[5]
By Oregonians for Food and Shelter [6],
The Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board [7] is seeking feedback on a draft report [8] establishing “resilience attributes” for Oregon’s Lands and Waters. These attributes will ultimately guide state agency investments and other actions based on the Governor’s Executive Order 25-26 [9]. Although the report acknowledges the role of stewardship, it primarily focuses on ecological resilience in terms of a “natural state” and connectivity, and identifies essential working-land infrastructure, such as dams, fences, roads, culverts, etc., as “barriers” to be minimized or removed.
Notably, the report admits that private landowners and economic development voices were missing from the workshop where these attributes were drafted. This comment period is a critical opportunity for our sectors to ensure that state agency policy and investments do not prioritize ecological goals at the expense of the economic viability of Oregon’s natural resource industries. Submit comments by May 1 via email [10].
When submitting comments, highlight these key points:
- Representation: The report explicitly states the design workshop “did not have attendees who could make it from… private landowners” and missed voices from economic development. This should have been key to developing even draft attributes.
- Defend Working Infrastructure: Ensure that dams, fences, roads, culverts, etc., are not viewed as “barriers” to be minimized, and are deemed essential to the resilience of Oregon’s natural resource economy and our ability to respond to disasters such as wildfire.
- Prioritize Economic Viability: Remind agencies that House Bill 3409 defines resilience as “minimizing damage to… the economy,” a mandate that is largely sidelined in this draft.
- Acknowledge Active Management: Commercial forestry and agriculture should be recognized as vital “ecological processes” that support biodiversity, carbon sequestration, and watershed health, rather than just being viewed as “stressors” to be managed.
- Regulatory Gaps: Question the report’s assertion that “gaps remain in governance systems,” which signals an intent to layer new regulations on top of Oregon’s already robust regulatory framework governing the natural resource sector.