2025 Legislative Session
Below are summaries of legislative bills related to water use and Water league’s brief views on each. All information is subject to change, and as bills are amended, every attempt will be made to update this page. With the first deadline passed on April 9, all bills that did not have a workshop that votes the bill out of committee is dead. We have recently updated whether the bills below are DEAD or ALIVE as of April 9, 2025.
You can click the links to the bill numbers that interest you. Water League’s commentary is [bracketed] and we provide links to our testimony.
Each bill number link takes you to the Oregon Legislative Information System (OLIS). On each bill page, you will see a blue link in the top left corner that is the text of the bill. Also make sure to click the “Amendments” tab to see any proposed changes to bills (some bills are “placeholder bills” and the entire bill is in the amendment, usually the most recent amendment). If you wish to provide written or oral testimony, the time period is around when the public hearings are scheduled and you must file a request at least 30 minutes before the start of the hearing. Written testimony is open from the time the hearing is scheduled to 48 hours after the start of the hearing.
Bills are listed as “HB” which means House Bill, and SB, which means Senate Bill. There is also one “SJR,” which means Senate Joint Resolution.
House Water-Based Bills
HB 2168 –ALIVE – Establishes a program to provide assistance to households that rely on wells for drinking water or on septic systems for wastewater treatment. Assists residents in maintaining, upgrading, or replacing their water and wastewater infrastructure when warranted due to declining groundwater levels, droughts, fires, or persistent groundwater quality concerns.
HB 2169 – ALIVE – Establishes state policy on water reuse. Directs the Department of Environmental Quality and the Water Resources Department to establish an interagency water reuse development team. [While water reuse seems to be a “perfect idea,” it has baggage. First, all types of efficiencies must be paired up with conservation to avoid Jeavon’s Paradox, which states “that increased efficiency can lead to increased consumption, rather than decreased consumption.” Then, that increased consumption puts pressure on further increased resource use. The efficient use of the resource through reuse should not incentivize expansion; rather, it should minimize the first-use of the resource. Also, water reuse is typically understood as a municipal water use program – “Purple Pipes.” But municipalities use only 9% of all water diverted annually in Oregon compared to irrigation, which uses 78% – that’s almost 1/9th as much water. The emphasis and funds spent on water reuse are often cost-prohibitive for cities and towns, so spending all that money to reuse a relatively small amount of water acts like a Red Herring that misdirects the emphasis on water management policy to address the vast quantities of irrigation water use. Some irrigation water seeps back into the groundwater reservoirs due to over-watering, and there is a “Conserved Water” statute that is rarely used; these factors; however, are not reasonable claims to pushback that irrigation is doing its part.]
HB 2801 – ALIVE – Extends the time for the Oregon Water Resources Department to approve leases or temporary transfers of water rights in the Upper Klamath Basin until the Klamath County Circuit Court issues a water rights decision affirming or modifying the Findings of Fact and Order of Determination for the Klamath River Basin Adjudication (Case No. WA1300001, which is the final judicial determination). This is part of the long and winding process of determining who has how much water, which includes incorporating the Klamath Tribes reserved water rights.
HB 2813 – ALIVE – (See the -3 Amendment.) This bill “Establishes the Harney Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) Match Fund in the State Treasury, separate and distinct from the General Fund.” This means that the General Fund monies are moving to a new interest bearing account because the funds have been getting appropriated and removed for lack of use annually. Now with a new fund they are appropriated and remain to collect interest. The CREP is a federal-state partnership to pay agricultural land operators to fallow parcels for conservation purposes. In this case, Oregon would pay large sums of money to permanently cancel water rights on a voluntary basis (Eminent Domain lite) in the Harney Basin Critical Groundwater Area (CGWA) to reduce water use leading to excessive declines in groundwater levels.
HB 2950 – ALIVE – Revision of the citizen Involvement planning goal by DLCD to achieve “the broadest and most inclusive public engagement and participation in land use planning and decision-making processes by all members of the community, including environmental justice communities, as defined in ORS 182.535.”
