Homebuilders ask Bend to remove junipers from city’s protected tree list – bendbulletin.com

Report on the Proposed Delisting of Juniper Trees in Bend, Oregon: An SDG Perspective

Introduction

A formal request has been submitted to the city of Bend by local homebuilders, including Hayden Homes and the Central Oregon Builders Association (COBA), to remove the western juniper tree from the city’s protected species list. The request argues that the tree’s protection under the June 2024 Bend Tree Code presents conflicts with several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those related to sustainable cities, terrestrial ecosystems, and housing affordability.

Urban Development and Housing Affordability (SDG 11)

The primary conflict identified by stakeholders relates to SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities, specifically Target 11.1 concerning access to affordable housing. The city’s tree code, designed to enhance the urban tree canopy and mitigate climate change, imposes preservation and mitigation costs on developers.

• Hayden Homes conducted an analysis on 261 acres of its land, identifying 3,100 juniper “trees of significance.”
• The estimated cost for mitigation under the current code is approximately $2.5 million.
• Stakeholders argue these costs are passed on to homebuyers, negatively impacting housing affordability within the city.
• The payment-in-lieu fees, intended to replace lost tree canopy, contribute to these development costs.

Terrestrial Ecosystems and Biodiversity (SDG 15)

Significant concerns were raised regarding the ecological impact of juniper proliferation, citing a conflict with SDG 15: Life on Land. Proponents of delisting argue that the species has become invasive, undermining local biodiversity and soil health.

1. Ecosystem Degradation: Citing Oregon State University research, it was noted that juniper woodlands have expanded tenfold since the 1930s due to human activities such as livestock grazing and fire suppression.
2. Biodiversity Loss: Junipers outcompete and shade out native grasses, reducing plant diversity and negatively impacting habitat, in opposition to Target 15.5.
3. Land Degradation: The loss of native plant cover leads to increased soil erosion and degraded soil health, which conflicts with the objectives of Target 15.3 (combat desertification and restore degraded land).

A nuanced perspective was offered by Deschutes County Commissioner Phil Chang, who differentiated between ecologically valuable “old-growth” junipers (over 140 years old) and younger, invasive junipers, suggesting the latter’s removal would not constitute a negative ecological impact.

Climate Action and Water Resources (SDG 13 & SDG 6)

The debate over the juniper tree also touches upon SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), presenting a complex balance between climate adaptation and resource management.

• Negative Impacts: Stakeholders, including COBA and Commissioner Chang, noted that invasive junipers have a negative effect on watershed function due to high water consumption, which is misaligned with Target 6.6 (protect and restore water-related ecosystems). They are also associated with increased wildfire severity.
• Positive Attributes for Climate Adaptation: Conversely, Bend’s Urban Forester, Ian Gray, highlighted the juniper’s unique suitability for the region’s climate. He stated the trees are remarkably well-suited to the hotter and drier conditions projected for the future, aligning with the goals of climate resilience and adaptation under Target 13.1.

Conclusion and Official Response

In response to the concerns raised by homebuilders, the Bend City Council has directed staff to revisit the issue. The city’s Urban Forester acknowledged the need for a more comprehensive discussion, emphasizing the juniper’s native status and its potential role in the city’s future, climate-adapted urban forest. The resolution of this matter will require balancing the interconnected goals of providing affordable housing (SDG 11), protecting terrestrial ecosystems (SDG 15), and ensuring long-term climate resilience (SDG 13).

Analysis of the Article in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

   • The article focuses on urban development in the city of Bend. The core conflict is between a city ordinance (the “tree code”) designed to manage the urban environment and the economic concerns of homebuilders regarding housing costs. The code’s goals of protecting the tree canopy and mitigating the urban heat island effect are central to creating sustainable urban spaces.

2. SDG 15: Life on Land

   • The debate centers on the ecological role of the western juniper. The article discusses its rapid spread, classifying it as an “invasive” species that negatively impacts native ecosystems by shading out native grasses, reducing plant diversity, causing erosion, and degrading soil health. It also touches on the conservation of “old-growth” junipers, which have ecological value, highlighting the need to manage terrestrial ecosystems sustainably.

