BACKGROUND 



On Octolvr lit, 19v0 the Department of Ecology issued a r,on-mandator\' M-vIe'i OrJ, nance i\;r 

 Wetlands Protection to all Washington Sta^c local governments. The Model Ordinance 

 contained two options for rating wetlands; local governments could use cither the Washington 

 State Four-Tivr Wetlands Ratipg System, or tho Puget 5v'"jnd Rei;uin Wct!and> Rannc 5v>!-^m, 



This evaluation is a planned review of the recommended wetlands rating system based on 

 comments we have received and our own knowledge of the need to improve the methodology. 

 TTie main thrust is to introduce rating criteria that are more specific and less qualitative. We 

 arc also merging the two rating systems info one statewide system that accounts for regional 

 differences. 



Following the evaluation and field testing, guidance for users will be finalised and changes to 

 the rating system will be formally recommended to local government. This system will also be 

 used by Ecology and may be used by other state agencies in conjunction with existing regulatory 

 programs as appropriate. 



INTRODUCTION 



The remaining wetlands in Washington state differ widely in resource value. Some wetland 

 types are common, and others are rare, but all provide some valued functions. These may be 

 ecologic, economic, recreation or aesthetic. To effectively protect the remaining wetlands, 

 managers, planners and citizens need to be able to better understand the resource value of 

 individual wetlands. One way to accomplish this is with a wetlands rating system: a process 

 that differentiates wetlands according to specific characteristics or functional attributes. 

 Permit decisions are considered in light of the wetland rating and the potential development 

 impact. Regulatory stringency and protective measures are varied, with the highest levels of 

 protection given to the highest rated wetlands. 



Amongst wetlands scientists, planners and regulators there is debate on the merits of rating 

 wetlands at all. There is also debate on the use of case-by-case versus landscape approaches to 

 wetlands management. Advocates of wetland rating note that this management approach 

 avoids the multitude of case-by <ase, subjective impact determinations made by permit 

 adnunistrators. Wetland rating systems also afford potential developers with early notice of 

 wetland sensitivity according to the rating assigned to a wetland. A rating system will increase 

 predictability, certainty and consistency of decision making. Additionally, it may simplify and 

 expedite permit review. Wetland rating can increases the credibility of a wetland protection 

 program by relating protection standards to wetland value. 



Critics of wetland rating are concerned that it can be used as a mechanism to direct development 

 impacts to lower rated wetlands, serving only to protect higher rated wetlands. Other critics 

 point to possibly subjective interpretations that may be required on behalf of the wetland 

 evaluator in order to determine a wetland's category or rating, and the high amount of training 

 which may be necessary to ensure appropriate determinations. Additionally, rating systems 

 differentiate and place value on wetland characteristics that are only partially understood. 

 Not only do we lack information on the complex internal processes of individual wetlands, but 

 the interaction of the processes of multiple systems is not fully understood nor are the effects of 

 their cumulative loss. Compounding the problem, less published scientific data exist concerning 

 Northwest wetlands than those in the East and Midwest. 



DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY - DRAFT 