HB 2965 – DEAD – This bill, in the -5 Amendment, states that “to protect public health and promote environmental protection, an aquaculture facility may not raise finfish in a marine or estuarine body of water in this state in nets, cages or other similar containers.” The bill -5 Amendment explains that “Industrial aquaculture presents risks to the environment, among other risks, and the risks may be mitigated by prohibiting the raising of finfish in a marine or estuarine body of water in this state in nets, cages or other similar containers.” When looking for the bill, make sure to click on the Amendment tab. [Aquaculture is an industry that seeks to focus on only the benefit side of the ledger and ignore the harms that result from concentrated waste flowing out of the nets into the estuarine and coastal waters, and the escapes of these non-native fish into the wild, which pose serious threats to wild fish. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.]
HB 2986 – DEAD – Provides that an irrigation district that receives a request from a user for delivery of a lower rate or duty of water during an irrigation season may not deliver to the user a higher rate or duty of water during the irrigation season than was requested. [This is the fetal beginning of a water market in Oregon where a water user is not using all the water they have at their disposal, so another irrigator can use it. Given that every basin in Oregon is over-appropriated that has led to the substantial over-pumping of streams and aquifers, the reallocation of water should not be permitted when a water user doesn’t need it. Oregon still has the residual effects of the “Use it or lose it” laws whereby the state can cancel portions or entire water rights for lack of use. This regressive policy has scared irrigators into using their full water rights even when they didn’t want to. HB 2986 is not the right way to solve the problem. An unused water right is as good as leaving the water in the stream or aquifer; incentivizing using the water amid climate change, dewatered streams, and excessively declining groundwater levels is a harmful policy proposed by irrigators. This bill is a good example of the conflict of interest water users have in setting water policy – what do we expect when the state allows irrigators to set water policy? For water use laws to serve special interests at the expense of the public interest.
HB 2988 – ALIVE – This bill reduces barriers and develops technical assistance resources to support aquifer recharge and aquifer storage and recovery. [This bill mandates that OWRD further study taking water from surface sources and infiltrating or pumping that water underground. This is already a program the state authorizes but it hits a lot of regulatory obstacles. OWRD is asked to do this work with no additional funding, which means other important work would be sidelined. This bill should authorize the expansion of the Aquifer Recharge program to include shallow terrace ponds as an exempt use – temporary storage solely for infiltration to increase base flows in streams. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.
Note: Water League testimony calls for inclusion of shallow terraced ponds to be allowed as an exempt use for groundwater infiltration as a way to achieve aquifer recharge. This proposal is part of a forthcoming legislative request in 2026 to revise ORS 537.141 Uses of water not requiring water right application, permit or certificate; rules, which currently permits “land management practices intended to save soil and improve water quality.” Water League proposes adding groundwater infiltration as a third outcome to these land management practices.]
HB 3105 – DEAD – This bill allows a person to assign a water right certificate to someone else. The existing law allows a person to assign an application, license, or permit, but not a certificate, which is a permanent vested right to use water. The bill could lead to a market where water rights are bought and sold primarily for profit. Changing who the certificate is vested in does not change the water right in ways the water right transfer process does.
This bill also places restrictions on testing of the projects unless unreasonably high bars are reached for harm, and strong-arms the OWRD by declaring that: “An applicant may file a writ of mandamus and seek awards of attorney fees if the department fails to issue a final order or initial decision within 200 days of submitting a complete application.” HB 3105 is what it looks like when the private sector water users take over the state apparatus because their patrons are elected officials who propose legislation such as HB 3105 – this bill is an example of the privatization of public sector water governance and management.
HB 3106 – ALIVE – Funds to the Department of Environmental Quality for the Oregon Water Data Portal project. [This project is an extensive dataset and reporting tool to understand water use in Oregon. [See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.]
HB 3108 – DEAD – This bill streamlines the process for for the review of limited license applications for an aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) permit. Note that almost all ASR projects use 5-year limited licenses and then renew those licenses every 5 years, so the bill’s statement that “In reviewing a limited license application the Water Resources Department: (a) Shall consider only the comments relating to impacts and issues that could arise during the five-year testing period described in this section” is to remove the longterm effects that should be known upfront when considering ASR projects. There are serious critiques against ASR for taking surface water and pumping it into the ground to then be pumped back out for use, which treats groundwater reservoirs as underground tanks. Also, there are real problems associated with water quality and impacts to groundwater that need long-term assessments.
