spread east across the state, county planner Jenni Anderson said.

“Essentially, agriculture becomes a nonconforming use,” Anderson said.

That has inflamed farmers and given county officials heartburn.

“There’s a lot of fear about, ‘I’m going to have to quit farming this land,’ ‘Is this a taking?’ — those kind of questions,” Anderson said.

Further, a draft ordinance designed to satisfy the regional growth board eliminates an exemption from critical-areas protection for small wetlands and those unintentionally created when highway or railroad construction blocked drainages.

To try to soften the impact on farming and ranching, the draft ordinance repeatedly underscores the importance of agriculture, which it calls “the most prevalent and sustainable industry in Stevens County.”

The tentative document also states that “other factors such as a limited county budget, low staffing levels and commitments to other needed programs, ranging from law enforcement to transportation to human services must be factored into the final course of action.”

The proposal calls for conflicts with agricultural uses in critical areas to be resolved with measures suggested by the Stevens County Conservation District and other agencies to mitigate environmental harm. If that sort of voluntary compliance doesn’t succeed, landowners could be prosecuted in District Court.

Expansion of nonconforming structures also would be limited by the proposal to beef up critical areas protection. No waterward expansion would be allowed, and limits would be placed on impervious surfaces such as driveways. However, the proposal says inclusion of pavement in the equation could create flexibility for structural changes.

Property owners could be required to hire expert consultants for complicated projects. The county itself has hired experts to craft the critical areas ordinance that is to be presented to county commissioners in early July for approval.

A final draft is expected to be ready for public comment in yet-unscheduled hearings in late June, Anderson said.

“We feel we are on track at this point,” she said.