Local government policies toward environmentally sensitive areas in British Columbia, Canada; Washington and Oregon, USA

Abstract

While there has been sustained debate on the issue of provincial and state versus local government environmental planning, maintaining privately owned natural resources in the public interest is increasingly viewed as beyond the scope of local governments alone. This paper describes and compares province- and state-level mandates and options for local governments (i.e., city, county, or district) to regulate land uses of environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs) in British Columbia in Canada and in Washington and Oregon in the United States. We define ESAs as landscape elements or places that are vital to the long-term maintenance of biological diversity, soil, water, and other natural resources, especially as they relate to human health, safety, and welfare, both on-site and in a regional context. Underlying similarities are that all three jurisdictions legally express the need for land-use planning by local governments in managing ESAs. Although all three jurisdictions exhibit similar problems in their attempt to accomplish this, ESA planning by local governments is an optional process in British Columbia and Washington but mandatory in Oregon. Furthermore, actual processes prescribed by each of the three jurisdictions are quite different. The information base upon which local regulation of privately held ESAs depends is variable, both within and between the province- and statelevel jurisdictions. Other than for some specific water-related resources, standard definitions and inventory methods for ESAs are lacking, as is coordination among local governments or among the province- and state-level governments. This study concludes that there is a need for a regional environmental information system in the Pacific Northwest based upon an integrated and scientific approach toward ESA structures and functions.