HB 3112 – DEAD – Establishes a program for compensating ground water right holders for voluntarily relinquishing all or a portion of the holders’ ground water rights in basins designated as Critical Groundwater Area s (CGWA). This is an Eminent Domain Lite proposal by an irrigator-legislator whose wells sit atop some of the steepest cones of depression in Oregon, and whose basin is currently under the process of being designated a Critical Groundwater Area (CGWA). In 2023, a similar bill was proposed by Rep. Owens and never made it to committee – it sought $105 million to buyout worthless water rights that the state was going to turn down the volume on anyways. Note that since 1955, the state has designated 7 CGWAs and curtailed water use in each without spending any money on worthless water right buyouts. The fact that a legislator-irrigator in the Harney Basin, site of the most excessive groundwater level declines would propose such a bill as HB 3112 speaks to some of the worst stereotypes voters have of elected officials using their power over legislation to potentially inure benefits to the industry they participate in and conceivably benefit from.
HB 3114 – ALIVE – Supports a process related to water management in the Chewaucan River watershed. This well-intentioned bill seeks to review all types of problems, find solutions, hold hands together, etc; however, the following provision, which does not need to be stated given the very precepts of Oregon water law, undercuts all of the welcome platitudes by reminding us that: “(4) The process may not interfere with water appropriations granted on or before the effective date of this 2025 Act for privately held surface and ground water rights to use water from the Chewaucan River watershed and the tributaries of the watershed.” This provision reminds us that nothing will change if the water right pumpers maintain their status quo. Water League will be providing testimony on HB 3114 A when it arrives for a public hearing in its next committee.
HB 3116 – ALIVE – Funds several regions and the Water Resources Department for place-based water planning.
HB 3121 – ALIVE – Provides technical assistance to address the needs and vulnerabilities of small and very small community water systems.
HB 3143 – ALIVE – Establishes the Landowners Living with Beavers Grant Program in the Oregon Conservation and Recreation Fund. [This bill supports landowners who wish to encourage beaver settlement and activities without experiencing harms resulting from flooding. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.]
HB 3173-A – ALIVE – Establishes the OregonFlora Program at Oregon State University, which documents and maintains an extensive and growing dataset of native plants. Appropriates moneys to the Higher Education Coordinating Commission to be distributed to Oregon State University for purposes of the OregonFlora Program. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.
HB 3194– ALIVE – This bill holds landowners and persons acting as farmworker camp operators jointly and severally liable for operating a farmworker camp on the landowner’s property. [In particular, this bill is driven by the human rights violations caused by organized crime syndicates operating large-scale unlicensed cannabis grows. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.]
HB 3342-4– ALIVE – This bill (must now see it in the -4 Amendment) streamlines the water right transaction processes to ensure timely consideration of pending water right applications and permits. [While there are reasonable revisions to numerous statutes that include allowing electronic form filing and payments and summary denials of applications in severely over-appropriated regions, we strongly oppose the regressive sections related to limiting public noticing requirements. The purpose of limiting public noticing is to limit the filing of spurious protests, but this is no way to solve that problem. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.]
HB 3343-4 – DEAD – This bill sought to revive the most reasonable elements of the water measuring and reporting concepts in the now-dead HB 3419 (see below for details). [HB 3343 is a placeholder bill — see the -4 Amendment for the actual bill. The original base bill was for ODFW-related legislation that wasn’t needed, so the House Committee on natural resources used it for a water use purpose and stuffed it with a revision of the cost-share water measurement program whereby the state helps pay for the costs of water meter purchases and installations. The bill also authorized OWRD to require water measurement and reporting when water right permits and certificates undergo changes, such as water right transfers. This bill has a lot of testimony and died for lack of ever having a public hearing. See Water League’s testimony here.]
HB 3346 – ALIVE – This bill requires the Department of Land Conservation and Development to study siting of energy facilities in designated critical ground water areas. [In Critical Groundwater Areas (CGWA), irrigators have excessively drained groundwater reservoirs to such an extreme extent that the state must implement the CGWA statutes and administrative rules that result in water use curtailments. This bill calls for a study of installing solar energy production equipment and infrastructure as a way for irrigators to have an income when their water use is curtailed. Water League supports this concept and the need for a study. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.]
