Conservation groups, farmers and ranchers urge funding for OWEB programs, easement matches and drinking-water protection

Co-Chair Frederick Levy and Co-Chair (name not specified) opened a public hearing Wednesday of the Joint Committee on Ways and Means Subcommittee on Natural Resources on House Bill 5039 and House Bill 5040, the appropriation and local grants budget bills for the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB).

Speakers from land trusts, conservation organizations, agricultural groups and rural producers urged the subcommittee to preserve and increase funding for several OWEB programs, including the Oregon Agricultural Heritage Program (OAHP), the drinking-water source protection grant program and the Natural and Working Lands Fund, and to fund staff positions needed to administer those programs.

The testimony matters because those state investments are designed to leverage federal matching funds, protect working farms and ranches from fragmentation, support drinking-water source protection for small communities, and sustain OWEB’s capacity to award and manage grants. Carson Kendrick, conservation director for the Coalition of Oregon Land Trusts, said the coalition “represents 33 land trusts…Collectively, our members have protected over 318,000 acres,” and urged funding that would allow more easement projects to close.

Witnesses cited specific funding requests and program details. Several speakers asked the committee to include a $2 million appropriation for OAHP included in OWEB’s budget proposal (referred to in testimony as POP 90) and to consider larger funding authorized in separate legislation (House Bill 3131), which supporters said would provide up to $17.3 million over the biennium to meet demonstrated demand. Neli McAdams, executive director of Oregon Agricultural Trust, told the committee that OAHP helps landowners access matching funds for conservation easements and cited federal matching grants in Lane and Harney counties that require a 50% nonfederal match.

Multiple witnesses backed continued funding for OWEB’s drinking-water source protection grant program. Daniel Whelan, director of government affairs for Sustainable Northwest, said the program — established in 2023 — has strong demand and that a statewide survey of public water providers estimated roughly $29 million in additional need; he noted House Bill 3341 (testimony cited the bill number as HB 3341) would appropriate $5 million for the program in the current biennium. Whelan also emphasized staffing, saying, “But it is OWEB staff that is most critical to the success of this program,” and described how a single natural-resources specialist helped OWEB quickly stand up the program, convene an advisory committee, and launch the first grant round.

Speakers also requested $5 million for the Natural and Working Lands Fund (included in POP 90 in OWEB’s budget recommendation). Lauren Link, state policy advisor for The Nature Conservancy on behalf of the Natural Climate Solutions Coalition, said the fund helps state agencies provide technical assistance and financial support to landowners and that the investments “sequester and store carbon” while delivering economic and community benefits.

Other testimony reinforced those points: Deschutes Land Trust’s Natasha Bellis described local conserved acres and warned of development pressure in Central Oregon; Ducks Unlimited’s Greg Green urged higher OAHP funding to increase leveraged federal impact; the Oregon Seed Council’s Megan Chouinard noted the seed industry’s rural employment footprint and supported OAHP funding; and rancher Keith Nance described OAHP as a tool to keep working lands intact for future generations.

Witnesses asked the subcommittee to support several budget “policy option packages” (POP 90, POP 100 and POP 105 in testimony) that proponents said provide grant match funding, a permanent position to lead land and water acquisitions and stewardship at OWEB, and additional positions to operate OAHP. Several speakers said continuity of staff and funding is critical: without stable funding from one biennium to the next, interest and capacity decline, they said.

The panel did not take votes during the public testimony. The subcommittee chair closed the hearing and said the committee will continue to consider the OWEB budget and related measures at future meetings.

(Reporting note: testimony at this hearing included references to HB 5039 and HB 5040 as the OWEB appropriation and local grants bills; witnesses also referred to House Bill 3131 (OAHP funding) and House Bill 3341 (drinking-water source protection funding).)