HB1565 was amended in the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy
Committee on 10-6. While the amendments improve the bill, HB1565 still
falls short of protecting headwaters streams
We all know the value of maintaining appropriate riparian
buffers, especially as they affect the quality of our coldwater
streams. As currently proposed, HB1565 would substantially alter the
existing protection afforded by riparian buffers by allowing their
elimination on those streams designated as special protection waters.
HB1565
proposes a "trade off" in the form of an option allowing the
elimination of riparian buffers in one portion of a stream as long as an
equivalent section is provided for in another section of that same
drainage. What this means is that development along headwaters sections
of our coldwater streams could eliminate riparian buffers on those
waters which are so critical to sustaining a wild trout population.
Update on Amended Bill
On
Monday, HB1565 was amended and voted out in the Senate Environmental
Resources & Energy Committee. The amendments do two things:
(1) Clarify
that the replacement buffer must occur along special protection waters
within the same drainage list (according to
chapter 93). This does not mean that the replacement buffer has to be installed on the same stream.
(2) Attempt
to strengthen practices that can be used instead of a buffer, by
requiring the alternatives used to be “collectively…substantially
equivalent to a riparian buffer…” This section recognizes that riparian
buffers are the most effective management tool.
Bottom line: While the amendments improve the bill, HB1565 still falls short of protecting headwaters trout streams.
Please
contact your Senator today, and before Oct. 14, and urge him or her to
vote NO on House Bill 1565 (P.N.4258) for the following reasons: CLICK HERE TO FIND SENATOR
1. Although
the amendments clarified the bill and made slight improvements, we are
still opposed to the bill because it fails to require maintenance of
existing riparian buffers in high quality and exceptional value
watersheds.
2. We currently have a system that requires
riparian buffers, but allows for flexibility through waivers and
exemptions. If there is an issue with delays in the waiver process,
let’s look for an administrative fix rather try to legislatively fix the
problem and as a result allow for existing buffers to be destroyed.
3. Stress
that there are no equivalents to a riparian buffer—these are the best
and most effective management tool for protecting streams and we need to
protect our best streams (EV and HQ).