Protecting Cherry Point (Xwe'chi'eXen) – Again and Again and Again

By Carl Weimer January 13, 2026

Remember the Coal Port fight at Cherry Point over a decade ago? Well Cherry Point is threatened again by the expansion of a different type of fossil fuel export facility, and the Whatcom Environmental Council, along with our coalition partners – RE Sources, Friends of the San Juans, Washington Conservation Action, Sierra Club, and Evergreen Islands – have once again intervened in the process to try to protect this beautiful and ecologically and culturally important area.

About 10 years ago Petrogas bought the LPG facility at Cherry Point, and then bought the Intalco pier. During the years that followed, Petrogas implemented dozens of projects at the terminal site that “facilitated” the “increased shipment” of butane and propane from the terminal. Petrogas did not seek or obtain permits for this work. The volume of butane and propane handled by the terminal steadily increased during this time. The company’s code violations triggered an enforcement action against the terminal by the Northwest Clean Air Agency (NWCAA), which resulted in a $4 million fine. In a 2021 letter to the County, NWCAA explained how Petrogas implemented a number of unpermitted changes that “increased the facility’s capacity for propane deliveries and handling.” The letter documented how railcar visits to the terminal increased from around 1,000 cars/year to nearly 17,000 cars/year, and vessel traffic increased from 2–5 berthing events per year to 26 in 2019. Over that same period AltaGas began the purchase of Petrogas, and became the sole owner in 2022. AltaGas now refers to this facility as ALA Energy Ferndale Terminal.

In 2016, while I was on the Whatcom County Council I help draft and get passed an “emergency moratorium” prohibiting “the filing, acceptance, and processing of new applications for conversion of land or water, new building or structure permits, or other County permits or authorizations in the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area for new or expanded facilities whose purpose is to facilitate the increased shipment of unrefined fossil fuel or new projects that would export fossil fuels.” This moratorium was in place while Petrogas was making the unpermitted changes to their facility, and the County ultimately amended its code to require such expansions go through a Conditional Use Permit process to ensure environmental protections.

In March of 2023, Whatcom County executed a “compliance agreement” with Petrogas. That agreement memorialized the County’s view that the unpermitted projects performed starting in 2016 “have substantially increased facility throughput” in violation of the emergency moratorium and other provisions of the County code. To rectify these alleged violations, the agreement confirmed that the company would seek a Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) and Whatcom County would prepare an environmental impact statement under SEPA.

In 2025 the County released its SEPA determination and at that time stated no Environmental Impact Statement would be required, and started the Conditional Use Permit process. Our coalition filed an appeal of this SEPA determination because mitigation to the environmental harms identified were inadequate and potential other harms were not even identified. We feel the County did not adequately address the impacts from increased ship traffic or emissions on climate change, and that the mitigations the County wants to require are too vague, often voluntary, and are difficult to assess and enforce. Our appeal seeks a full environmental impact statement, as the County had led everyone to believe would be required, to ensure all environmental impacts are properly identified and mitigations put in place. Our review shows that there has never been a complete environmental review of the impacts of ship traffic from this pier, even though there is a good deal of scientific evidence that ship noise effects both whales and herring, and that the materials used to build the pier have a toxic effect on herring (see herring graph below).

Starting on January 28th at 8:30AM both the SEPA appeal and the Conditional Use Permit hearings will begin in front of the County's Hearing Examiner at the County Courthouse. Public testimony can be provided in-person or be submitted via email (hearingexamineroffice@co.whatcom.wa.us).

We are represented in our SEPA appeal by EarthJustice, and have put together a great team of experts to testify at the SEPA hearing. At this time it is still not clear whether the public will be able to testify as part of that hearing, but the public can certainly provide testimony as part of the parallel Conditional Use Permit hearing. We are guessing that members of the public, such as you, will be allowed to speak for three minutes each at that hearing, but can also provide additional written comments. The public testimony will probably start around 9:30 on the 28th. Please consider joining us in calling for better protection of Cherry Point. Lots more information about this proposed permit is available on the County's website here. The hearing agenda, expert testimony, and exhibits are here.

