A Washington Court of Appeals decision has Island County officials back at square one.

They announced recently that the practices most farmers use to protect environmentally sensitive areas will need to be redeveloped as part of the Critical Areas Ordinance update.

And to comply with a Court of Appeals order, it will be done a bit earlier than expected.

Island County Planning Director Phil Bakke said that the county will be looking at establishing new Best Management Practices for people in the Rural and Commercial Agriculture zones. Originally scheduled to wrap up in February with the rest of the critical areas ordinance, a recommendation will be in place by late Fall.

“I think that’s what the community asked us to do indirectly,” Bakke said.

He was referring to a series of community meetings where the county presented proposed changes to county law that would eliminate a large portion of land available to farming because of increased buffers around critical areas.

The review was already scheduled to be included in the review of the Critical Areas Ordinance currently underway. Bakke said that the regulations would probably be facing an elevated level of scrutiny even without the court’s decision.

“I kind of feel like everything we’re doing is with a lot more scrutiny,” Bakke said.

Best Management Practices outline a plan that a farmer submits to the county detailing the steps the farmer will take to protect sensitive areas such as wetlands, small streams or high bluffs.

As a result of a court decision earlier in the year, the county needed to increase buffers around those critical areas. The county released a set of potential ordinances with those and other changes that irked many people in the county. Hundreds of people showed up to several community meetings on the subject to deliver one message — they didn’t like the change.

But the county is bound by the court’s decision. As a result, the county is looking at redeveloping what Bakke called the most restrictive practices in the state.

In King County, people can have six animals per acre of land. In Island County, however, people are allowed one animal per acre before a farm plan must be submitted. In Pierce County, people have the option to utilize best management practices.

“Island County, as far as we can tell, is the only county that has adopted BMP’s as a matter of law,” Bakke said.

This means that in Island County, if a person is not following the practices, they are subject to law enforcement action. In other counties, the policies are in place as guidelines.

“As we see it, the only alternative is to try and accelerate that revision,” Bakke said. “We’ll be developing a new program for users in the rural and commercial ag. zones. We won’t be reviewing the portion of the program that the court (struck down).”

Starting from scratch

Bakke said that the county will be leading a community-based effort to redevelop the standards that farmers need to follow.

According to an ordinance passed Monday by the Board of County Commissioners, the process will begin Aug. 18 at a Planning Commission meeting. The commission will establish its goals for the process. Bakke said he wasn’t sure yet what, if anything, would change.

“We’ll be working feverishly to figure that out,” he said.

The next part of the process will rely heavily on members of the community to help form the direction of the practices.

An agriculture review committee, similar to one established in the late 1990s to develop the current standards, will be appointed and will begin working on the new rules. It will meet Aug. 31 and again in September.

The committee is expected to report its recommendations by Sept. 26.

Island County commissioner Mike Shelton said he was not sure of how many people would be involved, or who exactly would be on the committee.

“We’re trying to put together something that works for agriculture and at the same time protects our critical areas,” Shelton said.

He said that the group will largely consist of farmers and those that “are concerned about the environment.”

But will any members of the Whidbey Environmental Action Network be a part of the group?

“I would doubt it,” Shelton said.

WEAN was on the original committee, but walked out on the talks shortly before they were approved, Shelton said. There were a number of issues, including the protection of certain critical areas, that WEAN did not agree with, he said.

“We came down to the end and everybody agreed except for WEAN,” Shelton said. “They walked away and said they were going to appeal.”

Shelton said that he hopes the review of the practices will lead to an equitable solution, but he is not sure if WEAN will be satisfied.

“My opinion is that we will never do anything that satisfies WEAN,” he said.