Dismantling ODFW?

E

everett464

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
389
Location
Happy Valley
The Oregon Senate is looking to dismantle ODFW, or at least merge it with the Parks and lands, creating the Department of Natural Resources.

I am a conservationist first, but I realize that not everyone around here sees the situation quite the same way. I'd be interested to see what some of the respective opinions around here are on this. I don't have a firm grasp yet on what this would really change.

I did a preliminary internet search, and couldn't find a whole lot on this. If you find any other news on this, post it.

Dismantling ODFW and assembling the Oregon Department of Natural Resources? SB 521 | The Caddis Fly: Oregon Fly Fishing Blog
 
H

halibuthitman

1
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
3,052
Location
on the edge
I believe Washington state did this several years ago... on paper, nothing changed and many arent sure even why they did it-
 
G

Growbug

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
527
Location
Dickie Prairie, Molalla
Saving money by merging departments will most probably mean that a load of biologists stop having their input heard.
 
G

GDBrown

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
1,485
Location
Hillsboro, Oregon
In Oregon Natural Resources is generally limited to the timber industry and small scale mining. At least that is were the money from industry comes from.(think political lobbyists) Fish and Wildlife are really considered more in terms of sport and tribal management issues, although there is still the commercial kill nets that go into the Columbia every year.
They would most likely end up with sub departments similar to the US Forest Service & BLM being under the US Dept of Interior. It could mean combining the budgets of both departments so they can move the funds around and then have reasons to raise license fees again.

Just my $0.02
 
Irishrover

Irishrover

Moderator
Most Featured
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
2,104
Location
Ocean
Guess it's time for some more reading. I hope that there is a portion of the proposed legislation that set up dedicated funds. Such as those funds raised from license fee for hunting and fishing are dedicated to what ever orgainization funs fish and wildlife. Like I say guess I'd better do some reading. Thanks for posting this.

Here is the section regarding tranfer of funds and expenditures.

SECTION 20. { + (1) The unexpended balances of amounts
authorized to be expended by the State Department of Fish and
Wildlife for the biennium beginning July 1, 2011, from revenues
dedicated, continuously appropriated, appropriated or otherwise
made available for the purpose of administering and enforcing the
duties, functions and powers transferred by section 18 of this
2011 Act are transferred to and are available for expenditure by
the Oregon Department of Natural Resources for the biennium
beginning July 1, 2011, for the purpose of administering and
enforcing the duties, functions and powers transferred by section
18 of this 2011 Act.
(2) The expenditure classifications, if any, established by
Acts authorizing or limiting expenditures by the State Department
of Fish and Wildlife remain applicable to expenditures by the
Oregon Department of Natural Resources under this section.
(3) The unexpended balances of amounts authorized to be
expended by the State Fish and Wildlife Commission for the
biennium beginning July 1, 2011, from revenues dedicated,
continuously appropriated, appropriated or otherwise made
available for the purpose of administering and enforcing the
duties, functions and powers transferred by section 18 of this
2011 Act are transferred to and are available for expenditure by
the Oregon Natural Resources Commission for the biennium
beginning July 1, 2011, for the purpose of administering and
enforcing the duties, functions and powers transferred by section
18 of this 2011 Act.
(4) The expenditure classifications, if any, established by
Acts authorizing or limiting expenditures by the State Fish and
Wildlife Commission remain applicable to expenditures by the
Oregon Natural Resources Commission under this section. + }
 
Last edited:
J

joesnuffy

Active member
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
645
Location
Baker City, Oregon
If anybody finds some good links about this please post it here. It's definatly something to keep an eye on.
 
Irishrover

Irishrover

Moderator
Most Featured
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
2,104
Location
Ocean
If anybody finds some good links about this please post it here. It's definatly something to keep an eye on.

Joe go to this link and type in SB 521. It will give you the bill in detail.

http://www.leg.state.or.us:8765/

Here is another link that takes you to the state legislature in general. From this link you can look up any proposed legislation and get information about the legislators.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/

I use it to contact certain legislators and keep track of how the bills are working there way through the process.
 
Last edited:
troutdude

troutdude

Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,068
Location
Willy Valley, Oregon
I looked for any press releases on the ODFW site; and found none about this issue. They're likely being told to keep things on the DL.
 
