Why lawmakers are seeking to kill Oregon wildfire risk map for second time
For the second time in two years, Oregon lawmakers want to kill a map meant to identify areas at high risk of catastrophic wildfires but that has become a lightning rod for anger from rural residents who say it places an unfair burden on them.
Oregon Republicans held a press conference Monday laying out plans to repeal the risk map, which was released earlier this year, and the stricter building codes and requirements it places on about 100,000 properties in the name of wildfire prevention.
Republicans touted different pieces of legislation — such as Senate Bill 678 — that would eliminate the map.
If they're successful, it would mark the second time the wildfire risk map has been killed. The original version of the map, released in summer 2022, was also recalled after outcry.
'This map is riddled with inaccuracies and fails to reflect real world conditions,' said House Republican Leader Christine Drazan, R-Canby. 'Property owners are understandably scared and confused. They're worried about their lives, their worried about their futures. This map is destroying property values that they have worked to maintain. They fear fines if they can't comply with the regulations tied to these maps. They fear this map is being weaponized to push them out of rural Oregon.'
It's not just Republicans taking aim at the map. Gov. Tina Kotek on Monday announced a pause on some of the requirements of the map until the legislative session concludes. Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Golden, D-Ashland, also supported repealing the wildfire map 'that has so many people scared and confused.'
After the historically destructive 2020 Labor Day wildfires, the Oregon Legislature passed Senate Bill 762 to 'help Oregon modernize and improve wildfire preparedness.'
Some of the bill remains broadly supported, such as funding a program to place remote cameras on mountaintops to spot and extinguish wildfires early.
But another big part of the bill, creation of a wildfire risk map, has been extremely controversial. Under the map, residents that lived in areas of high wildfire risk — and within the wildland-urban interface — would become subject to rules that require creating defensible space or using fire-resistant building materials.
The new rules were set to impact about 6% of all of Oregon's tax lots — or 106,000 properties.
As the owners of those tax lots have been informed of the new rules, it's led to a major pushback.
Residents have reported their home prices declining and insurance costs skyrocketing.
While there is a law against insurance companies using the map to set rates, whether coincidence or not, many have said their costs have doubled or tripled, or that they can't purchase any insurance at all.
Oregon Republicans said the rules meant the burden of wildfire mitigation was falling on families with fixed incomes unable to make the required changes and struggling to fill out forms that would allow an exemption.
Further, because the map was created by Oregon State University and the Oregon Department of Forestry in a 'landscape style way,' it led to flooded farm fields, for example, being labeled as high risk.
'To all those scared they cannot afford wildfire hardening, scared they cannot afford (this policy) or that the civil liability could make them go bankrupt, we hear you. We stand collectively to be your voice. Please help us as we repeal the fire maps,' said Sen. Noah Robinson, R-Cave Junction.
Robinson introduced a bill (SB 678) that would fully repeal SB 762, but he and others left the door open to only repealing the hazard map.
Senate President Rob Wagner, D-Lake Oswego, said he would be 'convening a group of legislators to craft a wildfire package of both budget and policy recommendations that keeps the health and safety of Oregonians front and center,' he said in a statement.
But Republicans said they wanted to repeal the map far sooner, and not have it tied to a complex legislation.
'We don't need delay, we need repeal,' Drazen said, ideally by early March.
The map's hazard ratings are based on weather, climate, topography and vegetation on a broad environmental scale.
'The wildfire hazard map is informed by decades of research on the nature of wildfire, where it begins, why it exists, and what the challenges are,' Oregon State University College of Forestry wildfire scientist Andy McEvoy said previously. 'The wildfire hazard map is intended to provide property owners and policymakers with an objective foundation for making decisions.'
The map can't zero down to the details of an individual property. However, 'if a property owner has implemented appropriate defensible space already, there is likely nothing that a designation of high hazard and being within the wildland-urban interface will require of them when future code requirements are adopted,' a news release announcing the wildfire maps said.
The map designates every part of Oregon as low, moderate or high risk of wildfires.
The highest concentration of high risk wildfire zones are located in Oregon's southwest, central and eastern areas, according to the map.
The size and number of wildfires burning across Oregon each summer has grown steadily, particularly since around 2012 and especially since 2017.
Last year, Oregon set a record for acres burned at just under 2 million acres, mostly in the grasslands of eastern Oregon. The 2020 Labor Day Fires blowup was the most destructive in state history in terms of property damage.
But even the average years are now striking, as the state has burned 640,000 acres per season for the past 10 years, compared to an average of 198,000 acres per year from 1992 to 2001, according to the Northwest Coordination Center.
"This state has to reckon with its new reality," Kyle Williams, ODF deputy director of fire operations, told lawmakers earlier this year.
Zach Urness has been an outdoors reporter in Oregon for 18 years and is host of the Explore Oregon Podcast. He can be reached at zurness@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6801. Find him on X at @ZachsORoutdoors and BlueSky at oregonoutdoors.bsky.social.
This article originally appeared on Salem Statesman Journal: Oregon wildfires: Lawmakers seek to kill risk map for second time
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNN
34 minutes ago
- CNN
GOP Rep on leaked DIA report: ‘I'll take Israeli intelligence over that document any time'
Republican Rep. Carlos Gimenez tells CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Pamela Brown why he thinks Israeli Intelligence about the damage to Iran's nuclear facilities is more reliable than an assessment from the US Defense Intelligence Agency.