HB 3364 – ALIVE – This bill updates the water project development and feasibility grant and loan programs. [Unfortunately, if not cynically, “Update” includes substantially weakening public oversight and accountability in water project funding by loosening application requirements, reducing public comment time, diminishing the emphasis on public benefit, and potentially circumventing legislative intent regarding community engagement funding, ultimately favoring developers over the public interest, then tha. While this bill may appear innocuous, it is a significant privatization of the public sector by removing important guardrails that prevent grant applicants for water projects from directly influencing the process. The cap was lifted for the maximum size and the match was reduced by half to just 25%, which means fewer large grants will be approved. This bill is ill-conceived and the result of non-experts in the foundation field making free money easily accessible to fewer applicants. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.]
HB 3372-5 – ALIVE – This bill allows residents on an exempt use domestic well who water their 1/2 acre lawn or garden to also sell their garden plants and produce at their local farmers’ markets (See the -5 Amendment for the actual bill.) [HB 3372-5 seeks to fix a 75-year old provision of the law that never should have been passed that prohibits using your 1/2 acre garden to grow food for your community by selling at farmers’ markets, CSAs, and fruit stands. Before 1955 is was legal to do so, but during the passage of the 1955 Groundwater Act, unacknowledged lobbyists pressed to shut down Victory Gardens while allowing brand new uses greater than what could ever be needed on a 1/2 acre: 5,000 gallons per day (GPD) for commercial and industrial uses.
Keep in mind the injustice towards these local 1/2 acre community gardeners: every exempt use domestic well owner can irrigate their 1/2 acre lawn or personal garden (when totaled may not exceed 1/2 acre), but not a single tomato may be sold. Yet, the state allows for 5,000 GPD for every other type of commercial uses. Specious arguments have been advance that this bill will incite a Farmers’ Market Rush and harm surface waters and groundwater levels. We reject this assertion out of hand, not just because all 225,000 domestic wells account for only 1% of all annual water diversion in the state, but also because all the people who ever wanted to garden their 1/2 acre commercially are already doing so based on the premise that never knew they were acting unlawfully. Furthermore, farming is hard work — going to the farmer’s market with backyard produce is a labor of love for the local community and is more than two orders of magnitude cheaper than prices that incentivize the Green Rush. We also reject the complaints that small and medium-sized farms who have the extraordinary privilege of holding water rights are at a competitive disadvantage: their much larger water use is a huge gift by the public (to which all water belongs) and those farms have never before begrudged or resented their neighbors who have been operating their little 1/2 acre backyard gardens. Furthermore, since the state has restricted approving new water right permits, water rights have become a vastly more valuable commodity that 1/2 acre gardeners can now never get; that larger farms with water rights are somehow disadvantaged is absurd and a gross misrepresentation of reality. See Water League’s testimony here.
HB 3372-5 is like a poultice that has drawn out of the “Conventional Wisdom” two ideologies that exemplify the need to modernize Oregon’s water code: untenable hydrologic fallacies and economic protectionism. HB 3372-5 embodies values that contrast with the polarized interests of those who’ve awkwardly come together from the ends of the water policy spectrum to preserve their respective status quos. We recognize the need to maintain stable groundwater levels and base flows in streams. We also recognize the need to ensure the longterm viability of small and medium-sized farms. However, asserting fallacies and falsehoods about water use and economic harms by the tiniest uses to gang up on the 1/2 acre gardeners who wish to sell their produce and plants at the farmers’ markets is not the way to go about it.]
HB 3419 – DEAD – Clarifies authority of OWRD to require water use measurement and reporting on water uses. [Blowback occurred when officials included Exempt Uses in the bill, such as domestic wells. There may be a plan to amend the bill to focus only on large-scale water rights that use more than 90% of all water in the state but represent a small fraction of the diversions. At a time when every basin is over-appropriated (hence, over-pumped), when climate change is reducing winter recharge and driving pumpers to keep up with extreme Vapor Pressure Deficits, and water scarcity is worsening among the haves and the have-nots, HB 3419 is a must-needed call for understanding how and how much water Oregon uses so that officials can more effectively manage water use. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.
