The Clark County Council took its first deep dive into the long-awaited agricultural lands study on Wednesday, Nov. 14, kicking off what may be a month-long process as council members grapple with what lands should remain or be removed from designation as protected agricultural lands.
The Clark County Council narrowly approved the $155,003 contract for the study in July, knowing it would push the completion of the County’s comprehensive plan update months ahead of the state’s Dec. 31 deadline. The agricultural lands study was added to the comprehensive plan after city leaders from Ridgefield and La Center argued they could not request the reclassification of nearby agricultural parcels without a current countywide analysis. If certain lands are deemed eligible for de-designation, they could be added to city urban growth areas and opened to future residential or commercial development.
Adding the study to the comprehensive plan pushed the county’s expected submission date several months past the state’s deadline, a delay that has concerned Council Chair Sue Marshall due to potential liability. The comprehensive plan shows how counties and cities will handle projected population growth, jobs and other long-term land-use needs.
The study, produced by ECONorthwest, analyzes 131,000 acres of land and tests them against state-required and optional criteria for agricultural designation. Of that total study area, roughly 101,000 acres meet the minimum statutory criteria to be considered agricultural land, even though only about 32,500 acres are currently designated for agriculture. Of what was surveyed, 29,000 acres were left out of the study, including Cowlitz Tribal lands and dedicated forest or resource lands.
Staff and consultants emphasized two themes that kept resurfacing among farmers during workshops and in commission meetings: parcel size and water rights.
A major chunk of the land supply outside the current ag designations consists of small, non-size-conforming parcels. These smaller parcels can still be farmed, but evidence shows stronger long-term agricultural viability on larger tracts.
Water rights emerged as another flashpoint. Farmers who were surveyed repeatedly stressed their value, noting that land with a water right can often outperform “better soil” without one. A water rights permit can allow a farmer to use more water for crop farming, allowing the cultivation of more water-dependent crops. At the same time, water rights are scarce in Clark County, but are not required for every type of farming. A parcel of land with water rights may have longer-term viability as farmland, though parcel size and soil will play important factors in determining some councilors’ decision-making.
Planning Director Oliver Orjiako said the county has already shared the report with cities, some of which are interested in potential de-designation. He expects a small interjurisdictional working group to form soon, bringing together county staff and city representatives to discuss the implications before the next phase of the Comprehensive Plan update.
The council will continue the discussion during the ongoing Comprehensive Plan update process. While the consultant will not provide any opinions other than the study’s outcomes, the Agricultural Advisory Commission can share its opinions with the Council.
