From wean@whidbey.net Sun Apr 5 18:31:50 1998 Received: from mxu2.u.washington.edu (mxu2.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.9]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with ESMTP id SAA19016 for ; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 18:31:50 -0700 Received: from islander.whidbey.net (root@islander.whidbey.net [204.57.140.1]) by mxu2.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.09) with ESMTP id SAA06377 for ; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 18:31:49 -0700 Received: from [204.94.52.160] (asn160.whidbey.com [204.94.52.160]) by islander.whidbey.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA13257 for ; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 18:31:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Priority: 2 (High) Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 17:30:06 -0800 To: consbio@u.washington.edu From: wean@whidbey.net (Marianne Edain/Steve Erickson) Subject: Help for Conservation Legal Action Urgently Needed I am on the Board and serve as litigation coordinator for Whidbey Environmental Action Network (WEAN), a non-profit dedicated to the preservation and restoration of native biodiversity. Whidbey Island is in northern Puget Sound. WEAN is engaged in continuing conservation legal action against Island County, Washington. To cut to the quick, the County must adopt a comprehensive plan and development regulations under the Washington Growth Management Act to designate and protect "critical areas" including "wetlands" and "fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas". Fish and wildlife conservation is defined as: "Land management for maintaining species in suitable habitiats within their natural geographic distribution so that isolated subpopulations are not created." Under law, the County must base this action on the "best available science". It has taken us three years of litigation to get to this point, with me functioning as unpaid lawyer in front of the relevant state administrative law body, the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board. I have been consistently winning. We now need to get material in the record for the next round of appeals. Specifically, we need expert submissions (the "best available science") that address the following points: 1) The relative importance of smaller streams and wetlands in a constrained island landscape compared to the mainland. Are the importance and functions of these landscape elements dependent only on their absolute magnitude, or also on their context? The County's consultant is proposing buffers that appear based on large mainland riverine systems and primarily on minimally protecting water quality and in-stream function, not terrestrial wildlife function. 2) The importance and reasons for the conservation of isolated and outlier plant populations. There are numerous native prairie plant species which, while not endangered elsewhere in their range, are severely reduced in numbers and distribution on Whidbey Island. (See #4 in this list). For example, does conserving such populations help buffer the species against extinction, and maintain evolutionary potential and genetic diversity? Does the definition of "fish and wildlife conservation" essentially translate into a policy of no extirpation of the remaining occurrances of these native species? 3) The importance of and reasons for the conservation of remnants of ecosystems which have been severely reduced in extent and occurrance. Specifically, old growth forest and native prairie remnants. 4) Not included due to its length - our evaluations of various native plant species whose status warrants (we believe) designation by the County as "species and habitats of local importance". I can supply much more detailed information about current and historical conditions and trends on Whidbey Island. Expert written submissions are needed, not in-person testimony. Our deadines for getting material into the record are April 9 and April 20. We can possibly pay, depending on your fee. If you can help, please contact me ASAP. -Steve Erickson Frosty Hollow Ecological Restoration Whidbey Environmental Action Network (360) 579-2332 Box 53, Langley, WA 98260 .