So many people have been working to protect Cherry Point for decades, so please help us ensure this expansion does not in some way undo previous work. Thanks in Advance!!

Urban Forests

Loophole allows landowner to avoid city requirements

By David Stalheim, WEC Secretary

In 2017, the City of Bellingham issued a Critical Areas and Clearing Permit to allow harvest of trees at Samish Heights. The conditions of those permits limited the harvest to 30% of the trees and required protection of critical wildlife habitat and buffers around Class I mature forested wetlands.

This overview of the forests and wetlands was submitted to the City as part of the landowners application to clear 30% of the timber

Wetland A was determined by the wetland consultant to be a Class I mature forested wetland, requiring a 150 foot buffer around the wetland under City Critical Area Requirements

This image was taken by the wetland consultants at the time of their site visits on January 31st, February 14th, and March 1st of 2017. Source: CAP2016-0036, STM2016-0068 and SEP2016-0017, "Exhibit C, Critical Areas Assessment, Samish Heights, Bellingham, WA, Appendix C", NW Ecological Services

This was the tree harvest plan approved by the City in 2017.

Landowner terminates permit and applies for less restrictive permit

In 2018, the property owner chose another path to harvest the forest at Samish Heights. Rather than apply for a clearing permit through the City, the property owner chose to pursue harvest of the forest through the State Department of Natural Resources. This "loophole", which appears to be legal, allowed the property owner to avoid all City requirements for clearing of the land and protection of critical areas and wetlands.

The conditions for using this loophole were:

1. The landowner had to maintain the property as forest lands for ten years;

2. The landowner had to manage the forest in accordance with a forest management plan:

   1. Reforestation was to begin in March 2020 and include 250+ seedlings per acre.

   2. Reforestation checks were required every two years.

   3. Competing vegetation checks were required every two years.

The difference between City and State forest cutting requirements were significant. The State would not enforce City habitat or wetland requirements, allowing timber to be harvested in Class I forested wetland buffers. While the City allowed just 30% of the timber to be harvested, the State allowed 95%. Over one mile of roads were constructed and over 1,300 million board feet of timber was harvested.

This video of "Wetland A" was captured after the timber was harvested.

Under the Growth Management Act, forested land within the city limits - or urban growth area, are not considered commercial forest lands. When a landowner applies to clear the forest, it is assumed that they will convert to non-forest uses. In fact, the landowner's website says there is a "significant master-planned residential development" that it intends to pursue. Rules allowing the cutting of the forest for a ten year delay just circumvents local rules meant to protect our urban forests and critical areas.

Why Urban Forests Matter

We all have our personal reasons why we might love urban forests. Urban forests provide areas for recreation and open space close to where we live and work. Urban forests and retention/increase of tree canopy are also critical to boost carbon sequestration, reduce heat islands, and improve air quality in overburdened communities.

In this heat map, you can see areas of Bellingham that were much hotter than others, which corresponds with less tree canopy. Source: Whatcom Million Trees Project (https://whatcommilliontrees.org/)

In 2023, the Legislature amended the Growth Management Act (GMA) to require the City's comprehensive plan show the use, location, and distribution of "urban and community forests". The Legislature also required that the City adopt a climate change and resilience element that results in reductions in overall greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and enhances resiliency to and avoid the adverse impacts of climate change.

Retention of our urban forests accomplish both GHG emission reductions and climate resiliency.

