||| FROM ISLAND STEWARDS |||
Island Stewards began this year with a simple belief: the future of the San Juan Islands should be shaped by those who live here — not just by markets, mandates, or well-funded visions from afar, but by people rooted in place, memory, and responsibility. This isn’t nostalgia — it’s stewardship. We’re here to protect what still feels alive — and to ask, carefully and collectively, what can last. We’re not trying to preserve perfection — we’re trying to preserve possibility.
In early 2025, we began by listening — first to those most often left out of public planning conversations: working families, renters, elders, and underrepresented community members whose time and access are stretched thin. These listening sessions, supported by a Department of Commerce grant, helped shape our first public survey on the San Juan County Comprehensive Plan. Built from real conversations, the survey asked about housing, affordability, and what it takes to truly live and thrive here — not just on paper, but in practice.
Turns out, islanders had a lot to say. So we kept asking.
The response was clear: people want to be heard. And they want to belong to a future that makes sense.
That’s when we introduced the Quick Goldilocks survey — a quick but revealing question: Is the population of San Juan County too big, too small, or just right? Over 100 residents responded within the first 12 hours. What we received weren’t checkbox opinions — they were reflections. Stories. Warnings. Many spoke of grief, imbalance,
and a growing sense that the islands are being loved to death — or developed past recognition.
So now we’re offering Deeper Dive on Goldilocks Survey— a comprehensive look into land use, infrastructure, tourism pressure, and what a livable future actually looks like in island terms. It’s a chance to weigh in on how we grow — and whether we should.
And yes, the original Comp Plan: Island Life and You survey is still open — still asking big, important questions that go beyond zoning maps and into the heart of what kind of life is possible here, and for whom.
Each of these surveys builds on the last. They don’t promise answers. But they make space — for clarity, for conscience, and for something we don’t always get in modern planning: context.
So here’s your invitation. Not to decide everything. But to help shape what matters.
Add your voice:
- Comp Plan: Island Life and You Community Survey Built through a Dept. of Commerce grant to expand public participation.
- Goldilocks Quick Survey: Too Much, Not Enough, or Just Right?
- Deeper Dive on Goldilocks Survey: Growth, Limits, and Livability
We’re a loosely woven network of islanders — long-timers, newcomers, and those in between — trying to hold on to what still makes this place worth belonging to. We know we won’t agree on everything. But we believe there’s a common ground truth beneath the noise — shared concerns, shared values, and maybe even shared solutions. These
surveys are one way to uncover that truth, together — not just to name what’s broken, but to move toward what’s possible.
There’s still time to shape the future — Let’s make sure it remembers who we are.
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
Thanks for this info and opportunity to respond. It seems I missed the first go round and I’m happy to participate this time, however, the links to the various surveys do not seem to be working. It would also be great to know when the next meeting of Island Stewards is and how to join in
Good on Island Stewards. You join a long list of people, organizations and non-profits who have lamented the evolution of the socio-economic scene in this odd little county. I joined in 18 years ago coming from 33 years of simpler life in Alaska: a far more natural and wild landscape than here. North Burn on Waldron railed against tourism before it really became the summer plague that it is.
Your timing is good with the current Comp Plan update nearing completion and transportation disruptions, water availability concerns, power concerns and backsliding in providing permanently affordable housing for a healthy middle class.
But my question is, after reading again your fine words, is just by what means, by what soapbox, by what political process by what collective leverage of any kind will you change the sad arc of history here?
Like Alaska, like here. Whether it be the results of ecological overshoot, climate change, or over-tourism and over-growth the symptoms are the same everywhere… only the efforts to minimize the negative effects thereof vary from community to community.
You frame the question, “But my question is, after reading again your fine words, is just by what means, by what soapbox, by what political process by what collective leverage of any kind will you change the sad arc of history here?
That’s a good question Steve, and one that’s raised every time someone tries to move the dial a little bit by raising awareness. But, it’s not like Joe as well as many others, haven’t offered many suggestions over the years.
To reframe it in perhaps a more accurate perspective one could easily ask, “In light of the fact that the many suggestions that have been made to date have been ignored, and since our elected leaders are obviously not going to do anything about it, what can “we” do about it?”
