All Carrot and No Stick: Why Washington's Clean Water Act Assurances Violate State and Federal Water Quality Laws

By Stiefel, Oliver | Washington Law Review, June 2013 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

All Carrot and No Stick: Why Washington's Clean Water Act Assurances Violate State and Federal Water Quality Laws


Stiefel, Oliver, Washington Law Review


Abstract: Current Washington State rules governing timber activities-including logging, road construction, and timber processing-were achieved through negotiated compromise. In response to growing concern over the decline of several salmonid species, stakeholders from government agencies, environmental groups, and the timber industry negotiated a plan for regulating timber activities to better meet the needs of aquatic species, while maintaining a robust and sustainable timber industry. The rivers and streams flowing through Washington's forests provide habitat for numerous aquatic species, including several species of anadromous salmonids. Timber activities, however, pose a threat to healthy habitat. In the 1990s, degraded forest habitat in Washington necessitated a change in policy. Without such a change, stakeholders would face a difficult dilemma: if those conducting timber activities continued under the status quo, they would risk costly litigation brought under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Clean Water Act (CWA), dramatic regulatory modifications in the future that would make timber operations economically impracticable, or both.

Stakeholders opted for a middle ground, devising and implementing a two-part framework for managing timber activities. First, they strengthened rules in order to provide better species protection. Second, they obtained assurances from the federal government that the new rules were strong enough that they provided those conducting timber activities in Washington (1) with immunity from lawsuits under the ESA and the CWA and (2) with regulatory certainty-that is, that no additional, more protective restrictions would attach to the new rules. While this regulatory framework is permissible under the ESA, an assurance of compliance with state and federal water quality laws does not square with the clear mandates of the CWA.

INTRODUCTION

Forests, and the rivers and streams flowing through them, are the lifeblood of the Pacific Northwest. In addition to providing habitat for a vast array of species1 like the iconic salmon, forests also contribute ecosystem services like carbon sequestration.2 In addition, the forestry industry provides jobs and bolsters the regional economy.3 Balancing the value of forests as habitat and for their ecosystem services against the value of forests as sources of jobs and commodities can present a variety of challenges.4 Uncompromising protection of forests for ecological purposes would threaten the viability of a sustainable forestry industry.5 Concerns about unpredictable regulations weigh heavily in decisions about converting forestland to uses that have greater ecological consequences, like residential development.6 Providing a regulatory climate more likely to keep landowners from converting forestlands thus remains an important objective for all parties.7 Despite the benefit of retaining forestland, there are also costs. Timber activities such as logging and forest road construction can adversely affect aquatic habitat,8 for example, by reducing habitat complexity.9

In the late 1980s, stakeholders from industry, government, and conservation groups in Washington State turned to negotiation as the procedure for finding an appropriate balance between a robust forestry industry and healthy forest habitat.10 An alternative to competitive lobbying and court cases, negotiations began to shape policies regarding the management of forestlands.11 In 1996, however, several events caused stakeholders to reevaluate the negotiated policies. At that time, the federal government listed several species of Pacific salmon under the Endangered Species Act (ESA),12 and included 660 Washington stream segments on a Clean Water Act (CWA)13 list of waterbodies with documented water quality problems.14 Again turning to negotiation in lieu of political wrangling and protracted litigation, representatives from Northwest tribes, state and federal agencies, the timber industry, and environmental groups convened to devise a plan to protect aquatic species and their forest habitat.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

All Carrot and No Stick: Why Washington's Clean Water Act Assurances Violate State and Federal Water Quality Laws
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?