Bill Overview
Title: Watershed Restoration Initiative Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the establishment of a Southwest Ecological Restoration Institute (SWERI) in Utah. Such institutes currently exist in Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado and promote the use of adaptive ecosystem management to reduce the risk of wildfires and restore the health of forest and woodland ecosystems.
Sponsors: Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals living in the US Southwest region, particularly in forested areas
Estimated Size: 30000000
- The bill focuses on the Southwest region of the United States which includes states like Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah.
- Populations living in these areas often face risks associated with wildfires and ecological degradation.
- Implementing adaptive ecosystem management can directly affect rural and urban communities that rely on forest resources or live near forested areas.
- The initiative may also influence local governments, forestry departments, indigenous communities, environmental organizations, and industries connected to natural resources.
Reasoning
- The policy is particularly targeted towards communities in the Southwest, specifically Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado, where forest and woodland ecosystems are prominent.
- The budget constraints suggest the policy might not have a widespread direct financial impact in the immediate term but aims for long-term ecological benefits.
- Several demographics could be indirectly impacted—those involved in ecological management, land use, or those at risk from wildfires.
- Simulated interviews will reflect a mixture of direct and indirect impacts, with varied effects on wellbeing scores depending on individuals' dependencies on forest resources.
Simulated Interviews
Forest manager (Santa Fe, New Mexico)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is crucial for preventing future wildfires. Our state could greatly benefit from coordinated ecological management.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Software developer (Salt Lake City, Utah)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's great, anything that helps preserve our natural spaces is a win.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Ranch owner (Durango, Colorado)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this can help reduce the fire risk near my property, I support it.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Tour guide (Moab, Utah)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Preserving the landscape is vital for my business, so this sounds beneficial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Retired teacher (Flagstaff, Arizona)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Forests near my home are my peace. This policy helps me feel more secure.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Environmental scientist (Grand Junction, Colorado)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This institute could facilitate vital research collaborations.
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 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Student (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is an exciting step forward for local environmental policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Firefighter (Las Vegas, New Mexico)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This initiative should reduce wildfire risks, making my job a bit easier.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Local government official (Albuquerque, New Mexico)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Adaptive ecosystem management is critical for our policy planning. This act complements our current initiatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Conservationist (Boulder, Colorado)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- SWERI's establishment could support broader restoration efforts I'm involved in, which is promising.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $6000000)
Year 2: $4500000 (Low: $3500000, High: $5500000)
Year 3: $4500000 (Low: $3500000, High: $5500000)
Year 5: $4500000 (Low: $3500000, High: $5500000)
Year 10: $4500000 (Low: $3500000, High: $5500000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The initial establishment cost will be high, but long-term savings are expected from reduced wildfire management expenses.
- The collaboration with existing institutes in neighboring states might require additional coordination and resource allocation efforts.
- The initiative may face challenges in balancing ecological, economic, and social considerations, especially concerning locals and indigenous communities.