In the Pacific Northwest, state agencies have adopted definitions of mature and old-growth forest, with minimum size and age criteria for the largest trees, as part of a program to protect rare forest habitats. State wetland rating and priority habitat protection guidelines use these criteria to identify mature and old-growth forested wetlands; however, these definitions are based on the characteristics of upland habitats and may not be applicable to wetlands. In this study, data from forested wetlands in western Washington were analyzed to estimate growth rates for five tree species: western red cedar, Sitka spruce, western hemlock, red alder, and shore pine. Estimated average diameter for mature forest is 46 cm (18 inches) and for old-growth 69 cm (27 inches), significantly smaller than the standard size criteria of 53 cm (21 inches) and 81 cm (32 inches), respectively. These results may be more appropriate as size criteria for these forest stages; however, growth rates varied widely between different wetlands and between trees in the same wetland. The great variation in growth rates calls into question the validity of estimating the age of a stand based on the size of trees. Consideration should be given to applying a higher degree of protection to all forested wetlands dominated by coniferous trees, regardless of the size of the trees.

Environmental Practice 11:68–83 (2009)

Although water-harvesting techniques have been used effectively in irrigated agriculture and domestic water supplies, there seems to have been little continued exploitation of the same techniques in arid and semiarid rangeland water conservation. A review of the history of rangeland water harvesting allows identification of the methods that have been useful in the past and that would likely be effective in the future. It seems that relatively simple water-harvesting approaches work best on rangelands, particularly water-ponding dikes to stimulate vegetation growth. Experience from rangeland water harvesting in New Mexico and other locations in the Southwest indicates that the approach is a long-term solution that produces significant vegetation growth, but generally only 10–15 years after installation because of the sporadic and spatially distributed nature of the summer monsoon rainfall. Additionally, the use of water-ponding dikes seems to most reliably produce an “island” of enhanced soil moisture and increased habitat cover and forage. Water-ponding dikes are easy and relatively inexpensive to construct and produce a pattern of vegetation similar to naturally occurring banded vegetation. Even very shallow dikes (7.5 cm) have been shown to produce a significant vegetation response. As climate changes our water supplies, historical techniques of water harvesting used for over 9,000 years are viable rangeland water conservation alternatives now and in the future for adapting to such changes.

Environmental Practice 11:84–94 (2009)

In Washington State, the agricultural community faces many environmental and regulatory challenges, including water availability for irrigation; water quality and Clean Water Act (CWA) compliance; and Endangered Species Act (ESA) compliance, particularly with regard to federally listed salmon. In 2001, the Washington State Department of Agriculture initiated the State's Agriculture, Fish, and Water (AFW) process to bring regulatory agencies, tribes, and environmental stakeholders to the table in an effort to address these issues. The result was the development of the Comprehensive Irrigation District Management Plan (CIDMP) process, which provides a voluntary, locally driven, incentive-based process by which the agricultural community can improve their operations and water management techniques in response to CWA and ESA concerns. The CIDMP process was modeled after the state's Watershed Management Plans; both processes reflect an innovative approach to collaborative resource management that is unique to Washington. The goal of the CIDMP is to allow the agricultural community the flexibility to address ESA and CWA while preserving the key processes and functions that are necessary to sustain commercial agriculture in a rapidly urbanizing landscape. To date, several CIDMPs have been developed around Washington State. These pilot CIDMPs have progressed to various stages of completion and degrees of success. This article will showcase the Skagit River Basin CIDMP, a project located in Skagit County, Washington, that began in 2005 and is ongoing. The article provides an overview of the CIDMP process and the key issues it addresses, status of implementation, and lessons learned.

Environmental Practice 11:95–104 (2009)

This commentary offers a background to the carbon challenge, carbon offsets, and emissions trading from an Australian perspective. It sets the scene for a more detailed discussion about carbon sequestration rights, which are defined explicitly by some Australian states and territories but not by others. We highlight that the term carbon sequestration right is poorly defined and relies, inappropriately we suggest, on the borrowed term profit à prendre. This terminology is at odds with the notion of a carbon property right, which has yet to be conceptualized fully by the marketplace and the existing legal framework, given the need to fully engage the sociological and ecological dimensions of carbon and climate change. We find that current policy intent, together with evolving public will and corporate responsibility, is ahead of the science and the legal framework for managing property rights in carbon (used broadly to represent the six greenhouse gasses). The Australian Property Institute has taken the lead in its 2007 policy paper Conceiving Property Rights in Carbon and more recently in Sheehan and Kanas's investigation of “Property Rights in Soil.” This article takes the discussion to the next stage by offering a framework for property rights in carbon and asking whether such rights should be vested in the state or the nation, rather than merely creating a commodity that can be efficiently allocated and thus speculated upon.

Environmental Practice 11:105–114 (2009)

The destruction of natural resources is a recurring feature of warfare. Indeed, throughout recorded history, environmental destruction has been used as a deliberate military strategy, and wartime actions affecting the environment constitute some of the most serious discrete instances of humanity's impact on the world's ecosystems. In this commentary, we consider the environmental consequences of warfare, with particular attention to the recent ecological disasters in Kuwait and in the former Yugoslavia. Armed conflicts are still raging worldwide, creating both immediate human tragedy and long-term ecological consequences. The authors argue that legitimizing the concept of environmental crime is an important part of establishing accountability and of providing appropriate recompense for acts of war. We propose that the principle of sustainability, and the right to environmental justice are the most pertinent basis for defining environmental crime. On this basis, we offer a core definition of the features of an environmental crime, and we call upon international leaders to assist in the establishment of legal frameworks that are adequate to address such crimes.