1 of 36

State Conservation Commission’s Role in Floodplain Resilience and Stewardship

June 12th

2 of 36

Today’s Speakers:

Mike Poteet, Voluntary Stewardship Program - Mike began at SCC in December 2024 after spending five years as the Senior Planner for Pierce County’s Agriculture Program, advocating for agricultural industry needs, supporting rural landowners, and connecting local farms to relevant programs and resources. Mike received his B.S. in Agriculture from Austin Peay State University in Tennessee and his M.S. in Soil Science from Pennsylvania State University where he studied soil carbon sequestration and conservation tillage.
Paul D'Agnolo, Office of Farmland Preservation Specialist - After spending several seasons working on and managing farms, Paul started his own farm in 2015. Paul holds a BS in Accounting from Western Governors University and joined the SCC from Whatcom County Parks and Recreation.

3 of 36

Agenda:

12:00 - 12:05 - Welcome and Context

12:05-12:15 - Overview of State Conservation Commission

12:15 - 12:30 - Office of Farmland Preservation

12:30-12:45 - Voluntary Stewardship Program

12:50-1:00 - Q&A and Closing (Q&A can continue for those that can stay past 1pm)

4 of 36

Background on SCC
Agricultural Land Use
Farmland Preservation’s Role in Floodplain Management
Voluntary Stewardship
Challenges & Opportunities
Funding Constraints
Continued Collaborations

Overview

5 of 36

SCC Mission & Vision

More information available: About the Conservation Commission

6 of 36

7 of 36

SCC Programs

Grant Programs:

Agricultural Conservation Easement

Sponsorship Program (ACES)

Conservation Reserve Enhancement

Program (CREP)

Disaster Assistance Program (DAP)

Farmland Protection and Land Access

Program (FPLA)

Forest Health and Community Wildfire

Resiliency (CWR)

Irrigation Efficiencies Grant Program (IEGP)

Natural Resource Investments (NRI)

Riparian Grant Program (RGP)

Riparian Plant Propagation Program (RPPP)

Shellfish Program

Sustainable Farms & Fields

Collaborations:

Center for Technical Development (CTD)

Coordinated Resource Management (CRM)

Food Policy Forum

Office of Farmland Preservation (OFP)

Pollinator Health

SCC Integrated Science Hub

Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP)

Washington Shrubsteppe Restoration & Resiliency Initiative (WSRRI)

8 of 36

Collaboration is the key to everything SCC does – with districts, farms, tribes, agencies, local governments, and NGOs

9 of 36

Conservation Districts are more than just Technical Service Providers to farms

10 of 36

Robust Habitat Restoration and Monitoring programs are in place at many of the state’s 45 Conservation Districts

11 of 36

All natural resources are considered valuable, from arable farmlands to native habitat to surface and groundwater sources

12 of 36

Prime farmland in many locations
Access to irrigation resources (ground and surface)
Population centers – historic settlement patterns
Cultural Resources
Infrastructure – on-farm & industrial/regional
Open Spaces and groundwater recharge
Water quality – nutrients, chemicals, wastes
Flooding and channel migration
Coastal settings – tidal influence and salinity in soils
Co-exist with fish and other indicator and migratory species
Targeted for development due to cheaper land preparatory costs
Flood insurance
GMA – Critical Areas Ordinance
Riparian area protection and enhancement

Agricultural Land Use in Floodplains (!)

13 of 36

Office of Farmland Preservation

13

Photo credit: Sarah Richards, Whidbey CD

14 of 36

OFP was established by the legislature in 2007 to address the need to protect prime agricultural lands for food security, open space benefits, and viability of agriculture.

Our Office is empowered to engage in a number of activities supporting farmland preservation, including:

Support for and acquisition of agricultural conservation easements
Technical assistance to local government for strategies to retain agricultural lands
Providing resources for farmland succession and transfer
Developing model programs for farmland preservation and acting as a facilitator for collaboration between conservation entities protecting farmland statewide

This includes convening a State Farmland Preservation Roundtable, as a Forum for practitioners to share best practices and developing shared strategies

In addition to our core activities, OFP also acts as a clearinghouse for data and research on trends impacting agricultural land conversion, as well as innovative strategies for addressing farmland loss and encouraging ag land retention. On our website, you’ll find a set of Farmland Preservation Indicators that can help inform land use planning at multiple levels. These indicators were last updated in 2019 and will be updated in the coming year. You’ll also find a number of reports and analyses on issues informing farmland preservation strategies, including most recently analyses of mechanisms to support affordability in protected agricultural lands, and an assessment of the opportunities and barriers for Urban Agriculture in WA.

