By Luisa Loi
La Conner Community News
On July 20, the Washington Growth Management Hearings Board ruled that Skagit County’s Critical Areas Ordinance’s section on riparian buffers does not comply with the state Growth Management Act.
The Critical Areas Ordinance is a series of regulations meant to protect wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, and areas that are prone to flooding and geological hazards. State law requires cities and counties to evaluate and revise their critical areas ordinances every 10 years as part of the Comprehensive Plan update.
Skagit’s latest update process began in late 2024, with county commissioners approving the rules in November 2025.
The ordinance had already raised concerns among members of the public and local environmental groups during the update process. Following the commissioners’ green light, nonprofits Evergreen Islands and Friends of Skagit County, as well as Big Lake resident Jan Edelstein, appealed the ordinance, arguing it fails to protect wetlands and riparian zones.
While most of their claims were dismissed, the Hearings Board agreed that “the county’s buffer sizing fails to sufficiently protect existing functions and values of critical areas,” as stated in the final decision and order.
Skagit County was ordered to revise the ordinance by Jan. 19, 2027.
‘A not-insignificant portion of buffers’ left unprotected
The ordinance established buffers of 150 feet for fish-bearing streams and 100 feet for non-fish-bearing streams, and imposed a size increase of at least 33% for buffers with sparse native vegetation — which the county claimed would increase the size of those buffers to at least 200 feet.
Evergreen Islands successfully argued that the county should instead use site potential tree height to calculate stream buffers, which Evergreen Islands President Marlene Finley said would average roughly 192 feet of riparian protection along the stream.
Evergreen Islands stated the buffer sizes approved in November would allow development across 3,000 acres of forested lands that should instead be protected for their riparian role.
“Therefore, there is a not-insignificant portion of buffers that are not being protected,” the Hearings Board wrote.
“In essence the County’s buffers are too small and should be equal in size or effect to the potential height of a 200 year old tree at any given point along a stream, including seasonal streams,” Jenn Rogers, communications manager for the county, explained in an email.
While the county believes that site potential tree height is not the most effective method to protect riparian areas, Rogers wrote that it respects the decision and will work on the amendments, with plans to reach out to Evergreen Islands to draft the amendments together.
Other claims dismissed
The board sided with the county on most of the issues the petitioners raised.
For example, Evergreen claimed the county did not follow best available science in exempting some wetlands smaller than 1,000 square feet from buffer provisions, as well as allowing the development of Category IV wetlands smaller than 4,000 square feet. The Washington state Department of Ecology describes Category IV wetlands as “the smallest, most isolated and have the least diverse vegetation.”
For both wetlands, the exemptions may apply if the wetland is isolated, does not contain “priority species,” and “is not required to mitigate drainage, flooding or water quality problems in the watershed,” according to the Hearings Board’s final decision and order.
The Hearings Board dismissed the claim, stating that the exemptions follow the Department of Ecology’s sample wetland regulations — which reflect best available science.
Finley said Evergreen Islands “is disappointed that the County does not protect all sizes of wetlands.”
Edelstein and Friends of Skagit County also argued the updated ordinance fails to protect critical areas from disturbances like stormwater runoff and artificial light by limiting the county planning director’s authority to require a critical areas review more than 200 or 300 feet away from a proposed project.
Edelstein explained that the challenge was brought following the 2024 approval of a 42-inch pipe discharging stormwater from a proposed 105-home development into Big Lake, where phosphorus levels have more than tripled since 1999. At the time, she was told that no critical area site assessment was required because the project was more than 200 feet away from the lake, she wrote. Friends of Skagit County appealed, and the county commissioners ordered the pipe approval to be remanded to the hearing examiner for a public hearing scheduled for Oct. 9, 2026, she wrote.
The board concluded the ordinance actually allows for a review of impacts beyond those boundaries “when the facts warrant it,” an acknowledgement that Edelstein and Friends of Skagit County were pleased with.
“This is a win for Big Lake, and other critical areas throughout Skagit County that are threatened by off-site impacts that travel more than 200’ or 300’ from the project site,” Edelstein wrote.
Finley expressed concern at the Hearings Board’s decision to allow for the removal of timber from riparian buffers because, the board stated, that provision already existed in the previous critical areas ordinance.
The ordinance states that timber may be removed from the buffers if the mitigation measures meet certain performance standards.
“How can this be called an “update” process if the County and State fail to recognize outdated, environmentally harmful regulations which fail to follow best available science?” Finley wrote.
Luisa Loi is a general assignment reporter for La Conner Community News.
