Our hot dry summer underscores the need for trees and shrubs to shade rivers and streams to protect the salmon that live in these habitats. The Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe appealed Kitsap County’s requirements to retain trees and shrubs and other native vegetation along Kitsap County’s rivers and streams in urban growth areas. The Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe holds treaty rights to fish for salmon in Washington State and Kitsap County.

Unfortunately, the Growth Management Hearings Board found that the county’s provisions complied with the Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements to protect fish and wildlife habitats. The Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe appealed this decision to the court of appeals. The court of appeals is Washington’s intermediate appellate court.

Futurewise wrote an amicus curiae, or “friend of the court,” brief supporting the tribe’s appeal. Friend of the court briefs are intended to help the court decide important cases. They are filed by entities that are not a party to the lawsuit. Futurewise argued that the GMA requires equal protection for critical areas both within and outside of urban growth areas (UGAs). Futurewise documented that Kitsap County’s urban stream buffers are narrower than other counties’ critical areas regulations. Futurewise argued that the Kitsap County UGA urban buffers will not protect the functions and values of critical areas as the GMA requires. Finally, Futurewise argued that Kitsap County’s problem with accommodating urban growth in the UGAs stem from low density zoning, not critical areas protections.

In mid-June, a court of appeals commissioner approved Futurewise’s motion to file and submit the amicus brief. This case, Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe v. Kitsap County Court of Appeals Case No. 61950-4-II, will be decided in 2026 or 2027.