Over the past four months, our outreach to a diverse group of Washingtonians reveals that the Np rule, with its demonstrable negative consequences to our communities, sets a precedent that harms all of us, not just forest landowners who are under direct attack.
What the Np rule does and why this matters:
- Sets a costly precedent that will make many commercial activities difficult, if not infeasible, in this state.
- Shifts policy development with significant economic and social consequences to unelected agencies with no accountability to the affected parties.
- Directly removes 200,000+ acres of working forests ($5–8 Billion in losses).
- Cuts revenues for schools, fire districts, hospitals, roads.
- Threatens mills and union jobs by shrinking timber supply.
- Rejects common sense lower cost alternatives.
- Accelerates conversion to development, weakening rural economies.
The Department of Ecology’s use of its de facto ‘veto’ power to force rule development consistent with its policy preference of having wide forested buffers on non-fish streams calls into question the role of the 13-member Forest Practices Board (FPB) that is responsible for forest practices rule-making on Washington’s private forest lands. Why does the Department of Ecology (Ecology) get to call the shots, including dictating how the other four agencies on the FPB vote?
Ecology’s policy preference was explicitly developed to meet their interpretation of the Clean Water Act for these non-fish waters: namely that there can be no temperature impact at no time in no place on these waters despite them being well below temperature thresholds for fish species that live downstream.
- As well as being an infeasible and unrealistic goal, Ecology’s no change at no time in no place interpretation of Clean Water Act requirements ignores federal Clean Water Act definitions of targets and limits on these waters.
- Ecology’s policy preference also ignores the biological opinion of the Forests and Fish Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) that was approved by the US Fish and Wildlife Service to guide forest practices on Washington’s private forest lands.
- Ecology’s policy preference ignores the biological relevance finding of the research (that was co-authored by Ecology staff) that supposedly is driving this rule change.
- Ecology’s policy preference most certainly ignores the economic impacts that our rural forestry-dependent counties will face if this rule is enacted, thus compromising a core goal of the Forests and Fish agreement that underpins our Forest Practices.
Washington’s Forests & Fish Law already provides strong protections for Np streams as memorialized in our HCP that was approved by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. So why this costly change for no net benefit? The $2 Billion of lost asset value and the economic loss of $5-8 Billion is not something that our rural Washingtonians and their communities can easily absorb. Public hearings showed overwhelming opposition to this rule because of this fact.
Now is the time to stand together. If you care about Washington’s working forests, rural jobs, and fair, science-driven processes please take action today.
Please go to Working Forests Coalition – TypeNp 
This link will transfer you to the working forests coalition site where you can learn more and send a letter to our state agencies.
To join us in opposing this rule in person:
On November 12th there is an open public meeting when the Forest Practices Board will take the final vote on the Type Np buffer rule. The meeting is in Room 172 of the Natural Resource Building at 1111 Washington St SE, Olympia, WA 98501, United States. The meeting starts at 9 a.m. Details on the Type Np discussion and vote timing will eventually be posted at this site: https://dnr.wa.gov/dnr-boards-and-commissions/forest-practices-board (scroll down to November 12th meeting date). Speaking on the rule is optional, but your presence standing against this rule will speak volumes.
We thank you for standing with us as we take on this David and Goliath task of inserting common sense and fairness into our natural resource policy development. Rural Washington depends on you.