Sauter, Katherine F. 1994. Explaining variation in western Washington riparian management zone width on state and private lands. M.S.
The past ten years have seen a tremendous shift toward riparian management among land managers. In Washington state, forest managers watched riparian regulations spring to life in 1976 and continue to gain in prominence and complexity. These regulations have been implemented on a tapestry widely varied in the physical land forms they encompass, the landowners and managers who follow them, and these people's scientific literacy and attitudes toward the regulations. Given the complexity of both the regulations and the regulated, assessing the effectiveness of the regulations is a complicated job. However, before their effectiveness can be determined, it will be necessary to find out how the regulations are being followed, to what extent people are complying with the regulations and why, and where gaps in riparian literacy, if any, exist. This study begins this process of discovery by searching for explanations for some of the variation seen in riparian management zones.
Riparian management zones (RMZs) are strips of standing forest left along streams to buffer them and their inhabitants from the effects of clearcutting and other timber harvesting practices. In their current form, western Washington RMZs have been required only since 1988. Between 1976 and 1988 the Washington Forest Practice(s) Rules and Regulations required "streamside management zones" which were intended to provide "stream bank integrity and temperature control" (Washington Forest Practices Board, 1976 and 1982). In order to accomplish this intent, regulations required 25-50 foot buffers, leaving "all nonmerchantable vegetation" and "sufficient merchantable timber, if any, necessary to retain 50 [to] 75 percent of the summer mid-day shade of the water surface" (Washington Forest Practices Board 1976). In 1988 the RMZ regulations were strengthened considerably, requiring up to 100 foot buffers (Washington Forest Practices Board, 1988). The change in regulations was a result of the Timber/Fish/Wildlife (TFW) Agreement reached in 1987 among representatives of the Washington state tribes, forest products industry, environment community and natural resource agencies. The agreement sought to resolve conflicts between these diverse groups by recognizing the common goal of preservation of natural resources and at the same time the need for a viable timber industry. As the final report of the agreement states, "these needs are not mutually exclusive. They are compatible" (TFW Agreement 1987).