It’s a balancing act between the needs of the environment and the needs of humans.

That was the consensus at the recent Critical Areas Ordinance meeting on Orcas last Tuesday. Many in the standing room-only audience were concerned about the ramifications of increased buffer zones and shoreline setbacks, and asked the county to weigh the needs of the human population as well as the environment.

“Has anyone done a social science study?” asked John Evans, who is on the CAO citizens’ review committee, but disagrees with portions of the draft. “What if these new setbacks help the salmon five percent but impact humans 60 percent?”

San Juan County was due to revise its Critical Areas Ordinance in 2006, but missed the deadline, as did numerous cities and counties across the state. The county council appointed 10 islanders to a citizens’ review committee to revise the local regulations aimed at critical aquifer recharge, fish and wildlife conservation, geographically hazardous areas, wetlands, and spots that frequently flood.

The upland and shoreline drafts are now available. The series of public meetings is to gather input on the proposed regulations. Scientists Scott Rozenbaum, Sandy Wyllie-Echeverria, and Tina Wyllie-Echeverria, and county senior planner Shireene Hale were in attendance to answer audience questions.

“When you look at San Juan County, we have a lot of habitat. And that means we have a lot to protect,” Hale said. “Most of the shoreline is covered with different types of habitat that have to be protected.”

Hale conceded that the buffers have been causing “fear and distress” for some homeowners, but she said, “Relatively undisturbed areas along streams, shorelines, and wetlands are necessary for a well-functioning system.”

Wetlands in categories I thorough III would see increased buffers and Category IV would have a decreased buffer of five feet less. Shorelines currently have a variable buffer of zero to 100 feet, and the draft proposes a minimum of 100 feet and could be as much as 200 depending on what is necessary to protect salmon habitat.

For streams, there is currently no existing buffer required. Vegetative stream, wetland and shoreline buffers absorb runoff, remove toxic chemicals, maintain bank stability, moderate temperatures, supply woody debris, and provide food and shelter for fish and wildlife. The change would be a 150-foot buffer for streams that support fish and a 100-foot buffer for those that do not.

As an alternative to these buffers, property owners will also have the option of preparing a site specific Conservation Area Stewardship Plan.

The existing codes for docks and bulkheads is being revised to better protect soft shore and eelgrass habitats, which act as nurseries for the marine food chain. On non-ferry served islands, it is proposed that docks continue to be allowed when necessary to provide reasonable access to property. On ferry served islands, when there is alternate moorage available, new docks may no longer be allowed in areas with eelgrass. New and expanded bulkheads will still be allowed to protect existing structures, but it is anticipated that regulations that are more protective will be adopted for other situations.

Evans told Hale he felt that such large shoreline setbacks will “impact the economy of San Juan County. Revenue and land development will suffer.”

Hale disagreed, explaining that “there are plenty of parcels that are large and will have no problem developing.”

Rozenbaum told the audience he also didn’t agree with some of the draft’s wording.

“I think buffer sizes should be more variable depending on use,” he said. “I will be writing my comments and showing the county examples of how other counties have done it. So write to the planning department and tell them what you think.”

Patty Miller asked the panel if there was any way to examine the science that was done for more urban areas and translate it to a smaller county.

“While there are some specifics that change for each county, there is general science that applies to King County and to us,” Sandy said. “We have the best available science to guide us and then modify it for our area.”

“We don’t want you to see science as the evil empire,” he continued. “I agree that we need to look at the human aspect too. We need to strike a balance. But I don’t know how we can do that without regulation.”