# Lake Whatcom Policy Group Charts Course for Forest Management ## Meeting Overview The Lake Whatcom Policy Group convened on October 1, 2025, at Bellingham City Hall for what turned into a pivotal discussion about the future of forest management in the watershed. The meeting brought together representatives from the City of Bellingham, Whatcom County, and the Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District, along with staff and members of the public, for an in-depth presentation on the forthcoming Lake Whatcom Forest Management Plan. The afternoon session was dominated by a comprehensive briefing from Northwest Natural Resources Group forester Matthew Schmidt, who walked the group through the principles of ecological forest management and how they apply to the 12,200 acres of city and county-owned lands in the watershed. What emerged was both an education in forest ecology and a preview of what could be significant management changes in the years ahead. The presentation came at a crucial time, as the consulting team is roughly a month behind schedule on delivering their final management plan, but the policy implications and community engagement aspects are clearly taking shape. ## The Ecological Forest Management Framework Matthew Schmidt began by establishing the foundational principle that would guide all subsequent discussion: ecological forest management is fundamentally different from the agricultural-style forestry that many residents might be familiar with. "We may recommend cutting trees, but never cutting the forest," Schmidt explained, outlining an approach that seeks to maintain ecosystem functions while achieving specific management objectives. The forester took the group through what amounted to Forest Ecology 101, describing how Northwest forests naturally cycle through distinct phases over hundreds of years. He showed images of forest development stages, from the sparse pre-forest conditions following major disturbances like wildfire, through the dense young forest phase characterized by intense tree competition, to mature forests with complex understories, and finally to old-growth conditions with multiple canopy layers and diverse species composition. "Forests are just dynamic," Schmidt noted. "They may look very similar every year we drive by them, because our lifespan is so short, but on big scales, forests are constantly responding to disturbances like a windstorm, a wildfire, maybe logging, and they're responding, growing new trees, growing larger, or sometimes dying under competitive pressures." This ecological lens revealed that most of the county and city-owned forests in the Lake Whatcom watershed are stuck in what Schmidt called the "cusp of young forest to early maturity" – dense stands where trees are competing intensely for resources, making them vulnerable to disease, fire, and other stresses while providing limited wildlife habitat and using more water than older forests. ## Current Forest Conditions and Historical Context The management history of the Lake Whatcom watershed reads like a compressed version of Pacific Northwest logging: primary forests harvested between the 1850s and 1950s, followed by natural regeneration, then some areas harvested again from the 1980s through 2010s and replanted with Douglas fir plantations. Schmidt presented this history matter-of-factly, but the implications were striking. "We would expect most – 75% of this landscape to be old-growth conifer forests, and you have 0% today," he told the group. "And we'd expect 25% to be mature conifer forests, and you do have some of those. And we expect 5% to be in our young stand phase, and almost all your stands are somewhere between young stand and early matured." This historical context prompted pointed questions from attendees. Councilmember Skip Williams raised what may be the most politically sensitive aspect of the entire plan: the disconnect between current public perception and the forest management commitments made during the 2014 state land reconveyance process. "At least three quarters of the acres we're talking about are those reconveyance lands," Williams noted. "And there was a discussion then about I think a lot of the practices you're talking about being part of the expectations of what was behind the reconveyance, that should be driving the objectives as much as whatever people are saying today." Williams went on to articulate a concern that will likely surface during public review: "Everybody remembers the reconveyance discussion in terms of trails and recreation, so if they don't remember that we were talking about all the stuff 10, 11, 12 years ago. So it might be good to get that maybe somehow incorporated into, like, this isn't just something we're coming up with right now, but that was part of the deal that the governor signed in 2014." The political sensitivity is real. As Williams put it bluntly: "We take out 10 trees to put in a porta potty at a campground, and you get all kinds of people – you're clear-cutting." ## Management Tools and Objectives Schmidt outlined the management objectives that were driving the plan's recommendations: water quality protection, forest health and resiliency, wildfire resistance, wildlife habitat enhancement, and recreational access. These objectives, he emphasized, determine what management actions make sense in any given forest stand. The primary management tool being recommended is thinning – selectively removing trees to reduce competition and accelerate forest development toward more mature conditions. Schmidt was careful to distinguish this from clear-cutting: "Here's a picture of a landscape. Part of it's been thinned, and part of it hasn't. And so on the left, we have the thin portion, on the right, the not-thin portion. So just to give you a sense that thinning is not a complete removal of the canopy." The thinning approach being recommended is called "variable density thinning," which creates a patchwork of different densities across the landscape rather than uniform treatment. Some areas would be thinned more heavily, others lightly, and some left untreated, creating the spatial complexity that characterizes mature forests. Schmidt addressed the commercial versus non-commercial thinning question directly. While profit is not an objective of the management plan, there are practical reasons why selling some of the removed trees might make sense. "There are some real concerns with non-commercial thinning and leaving a lot of dead wood in a stand for fire risk and beetle outbreaks," he explained. "And so a lot of times, commercial – like, taking the trees out of the stand and selling them – is a good option." ## Water Quality and Risk Mitigation Given that the Lake Whatcom watershed provides drinking water for much of Whatcom County, water quality protection dominated much of the discussion. Schmidt outlined the primary sediment delivery risks: slope failures, road-related erosion, wildfire impacts, and logging activities themselves. The management approach incorporates multiple safeguards developed over the past 20-30 years of forest practice evolution. These include mandatory riparian buffers, unstable slope screening using geological analysis