Oregon releases new versions of controversial property wildfire risk maps

Earlier versions of the maps, released in 2022, were quickly rescinded after fierce backlash from the public.
Read more: www.kgw.com/ar...
Watch more The Story videos: bit.ly/watchThe...
Follow The Story on Twitter: / thestorykgw
Follow The Story on Instagram: / thestorykgw

[@tronbasic4968]

Maybe, just maybe, they should spend money on forrest management and not some stupid map.

[@steveanimatrix3887]

And what restrictions are being placed on the government, federal and state, for managing the 52% of Oregon forest land "they" own?

[@danhelwig]

Manage?

[@doneaton6704]

Fire risk maps are doing nothing for property owners, just giving insurance companies a freebie to raise rates. Seems like the State is working for the insurance companies.

[@mrsentinel4911]

They can take their maps and stick it where the sun doesn't shine.

[@mikewilson8151]

I’ve been canceled by three different insurance companies just this year. They say yes we will cover you then they look at the fire map and see that you are in it. Then send you a letter saying sorry we can’t cover you.

[@2010audralee]

We recently purchased a home that has been here 50+ years (no fires) and the State has designated us as the top 1% of risk. This is a fact that must be disclosed if we were to sell. Who would purchase a 1% highest risk home. Had we known about this "Map," we would not have bought. The "map" has knocked the value of property in half, if that. The State is ruining property values with the mere labeling of property (based on studies by college students) of any Oregonians living in rural forestry lands. Thin trees to ten feet apart? With 1,000 trees on five acres, the cost would be prohibitive. Lumber industry should love this. I guess we'll move to a 15 minute city, eh? Oh, yes, we can appeal within 60 days .. but the "Codes" haven't been completed yet! I feel this is unconstitutional.

[@AmericanCitizenX]

Just another way for the state to take the wealth of the people and give to themselves. Grass to high, fine em. No damages, but I project there could have been damages.

[@aquiconfeya]

Oh man.....I am planning to retire in oregon, now I'm having second thoughts 🤔

[@TheCriminalViolin]

If the regulations have text that require by law what you can and cannot have, use or do on your own property, that's never going to be defensible in my opinion. Dictating that you absolutely have to create fire breaks, remove trees and other plant life, etc is too far. Way too far. It is NOT the government nor taxpayer's property, it is yours alone, so it is not your neighbor's nor your government's place to dictate and control such things. That is inexcusable. That state is so intent on revoking rights and control away from us and it's getting to be infuriating. Essentially from what it sounds like, the government is becoming a state-wide HOA.

[@beachcomber3036]

I'M GLAD I LIVE A 1/2 MILE FROM THE PACIFIC OCEAN WITH A WEST WIND IN THE SUMMER 🌊🌀🌀🌊

[@Vamanos46]

This is going to affect insurance rates vs insurance companies to back out of the state, like it already haa been going in in California

[@mikeonmicshow]

Which just happens to mirror the state's map. It's irrelevant that they can't use the state's map to rationalize rates. @@jimjones9949

[@jgcelliott1]

Creating the map is actually pointless and unnecessary. The various fire zones and their risks are already well known. Regulations don't need to be tailored to the particular piece of property, or the exact square foot. All this map does is provide lines for government to tinker with, details that insurers will (with a wink and a nod) pretend to ignore, and make excuses for the endless (and inevitable) cost and hassle that property owners will be forced to tolerate. This strikes me as a nuisance disguised as an improvement. .

[@NatKekuna2012]

Something for the insurance companies

[@markrobinowitz8473]

Would be nice to see a large scale defensible space / firewire program that would sincerely reduce ignition risks, create a lot of jobs and lower political temperatures.

[@uncledog-x2n]

Maui, Paradise, Alameda. Melted car wheels, melted metal. We are next get a blue tarp on your roof.

[@krslavin]

It seems to me that they needed MORE fire hazard categories, not fewer. Lets say we have 10 levels, then they could also guarantee that neighbors were only one level apart in 10 instead of 1 apart in 3.

[@nancyhannan1977]

Do they realize it will raise home owners insurance

[@12isaaco]

Stupid question time - if this new 3-tier hazard rating can't be used for property insurances, then what's it's endterm large-scale societal value, esp after having already undergoing a multi-year reassessment to assumedly fix citizens real concerns over the initial process's invalid rate-scoring process that insurance companies would've sure frothed at the mouth and screwed over thousands of people with(all of which was also assumedly paid for by taxes)? I assume there may be a bigger purpose(environment, transport, climate change, etc) , I just don't understand it yet, based on how this was described 😅 so curiously inquiring

[@rabbitfire37]

As a retired firefighter and fuels management officer more than 150 million dollars was spent in Oregon in the ten years (2000 to 2019) across Oregon. Some homeowners took ownership and responsibility to manage their own land but most had no interest in doing so. This map showing Eastside counties with the same risk as a place like Eugene is ridiculous. Ag/farm land that haven't received water in a year are still at a high risk. Maybe Oregonians need to realize where they live, the risk they are willing to take and take responsibility for their lands. Insurance companies SHOULD be regulated and forced to cover homes no matter the location. Timber companies need to clean up their logging messes. Fire isn't stopping and only getting worse because of climate change. Time to realize this is now.