Finally, since 2019, OFP has been a co-convenor of the State Food Policy Forum, which touches on many issues of interest to FbD partners.

15 of 36

OFP Activities

15

Support and sponsor agricultural conservation easements
Assist localities to develop and implement measures to retain agricultural lands
Provide farmland succession and land transfer resources
Facilitate partnerships across conservation entities to advance farmland protection efforts
Co-convene the Food Policy Forum with the Commission and the Washington State Department of Agriculture

Purpose: Support the retention of farmland and the viability of farming for future generations (RCW 89.10)

Agriculture is foundational to our state’s economy and food security. Washington state produces 300 agricultural commodities across 13.9 million acres of agricultural land. In 2023, the state’s agriculture industries supported over 89,000 direct jobs—not including secondary employment impacts related to agricultural production — and added nearly $14 billion to the state’s economy (WSDA Climate Ag Resilience Plan)

This production is dependent on the agricultural resource lands that fall across the entire state, both west and east of the Cascades. However, Washington is outpacing the nation currently in farmland loss. We lost more ground in the past five years (over 800k acres) than was lost in the previous fifteen (640k), placing us in the top four states for farmland loss in last Ag Census report.

Why is this happening?

Traditional drivers of farmland loss:

pressures of population growth and peri-urban sprawl,

commercial and industrial development,

retiring farmers and lack of successor,

land/parcel fragmentation,

lack of strong zoning protections/zoning changes, and

decline in ag sector support services and overall ag economic viability

Emerging drivers of farmland loss:

Low density rural residential development

Increasing land prices

Barriers to entry and land access for new and beginning farmers

Competing uses for locations of prime/productive agricultural conditions, including renewable energy development

16 of 36

16

Source: American Farmland Trust, Farms Under Threat, https://csp-fut.appspot.com/

This map is now a bit out of date, but highlights the findings of an American Farmland Trust analysis of where farmland conversion was happening – both where and on which soils this was occurring. This map shows the overlap of the highest quality agricultural resource lands with lands converted to urban and low density residential uses.

Washington best agricultural lands are highly soil resource dependent. As you can see on this map, much of the farmland conversion happening in WA is occurring on some of our best agricultural soils. In addition, these soils can be located in areas not only experiencing pressures of residential or industrial/commercial development, but also other competing uses and priorities.

In Western WA, efforts to protect the most highly productive agricultural soils and lands occurs often in constrained floodplains, where alluvial and volcanic processes have contributed to the soil characteristics. These floodplains are also high priority for flood hazard mitigation and salmon habitat and recovery. The integrated floodplain approach has become a critical venue for farmland preservation efforts in Western WA in particular.

In Eastern WA, there is significant potential for conflict with solar and other renewable energy siting, with concerns of potential future farmland conversion and degradation.

17 of 36

OFP Easement programs

17

Agricultural Conservation Easement Sponsorship Program
Farmland Protection & Land Access

In terms of support of agricultural conservation easement acquisitions, our office currently has two programs we operate.

Easements are one of the strongest tools for preventing conversion of high priority farmlands. As such, easements are recognized as a primary strategy under OFP’s original statute; when the legislature established OFP, it also established an account and authority for OFP to acquire and fund agricultural conservation easements.

OFP currently acquires easements two ways – one through partnership with Conservation Districts on applications to RCO’s FP program. In this program, we sponsor CD applications to RCO to acquire ag easements on agricultural lands, with a focus on those geographies not otherwise served by a land trust or other land conservation program. To date this strategy has protected roughly 7,000 acres of agricultural lands in Central and Eastern WA.

Secondly OFP funds easement acquisitions through the recently launched Farmland Protection and Land Access program. FPLA was established via a budget proviso in the 2022 supplemental capital budget, specifically targets farmland acquired through “Buy Protect Sell” strategies of land protection. Working in tandem with a low-risk, low-interest rate loan program at the State Housing Finance Commission (FarmPAI), FPLA fills a critical gap by providing easement funding for high priority farmland acquisitions that are listed on the market or otherwise at immediate risk of conversion. The programs work together by supporting land trusts to secure financing for acquiring highly threatened farmland properties. Once secured, FPLA places a permanent conservation easement on the property, ensuring the perpetual protection as well as bringing down the remaining value of the property to its agricultural value. This enables the land trust to then sell the property to a farmer at an affordable rate, improving opportunities for farmland access particularly for historically underserved farmers and ranchers.

18 of 36

Farmland Transition

Farmland Succession Planning Workbook - OFP

Land Transfer Navigators – American Farmland Trust

Farm to Farmer – Washington Farmland Trust

And more…

Transition Planning

18

Photo credit: Rachel Little, Benton CD

Finally, a number of entities are working on the issues of farmland succession and transition support. I mentioned that is part of OFP’s policy work. The Office of Farmland Preservation has a publication available in English and Spanish that is a workbook for family farms to begin the succession planning process. We’ve worked with CD’s and other institutions to offer training to service providers to support land succession conversations with farmland property owners.

