Document text
Medford aims to preserve swampy spots Mail Tribune / Jim Craven Wetlands surrounding the Medford airport are among the properties identified by the city of Medford in its inventory of significant wetlands. The city is working on an ordinance that preserves wetlands by protecting them from development. Wetlands protection could become law By Chris Bristol Medford is not known for swamps and marshes. A bog here and there, maybe. Swamps, no way. "We don�t have any big old swampy areas around here," Mark Gallagher, a city planner, pointed out helpfully on a recent tour of local wetlands. Outside his air-conditioned car, the temperature hovered near 90 degrees. "All in all, we�re actually a pretty dry place." Dry or not, a recent city-sponsored inventory identified at least 29 environmentally "significant" wetlands that qualify for beefed-up protection under Oregon land-use law and federal regulations. Another 30 sites are under consideration.But qualifying for protection and enforcing it are two different matters. Most Medford wetlands are on private property, and efforts by the city to draft a wetlands ordinance last year met with resistance from some large property owners who stalled the law for months. The ordinance has resurfaced, and could become city law later this summer. As a housekeeping measure required by state land-use law, city planners last year proposed a pair of ordinances that would effectively stop development of wetlands and riparian areas; the riparian ordinance has since been adopted separately. No conservation or environmental group was behind the move; indeed, none seems keen on getting involved in the current dispute. "It�s Fish and Wildlife that�s pushing this," explained Medford Councilman Jim Key. The federal agency oversees the Endangered Species Act and protections for the region�s troubled fish populations. "Any stream that has the possibility of salmon habitat, that�s what this is all about." Medford isn�t the only local government wrestling with wetlands. Jackson County industrial land in the Agate Desert outside White City contain vernal pools that are home to tiny freshwater shrimp, a threatened species.The city�s proposed ordinance would enforce a 50-foot setback, or buffer zone, and put tough restrictions on grading, excavation, placement of fill and removal of vegetation (other than perimeter mowing and cutting necessary for prevention of hazards). The city sees the ordinance as an extra level of protection desired, even required, by the state. Opponents see it as a threat to their property rights. "Your hands are tied as a property owner," complained Rob Patridge, legal counsel for the Rogue Valley Manor, which owns a 2.4-acre wetland that overlaps the Quail Point Golf Course. "It creates a potential for takings." Last fall, the City Council tabled the ordinance after opponents objected that it was too restrictive and violated property rights. Chief among them were a trio of businesses � the Manor, Lithia and Sterling Business Forms � that own commercial or industrial property where some wetlands are located. Their attorneys argued the ordinance contradicted a long-established permit system overseen by the Division of State Lands. The permits allowed for off-site mitigation, an environmental swap that lets developers plow up and pave over sensitive habitat if they replace it somewhere else. But after months of delay, state land-use planners in Salem have spoken. "We were right from the beginning," Gallagher said. "The state says you can�t do off-site mitigation anymore. Under our proposed ordinance, you just have to leave it there." Bogs, pools and fens That wetlands exist at all within the city limits may come as a surprise. Many are no bigger than an acre or two, their boundaries not always obvious to the untrained eye. Often they look like nothing more than a fenced pasture or an undeveloped lot near a creek.They come in many shapes and sizes and are known by many different names � some colloquial, some scientific. Among the better known: bogs, marshes and swamps. Among the lesser known: vernal pools, prairie potholes and fens. As broadly defined by environmental scientists, wetlands are areas where the frequent and prolonged presence of water drives a unique ecosystem. Medford�s wetlands are generally considered "palustrine emergent," the common, classic wetland dominated by perennials such as cattails. Sometimes compared to tropical rain forests and coral reefs in terms of biodiversity, they are home to a wide variety of plants and animals. Some species are found nowhere else. Federal biologists estimate that more than 40 percent of threatened or endangered species rely directly or indirectly on wetlands for survival. Overlogging of mature bottomland hardwood forests (yet another type of wetland) is believed to have caused the extinction of the ivory-billed woodpecker, once North America�s largest woodpecker. Wetlands also act as Mother Nature�s sponges, filtering runoff, recharging aquifers and helping control flooding and erosion. Except for tidal wetlands, the amount of water fluctuates as a result of rainfall patterns, snow melt, dry seasons and droughts. An estimated 38 percent of Oregon�s historical wetlands have been converted to agricultural, commercial and other uses, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA estimates that more than half the wetlands in the lower 48 states have been lost over the last 200 years. Some states, including California, have lost over 80 percent. Nobody knows how much of Medford�s original wetlands have been destroyed over the years. �Safe harbor� Protection of wetlands first became an issue with the passage in 1972 of the federal Clean Water Act. More legislation followed, including the North American Wetlands Conservation Act and the Emergency Wetlands Resources Act, leading to the involvement of a host of federal agencies, primarily the EPA and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In Oregon, preservation of wetlands has been a goal of the state�s groundbreaking 1973 land-use law from the beginning. The Land Conservation and Development Commission, the state�s land-use policy body, revisited the subject as recently as 1996. In fact, it was in 1996 that the state first extended so-called "safe harbor" protection, which insulates municipalities like Medford from lawsuit if they rely on basic environmental protections desired by the LCDC. The City Council recently chose to go this route, rather than a second, more flexible approach that calls for careful � and costly � analysis of every wetland within the city limits. Safe harbor bans mitigation. Gallagher said the state apparently has decided that mitigation simply isn�t good environmental policy. "The (wetlands) you create are never as good," he said. "The thinking is, better to leave the ones you have alone." The ordinance is flexible to a point. It grandfathers in existing uses, allows limited conditional uses (the Manor wants to build a footbridge across its wetland for access to the golf course, for example) and provides for variances to avoid "takings" lawsuits. But opponents still are unhappy with the mitigation ban. Patridge, a state legislator and former Medford councilman, said lawyers for Sterling Business Forms and Lithia may challenge the ban. The policy was enacted as an administrative rule, meaning it came not from the Legislature but a bureaucrat. "This is someone (in Salem) just flexing their political muscle," he groused, adding that the Manor opposes the policy in principle but is waiting to see what the final draft looks like. Over the past seven or eight months the ordinance has been the subject of a great deal of behind-the-scenes negotiation and debate before the planning commission. Never actually dormant, it resurfaced in recent weeks and appears headed for a final vote by the end of summer. Despite the negotiations, city officials predict the final version of the ordinance will look much like the original proposal, dispelling any suggestion that political pressure would water it down. They say the LCDC has confirmed their interpretation of land-use law, particularly with regard to the ban on mitigation. Councilman Key said the safe-harbor protection is too good to pass up. The council, he said, is not in the mood to keep "messing" with the ordinance. "Why would we want to go against the LCDC?" he asked. "With safe harbor, there�s no great amount of cost to the city. We just apply minimal protections to wetlands and get on with it." Obituaries | Sports | Business | Classifieds | Tempo | Prime Times | So Oregon Sites | Outdoor Journal | Subscribe | Contact | Movies | Advertise | Real Estate Showcase | Archive | Editorials | Letters to the editor | Religion | Wake-up Call | NIE | Cyber Chef | Job Network | So Oregon Weather | WSJ Northwest | Forums | AP Wire | AP Money | F.A.Q. | Awards Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. The Community Newspaper Subsidiary of Dow Jones & Co, Inc Copyright �The Mail Tribune 2000, Medford, Oregon USA