“If something is rare does that automatically make it important? Does it automatically become worthy of greater protection than something that isn’t so rare? And when is rare truly rare, and not just something out of the ordinary or an isolated case?Such pondering will be at the root, so to speak, of a public hearing Monday as commissioners Mike Shelton, Bill Thorn and Mac McDowell deliberate the possible future of more than 30 plant species in Island County. Some of the plants in question only occupy a few square feet of a hillside or border a roadside drainage ditch. But the commissioners must decide if they deserve special protection — protection that in sporadic cases could make it illegal for some property owners to build a home or even mow their lawn at certain times of the year.The list of plants proposed for local protection was submitted to the county by the Whidbey Environmental Action Network as part of a nominating process set forth in the state’s Growth Management Act. The wild, native species include plants with common names like tomcat clover, showy fleabane, fool’s onion and chocolate iris. Most are prairie plants growing on land that is already publicly owned or protected by conservation easements. In nearly all cases the plants are not rare outside of Island County but their presence here is small and isolated.During the first part of public hearing held last Monday, the commissioners heard from their own hired consultants as well as a botanist from the University of Washington. The consultants recommended that at least 14 of the nominated species should be protected and 10 others could be considered after further study.Lizzie Zemke, a senior biologist with the consulting firm of Adolfson Associates, explained that while some of the nominated plants grow elsewhere, plant species that develop on islands are often genetically different than those that grow on the mainland. She added that in some cases plants on the list have a history on Whidbey but may not be currently visible. They may exist only as seeds, bulbs or corms in the ground waiting for the right conditions to grow.But the commissioners also heard from several property owners who questioned whether the possible existence of a plant on Whidbey that may be found in abundance east of the Cascades should supersede their rights to use and develop their land.“If it goes away on the island it won’t be the end of the world,” said North Whidbey resident Michael Gerrity. Gerrity reminded the commissioners that most of the nominated plants live in parks or other publicly owned land. He suggested the commissioners should concentrate their preservation efforts there instead of on a small number of private property owners.“Take control where you have the control,” he said. “Maybe you shouldn’t open Pandora’s Box.”South Whidbey resident Phyllis Turner agreed. She said plants naturally come and go on her property all the time.“I can’t understand why these particular spots are so precious,” she said.Coupeville-area resident Jerry Fillman asked how much harm would actually be felt if a plant no longer existed on Whidbey.“Would it be something that would really hurt us?” he asked, adding that environmentalists often point with outrage to the extinction of the once-abundant passenger pigeon by overhunting. “I’ve never been impacted by the loss of it.”South Whidbey resident Rufus Rose said that educating people about the importance of certain plants was preferable to forcing protection through more laws and police power.The county’s chief planning consultant Keith Dearborn explained that if the commissioners designated a plant for local protection and it is found on private property, the county would have to do a biological site assessment and help the property owner write a management plan before any development or activity could take place on the land. That could mean a proposed home site might have to be moved a few feet one way or the other, or that activities such as ditch clearing, haying of fields or mowing might have to be curtailed or delayed until after the plants have gone to seed.Dearborn also reminded the commissioners that they had to use scientific evidence rather than opinion to make a “reasoned” decision on the nominations. The Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board has ordered the county to take action on the nominations by the end of January.Speaking for WEAN, South Whidbey resident Steve Erickson said that since the nominated plants were already scarce very small areas on a small number of properties would actually see any impact at all by new protection laws.“With only a couple exceptions, development would not be stopped by listing,” he said.When the commissioners questioned the relatively sparse information and documentation available on many of the plant species, Erickson shot back that county officials have never shown much interest in gathering data.“Since 1992 I have offered to take the Island County planner in charge of critical areas out to these areas. Every year he has turned me down,” said Erickson. He said if the commissioners use the lack of information as a basis for not designating a species he will ask what they plan to do to get more information. The commissioners held the window for public comment open through Thursday, Dec. 14. On Monday they will review what they have and should make a decision. Once a list of protected species is named, the county planners will begin writing a plan for how they must be protected and how the new laws will be enforced. Their findings will be presented to the commissioners Jan 22. “