Bill Overview
Title: Smith River National Recreation Area Expansion Act
Description: This bill expands the Smith River National Recreation Area in California into Oregon and designates specified segments of the North Fork Smith River as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System (NWSRS). The management emphasis for any portion of the recreation area in Oregon shall be on roadless backcountry and white-water recreation. The Department of Agriculture (USDA) shall study the additions to the recreation area, including inventories and assessments of water features (e.g., streams and lakes). USDA shall modify any applicable management plan to protect the resources inventoried. USDA shall seek to enter into a memorandum of understanding with applicable Indian tribes to (1) provide them with access to the portions of the recreation area in Oregon to conduct historical and cultural activities; and (2) develop interpretive information to be provided to the public on the history of, and use of the area by, those tribes. On the adoption of a resolution by the State Land Board of Oregon, USDA shall acquire the 555 acres of land known as the Cedar Creek Parcel in Oregon. A streamside protection zone in which timber harvesting is prohibited (with exceptions) shall be established for each of the designated North Fork Smith River segments.
Sponsors: Rep. Huffman, Jared [D-CA-2]
Target Audience
Population: people impacted by the expansion of the Smith River National Recreation Area
Estimated Size: 70000
- The expansion of the Smith River National Recreation Area will directly affect people living in proximity to the new boundaries, including residents in southern Oregon and northern California.
- The inclusion of segments of the North Fork Smith River in the NWSRS will impact recreational users of the river, such as kayakers, hikers, and nature enthusiasts.
- Local indigenous tribes will be affected, as they will gain access to conduct historical and cultural activities.
- Environmental scientists and conservationists interested in studying and preserving the area will be engaged due to the USDA's planned studies and management adjustments.
- Tourists visiting the expanded recreation area in Oregon will have new opportunities for roadless backcountry and white-water recreation.
- The prohibition on timber harvesting in designated streamside protection zones will impact local timber industry stakeholders.
- Nationwide, people with interest in national park expansions and environmental preservation will be indirectly affected as the expanded area contributes to broader conservation efforts.
Reasoning
- The major stakeholders affected by the policy include local residents, recreational users, indigenous tribes, environmental scientists, tourists, and the timber industry. These groups vary in size and in how directly they are impacted by the expansion, ranging from high impact (local residents, tribes, and recreational users) to indirect impact (broader environmental enthusiasts).
- Given the budget constraints, the policy's primary focus will likely be on the most immediate needs: land acquisition, developing management plans, and entering agreements with tribal entities. Other long-term projects like tourism development will occur as funds become available over the ten-year plan.
- The policy will likely have a positive impact on wellbeing for those who value environmental conservation and recreational opportunities but possibly a negative impact on those reliant on timber industry jobs.
- Indigenous tribes, being given increased access for cultural activities and interpretive developments, may see cultural and educational benefits.
- Overall, the economic impact is mixed, suggesting some short-term negative effects due to restrictions on timber but long-term gains in tourism and environmental resilience.
Simulated Interviews
White-water Guide (Crescent City, CA)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The expansion will definitely be beneficial for my business as it will attract more tourists.
- I appreciate the conservation efforts; it keeps the river pristine for us guides and visitors.
- The restrictions on timber harvesting are great; less risk to water quality.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Forester (Brookings, OR)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We're really concerned about job losses given the prohibitions on timber harvesting in certain areas.
- The local economy here is heavily dependent on forestry; I'm not sure what people will do if jobs are cut.
- Environmental conservation is important, but we need a balanced approach.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Environmental Scientist (Grants Pass, OR)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The expansion is a dream for us environmental scientists, providing more data and areas to study.
- I think including the local tribes in cultural and educational efforts is critical and overdue.
- This could be a big win for biodiversity if managed correctly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Retired Factory Worker (Medford, OR)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I enjoy the idea of having more trails to explore; it sounds like a positive change.
- I'm worried about the traffic though; increased tourism could make the area busier than I like.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
College student (Portland, OR)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns with what I study and hope to see more of nationally.
- I'd like to visit more often since it's being preserved and expanded for recreation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Tribal Cultural Expert (Cave Junction, OR)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Gaining access to our historical lands is a vital step in preserving our heritage.
- It's encouraging to see our culture being included in public education efforts.
- This move should have been made a long time ago.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Small Business Owner - Outdoor Shop (Bliss, CA)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increase in protected areas could drive more business for my shop.
- While I'm happy about potential increased traffic, I worry about increased taxes or costs for local businesses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Nature Photographer (Eugene, OR)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This adds more value to my work; I'm thrilled about these new opportunities in wild areas.
- I support all efforts to preserve natural beauties for future generations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
School Teacher (Eureka, CA)
Age: 44 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This will be a fantastic opportunity for school trips; more areas preserved means more learning experiences for kids.
- I hope we integrate more local history with these choices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retired Farmer (Ashland, OR)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm indifferent; I don't think it will change my day-to-day much.
- It's nice that the area is being cared for, but I hope it doesn't get too crowded with tourists.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 3: $12000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $15000000)
Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $13000000)
Year 10: $9000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $11000000)
Year 100: $7000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $9000000)
Key Considerations
- The acquisition and management of land require initial and ongoing commitments from federal resources.
- Environmental impacts and benefits extend beyond direct financial costs and affect broader ecological and conservation goals.
- Coordination with indigenous tribes adds a cultural and potentially sensitive dynamic to project costs and implementations.