Correct Links to the surveys:
(three buttons and contact form) https://www.islandstewards.org/contact
Comp Plan Survey: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdo6ihzAu6q2WEALknM3qCgLKi8ObNnzVxkuv-15pi9WG4y_w/viewform
Quick Goldilocks: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/18DOE9UWiITw2hzSsyWX4du_rOYRvxzDY0ICZ0DSMSW0/edit
Deeper Dive Goldilocks: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd3IFz1m4UZdidTHi0HlzyI72QDzdFbIFv9Z2u8uF34RtPRtA/viewform?pli=1
You are correct MJ but I tire of restating what I consider to be obvious hence the open-ended question.
If I am not mistaken the County has made great motions to address the issue of human carrying capacity out here in every Comp Plan update but has failed to come to real conclusions. The idea that “we will know it when we see it” is just another form of socio-environmental insanity. Perhaps you or others are aware of a community, in our nation or elsewhere, with a capitalist economy that has taken control of a livable future in that way and is making it work. Maybe the Island Stewards have such a blueprint?
Another good question Steve. And like yourself, (“I tire of restating what I consider to be obvious hence the open-ended question…”), there are those of us that tire of offering suggestions that will never be heeded. It does seem, as you suggest, that we’re operating under the idea that “we will know it when we see it is just another form of socio-environmental insanity.” Your saying this struck me as being an accurate assessment of the moment, and upon reading that, the phrase “We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it,” came to my mind.
Our community continues to be in crisis. Our needs are many and the existing intersectionality between the issues at hand, for example, tourism and growth beget short-term income, but also come with long-term costs to our communities, our natural resources, and our environment (including climate change and environmental overshoot), are obvious. The answers to the questions you ask depend on who you ask, with some saying the answer is more, (more housing, more infrastructure, more jobs), and some saying we need less, (fewer second homes, fewer people, less infrastructure, less tourism). What’s obvious is that we’ve gotten ourselves into a “can’t live with it, can’t live without it” situation, and in spite of what we see happening in other communities throughout the state, the country, and the world, and in spite of the results of all the public surveys and studies that have been done to date (including the recent past SJC Tourism Master Plan), past council’s have continued to promote for “more,” and have more recently chosen to weaponize both the Visitors Bureau and the Chamber of Commerce in an effort to further that.
Are there, as you ask, communities in our nation or elsewhere, that have taken control of their futures and are “making it work”?
In an effort to answer this I suppose I could take the many hours required to go back through all of the Orcasonian articles, or my bookmarks of news reports throughout the years that offer examples of communities that have taken efforts to limit growth, to limit tourism, and to deal with their housing, their economic, and their climate related crisis’… but I won’t. Though I see examples of communities here in the U.S. that have done amazing jobs becoming more energy and economically independent, I cannot think of, or find any communities out there that have taken the whole picture into context (as per your question), and have come up with a workable solution to the moment… and if there were you’d be hard-pressed to find much press regarding them in today’s MSNs.
Realizing that our situation is exacerbated by the fact that we’re unique in being island communities in the pacific NW, (thus having limited land mass, natural resources, a more sensitive environmental setting, and seasonality beset by over a million tourists per year), there are, I believe few precedents by which to go by. You’d be hard-pressed to find a judge, a prosecuting attorney’s office, or a county council anywhere willing to buck the status quo and side with the environmentalists and slow-growthers. Such is, and will be, the picture I believe until it is to late and we find ourselves forced to do so. There is no precedent until there is. Isn’t that always the case? And though we’ll never be able to say “if we’d only known then what we know now” with a straight face, “a day late and a dollar short” is the phrase that comes to mind.
What continues to be startling to me is in light of the stories of the many communities that have gone down this road before us and in retrospect wish they’d done differently, and in light of the predictions by many throughout the decades of where this is leading us… is how our elected officials continue to promote it.
As a wise woman recently said to me, (and I believe her), we need to–
1. Stop giving tax breaks to industry to move to the state and use electricity.
— Prioritize removing crypto-currency “miners”.