3. SDG 13: Climate Action

   • The city’s tree code is explicitly stated to be a measure to “mitigate the urban heat island effect and climate change.” This directly links the local policy to broader climate action goals, as managing urban green spaces is a key strategy for climate adaptation in cities. The article also mentions the increased frequency and severity of wildfire as a negative impact of invasive juniper, a known climate-related hazard.

4. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

   • The article mentions that removing junipers could “prevent water loss” and improve “watershed function.” It notes that while junipers are drought-resistant, they “can consume a lot of water.” This connects the management of this tree species to the protection and restoration of water-related ecosystems.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Targets under SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities)

   • Target 11.1: “By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing…” The homebuilders’ primary argument is that protecting junipers will “increase the cost of new homes” and impact “housing affordability.” The article cites a specific cost of “$2.5 million” to mitigate 3,100 trees, a cost that would be passed on to homebuyers.
   • Target 11.b: “By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change, disaster risk reduction and resilience…” The city of Bend’s “tree code” is a direct example of an integrated policy aimed at climate change mitigation and managing the urban environment.

2. Targets under SDG 15 (Life on Land)

   • Target 15.5: “Take urgent and significant action to reduce the degradation of natural habitats, halt the loss of biodiversity and, by 2020, protect and prevent the extinction of threatened species.” The article states that junipers “reduce plant diversity, leading to erosion and degraded soil health,” which are forms of habitat degradation and biodiversity loss.
   • Target 15.8: “By 2020, introduce measures to prevent the introduction and significantly reduce the impact of invasive alien species on land and water ecosystems and control or eradicate the priority species.” The article describes the “rapid spread” of juniper as a result of human activity and quotes a county commissioner who calls it an “invasive juniper” with “negative impacts on habitat.” The proposal to remove them from the protected list is a measure to control their impact.

3. Targets under SDG 13 (Climate Action)

   • Target 13.1: “Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.” The tree code’s aim to “mitigate the urban heat island effect” is a direct action to build resilience to the climate-related hazard of extreme heat. The mention of junipers’ impact on the “frequency and severity of wildfire” also relates to strengthening resilience against climate-related disasters.

4. Targets under SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation)

   • Target 6.6: “By 2020, protect and restore water-related ecosystems, including mountains, forests, wetlands, rivers, aquifers and lakes.” The argument that removing junipers would “prevent water loss” and improve “watershed function” directly relates to the protection and restoration of water-related ecosystems.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Indicators for SDG 11

   • Cost of housing: The article explicitly mentions the “cost of new homes” and provides a specific financial figure: “$2.5 million” as the “cost to mitigate these 3,100 trees.” This serves as a direct, quantifiable indicator of the economic impact on housing affordability.
   • Existence of local climate action plans: The “city’s tree code, passed in June 2024” is itself an indicator of a local government implementing policies for climate change mitigation and adaptation.

2. Indicators for SDG 15

   • Land area covered by an invasive species: The article provides a clear quantitative indicator of the spread of junipers. It states that “Juniper woodlands have grown from less than 500,000 acres in the 1930s to more than 7 million acres today.” This data can be used to track the extent of the invasive species’ impact.
   • Measures of ecosystem health: The article implies indicators by mentioning the negative effects of junipers, such as reduced “plant diversity,” “erosion,” and “degraded soil health.” These ecological conditions can be scientifically measured to assess habitat degradation.

3. Indicators for SDG 13

   • Urban tree canopy coverage: The tree code’s purpose is to “protect the city’s tree canopy.” The percentage of canopy coverage is a measurable indicator of a city’s efforts to mitigate the urban heat island effect.

4. Indicators for SDG 6

   • Watershed health metrics: The article implies indicators by referencing “water loss” and “watershed function.” These can be measured through hydrological studies assessing water tables, streamflow, and overall watershed health.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: bendbulletin.com