NOTE: Water League erred in missing the bill references to ORS 537.141 and ORS 537.545 in the -3 Amendment that include metering domestic exempt use wells, which we are stridently opposed to. Water League has repeatedly denounced the idea of metering domestic use wells because they account for only 1% of all annual water use and pose NO threat to water sources compared to the large-scale water rights that account for more than 90% of all annual water diversions. We formally retract our support for the -3 Amendment to HB 3419 until all references to ORS 537.141 and ORS 537.545 are removed.]
HB 3501 –ALIVE – The bill prevents the state agency from considering whether water right transfers will impair or be detrimental to the public interest. The attempt to prevent the public interest in water right transfers speaks to the disregard for the public’s interest in managing the gross over-supply water rights in the 21st century that are draining Oregon streams and aquifers. (Note that HB 3501 is one of three competing bills to reform water right transfers; the other two are SB 427, which seeks to restrict water right transfers if they result in the diminishment of streamflow, and SB 1153, which is a Goldilocks version between the other two bills, which seeks to limit water right transfers when they harm threatened or endangered species.)
Background to HB 3501: The Oregon Water Resources Commission adopted revisions to administrative rules in 2024, which imposed substantial restrictions on permitting new water right applications for groundwater because groundwater reservoirs have been over-appropriated in every basin in the state. (Note: surface water was over-allocated back in the mid-20th century and new surface water rights have been restricted for decades.)
For the most part, the only types of water right transactions left are water right transfers; these permits move water rights around basins, and in some cases, between basins. Since water rights are grossly over-supplied compared to the available water sources, water rights transfers will mostly be about seeking water wherever possible. As climate change, soil salinization, dewatered streams, and declining groundwater levels worsen, water right holders will attempt to chase water across the state in a flurry and chaos that the public would never tolerate. This public outrage is generally accepted as fact, especially by those who now wish to prevent the state from applying the public interest standard when considering whether to approve water right transfers.
The public interest standard is among the most important criteria all laws must follow because all laws are of, by, and for the people. Furthermore, by law, all the water in the state belongs to the public. The irony of public officials preventing the public interest standard in water right transfers has always been an extraordinary breach of the public trust; ensconcing the obstruction in HB 3501 is unAmerican because no one is above the law. Yet this proposal, to prevent the public interest determinations on the only remaining types of water right transactions, puts large water users (mostly irrigators) above the law that, by definition, must account for the public health, safety, and welfare.
HB 3501 only addresses water right transfers because these types of transactions are all that’s left. They account for pretty much all the impacts water right transactions will have in the 21st century. This is why no attempt was made to revise the statutes for new water right applications, which are mostly dead in the water. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.]
HB 3528 – ALIVE – Appropriates out of the General Fund, the amount of $3,200,000, for distribution to the University of Oregon, for the Climate Solutions Center, to conduct research to understand and address water needs of environmental justice communities and to award grants.
HB 3531 – DEAD – This bill never had a public hearing; yet, it was possibly the simplest bill of the session to pass. It would have directed the Commission on Indian Services to employ a natural resources management tribal liaison officer to facilitate opportunities for integrated natural resources management between Indian tribes and state agencies with natural resources management duties. In particular, this bill will: “(1) Identify and promote opportunities for improved integration and coordination between tribes and state agencies or other governmental entities on natural resources-related issues; and (2) Assist with advancing the recommendations of the Oregon Tribal Water Task Force and support continued facilitation of the work of the task force.”
HB 3544-5 – ALIVE – This bill aims to streamline the contested case process to accelerate the processing of water right transaction-related cases. See the -5 Amendment for the current version of the bill; soon it will be engrossed as HB 3544 A. [Contested cases should not be unreasonably stalled by inefficient procedures and the tactics used by those who exploit weaknesses in the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). The -5 revision limits, by degrees, how legitimate activities designed to protect the public interest could be caught up in the streamlining process alongside illegitimate activities that unreasonably stall and obstruct the contested case process. Parts of this bill are still unreasonably restrictive. See Water League’s’ testimony on the -3 Amendment here.]