M

mlw

Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
223
Location
Eugene, Or
Who is supporting this may give a clue as to intention. My fear is that it is an attempt to slide those agencies concerned with conserving our natural resources under the thumb of the agencies who focus on extracting and consuming our natural resources (ie forestry). How would the revamped odfw promote increased stream buffers and salmon restoration if their boss is the forestry folks trying to maximize logging sales, etc. The lack of open discussion, news stories an debate makes me nervous and suspicious - why do we have a bill without media coverage and discussion?
Michael
 
Irishrover

Irishrover

Moderator
Most Featured
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
2,104
Location
Ocean
I spent quite a bit of time reading the bill today. Someone has been at work a long time putting this together. "The lack of open discussion, news stories an debate makes me nervous and suspicious - why do we have a bill without media coverage and discussion?" This might be an understatement. The bill is massive and the ODFW is but a small part. State Senator Starr out of the Hillboro area is the one who introduced the bill. I'm left wondering why such a big shift in the way the State does business is being done under the radar and why it has an emergency declaration.:think:

Here is a summary of the bill. If you read the whole bill bring coffee and a couple set of glasses. Think on Monday I'll be getting a hold of my state senator to ask him what's up.
I truely don't know if this is good or bad yet.:confused:


Establishes Oregon Department of Natural Resources and Oregon
Natural Resources Commission. Directs Governor to appoint
Director of Oregon Department of Natural Resources and members of
commission. Establishes Oregon Natural Resources Fund.
Continuously appropriates moneys in fund to department for
purpose of carrying out its duties, functions and powers.
Abolishes State Department of Fish and Wildlife, State Fish and
Wildlife Commission, State Parks and Recreation Department, State
Parks and Recreation Commission, Department of State Lands,
Department of Land Conservation and Development, Land
Conservation and Development Commission, Land Use Board of
Appeals, State Department of Geology and Mineral Industries,
Water Resources Department, Water Resources Commission, Oregon
Watershed Enhancement Board, State Forestry Department, State
Board of Forestry and Oregon Forest Resources Institute.
Transfers duties, functions and powers from abolished
departments, commissions and boards to Oregon Department of
Natural Resources.
Declares emergency, effective on passage.
 
Last edited:
M

M-T

New member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
1
There are two bills: Senate Bill 521 is the one that doesn’t make sense. SB 521 creates the DNR -- sloppily. This thousand page bill just goes through and replaces individual agency names with the name of the DNR and transfer assets, staff and funds to the agency. Senate Bill 169, though, creates a task force to investigate whether making the DNR is a good idea or not. Why would a legislator propose 521 before the task force set up by 169 does its job? Dunno. That seems stupid. 169 gives the task force a deadline of July 1, 2012. The task force is our opportunity to review the facts and offer opinions.
 
C

ChezJfrey

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
1,508
Location
Tigard, OR
There are two bills: Senate Bill 521 is the one that doesn’t make sense. SB 521 creates the DNR -- sloppily. This thousand page bill just goes through and replaces individual agency names with the name of the DNR and transfer assets, staff and funds to the agency. Senate Bill 169, though, creates a task force to investigate whether making the DNR is a good idea or not. Why would a legislator propose 521 before the task force set up by 169 does its job? Dunno. That seems stupid. 169 gives the task force a deadline of July 1, 2012. The task force is our opportunity to review the facts and offer opinions.

No, this indeed makes perfect sense in the bizarro world of political government. Implement a new program/regime, while simultaneously instituting a task force to determine whether the program was a good idea...all to the tune of a large cost of spent dollars. LOL!
 
Irishrover

Irishrover

Moderator
Most Featured
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
2,104
Location
Ocean
True 521 is just a authorizing piece of legislation that allows the (IF it happens) DNR to absorb all of these different agencies. One of the real impacts of the bill, should it pass is to abolish all the commissions and boards. There would only be one board the DNR board. The agencies are not dismantled they and their fund are placed under the controll of the of the DNR. SB 521 looks like a lot of cut and past.

SB 169 is the "is it worth while bill". It will be interesting to watch and see if either bill makes it out of committee to the floor.
 

Similar threads

Top Bottom