• Tree loss accounts for 12% of the estimated communitywide greenhouse gas emissions in 2022. (Source: Whatcom County 2022 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis, Figure 4, pg. 11)

• 40% of Bellingham is covered by tree canopy and 42% of the entire Urban Growth Area. The majority (54%) of tree canopy is found on private land. (Source: City of Bellingham Urban Forest Plan, Draft April 2024, pg. 16 and 19)

Samish Crest forests were identified as significant wildlife habitat with the highest biodiversity scores in several of the City's studies. The harvested area is shown in the red outline. Source: "Exhibit C, Critical Areas Assessment, Samish Heights, Bellingham, WA", NW Ecological Services

2022 Aerial photo of Samish Heights and Samish Crest. Areas shaded green are part of the City's Greenways program. Source: Bellingham GIS https://maps.cob.org/arcgis4/rest/services/Imagery/Photo_2022/MapServer

This overview from 2022 includes the subwatershed boundaries and wetland delineations. Wetland A, which was identified as a Class I mature forested wetland that required a 150 foot buffer under City Critical Area requirements, was within the Lake Padden watershed. Source: Bellingham GIS

What action can be done to close this loophole?

We're encouraging the Bellingham City Council to add two policies to the Bellingham Plan before they take action December 8th.

1. Ensure state forest practices within the City require appropriate approvals for all phases of the conversion of forestlands, including land clearing and grading and protection of critical areas, consistent with Bellingham’s development regulations and Urban Forest Plan.

2. The city establishes a city-wide tree canopy cover of no less than 40%, to be updated and implemented through adoption of an urban forest plan, capital facilities plan and development regulations.

You can contact the City Council and Mayor and ask them to add these policies to the Bellingham Plan.

Mayor Kim Lund: mayorsoffice@cob.org

City Council: ccmail@cob.org

Council members (https://cob.org/gov/council):

• Hollie Huthman (hahuthman@cob.org),

• Hannah Stone (hestone@cob.org),

• Dan Hammill (dchammill@cob.org),

• "Skip" Williams (ehwilliams@cob.org),

• Lisa Anderson (laanderson@cob.org),

• Michael Lilliquist (mlilliquist@cob.org), and

• Jace Cotton (jacotton@cob.org).

This effort to close this loophole is just beginning. It appears that changes to the State Forest Practices Act and Rules might be necessary. Let us know if you want to help by signing up as a Whatcom Environmental Council supporter.

Protecting Lake Padden and Samish Crest

By Laurie Caskey-Schreiber

Laurie Caskey-Schreiber

October 25, 2025

Below is a letter I recently sent to the City Council as they move to adopt growth areas for the next ten years. I wrote this because I live in this neighborhood and have come to love this open space area near my house. Yes, some will call me a NIMBY, but as I have learned more about this area not only do I love it, but for multiple reasons it is a really bad idea to hold it for future growth. Here is my letter explaining what I believe ….  

Bellingham City Council 210 Lottie Street Bellingham, WA 98225 Dear City Council Members: I understand you will soon make decisions about how the City will move forward in adopting a plan to accommodate future growth. I understand how laborious this process can be, as I served on the Whatcom County Council (2002-2010), and was heavily involved in the county-wide update of the Whatcom County Comprehensive plan in 2009.

I am taking this opportunity to share a bit of history with you, and hope to influence the outcome of your planning decisions. When we (the County Council) decided to remove the UGA status for the area on the south side of Yew Street Hill (including the South Hills neighborhood), we did not make this change without serious consternation. The following factors influenced my final decision to put this area in Urban Reserve status:

• The geography for this area makes the entire southern portion of Yew Street Hill prone to heavily influence Lake Padden’s water quality. If you look at a LIDAR map of the area, you will see that steep slopes allow everything in its path to flow to Lake Padden.
  

• Lake Padden water quality is at risk of eutrophication. Urban development contributes to excess phosphorous being delivered to the Lake. Hastening the decline of that resource. Lake Padden Park is used year round by thousands of Bellingham and county residents, it is a resource worthy of serious protection. Historically the water quality was good enough to serve as a reservoir for South Bellingham. Why let it degrade to swamp?
  