HB 3573 – DEAD – Funds the Water Resources Department for water resources data collection and monitoring. Pairs up with HB 3419. This bill is also controversial because it funds metering and reporting, the details of which were never well-thought through since officials included exempt domestic wells that caused a huge statewide uproar.
HB 3800 – ALIVE – This bill introduces overriding mandates for groundwater management in the Harney Basin that will supersede the ongoing Division 512 administrative rulemaking process (OAR 690-512) that is currently underway designating a Critical Groundwater Area in the Harney Basin. The Division 512 rulemaking process has been contentious because groundwater levels are excessively declining and the state’s efforts to regulate the harm has been met with obstruction and anger by irrigators who resist the process on the grounds they will lose income. (In the Harney Basin, water used to irrigate alfalfa unlocks about 1/9th of one cent per gallon of groundwater and irrigators are mining groundwater for that value. Furthermore, there is a 110,000 acre-foot deficit between recharge and discharge, which is about the amount Portland uses yearly.) One of HB 3800’s sponsors is the most prominent irrigator in that basin, a leading opposition figure lambasting the CGWA process for two years. HB 3800 is the most recent attempt to obstruct the Division 512 rulemaking process to favorably control the process for the class of citizens who are draining the aquifers of what the USGS calls Ancient Water.
HB 3801 – WALKING DEAD/ ALIVE – (The bill language will be blended into HB 3800 discussed above.) Legislators passed the Voluntary Agreement (VA) statute (ORS 537.745) in 1955 to provide an alternative to regulatory actions, such as water use curtailments in Critical Groundwater Areas where the state addresses the problem of excessively declining groundwater levels. The VA statute is flawed because 1) the law assumes that water users will voluntarily reduce water use, 2) senior water right holders have no use for VAs and juniors have nothing to offer each other in a VA contract, and 3) the proposals to horse-trade water rights between senior rights on defunct wells and juniors on new wells breaks the most fundamental tenets of water rights management for a class of water users who have severely impaired water sources, all of which belong to the public.
The general idea behind VAs is to avoid regulatory action by the state – that somehow, irrigators could agree among themselves to shut off their water and achieve the same results in the same timeframe as regulatory action. In California, where the state has tried to implement VAs, the sole result has been an elaborate campaign to stall regulatory action and compliance under the pretense VA parties are “learning while doing” and trying out every possible action besides the one that gets the job done.
Oregon VA proponents are a bit more nuanced: they seek to use the existing 1955 statute to carve out a special place for irrigators to comply with the law freely, and in return for this concession, these beneficiaries seek exclusive privileges and immunities to shield them from the law. Yes, the plan is absurd and unconstitutional by offering privileges and immunities that shelter them from the groundwater statutes while all others who don’t get into VAs remain exposed to the cold hand of the regulatory state.
HB 3801 is a collection of provisions that legalize all the illegal ideas VA proponents have sought. Imagine draining the groundwater reservoirs, the state designating a CGWA with subsequent water use curtailments, irrigators proposing to implement VAs in substantially unlawful ways, then one of those irrigators with the power to introduce legislation writes a bill that makes the unlawful acts legal – that is HB 3801.
One of several regressive ideas proposes that VAs don’t have to follow water right transfer laws in Chapter 540. In no instance in the history of Oregon law has any class of water users been given a free pass to skirt the water right transfer laws. The bill is extraordinary for how it puts VA parties above the law everyone else must follow. That a Harney Basin irrigator-legislator with wells sitting on top of some of the steepest cones of depression in the state and who faces regulatory action would sponsor such a bill perpetuates the worst stereotypes of the regressive conventional wisdom, which says the largest water users should have the most influence on water policies.
The audacity and regression of this bill and a few others like it (such as HB 3501, which removes the public interest in water right transfer applications) are unthinkable. That supernumeraries in the Oregon, House and Senate would ever consider such proposals is inconceivable; that the Governor would as well is preposterous. The purpose of HB 3801 and a few others like it can only be for spurious political purposes.
