SCIENCE SHOWS Current RIPARIAN BUFFER RULES Keep Water Cool for Fish

Adaptive management CMER science called Hardrock and Softrock Experimental Buffer Treatment Studies show that current forest practices rules keep non-fish and fish stream temperatures below the Dept. of Ecology’s temperature criteria for salmon streams, below 16⁰ C, (60.8°F). In fact Np streams are all cooler than that, at 12-14°C (54-58°F), they are called Tier II waters. Water Qualtiy Standards allow balancing productive industries and clean water so long as the temperature does not exceed the stream criteria of 16°C.

small, large and COUNTY forest landowner proposE RULE CHANGES BASED ON the science FOR Tier II waters

Hardrock and Softrock Experimental Buffer Treatment Studies, shows timber harvesting may temporarily increase water temperatures 0.5-1°C (0.9-1.8°F), this inconsistent with EPA approved Tier II policy, and does not affect salmon-safe temperatures. Studies show this is a temporary effect and streams recover to their natural temperature as trees and vegetation grow back in a few years. As an extra precaution to minimize this change, small, large and county forest landowners propose doubling the length of buffers where it matters, to a minimum of 1,000′ – upstream of the intersection where fish and non-fish streams meet, and widening the first 500’ to 75′, to ensure fish-safe temperatures are protected. 

Ecology says a temporary temperature INCREASE is PROHIBITED above DE MINIMIS OF 0.3°C (0.54°F) in tier ii waters

The Dept. of Ecology is attempting to impose no change in temperature anytime, anywhere beyond what is called “measurable change” of 0.3°C (0.54°F). This is inconsistent with EPA approved Tier II policy and the plain language in the law. Their remedy is to try and effect this de minimis change and double the width and length of buffers along all non-fish streams in Western Washington, which are currently protected with a 50′ intermittent buffer on either side of the stream, plus additional buffers at sensitive sites, such as intersection of fish/non-fish streams and unstable slopes. They are trying to require private landowners leave trees in buffers for de minimis change in temperature that is 10 times below natural variation which can be 3°C or greater, even in areas with no timber harvest activity. Natural and temporary disturbance from windstorms or forest fires can cause stream temperatures to warm up and then recover as trees grow back, and salmon continue to thrive. Ecology’s 0.3°C limitation is just 10% of the actual background temperature variation in the Hardrock and Softrock studies and does not reflect what really happens in nature.

DEPT. OF ECOLOGY’s JUSTIFICATION IS FROM AN ERRONEOUS APPLICATION OF THE STATE’s TIER II ANTIDEGRADATION POLICY

Water Quality Standards consist of two parts: 1) designating beneficial uses and establishing criteria to protect them; and 2) antidegradation policy and implementation process, which established three tiers of protection.

1. Tier I: All existing uses must be fully protected and waters not meeting criteria must be brought into compliance.
2. Tier II Alternatives Analysis: Waters of higher quality than their assigned criteria can be degraded if necessary and in the overriding public interest (OPI). Only new or expanded actions under Ecology’s authorizations (NPDES permits, Clean Water Act Section 401 certifications, state waste discharge permits, and other water pollution control programs) that have a measurable change* in the quality of a water body would trigger a Tier II analysis. This assures that resources are spent on those actions that will cause a measurable change vs. insignificant actions. The Tier II Antidegradation process:
   1. Must evaluate less degrading alternatives and
   2. Must include intergovernmental coordination and public participation allowing affected communities to provide input on the proposed activity to balance the costs and benefits of economic or social development and water quality protection.**
3. Tier III: Any waters formally adopted as Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) must be protected from all future lowering of water quality.

*For purposes of Tier II, “measurable” is defined as a degradation of 0.3ºC temperature, 0.2 mg/l dissolved oxygen, 2 cfu/100ml bacteria, 0.1 pH units, 0.5 NTU turbidity, or any detectable change in a toxic or radioactive substance as measured in the waterbody outside the source area and after allowing for mixing.

**Ecology internal communication agrees: “Part of our job is to balance having productive industries and clean water”.  “Also wanted to reiterate that we do allow degradation beyond measurable change — Tier II — so long as it meets OPI”. Nov. 1, 2022 

Ecology ERRONEOUSLY USES THE ANTIDEGRADTION MEASURABLE CHANGE TRIGGER AS A HARD AND FAST LIMIT, MAKING THE DECISION BEFORE AFFECTED public HAS HAD input and REMOVES alternatives fROM ANALYSIS BY THE FOREST PRACTICES BOARD.

Antidegradation is not a “no growth” rule and was never designed or intended to be such. It is a policy that allows public decisions to be made on important environmental actions (EPA Water Quality Standards Handbook, Ch. 4 Antidegradation, EPA-823-B-12-002, 2012)

The state manages non-point source pollution from urban runoff, agricultural and forestry activities through establishing Best Management Practices (BMPs), voluntary initiatives, and grant programs, except for forestry conducted under the state’s Forest Practices Rules.

Washington state and private forest landowners voluntarily agreed with Ecology that forestry practices are considered a “Water Pollution Control Program” in the antidegradation rules. This treats forestry in a similar manner as a general point source NPDES* permit, in which a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) water clean up plan is developed. The general NPDES permit and Water Pollution Control Programs are expected to pass the antidegradation test during the statement of benefits and costs of the social, economic and environmental affects used to develop the general permit or program, rather than requiring each individual action to be evaluated for compliance. (Mark Hicks, WQS_Temperature_Forestry 10/01/2018)

Ecology is calling forestry’s Water Pollution Control Program “Clean Water Act Assurances” meaning that all forestry’s Best Management Practices (BMPs) protect water quality criteria for aquatic uses, as determine by scientific studies. Clean Water Act Assurances relieves Ecology from developing individual TMDLs or water clean-up plans for impaired stream segments regulated under the Forest Practices Act. The Adaptive Management Hardrock and Softrock studies show TMDLs would not be required for forested streams as none in the study are considered impaired, causing the loss of beneficial use. The criteria for aquatic uses were not exceeded (temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity or sedimentation, dissolved gas, pH, and bacteria, see WAC 173-201A-200).  

*Authorized by the Clean Water Act, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program controls water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States.

Now the Forest Practices Board is faced with making decisions based on experimental buffer treatment studies, USING ONLY THE ECOLOGY PROPOSAL, instead of long-term water quality monitoring.

We believe the small, large and county landowner proposal addresses the results of the science studies. This proposal increases buffer area and foregone timber value by 38% to respond to the research, and Ecology’s proposal increases buffer area and foregone timber value by 140%, for an uncertain environmental benefit. To avoid overreacting to temporary and small temperature changes, monitoring is necessary to understand temperature patterns across the landscape, particularly given the potential effects of climate change. This was anticipated in the 1999 Adaptive Management program, but initial priorities focused on site-scale studies designed to effect rule changes instead of long-term water quality monitoring.