Bill Overview
Title: Wild Rogue Conservation and Recreation Enhancement Act
Description: This bill designates specified Bureau of Land Management land in Oregon as the Rogue Canyon National Recreation Area and adds approximately 59,512 acres of federal land to the Wild Rogue Wilderness. The Department of the Interior, for public land, and the Department of Agriculture (USDA), for National Forest System land, must conduct a wildfire risk assessment that covers the recreation area, the Wild Rogue Wilderness, and any adjacent federal land. Interior and USDA must develop plans to mitigate wildfire risk to communities located near the land. No new permanent or temporary roads shall be constructed within the recreation areas except as necessary for public safety or to implement the wildfire mitigation plan. Interior or USDA, as appropriate, may take measures within such wilderness additions as are necessary to control fire, insects, and disease. All federal surface and subsurface land within the recreation area or the wilderness additions is withdrawn from entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land laws; location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral leasing, geothermal leasing, or mineral materials.
Sponsors: Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4]
Target Audience
Population: People impacted by the Wild Rogue Conservation and Recreation Enhancement Act
Estimated Size: 500000
- The bill affects Bureau of Land Management land in Oregon, specifically designating land as the Rogue Canyon National Recreation Area and expanding the Wild Rogue Wilderness.
- It involves federal land and thus, impacts U.S. citizens directly who may use, visit, or live near these lands.
- The legislation pertains to land management, so it will affect local communities, environmentalists, and land users.
- Wildfire risk assessments and mitigation plans are a primary goal, indicating that people living in and near these areas will be directly affected, especially concerning safety measures.
- Recreational users of this area who might see changes in land access or land use policies are affected.
- The withdrawal of federal land from mining and mineral leasing affects industries and workers that depend on these activities.
Reasoning
- Considering the policy’s focus on land in Oregon, affected populations include residents of nearby communities, recreational users across the state and others interested in federal land use.
- Since the policy adds significant acreage to wilderness areas, people depending on resources from these lands like miners or forest products workers should be considered, although the impact will be limited due to regulatory precedents and existing restrictions.
- The financial constraints mean measures must be efficient, addressing wildfire risks conservatively enough to prioritize necessary safety measures while avoiding unnecessary construction.
Simulated Interviews
Park Ranger (Medford, Oregon)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy is a great step towards preserving our natural heritage.
- The focus on wildfire risk assessment is very important for keeping us safe.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Timber industry worker (Grants Pass, Oregon)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about my job security with more land being protected.
- Balance is needed between conservation and industry for community wellbeing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 6 |
Wildlife conservationist (Ashland, Oregon)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a milestone for wildlife protection.
- Ensuring a natural legacy for future generations is crucial.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired (Coos Bay, Oregon)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm happy to hear the wilderness area will be expanded.
- Access to nature is important for health, but we need to ensure it's still accessible to older people.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Local Business Owner (Outdoor Gear Store) (Eugene, Oregon)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could be beneficial for our store if it attracts more visitors looking for outdoor experiences.
- Concerns remain about restrictions possibly deterring recreational access.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Environmental Policy Analyst (Portland, Oregon)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This Act aligns with sustainable land management practices.
- Keeping mineral extraction at bay is essential for long-term conservation.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Firefighter (Rogue River, Oregon)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased efforts in wildfire mitigation are crucial.
- The restriction on road building might complicate emergency responses.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Mining Engineer (Salem, Oregon)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The prohibition on mining poses a threat to my industry.
- Economic impacts should be cushioned by alternative job creation opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 6 |
College Student (Corvallis, Oregon)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This Act is inspiring for students like me focused on environmental careers.
- Long term sustainability of our natural areas is most important.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Tour Guide (Brookings, Oregon)
Age: 39 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Expanding the protection around the Rogue River could enhance my tours.
- Some clients may be unhappy with increased access restrictions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $6500000 (Low: $5000000, High: $8000000)
Year 2: $7500000 (Low: $6000000, High: $9000000)
Year 3: $7000000 (Low: $5500000, High: $8500000)
Year 5: $6000000 (Low: $4500000, High: $7500000)
Year 10: $6500000 (Low: $5000000, High: $8000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The scale of administrative costs associated with managing the new lands and wilderness areas.
- Potential economic benefits of enhanced tourism versus the economic impact of restricting extractive industries.
- Impact on wildfire management and potential long-term savings in reduced damage and firefighting efforts.
- Net environmental benefit of conserving lands versus immediate economic activities.