2. Prioritize residential users; require industry curtailments during peak load events. https://nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/sites/default/files/publications/rethinking-load-growth.pdf
3. Get out of the Growth Management Act and put a Degrowth Management Act into place instead.
I am glad that Island Stewards is keeping the conversation going, and inviting more people into the discussion. The surveys try to include all concerns but I also think it’s growth distribution in grotesquely short-sighted density areas decided long before most of us even KNEW about the Growth Management Act. Meanwhile, unlimited, mostly unregulated or regulations flaunted and ignored by those with the money to buy their way out of consequences, dictated even in the 70s how things would go. Even before that, it was a long slow decline into dollars over quality of life, rural character, environmental concerns, human services, and all the things and reasons why these islands are special. What was done to Eastsound Swale riparian watershed is a travesty. Dorothy Austin tried. She took one of the Comp Plan reviews all the way to the Hearings Examiner, and won. This ‘set back’ that update, and almost every update has been ‘late’ in being completed and adopted because, IMO, economic development trumped all else and those who benefitted most from the Industry could sue the County, and often threatened it. There are many lawsuits against the County, ongoing. What a waste of money! But know that things were decided long before the first Comp Plan, and without us. Is there even an original copy of the Comp Plan still around? If so, we are damned lucky the Joe Symons and others thought to keep one so we could see how far degraded things have become.
There are some thoughtful answers in the longer survey. Compass and Island Stewards did all they could to include voices of underserved residents. I hate to keep harping on the fact that SJC now has the dubious distinction of moving on up from #7 to #1 in the country for income disparity, but this fact has impacted the middle class and low income populations and has forced formerly comfortable people to be priced off the island.
Someone mentioned the Tribes – welcoming them back Home and welcoming their leadership in how to steward these lands and learn from their ways how to be deserving of the title ‘stewards.’ I thought that was one of the best answers in the survey under ‘other thoughts,’ but there were many good answers which proves to me that together, We the People ARE the government and that government is only as good as its citizenry’s involvement, attention, and voices.
Steve, it was South (or Bob) Burn who did an extensive work on tourism in 1980. His daughter Skye Burn who lives in Bellingham, I believe, has it.
As to the dynamics of tourism, it is like any other business. It must grow, adapt to changing conditions, or die. I think people can work out the dynamics from here.
Thank you Bill, you are so right. Got my north and south confused. Of course I was far too late to have met them but I hope to take a look at the undigitized archives at Western.
I don’t expect to find any “silver bullets” there in musty papers as I believe summer tourism as it occurs here today is a wicked, self-inflicted and wholly unmanageable problem.
So although I enjoy your astute comments and opinion pieces I must disagree with your broad comment above.
Summer boom tourism here, has like a parasitic wasp laid eggs within the host community, devour other struggling economic sectors by altering the socio-economic character of the host. Such an outcome is glaringly obvious on an island, a bucolic seascape with only real estate transaction, trophy home construction and sales taxes keeping our heads above water. One can argue that summer over-tourism also helped to diminish marine fisheries and the harried SRKWs as well as rejiggering local socio-economic possibilities. After decades the County belatedly but bravely responded to cries for a tourism plan and failed. Not surprisingly visitation can only be continually studied but not managed except for site specific types of limitations and the daily total capacity of ferry boats.
Now the summer boom-winter bust cycle is deeply ingrained and seems to incapacitate the Town of Friday Harbor. Parasitic summer tourism has altered the character of rural island life and especially our few business centers. Tourism should be a sector of our year-around economies to the extent that it fits in with increased tech business incubation, service sectors aimed at meeting resident’s needs, etc. and this outcome can only be attained by greatly increased low and mid income affordable housing IMHO. There is some promise in the County finally setting limits and enforcing reasonable regulations on Air B and Bs and of course the steady (but never catching up) wonderful work of our community land trusts and generous donors and the blessed REETs.
I am glad for the increased community discussion around permanently affordable homes and rentals but disheartened by the Town of Friday Harbor’s failure in strategic thinking regarding two critical Community Home Trust projects here. Those who step up to lead are also infected by decades of summer tourism reducing their ability to think outside of the box and create resilient economies.
