In a lopsided victory for Island County, a state growth board said this week that the county’s new rules for farming will protect both farmers and the islands’ streams and wetlands.

The landmark decision ends a dispute between the county and the Whidbey Environmental Action Network that stretches back to 1998.

WEAN has fought the county’s rules for farming near “critical areas” — environmentally sensitive areas with wetlands and streams — because the activist group believes the county’s regulations aren’t tough enough.

Unlike previous growth board and court rulings that resulted in split decisions, the Wednesday decision was a one-sided win for county officials.

County officials called it “unprecedented.”

“I was thrilled,” said County Commissioner Mike Shelton. “This had been going on since 1998. Here we are eight years later and we finally got a decision that we believe the people of Island County, specifically the agriculture people … can live with,” he said.

“My hope is that they will continue to do their agriculture practices, and I think that’s critical to maintaining the rural character of Island County,” Shelton said.

In its decision, the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board heaped praise on the county’s new farming rules.

“Island County has achieved compliance in an impressive way that could be a model for other jurisdictions,” the board said in its decision.

County commissioners unanimously adopted new farming rules to regulate existing farms in May.

The rules require farmers to apply “best management practices,” called BMPs, to their agriculture operations or complete custom farm plans that detail how they will manage their farms in earth-friendly ways.

WEAN spokesman Steve Erickson called parts of the growth board’s 22-page decision inaccurate. But he stopped short of saying the group would fight the ruling.

WEAN can ask the hearings board to reconsider its decision, or WEAN can appeal it to Superior Court.

“We’re evaluating this decision and we’ll be deciding whether or not we’ll appeal,” Erickson said. “We need to talk that over between the people involved in WEAN, and various people in the community.”

“It’s not a trivial decision, it’s also real expensive,” he said, adding that a challenge that would go all the way to the Court of Appeals could cost between $30,000 and $50,000.

WEAN has intensely criticized the new farming rules, which were highly controversial with farmers, as well.

The rules led to the biggest public hearings in Island County history and attracted crowds numbering in the hundreds. Many farmers said the rules were excessive and would drive them out of business.

WEAN, however, said the rules did not go far enough. The activist group claimed that existing and ongoing agriculture operations is hurting environmentally sensitive lands, and polluting streams and groundwater.

WEAN also said the county’s plan to protect critical areas focused too much on water quality, and was too reactive, because nothing would happen until state water quality standards are violated.

The group complained that no one would be able to know if farmers were following the new rules, because farm plans will be kept secret from the county and public.

WEAN also said the regulations were not based on “best available science,” which the state requires as the basis for creating critical areas regulations.

The growth board, however, lauded the new rules.

“Island County has done a thorough analysis of its local circumstances and (has) come up with an admirable commitment to preserving its rural character while protecting the functions and values of critical areas…The involvement of landowners is one of the many strengths of the county’s program, since it makes the consideration of the protection of critical areas an everyday part of agricultural practices,” the decision said.

“The county’s involvement in every step of the process — from gathering questionnaires to working with the Conservation District on farm plans, to investigation of complaints, to monitoring of water quality, to prompt adaptive management of ineffective BMPs — represents an active engagement in the protection of critical areas,” the growth board concluded.

“The growth board unanimously ruled in favor of the county on every single point – every single point,” said Phil Bakke, Island County’s planning director.

“I think this is a community victory, whether you own agricultural land or a home next to the golf course,” he said. “It doesn’t matter if you’re a farmer or a homeowner on a little lot, it goes a long ways to protect rural character.”

Even so, the new rules are not popular with farmers who already feel over-regulated.

“One of the things that I’ve always been concerned about is even though the county has won this, this puts a significant burden on farmers,” Shelton said.

It won’t be business as usual for farmers, he added.

Farmers will be need to fill out a questionnaire, and some will be required to complete custom farm plans.

“I just hope that farmers will do that rather than saying ‘This is too much trouble, I’m just going to bag the whole thing and forget about agriculture,’” Shelton said.

Farmers who don’t complete the questionnaires will lose their ability to farm by using only BMPs, and will be forced to abide by even more restrictive critical areas regulations.

Erickson, of WEAN, was skeptical that the new rules will work.

“Overall, our expectation is that water quality is going to be impacted and is going to continue to deteriorate because this ordinance is not going to do the job,” Erickson said.