There are also some great entities engaging in direct client support services for farmland succession planning (AFT), and farmland access and transition support through land linking programs such as WFT’s Farm to Farmer.

I can’t overstate the importance of these land transition support programs to address both farmland conservation and farmland access barriers in our current situation in the state. While not a direct land use policy, recommendations to provide technical assistance for transition and incentives and opportunities for affordable farmland access are critical to supporting agricultural viability and food security.

19 of 36

Washington State Food Policy Forum

19

Resources relevant to FbD:

The Washington State Food Policy Forum (Forum) is a cross-sector group of food system stakeholders with representation from across the state. The Forum was initially created by the Legislature via budget proviso in 2016 and is now established in statute (RCW 89.50).

The Forum is charged with developing recommendations for improving the food system in Washington.

The Forum currently has forty-four (44) appointed members representing a diversity of knowledge, expertise, and perspectives in Washington’s food system, and four (4) ex-officio members appointed by the legislature. This membership includes representatives of food/hunger advocacy organizations, farmers markets, food distribution, agricultural commodity groups, agricultural interest groups, conservation districts, county governments, state agencies, and elected officials.

Food Policy Forum Goals

•Increase direct marketing sales and consumption of Washington-grown foods;

•Expand and promote programs that bring healthy and nutritious Washington-grown foods to Washington residents;

•Examine ways to encourage retention of an adequate number of farmers for small scale farms, meet the educational needs for the next generation of farmers, and provide for the continued economic viability of local food production, processing, and distribution in the state;

•Reduce food insecurity and hunger in the state; and

•Identify ways to improve coordination and communication among local food policy entities and communication between the local food policy entities and state agencies.

•

Relevant to FbD partners, there are a few resources the Forum has issued that may be of interest –

In 2022, the Food Policy Forum issued a detailed set of recommendations to the legislature on farmland retention priority strategies.

And in 2025, the Forum issued a report describing the context and Forum’s consensus recommendations for the 2025 legislative session regarding climate change impacts on water for food production.

20 of 36

Emerging trends and issues

Farmland affordability
Farmland access
Urban/Peri-Urban agriculture
Renewable energy siting impacts
Intersection of ag viability & food security with community & landscape priorities

Photo credit: Justin O’Dea, Washington State University Extension, “Farming on the Urban Edge”

New and emerging trends

Farmland prices, affordability, and land access

Increase in land prices, particularly since COVID

Steep increase in farmland prices since 2017 (USDA NASS 2022 Ag Census)
avg value per acre for farmland increased by 37% between 2017 and 2022 ($2,789 to 3,824 per acre); prior census period the increase was 21%; rate of increase nearly doubled
County average per acre prices?

Some counties nearly doubled since 2017, many counties ranging from $12k to 20k/acre
Chelan, Clallam, Clark, Island, Jefferson, Pierce, Snohomish, Skagit, San Juan, Thurston, Whatcom
King is $38k/acre!! Kitsap is $50k/acre!! Pierce is $28k

The increase in land prices has significantly impacted areas of the state where development pressures had previously been less intense – aligns with where AFT data has shown new conversion pressure of low density rural residential development in WA and nationwide
These prices exacerbate land access barriers for new & beginning, historically underserved, and next generation farmers
Farmland affordability easement mechanisms and other tools are an area of current research and exploration for OFP

Goal for these tools to work in tandem with FPLA and other easement programs to reduce land access barriers
There is increasing interest in exploring land access and tenure models that learn from the affordable housing sector – community land trusts, 99 year leases, public lands made available for ag, etc.

Urban Agriculture

OFP released an Urban Agriculture Report in late 2024, which was directed by HB 1552 (2023) to conduct a study of urban agricultural opportunities and barriers in Washington state. The study looked at urban and peri-urban farmers who grow food outdoors in WA state.
Urban agriculture is becoming increasingly popular among producers and consumers by providing benefits including the potential to increase access to fresh locally grown food, create economic opportunities, support food security, provide education, and build community.
Despite these many benefits the study revealed significant challenges faced by urban farmers in Washington, particularly regarding unstable land tenure and regulatory burdens to market access.
The report to the Legislature lays out five key areas of challenge and potential solutions, as well as case studies and program spotlights. The following key challenges are addressed in the report: 1) Land Access, 2) Water Access, 3) Networks & Community, 4) Market Access, and 5) Technical Assistance.

