Save a Forest in Southworth, WA

Southworth Forest Update:

Kitsap County Fumbles Southworth Deforestation Comments

Posted November 21, 2023 by Southworth Forest

Meghan and Clint Edwards' deforested area is surrounded on all sides by private property, and this removed fir tree was growing against their boundary fence. And yet, they claim no aesthetic or climate impacts on neighbors. Edwards instead states that neighbors will "have obstructing trees removed," revealing only views of their "agricultural operations."

Kitsap County's comment period for the after-the-fact permit (20-04869) to legalize the code-violating 2019 deforestation in Southworth closed on November 9, 2023. Comments were submitted by a wide variety of concerned neighbors, locals in the Southworth area, and from around the region. Sadly, a public record request fulfilled after the comment period suggests that an alarming quantity of the submitted comments were not recorded in the permit's case file.

Among the comments missing from the record was a comprehensive, 41-page submittal assembled by the SouthworthForest.org group. This community response details both the facts and the law involved in this deforestation action, and it is supported by 187 photos, videos, maps, diagrams, and legal filings. Supplied to the County on November 8th, this comment applies State and County code to show clearly why this proposal is incompatible with and damaging to the rural character of the area. It also addresses the highly problematic permit materials from clear-cutters Meghan and Clint Edwards:

"The preliminary Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) is based upon applicant submittals that are riddled with errors, obfuscation, and misrepresentation, continuing a trend that began with fraudulent Edwards submittals for the 2019 County danger tree permit (18-04575) that led to the massive over-clearing violations that spawned this corrective SDAP. The extensive evidence cited below illuminates the disturbing quantity of these issues on the applicants' engineered site plan, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) checklist, farm plan, and more."

Other remarks that failed to be included in the permit's case file include those provided by J.B. Fenton during the comment period. "I am highly disturbed by how the DCD has handled this permit, and I believe the director and commissioner should be made aware of how badly the Southworth community has been let down," Fenton stated. He objected to waived fees for the violators, previously lost comments by the County, the permit reviewers' dismissive attitudes, environmental impacts ignored, and the failure to apply Kitsap Land Use Policies to prevent what the reviewers themselves noted as additional "spite use" clearing by Edwards in an easement on a neighboring property.

Also citing Kitsap Land Use Policies in her comment was Jennifer Lewis, who is concerned about the character of the Southworth's core community. "The Edwards call their new activity 'agricultural operations.' I love the Southworth area and although people have a few larger animals here and there, we don't have 'agricultural operations' in the neighborhood near the ferry," she noted. "Edwards' plans do nothing to limit their options for large 'agricultural operations' and they don't care to protect their neighbors." Along with citing County Policies 50, 51, 54, and 55 about preserving neighborhoods, she also expressed concern over Policy 13 regarding health impacts on direct neighbors.

One of those direct neighbors, Stella Clemmensen, expanded upon those health concerns. "My spouse, our two children, and I all have allergies to grass and animal dander, so haying and livestock would be triggers," she worried. "The Edwards' illegal deforestation has already impacted my rural enjoyment of my property, and if allowed to continue with their permit as currently planned, I would be unable to use portions of my land. [Edwards'] pasture fencing comes right to our property line, meaning the animals will be within touching distance. Their plan eliminates any and all effective buffers between us and their livestock, putting us at risk for severe allergic reaction just by being on our own land."

Another direct neighbor, Greg Anderson, emphasized that the illegal forest removal in 2019 has already caused him to take action because of new light impacts that are supposed to be mitigated as part of the permitting process. Anderson installed a solid 7-foot fence between his home and the deforestation "to block the Edwards' headlights from glaring into our house (their access road goes straight towards our yard then turns and runs parallel to our back property line)," he stated. "When they drive down their access road from their house, their headlights directly blast into our house. I suggest 20' of buffer space, well vegetated with evergreen trees and that is non-accessible to animals/livestock."

Geologist Dr. Christian Kuehn concurred in his comment about the need for natural forest buffers around the proposed agricultural operations: "Such a buffer zone can act as an effective local barrier to keep hot, dry winds carrying dust into the surroundings and causing even larger areas of dried-out soil in as-of-yet still intact parts of the forest." This buffer suggestion was reinforced by Louise Schlegel in her comment about the local climate impacts. Meanwhile, Jonathan Blough was distressed about Edwards appearing to be "comically lax and obtuse in responding not just to community concerns but also to legal permit requirements." He added, "Teddy Roosevelt is rolling over in his grave."

Public records suggest that most of the above concerns were not recorded in the County's case file for this permit. Also missing from the case file were submitted comments by Steven Phillips, Adar Kaba, Coleen Anderson, Brian Higraff, and Clint Morgan about the deforestation, along with a May 2023 presentation of already-existing impact evidence supplied by Christian Clemmensen. Such omissions have occurred despite these interested parties sending their concerns directly to permit reviewers and/or the clerk as instructed.

If Kitsap County continues to mishandle and ignore community concerns about this Southworth deforestation, then a formal appeal to the County's hearing examiner will inevitably result. The comprehensive 41-page comment from the SouthworthForest.org group will serve as the basis for that appeal since it consolidates many of these concerns. It concludes with a call to protect the core of the Southworth neighborhood, "a small ferry community unaccustomed to land use changes of this magnitude."