The Intercept
36 minutes ago
- The Intercept
War Powers Resolution From House Democratic Leaders May Not Limit Trump's War Powers
As Democrats try to push forward legislation that would block further strikes on Iran, one measure advanced by House leadership could actually strengthen the Trump administration's justification for subsequent attacks, anti-war advocates warn. House progressives on Wednesday were trying to reach a compromise with Democratic leaders that would curb further U.S. military involvement in Iran while satisfying concerns from pro-Israel members about American support for Israel's missile defense. There are three different war powers resolutions in play in Washington. In the Senate, a resolution from Tim Kaine, D-Va., appears to be on track for a vote on Friday. In the House, however, Democrats remain sharply divided between two resolutions. 'There's no upside to advancing a competing War Powers Resolution. It's not just unnecessary — it's actively counterproductive,' Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser at Demand Progress, said in a statement. 'There's still time to reconcile this on the House side, and we hope an agreement can be reached to enable a strong vote with the best possible language.' The resolutions in both chambers face long odds, thanks to near-unanimous support from the majority Republicans for President Donald Trump's strikes. Congressional Democrats are responding to Trump's strikes by pursuing a vote under the War Powers Act, the Vietnam War-era law designed to limit presidents' ability to launch military action abroad without congressional approval. Kaine's initial resolution introduced last week directs Trump to halt hostilities against Iran, while making clear that the president can still defend the U.S. from imminent attack. Kaine's resolution has drawn support from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. It is expected to come to a voter later this week. Amid concerns from pro-Israel Democrats, Kaine said Tuesday that he was co-sponsoring an amendment to his resolution with Sens. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Andy Kim, D-N.J. The amendment is intended to continue to allow the U.S. to participate in Israeli missile defense. Pentagon officials said last April that the U.S. — not Israel — shot down most Iranian drones and missiles during an Iranian attack. 'This amendment would leave no doubt that Senator Kaine's resolution would ensure that President Trump has to make the case to the American people for further action against Iran without constraining our ability to help defend the Israeli people from Iranian attacks,' Kim said in a statement. While most Senate Democrats appeared to have coalesced around Kaine's resolution, House Democrats remained split on Wednesday over how to respond to Trump's strikes. Advocates last week said they were frustrated that Democratic leaders were not moving forward with a resolution as Trump publicly mulled attacking Iran. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., teamed up with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., to introduce a resolution. After the strikes were launched, three House Democratic committee ranking members introduced an alternative resolution that its authors claim would also force Trump to cease hostilities with Iran. The sponsors are Reps. Jim Himes of Connecticut, Adam Smith of Washington, and Gregory Meeks of New York. Anti-war advocates worry that the House leadership measure could actually wind up strengthening Trump's justification for launching further strikes on Iran. In an apparent nod to Israel, the leaders' resolution would give the president the power to 'defend the United States or an ally or partner of the United States from imminent attack.' Trump has already justified his strike on Iran as an act of 'collective self-defense of our ally, Israel,' according to a letter he sent Congress, despite the assessment of U.S intelligence agencies that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon. Critics say the House Democratic leadership resolution mirrors the language of Trump's justification far too closely. 'We think if it passes, it would be worse than not having a war powers resolution.' 'We think if it passes, it would be worse than not having a war powers resolution,' said Yasmine Taeb, the legislative and political director for the Muslim advocacy group MPower Change. 'This war powers resolution gives the impression that the president has broad authority to be able to engage in military offensive action with respect to Iran — if Israel is asking us to.' Spokespersons for Himes, Meeks, and Smith's offices did not immediately comment. Khanna has said that his resolution is intended to preserve the U.S. military's ability to participate in Israeli missile defense. Advocates said they understood there were ongoing discussions about a compromise. The two sides have ample time: A vote on the measure is not expected to come to the floor before mid- to late-July. Whether or not the two sides come to an accord, however, the push to respond to Trump's strikes could face serious pushback from Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson. Johnson said Tuesday that he thought the War Powers Act itself was unconstitutional and signaled that he may use a procedural move to prevent it from coming to the floor. The War Powers Act states that resolutions brought under its auspices must be fast-tracked to the House floor within 15 working days. Johnson, however, could try to block the resolution from receiving such a 'privileged' status — although that would likely force a vote on the procedural maneuver itself. Massie's co-sponsorship of the resolution gave it bipartisan support, but it's unclear whether he will continue to push its passage in the face of intense pressure from the White House and the ceasefire announced by Trump on Monday. Massie has said he is taking a 'wait and see' approach. As a shaky ceasefire between Israel and Iran continued to hold Wednesday morning, progressives in the House said they were pursuing a vote on their preferred resolution despite the opposition from Johnson. Khanna said at a Capitol press conference that blocking the vote with a procedural maneuver would be an 'unprecedented abrogation of congressional power.' 'The fundamental point here is that we don't know what the strikes accomplished, but we do know a lot of the harm,' Khanna said. 'It has hardened the resolve in Iran to now race towards a nuclear weapon.'


CNN
41 minutes ago
- CNN
GOP Rep on leaked DIA report: ‘I'll take Israeli intelligence over that document any time'
Republican Rep. Carlos Gimenez tells CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Pamela Brown why he thinks Israeli Intelligence about the damage to Iran's nuclear facilities is more reliable than an assessment from the US Defense Intelligence Agency.