• In 2009, the City staff determined that to further develop this area was cost prohibitive to the City of Bellingham. Upgrading the last remaining stretch of Yew Street Hill Road will cost at a minimum five million dollars (today, per County Public Works staff – the cost would be closer to 7 million, minimum). The area at the top, also needs additional water infrastructure, cost estimates vary, but probably in the 5 to 10 million range. Developing Palmer Road to city standards for an access road to Samish Crest area is probably going to cost 3 to 5 million.

• The South Hills neighborhood was developed to City standards, however due to cost the City declined to allow for annexation. So now, people who live in this neighborhood, have an urban feel, but pay almost double for their utility bills, and have to rely on the County for the maintenance of their roads. The homeowner’s association maintains the stormwater retention pond, and recently spent almost $100,000 to have it cleaned and serviced. Even though this is well-maintained system, it does not remove any amount of phosphorous.
  

Photo by Laurie Caskey-Schreiber - View from Samish Crest

Now, my perspective on the current decision before you, obviously all of the factors that we considered in 2009, are still relevant today. Protecting Lake Padden has never been more important. Each year the Lake experiences a huge growth in algal blooms, that are often toxic to animals and humans. I live in the South Hills neighborhood, and I constantly see people washing their cars, piling up grass clippings, and animal waste not being properly handled. Humans degrade the environment, and there isn’t a stormwater system out there that can fully negate that fact. Lake Padden is a real treasure, and deserves to be preserved for future generations to enjoy. Cost, being a huge one, at what point do you be honest and really look at the costs involved for the number of housing units this area would accommodate. They certainly won’t be adding affordable housing up there, because the developer will have to target high end buyers to recoup their investments. Will the developer really cover the cost to finish Yew Street Road (at least 7 million), water infrastructure (10 million), Palmer Road upgrade (3-5 million), so for 250 homes, someone needs to invest 20 to 25 million, otherwise the city taxpayers will be footing the bill.

Another option, and I highly encourage you to step off the hamster wheel of trying to meet the needs of the growth projections; instead, plan for the people and wildlife, here and now!

• The area above South Hills, known as the top of the Hill or the crest of Samish crest, has already had a portion of it preserved via the Greenways Program, and although that’s important, adding to that space would be a legacy you can all be proud of.
  

  

  Photo by Laurie-Caskey Schreiber - The crest of Samish Crest

  
  

• This area is teaming with wildlife. I personally hike there at least three to four times a week. I have seen so much wildlife that I now hike with my phone on (Pandora on speaker), to let them know that I am passing through. I have seen, multiple coyotes, bobcats, deer, racoons, and rabbits. My neighbor’s property abuts the forest, and he has collected a series of videos of cougars passing through the property with their cubs, year after year. It’s a special area for wildlife and they deserve to have representation and protection.
  

  Chris Sandvig provided permission to post this video he captured early this month of cougars in his backyard, abutting Samish Crest east side forest.

  
  

• This area is easily accessible by at least five neighborhoods (Yew Street, South Hills, Parkhurst, Samish Crest, Samish Hill and Puget Hill). What’s really important is that this area provides walkable recreation to many. It is already enjoyed by hundreds of visitors almost every day. It also provides some of the most gorgeous views of Bellingham! Well worth protecting, so that everyone has access to enjoy this special feature of our town.

  
  

  

  Photo by Laurie Caskey-Schreiber - Walking my dogs on a Samish Crest trail accessed from Governor Road

I want to thank you in advance for giving my comments further consideration. I have the luxury of seeing how our decisions made in 2009, played out. In hindsight, I wished I would have focused more on quality of life in our town and county, rather than just doing whatever I could to meet those growth projection numbers.

Thank you for your service! Your work is important and much appreciated. Warm Regards,

Laurie Caskey-Schreiber

Former Whatcom County Councilmember

Member of the Whatcom Environmental Council

C: Whatcom County Council