HB 3932 – ALIVE – This bill instructs ODFW to adopt rules that prohibit a person from taking a beaver on waters or watersheds that are classified in a certain manner or on public land that is within the watersheds or within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of the waters. [HB 3932 requires that the agency list (map) certain watersheds and surface water channels and bodies “that flow through or are adjacent to public land” to facilitate regulations prohibiting persons “from taking a beaver, for a recreational or commercial purpose” from those locations. The purpose of this bill is to create a new default action that is not killing the beaver when on or directly adjacent to public lands. This bill does not prohibit killing beavers in these locations; rather, it requires non-lethal corrective measures first. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.]
Senate Water-Based Bills
SJR 28 – ALIVE – This bill is an amendment to the Oregon Constitution called the Oregon Coalition for an Environmental Rights Amendment (OCERA). This bill states: “All people, including children and future generations, have the fundamental right to a clean, safe and healthy environment. (2) The state shall protect and restore this right equitably for all people, giving the highest priority to the safety and health of children and future generations . . . Any person may obtain equitable relief against state action or inaction allowing harm or the threat of harm to public safety and health interests in this right . . . This right is enforceable upon enactment, without implementing legislation or exhaustion of other remedies.” [Thia environmental rights bill calls for the amendment to be put before the Oregon voters at the next general election. See Water League’s Testimony here.]
SB 74 – ALIVE – Requires the Department of State Lands to study determinations of navigability on Oregon waterways. [Rivers meander and change locations over years due to flooding, scouring and sediment transfers. The Public Trust Doctrine directly applies to navigable rivers; however, impacts to adjacent landowners’ properties, over decades and since 1859 when Oregon assumed ownership of navigable rivers upon statehood, has caused mapping to be out of date.]
SB 162-1 — ALIVE – This bill (see the -1 Amendment) addresses ongoing issues related to lawful and unlawful cannabis production. [In particular, this bill permits the destruction of hoop houses as a safer method of shutting down illicit grows (note: law enforcement focuses its limited resources on the largest-scale operators and also seeks to prevent them from starting right back up). This bill also permits OWRD and DEQ access to ODA hemp and OLCC cannabis maps of licensed operators to reduce ambiguity about which grows are and are not lawfully operating. There are a few other factors as well. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.]
SB 359 – DEAD – Authorizes any person to submit a complaint to the Department of Environmental Quality if the person reasonably believes that a camping site of homeless individuals is causing the discharge of wastes into state waters. [Spurious since anyone can file a complaint about pollution regardless of who pollutes or if the pollution is unattributable.]
SB 427 – ALIVE – This proposed bill comes from the Oregon Water Partnership and is one of three bills that speak to the water right transfer process, along with SB 1153 and HB 3501. (See the other two bill descriptions herein for more information.)
[This bill, SB 427, prohibits certain proposed changes related to water right transfers that will result in the diminishment of streamflow. The existing process for changing a water right through a transfer impacts/ relates to three main criteria: 1) the place the water comes from, called the Point of Diversion or Appropriation; 2) the place where the water is used, called the Place of Use; and 3) the type of use, called the Character of Use. Water right transfers currently have two limitations: 1) they cannot result in enlarging the water right, which means the transfer cannot increase the rate of flow or the total volume of water (duty) that gets pumped; and 2) transfers cannot injure other water right holders, regardless of seniority, meaning a water right holder can’t show up on the scene by filing a water right transfer application and put the water use of others at risk, in-stream water right included. SB 427 seeks to add a third limitation, which is to prohibit the diminishment of streamflow that specifically benefits the integrity of streams.Streams are already over-appropriated (since the mid-20th century) so water right transfers to over-appropriated areas could cause unreasonable harm to streams. Also, since groundwater forms the base flows for streams during the summer and fall after snowmelt and rains have stopped, the water right transfers under SB 427 would not be permitted to drop groundwater levels so low that they would impair groundwater discharge to streams. See Water League’s testimony on this bill here.]