The South Burn archives are located at the WWU library in Bellingham–
Rozlind Koester 360.650.7534 | http://library.wwu.edu/archives-special-collections
“As to the dynamics of tourism, it is like any other business. It must grow, adapt to changing conditions, or die. I think people can work out the dynamics from here.”
The following is from a 1/05/24 article written by Ijaz Hussain in the go-to employment website NCESC.com — https://www.ncesc.com/what-are-the-disadvantages-of-the-tourism-industry/
What are the disadvantages of the tourism industry?
Tourism can put immense pressure on local resources and infrastructure. When a destination becomes popular among tourists, its natural beauty and resources may be negatively impacted. Increased footfall and the development of tourism-related facilities can lead to the degradation of ecosystems, deforestation, pollution, and strain on water supplies. Additionally, the existing infrastructure may not be well-equipped to handle the sudden influx of visitors, resulting in overcrowded streets, inadequate waste management systems, and insufficient public transportation.
Another disadvantage of the tourism industry is the concept of leakage. Leakage refers to the situation where a significant portion of the revenue generated from tourism does not stay within the destination country but rather leaves the country through foreign-owned hotels, international airlines, and tour operators. This can result in limited local economic growth and development, as the benefits of tourism are not fully retained within the community.
Tourism can have adverse effects on the environment. Popular tourist destinations often experience increased pollution, deforestation, and degradation of natural habitats due to the construction of hotels, resorts, and other tourism-related infrastructure. Additionally, the carbon footprint of transportation used by tourists can contribute to climate change.
One of the disadvantages of tourism is the potential for cultural homogenization. When destinations become heavily reliant on tourism, there is a risk of losing authentic local traditions and cultural practices. Local communities may modify their cultural expressions to cater to tourist expectations, resulting in a loss of diversity and cultural identity.
While tourism can bring economic opportunities to local communities, it can also have negative impacts. The influx of tourists can lead to increased living costs, pushing locals out of their homes due to rising property prices. Additionally, the focus on catering to tourists’ needs may lead to the neglect of local residents’ priorities, causing conflicts and resentment.
Mass tourism can result in overcrowding and overtourism in popular destinations. This can negatively affect the daily lives of local residents, causing inconvenience and diminishing their quality of life. Furthermore, the behavior of some tourists, such as disrespectful behavior or disregard for local customs, can create social tensions and conflicts between locals and visitors.
While tourism can generate income and employment opportunities, it can also exacerbate economic inequality. The majority of direct tourism revenue often goes to large international companies, leaving local entrepreneurs with limited economic benefits. This can create a significant wealth gap between those who directly benefit from tourism and those who do not.
Overtourism occurs when a destination becomes excessively crowded with tourists, leading to negative consequences for both the environment and the local community. The pursuit of profit and the desire to attract as many tourists as possible can result in overcrowding, strain on infrastructure, and the degradation of natural and cultural resources.
Tourism can have both positive and negative impacts on wildlife. While wildlife tourism can promote conservation efforts and generate revenue for the protection of endangered species, irresponsible tourism practices can disrupt natural habitats, disturb wildlife, and lead to negative consequences for their populations.
The commercialization and commodification of destinations for tourism purposes can result in the loss of authenticity. Genuine local experiences and cultural practices may be replaced with tourist-oriented activities and attractions, catering to mass-market demands rather than preserving the unique characteristics of a destination.
In some cases, the development of tourism can lead to the decline of traditional industries that were once the economic backbone of a community. For example, a shift from agriculture or fishing to tourism-related activities may result in a loss of traditional skills, cultural heritage, and the disruption of intergenerational knowledge transfer.
The commercialization of culture for tourism purposes can increase the risk of cultural commodification. Traditional crafts, music, dances, and other cultural expressions may be simplified, modified, or exploited to cater to tourist desires and create marketable products. This can result in cultural commodification, where cultural practices lose their intrinsic meaning and become mere commodities. These FAQs shed light on various aspects of the disadvantages associated with the tourism industry. While tourism undeniably has its drawbacks, it is crucial to address these challenges through sustainable practices, community engagement, and responsible tourism management to mitigate its negative impacts and ensure a balance between economic development and environmental and cultural preservation.