Clark County previews forestry advisory committee; public urges climate, tribal and youth seats

The Clark County Council on June 24 reviewed an early draft to establish a Forestry Advisory Committee and received public recommendations to add climate, tribal and youth representation.

Jordan Boie, the county policy analyst, presented the draft as a voluntary advisory group modeled on the county's agricultural advisory commission. "This forest advisory group would provide review, input and recommendations on forestry‑related issues across the county," Boie told the council, describing prospective members including small and commercial forest landowners, a forest products manufacturer, recreation and conservation representatives, and representatives from the Department of Natural Resources and U.S. Forest Service.

During public comment, Mary Goodie, a Clark County resident and board member of Friends of Clark County, urged the council to include climate expertise and community equity voices. "We're asking for a climate representative to be on this," Goodie said, recommending alignment with the GMA climate element, a BIPOC or environmental‑justice community representative, land‑trust voices and at least one youth seat.

Councilors debated committee size and composition. Several members said 11 seats could be increased to accommodate additional expertise without displacing suggested roles; others favored subcommittees so trust beneficiaries and other stakeholders could be engaged only when timber sales or district impacts were at issue. Boie said the positions would be volunteer appointments supported by county staffing and that the draft is a preliminary proposal to be refined after public input.

Councilors also raised tribal consultation and technical expertise. Boie said he had included the Cowlitz Tribe by name and planned to verify whether other tribal interests should be invited to participate. Members discussed including non‑voting technical experts and land‑trust representatives to advise on potential tools such as transfer of development rights and land‑conservation swaps.

The council did not take a final vote. Boie said staff would incorporate the feedback and likely bring a revised structure back for another council discussion in July or later, depending on staff scheduling and any public engagement steps.