Water Users Survey

Select Findings from Water Users Survey

This summary is divided into the basic sections of the survey. All results are considered preliminary until peer-review of data is completed. Because of the sampling strategy used, results are not generalizable to the entire Willamette Valley.

Sample demographics

• Survey respondents averaged 64 years of age.

• More than half (60%) of survey respondents were male.

• Nearly all (99%) of survey respondents own their home.

• Average length of residence at the current address was 23 years.

 

Perceptions of Water Availability

Most respondents reported that they think about the role of water in their life in terms of their lifetime (25%) or for future generations (57%). When asked the degree to which they believe that the Willamette Valley has enough water to meet the needs of people, plants, and animals in several time periods, respondents indicated greater uncertainty as time increased into the future (Fig. 1). No statistical difference existed between residential versus agricultural landowners.

Risk to Water Availability

When asked about their perceived risk of activities to availability of water in the Willamette Valley, more than 40% of respondents indicated:

• Drought conditions and population growth to be high risk.

• Agriculture, forest management, and industry to be moderate risk.

• Water storage (e.g., hydro-electric dams), private wells, and historical appropriation (e.g., water rights) to be low risk.

Activities perceived to be high or moderate risk to availability of water in the Willamette Valley by at least 70% of respondents include: agriculture (74%), drought conditions (73%), and population growth (85%).

• Marion County respondents were less likely to perceive high or moderate risk of agriculture and drought conditions than the other two locations.

• Residential landowners were less likely to perceive high or moderate risk of agriculture than agricultural landowners.

 

Definition of Water Scarcity

A group of WW2100 stakeholders developed a definition of water scarcity:

“Water scarcity occurs when there is not an affordable, attainable, and reliable source of clean water when and where it is wanted or needed by humans and animals and plants currently and into the future.”

Landowners were asked to indicate the extent to which they perceived each underlined term to be associated with their own perception of water scarcity.

• The greatest number of respondents indicated their perceptions to be strongly associated with “clean” and “humans.”

• “Affordable” and “currently” were terms identified as weakly associated by the greatest number of landowners.

• Two terms varied statistically for residential versus agricultural landowners. More residential (37%) than agricultural (26%) landowners indicated “affordable” (37% versus 26%) and “clean” (67% versus 57%) as strongly associated with their perception of scarcity.

• Perceived association of several terms varied by location (county): attainable, reliable, clean, needed, humans, and animals and plants. Exploration of patterns in these differences is ongoing.

 

Water Regulation

Water law in Oregon currently is a “first in line, first in right” (i.e., those with the most recently acquired water rights lose them first). Most landowners (79%) believe that at least some regulation should exist related to water use and management, regardless of whether residential (81%) or agricultural (77%). Agreement with this statement was greatest in Washington-Yamhill Counties (83%), followed by Lane (80%) and Marion (74%) Counties.

Landowners were asked to indicate, in their opinion, the acceptability of different ways of distributing water among competing uses at times of limited water availability (Fig. 3). These included:

• Current Oregon water law (see above)
• The method that makes the most economic sense, regardless of priority
• Users must share any excess water beyond what they need
• Users can sell any excess water beyond what they need
• All potential users have equal access to water that is available
• Those who use more water pay more for its use
• Users farther from the water source pay more for its use
• Store enough water in reservoirs to account for all potential users
• Give water not used by agriculture to municipal use
• Give water not used by agriculture to biological use (e.g., more water in streams to maintain appropriate water temperature for fish)
• Give water not used by agriculture to recreational use
• Build more facilities for water storage and replenishment
• Allow the state to decide allocation methods for water

Among the most acceptable distribution methods were those where excess is shared among users, those who use more water pay for its use, and water storage. Exploration of differences between residential and agricultural landowners and among counties are ongoing.

 

Future Use of Agricultural Land (Agricultural Landowners Only)

Agricultural landowners were asked several additional questions about water management on their land, and current and future use of their land. Eighty-seven percent (87%) reported that they currently live on their property. A majority of those who do not live on their property do live in Oregon. Ninety-three percent (93%) reported that they or an immediate member of their household manages decisions about water use on their property. Landowners were asked why they currently participate (or not) in selected land conservation practices (Fig. 4) and their interest in future participation in selected land conservation practices (Fig. 5).

Sixty-six percent (66%) of respondents indicated that they now have a formal, defined plan for future ownership of their land. There was no statistical difference between counties or location relative to UGB. Of those with a plan:

• Forty-eight percent (48%) reported that the land will remain in its current use.
• Twenty-five percent (25%) reported that a beneficiary will make any land use decisions.
• Two percent (2%) reported either land will be divided into residential parcels or be part of a conservation easement.
• Twenty-three percent (23%) reported “other.” Further evaluation of specific items provided by respondents is ongoing.

Landowners were asked to indicate which of the following will most likely to influence their decision in developing a plan for future ownership of their land, or potentially change an existing plan. Although there was no difference among counties, variation existed based on location relative to the UGB (Fig. 6).

Landowners were also asked to report on factors that influence their decisions about changing the land use on their property (Fig. 7). Preliminary results suggest that differences among counties exist for demand for particular products and possession of a current water right for the property, and differences in relation to UGB exist for regulations on land management practices, and regulations on water use.