from a 2004 hazard zone study, proper road maintenance, and light-touch operations using techniques like brush mats to minimize soil disruption. "You're not legally allowed to log on an unstable slope. That wasn't always the case when you had your major watershed failures. You could log on an unstable slope," Schmidt noted, referring to past landslides in the watershed. "And that's really been a development in the last 20 years by the forest practice regulators." Councilmember Kaylee Galloway pressed for more specifics about how the plan would ensure no harm to the drinking water source. Schmidt responded that "over half the watershed is probably inaccessible for various reasons" due to lack of roads, steep slopes, or other constraints. "We think that if you avoid these unstable slopes, that sediment delivery is very mitigatable under your current rules and under the management paradigms that we're outlining here." ## Wildfire Risk and Climate Resilience The Blue Canyon Fire provided a sobering backdrop to discussions of wildfire risk. Schmidt explained that catastrophic wildfire requires three elements: ignition, fuel, and strong winds from the Fraser Valley. The current dense young forest conditions provide abundant fuel and allow fires to easily reach the tree crowns, creating the most dangerous scenario for the watershed. One recommended strategy is creating "shaded fuel breaks within 100 feet of public roads" in high-risk ignition areas. Schmidt noted that firefighters have a significant advantage in the Lake Whatcom area because the lake itself provides an abundant water source for helicopters – they were "dropping water buckets every 5 minutes" during the Blue Canyon Fire response. The discussion touched on the wildland-urban interface, particularly around Sudden Valley, where the fire department is concerned about backyard burns spreading into the forest. This highlights the interconnected nature of forest management across different ownerships in the watershed. ## Community Engagement and Public Response Schmidt reported that the community engagement process had yielded 56 public comments, with a surprising theme emerging: "A sense that the community felt that stewardship should be active, and that we should actively steward the forest to meet the objectives that the citizens had for their watershed." This represents a shift from what might have been expected 20 years ago, when a more preservationist approach might have predominated. "There was less of a preservationist perspective on engaging with the landscape, and more of a sense that there was a stewardship responsibility to do something about the forest that the public owns and trusts in this watershed." The comments ranged widely, with many focusing on recreation despite that not being the central focus of the forest management plan. Many others emphasized prioritizing ecological health in the watershed. ## Timeline and Next Steps The management plan is running about a month behind the original schedule, with the complete draft now expected by the end of October rather than early September. The plan will be substantial – 200 to 300 pages covering landscape-level analysis and property-specific recommendations. The plan will ultimately go to the respective councils in November and December, with the City of Bellingham expected to consider it on November 8th and Whatcom County on November 9th. Before formal adoption, the plan will go through a public comment period in December. Bennett Sports, representing Whatcom County, gave credit to Schmidt for handling an expanded workload due to a colleague being on sabbatical: "He's not only been doing all the analysis, but also has prepared his presentation today." ## Policy Group Planning and Governance The meeting's final segment turned to internal governance questions that have been simmering for some time. Councilmember Galloway raised several organizational concerns that reflected broader questions about how the policy group operates. "I was like, I kind of saw the agenda yesterday, I held my breath, I was like, I might be late, I hope I'm not chairing, I'm like, oh, thank goodness, Hannah's chairing, but like, I didn't know Hannah was chairing this meeting until like 24 hours before the meeting, right?" Galloway said. She proposed creating an annual calendar that maps out when certain presentations historically come up, which ones are due for updates, and who will chair each meeting. "So I think just building in some certainty among those of us that are going to be rotating chairs would be really helpful." The discussion revealed that there are regular transitions as council members' terms change, with appointments typically made in January. This creates both continuity challenges and opportunities to establish better structure. Galloway also suggested moving beyond the presentation-heavy format toward more interactive approaches: "I guess I'd be curious to know if there would be any interest for this body to do, like, in addition to maybe our conference room-style events, to go do, like, some site visits." Staff responded enthusiastically to the field trip suggestion, with Cathy Gramer noting via phone that they've been working behind the scenes to coordinate site visits to stormwater management projects and other facilities. ## Broader Policy Questions Several participants raised questions about the Lake Whatcom Policy Group's role and effectiveness. The group doesn't take formal action – members can only take information back to their respective jurisdictions – which sometimes leaves it feeling more like a briefing forum than a policy-making body. Councilmember Galloway specifically requested future updates on the Department of Natural Resources landscape plan and potential updates to county comprehensive plan elements related to Lake Whatcom. She also mentioned ongoing work with Councilmember Donovan on county code changes related to phosphorus-neutral development and private stormwater inspections. These items reflect the reality that Lake Whatcom management involves multiple regulatory frameworks and jurisdictions, with the policy group serving as a coordination mechanism rather than a decision-making body. ## Closing and Future Meetings The meeting concluded with agreement that the December meeting should focus on planning and calendar-setting for 2026. Staff committed to coming to that meeting with a partially filled-out draft calendar incorporating suggestions from group members, along with clarity about rotating chair assignments. The discussion reflected a maturing organization trying to balance the technical complexity of watershed management with the practical needs of elected officials juggling multiple responsibilities. With major decisions on forest management approaching and ongoing questions about governance structure, the Lake Whatcom Policy Group appears to be at something of an inflection point. The forest management presentation had clearly achieved its goal of educating the group about ecological forestry principles, but it also highlighted the political challenges ahead as these concepts move from conference rooms to public implementation in one of the region's most treasured landscapes.