In this April 13, 2011, file photo, Lisa Hiam holds a Mazama pocket gopher after trapping it in the Mima Mounds of West Rocky Nature Preserve near Maytown.
Thurston County and federal officials are putting together a pair of plans designed to provide a long-term fix to permitting headaches caused by the protection of the endangered Mazama pocket gopher.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is preparing private biologists to take on some site reviews as the agency abandons that role to focus on writing a recovery plan for the gopher.
“The same people who have been out in past years doing the surveys are the people we need to write the plan,” said USFWS Deputy State Supervisor Brad Thompson.
The permitting and planning responsibilities have been a thorny issue in Thurston County since the Mazama pocket gopher was identified as a threatened endangered species in 2014. Since then, residents applying for building permits within mapped gopher soils — about 10 percent of all applications — have been required to have their properties reviewed before moving forward.
“We're stuck,” said Thurston County Commissioner Gary Edwards. “We have to abide by their rules, whether they're reasonable or not.”
Edwards and many in the county have been frustrated by the mandatory reviews, which require multiple site visits and must take place during the summer months. They’ve been a drain on county resources and stalled many residents’ building efforts, he said.
In the past, Fish and Wildlife officials had pitched in to help with site visits in unincorporated areas of the county, assistance Thompson said the agency has not provided in many other communities with similar issues. This year, the federal officials are ceding that role entirely to the county, but they will be offering training to private biologists who can be certified to conduct site visits on behalf of the county or property owners.
“There will be this pool of people who are then trained up,” he said.
The county has not said whether it will contract with the private biologists who receive the training or simply allow property owners to seek them out in order to bypass the queue of county-conducted site visits.
Thurston County is also taking steps to expedite the process, capping site visits at two per property. In past years, some properties had required three site visits. Additionally, final visits will be allowed to take place in July, up to a month earlier than before.
“We’re going to do what we can with our county staff,” Edwards said. “The mere fact that we will be able to augment as best we can by allowing the applicant to hire their own [consultant] is a step in the right direction. We’re being as responsible as we can with a very limited budget.”
Last October, Thurston County announced it had finally cleared its backlog of permit applications and processed all new applications. County associate planner Andrew Deffobis said in an email that the county and USFWS conducted 315 site visits in 2017, a record number.
He wouldn’t speculate on if that efficiency could be maintained when private consultants take over the Fish and Wildlife role of providing reviews.
“The Board is exploring ways to maximize flexibility to help ensure County staff and consultants are able to meet the demands in 2018,” he replied to a written query, citing county policy about only answering questions over email.
The adjustments for this year’s permitting are a stopgap measure as both Thurston County and the Fish and Wildlife Service work on plans to stabilize the issue going forward. County officials are drafting a Habitat Conservation Plan, essentially a long-term document to outline conservation efforts that would offset future habitat destruction caused by development. Edwards is hoping to submit the plan to USFWS in June.
The plan, Edwards said, will likely require the county to set aside around 100 acres a year, at a cost of more than $1 million. It must either buy that land or persuade property owners to forfeit development rights on their land. The plan must demonstrate that habitat protection efforts will keep pace with the acreage of habitat that is developed over the 30-year life of the document.
If federal officials find that to be the case, the county will no longer have to put prospective builders through the gopher permitting process. Not only will that limit the strain on the county resources currently required to conduct the reviews, but it will also allow for permits to be issued year-round, instead of the June to October window when gopher reviews can be conducted.
“It is a major draw on our limited resources, and it's a quite a plight on the citizen that is trying to do something with their property,” Edwards said. “Six months out of the year, they're basically prohibited from even putting together a plan.”
Added Thompson: “That would really help them from a standpoint of more efficiently and quickly approving individual building permit requests.”
He noted that it will take more than a year for Fish and Wildlife to review and approve a Habitat Conservation Plan.
The county, Edwards said, has been given little guidance on what it will need to outline in the plan to meet the government’s approval.
“How many acres are enough?” he said. “How many gophers on an acre are enough? What does recovery look like? … We’re going to make a proposal and see if they accept it.”
Another frustration in Thurston County has been the lack of an endangered species recovery plan, a document outlining what it will take for the gopher to no longer require protected status. Long-term, restoring the livelihood of the species is the best way to avoid the accompanying bureaucratic headaches.
Fish and Wildlife is working on that plan, said Thompson, which is why they’ve directed resources to that effort instead of site visits.
The agency is hoping to have a draft of the plan by the end of 2018, with the document finalized the following year.
Most importantly, the plan would put in writing how many gophers or acres of habitat will need to be restored, a guideline for the county to shoot for. It will also provide a list of actions to make that attainable, a timeline for doing so and a general cost estimate. The plan would not be binding, but if Thurston County hopes to get its endangered species problem resolved, it would provide a clear roadmap.
“A recovery plan is not something that is a requirement for people to implement,” Thompson said. “It puts a marker out there for people to shoot for.”
