In Our View: County Must Save Service

Since 1942, the Clark Conservation District has assisted local farmers and other landowners in preserving and effectively tilling their soil. Now, with the district facing a financial crunch, it is imperative that Clark County councilors find a way to maintain those essential services. Through a combination of fees for all landholders and payments from those who use the district’s services, councilors can develop a solution without overburdening residents.

As Denise Smee, manager of the conservation district, told council members: “We believe the district has the opportunity to get the county back to that ethic and vision of working with landowners to help take care of their land instead of putting more regulations on them.” Even as Clark County moves toward a more urban and less agrarian setting, that vision remains robust; proper care for the land can enhance efficiency and soil preservation for both large-scale farmers and backyard gardeners.

In an extreme example, the importance of such care was demonstrated in the Dust Bowl that devastated the Great Plains during the 1930s. While an extended drought helped destroy the vast farms of the Midwest, the situation was exacerbated by poor farming practices. The middle section of the United States turned into an arid desert of topsoil that was blown into dust storms reaching as far as the East Coast.

Improved knowledge and attention to appropriate farming has prevented a repeat of the disaster, which was aggravated by the Great Depression and simultaneously contributed to it. Sharing that knowledge has been the mission of the Clark Conservation District for more than seven decades. As The Columbian recently reported about an outdoor learning area run by River HomeLink in Battle Ground: “Staff from the district came out and examined the soil and drainage. After finding out what would be best to plant there, they helped get rid of the grass and installed native plants such as dogwoods, Oregon grape, Indian plum and others. Now, the area has a vegetable garden, a bioswale to help drain runoff and a hedge of native plants that will provide a buffer from a busy nearby street.”

Such services are provided for free, but officials say the district is endangered by a lack of funding. Its annual budget of approximately $350,000 is supported mostly by state and federal grants, but those grants have become more difficult to secure. Funding is expected to run out at the end of this year.

Because of that, county councilors recently considered — but rejected — a countywide fee of $5 per parcel of land, plus 10 cents per acre. County Council Chair Marc Boldt provided the only “yes” vote, and Councilor Jeanne Stewart said, “I have to see benefits for all the people that are going to be required to pay, and I’m still struggling with that.” Stewart’s concern for taxpayers is laudable, but we feel the district is beneficial to all county residents.

The proposed fees would annually generate an estimated $830,000, far exceeding the current budget for the district. Because of that, the proposal should be tweaked and combined with user fees for those who seek assistance from the district. Charging a nominal fee for customers and subsidizing that with, say, $2 for each parcel could keep the district up and running. This is not a novel idea; among the 45 conservation districts in Washington, 16 charge fees.

Regardless of the eventual formula, the county council should act to preserve a service that helps residents make the best possible use of Clark County’s land.