Lawmakers may lift Oregon’s prohibition on irrigating commercial crops with domestic wells, alarming agricultural and environmental groups who rarely agree on water policy.

Some small farm advocates have told the House Agriculture Committee it’s unreasonable to prohibit growing food with domestic well water while still allowing its use for other commercial purposes.

“This discrepancy in our current law is unacceptable, illogical and does not line up with our state or this committee’s goal of protecting our natural resources, promoting local food systems, supporting Oregon’s agricultural economy and protecting our water supply,” said Alice Morrison, co-director of the Friends of Family Farmers nonprofit.

Since they’re exempt from normal water rights permitting requirements, domestic wells can withdraw a maximum 15,000 gallons a day for household use and irrigate no more than half an acre of lawn or non-commercial garden, among other limitations.

While up to 5,000 gallons a day of domestic well water can be put toward a commercial or industrial use, that does not include promoting plant growth.

Many gardeners and small farmers were unaware of this provision in the seven decades since it was enacted until state water regulators began enforcing it more strictly in recent years, Morrison said.

“It is unacceptable for commercial agriculture to be the only restricted use from domestic wells,” she said during a recent legislative hearing. “There are now people throwing away food that could go to families in need, simply because it’s illegal to sell that food.”

This “disgrace” should be remedied by House Bill 3372, which would alter the domestic well limits to allow half-acre commercial gardens to be irrigated with up to 3,000 gallons per day, Morrison said. That maximum amount would apply to personal lawns and gardens as well, and would count toward the existing limit of 5,000 daily gallons for general commercial use.

“There’s simply no reason to alienate the smaller actors in our water system,” said Christopher Hall, executive director of the Water League, a nonprofit that supports the bill.

Though nearly 90% of Oregon’s wells are domestic and exempt from water rights permitting, they’re only responsible for about 4% of the state’s groundwater withdrawals by volume, Hall said.

“We know the impact on the state from this type of domestic well water use is minimal,” he said.

Proponents of HB 3372 say the current prohibition discourages small-scale fruit and vegetable cultivation in rural areas with insufficient access to grocery stores.

These growers often can’t rely on regular water rights for irrigation instead of domestic wells due to the lack of surface and groundwater available for appropriation, said Jenny Jonak, a small grower near Eugene, Ore.

“The implication we can just fix this by following the process isn’t a reality for most small farmers,” she said.

However, those arguments did not hold much sway with either the Oregon Farm Bureau or the Waterwatch of Oregon nonprofit, who often butt heads at the statehouse but have both come out against the proposal.

Given the depletion of groundwater in several regions of Oregon, lawmakers should consider reining in existing uses of domestic wells, such as restricting the allowance for commercial uses and livestock watering, said Kimberley Priestley, senior policy analyst for Waterwatch of Oregon.

“Expanding the exempt well statutes is the antithesis of where this state should be going,” she said.

The Oregon Farm Bureau likewise opposes the bill, claiming it’s most likely to harm the mid-sized farmers who are already under the greatest financial strain in the industry.

Farmers who exceed the bill’s limits on commercial irrigation, or who have already invested in water rights permitting, would have higher production costs and face a “competitive disadvantage” compared to those using domestic wells, said Ryan Krabill, government affairs manager for the Farm Bureau.

The bill could also encourage more groundwater pumping without giving the state’s Water Resources Department additional tools to manage these new withdrawals, Krabill said. “One exempt well may seem minor but multiply that by hundreds or thousands across groundwater limited basins and the cumulative effect becomes significant.”