Renewable energy siting conflicts, impacts on soils

Food Policy Forum issued a consensus recommendation in the “Land Use Policy Solutions to Stem Ag Land Loss” (Report to the Legislature) to encourage WSU’s Lease Conflict Solar Siting study to inform renewable energy siting studies going forward.
Farmer and ranchers have shared concern about conversion of best agricultural soils/farms in communities (particularly Columbia Plateau), in terms of the long-term leases removing land from production, driving further impacts on land prices, and the longer-term unknown/uncertain impacts to soil contamination, compaction, etc. once installations are decommissioned
Have also heard interest in agrivoltaics, although not a solution at scale for the potential siting conflicts in WA state; learning from research and models in other states for applicability on small scale

Ag viability – constraints on small & mid-scale producers, impacts and intersections on evolving landscape

Cutting across all of these trends are the themes of continued agricultural viability, particularly the economic constraints on small & mid-scale producers, and how that impacts both the changes on the landscape and the vulnerability of our State’s food system and food security.
These themes and trends are interrelated with the community and landscape challenges FbD seeks to address – multiple benefit, community priorities that intersect on constrained landscapes, etc.

21 of 36

Confronting evolving challenges

Exploring avenues for additional easement funding
Model state program examples
Topics for further research:

Agricultural districts
Financial incentives for land access and transition
Barriers to next generation farmers
Integration of farmland protection at landscape scale, local priorities

OFP Strategic Direction – learning from other state models

Easement account – could receive revenue from multiple sources, provide new avenues for funding easements in complement to efforts of RCO and FbD

Opportunity to learn from other states that have robust easement programs, with stepped incentives towards full preservation

Agricultural districts – take many different shapes, but all act as a temporary pause on conversion, help maintain ag base

Financial incentives for transition and access will be critical due to high cost of land

Alternative land access strategies for some next gen producers and communities facing exacerbated barriers to ownership

Critical to consider how farmland preservation can be integrated into balanced landscape strategies, and strategies need to be locally driven and tailored - challenge and opportunity. What is priority in Kitsap may look very different than in Yakima. Protecting farmland one parcel at a time scattered across is not likely to provide benefit of a landscape approach.

22 of 36

Voluntary Stewardship Program

22

23 of 36

Ruckelshaus Foundation – The Big Compromise (2011)
Part of GMA (RCW 36.70A)
28 counties opted in thus far (out of 39)

27 in 2015-2016 window
1 in 2025 (Wahkiakum)

Watershed-based
County Work Plans and supporting Work Groups
Unusual program for SCC (County-based vs. CD-centric)

Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP)

24 of 36

28 Counties

25 of 36

Work plans address critical areas in Ag Lands by setting Goals and Benchmarks
Protection and Enhancement (2011 Baseline)
Landowner Participation and Ag Viability metrics
Regular reporting cycles (2-yr & 5-yr)
Adaptive Management
Monitoring Plans
Unusual program for SCC (County-based vs. CD-centric)

Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP)

26 of 36

Technical Panel

WSDA
WDFW
Ecology

Statewide Advisory Committee

Two each from Ag sector, Environmental groups, local government officials, and Tribal governments

Evaluate work plans and 5-year reports for SCC
SCC Executive Director makes final determination on whether counties are meeting protection goals and benchmarks
Counties may be removed from the program under statute

Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP)

27 of 36

Most counties rely on Conservation Districts to lead their local VSP efforts, but every county is given flexibility and autonomy in their approach

28 of 36

Work groups made up of county officials, conservation districts, agency staff, farmers, Tribal reps, and local environmental organizations

29 of 36

Work plans incorporate findings and strategies from other local and regional plans and initiatives

30 of 36

Monitoring is done in partnership with agencies and other watershed management groups in each county

31 of 36

Still in its relative infancy
“Umbrella” for all conservation efforts in Ag Lands
Technical expertise varies across counties
Tribal engagement and acceptance varies regionally
Still developing and identifying the best tools for success in monitoring and reporting
Addition of capital funding in recent biennia
Internal process improvements underway

Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP)

32 of 36

Range from uncertainty in federal programs to recent state cuts to local commitments and district budgets (grant awards, etc.)
Always more demand for services and funds than what is available
Attempts at equity in conservation funding
Balance expectations to meet critical area protection requirements with limited funds to achieve and document the work
Temporary nature of many local partnerships and work efforts vs. long-term state programs
INVERSE is true, too 🡪 state programs that end may impact the ability to effectively engage landowners, report on important program metrics, and execute long-term strategies developed locally

Funding Challenges – SCC Programs

33 of 36

Landowners, Farmers, and Conservation Districts are committed to their lands and programs – SCC is the state agency that helps facilitate and realize those commitments.