SB 673 & SB 674 – DEAD – The first instructs the Water Resources Commission to allow the appropriation of water from the main stem of the Columbia River for use in eastern Oregon and the second Instructs the Water Resources Commission to allow the appropriation of water from the main stem of the Columbia River at a total rate and duty of two percent of average annual flow. [This is one of the most absurd proposals floated in a long time; as such, it is a waste of legislative resources. Two percent of the flow is 3.8 million acre-feet per year, about one-third of the Colorado River. The Columbia is repeatedly dammed and under stress. Despite that, the river is a balanced ecosystem and a reduced water volume would impact water temperature, flow rates, and sediment transport. The effect would be a massive Virtual Water Export no water right should authorize.]
SB 747 – DEAD – Requires persons with ownership interests in at least 200 acres of irrigated land used for agriculture to annually report information about fertilizer application to the State Department of Agriculture. [This bill addresses over use of fertilizer leading to water pollution and air pollution. Areas of intensive irrigated agriculture in the state are highly industrialized and cause the same types of problems in other highly industrialized regions – chemical pollution does not distinguish between the rural or urban character of where industry is located.]
SB 775 – DEAD – This bill innocuously, if not sanctimoniously, requires all groundwater quality and quantity data to be peer reviewed; otherwise, no actions can be taken regarding the implementation and enforcement of water laws related to water use and water quality. The purpose of this bill is to bring water management to a grinding halt in Oregon. Peer review is necessary for original research but not so much for agency management actions. Across the West, state agency scientists, such as hydrologists, hydrogeologists, geochemists, and environmental chemists put their professional skills to work everyday. To halt their daily work to require their management decisions be peer reviewed is unreasonable and not a good use of the peer review process, which has limited bandwidth.
SB 1023 – DEAD – Requires the Attorney General to adopt and maintain a list of foreign adversaries who are ineligible to receive conveyances of certain land, mineral or water interests. This bill should be amended to prohibit the transfer of any water right to a foreign national or their agent. Saudi Arabian and other nations that have banned irrigation for forage crops have turned to Western States to mine our groundwater causing Virtual Water Exports. The problem is rampant in Arizona.
SB 1153 – ALIVE – This proposed bill comes from the Governor’s office and is one of three bills that speak to the water right transfer process, along with SB 427 and HB 3501. (See the other two bill descriptions above for more information.) SB 1153 “directs the Water Resources Department to consider whether water right transfers will result in a loss of in-stream habitat for sensitive, threatened or endangered aquatic species in stream reaches not protected by an existing water right or contribute to water quality impairment in water quality limited streams.” The bill also provides an “opportunity for tribes to review water right transfer applications” and “to condition water right transfers with water use measurement and reporting, water level measurement and reporting, or the installation of fish screening or by-pass devices.” [SB 1153 is a more detailed version of SB 427; as such, it is less restrictive. Unlike SB 427, which prohibits the diminishment of streamflow, SB 1153 presumably allows streamflow reductions when they do not harm “in-stream habitat for sensitive, threatened or endangered aquatic species in stream reaches not protected by an existing water right or contribute to water quality impairment in water quality limited streams.” See Water League’s Testimony here.]
SB 1154-1 – ALIVE – The bill addresses the worsening problem of groundwater contamination. The -1 Amendment is now the version of the bill as it moves to the Rules Committee. The legislative counsel staff measure summary states that: “The measure modifies processes for managing ground water quality contamination concerns, including the declaration of “ground water quality concern areas” and modification of responsibilities related to ground water management areas. It requires coordination among state agencies and local entities to address ground water issues, including monitoring, action planning, and remediation strategies. It also authorizes the Governor to appoint agencies to develop an agency assessment, prepare an action plan, implement regulations and take necessary actions to address groundwater quality, while allowing for increased monitoring, reporting, and coordination to protect public health and water resources.”
Water League supports the Governor’s initiative to prevent groundwater contamination from worsening because the literal effect of polluters is “poisoning the wells” for all other water users. Historically, conflicts between warring factions resulted in asymmetric attacks, which included poisoning wells that opponents relied upon for survival. Incredibly, a similar but unintentional effect is happening in Oregon as large polluters leach nitrates and other poisons into groundwater during the regular but unregulated course of doing business. Water League will be providing comprehensive testimony in support of SB 1154-1 when the legislature holds hearings in the Rules Committee.