A state-funded report written by a Seattle law firm broaches forcing Washington landowners to plant riparian buffers to help recover salmon, a policy rejected by legislators two years ago.

The report stops short of recommending mandatory buffers, but suggests policymakers and interest groups discuss imposing the requirement on landowners who don’t participate in voluntary conservation programs.

Plauche & Carr wrote the report after meeting with tribes, farm groups, environmentalists, legislators and government officials. More meetings are planned.

Funding voluntary programs has broad support, but there is no consensus on what to do if those programs fall short of conservation goals, firm partner Billy Plauche said Wednesday.

The report also suggests considering acquiring farmland through eminent domain, imposing building moratoriums and requiring landowners to accumulate “riparian credits.”

“We’re not passing judgment on any of these ideas,” Plauche said. “Nobody said, ‘Yeah, that is a great idea.’ “

Mandatory buffers are a “nonstarter” for farm groups, Washington State Dairy Federation policy director Jay Gordon said. “This is a, ‘Do it or else,’ ” he said.

Gov. Jay Inslee, with support from some tribes, proposed mandatory buffers in 2022. The legislation failed to go anywhere. Inslee blamed the defeat on indifference to salmon recovery.

Some lawmakers faulted the governor for failing to consider the interests of others, such as farmers. Legislators put more money into voluntary programs and commissioned Plauche & Carr to lead talks.

A preliminary report in May brought up eminent domain. The newly issued final report resurrects Inslee’s proposal for watersheds where targets for maintaining or expanding buffers are not met. 

Programs, such as the state Voluntary Stewardship Program or the federal Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, fund riparian projects or compensate farmers for taking land out of production.

The Washington Farm Bureau supports salmon recovery, but it’s premature to talk about imposing requirements on farmers, said Breanne Elsey, the bureau’s director of government relations.

“I don’t think there’s enough proof voluntary measures couldn’t work, so I’m failing to see the need to have a regulatory backstop when voluntary programs have never been fully funded,” she said.

Washington State Association of Counties policy director Paul Jewell said counties don’t want to get mixed up with mandatory buffers. It would be risky to get involved in what could be an unconstitutional taking, he said.

“Our big concern is that counties not be the enforcement agency in a situation like that,” Jewell said.

The Plauche & Carr report recommends local land-use regulations be guided by a two-volume report the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife released in 2020.

Volume 2 recommends buffers be at least 100-feet wide and possibly hundreds of feet wide. Buffers could start at the outer edge of the floodplain.

The dairy federation’s Gordon farms in Grays Harbor County in Western Washington. The buffers described by Fish and Wildlife would gobble up farmland, he said.

“On my farm, you’re looking at a 4,700-foot buffer,” he said.