4
CapitalPress.com
May 1, 2015
Sides clash over Idaho’s ‘ag gag’ law
By SEAN ELLIS
Capital Press
BOISE — The opposing
parties in a federal lawsuit
targeting Idaho’s Agricultural
Security Act differed greatly
in federal court April 28 over
what the law actually does.
Plaintiffs, who seek to
overturn the 2014 law, said it
violates free speech rights and
prevents whistle-blowing.
Defenders of the law said it
only prevents certain types of
conduct, such as trespassing
on private property and lying
to gain access to an agricultur-
al operation or its records.
The law makes it a crime
to gain employment with an
agricultural operation through
misrepresentation or deception
with the intent to cause harm to
that operation. It also prohibits
people from making a video or
audio recording of the produc-
tion facility’s operations with-
out the owner’s consent.
A broad coalition of ani-
mal welfare, food safety and
civil rights groups and jour-
nalists filed a federal lawsuit
against the law.
Private property rights,
trade secrets and intimate pri-
vate details are already protect-
ed by federal and state statutes,
Justin Marceau, a constitu-
tional law professor who is
representing the plaintiffs, told
Chief U.S. District Judge B.
Lynn Winmill during oral ar-
guments on plaintiffs’ motion
for summary judgment.
“None of these things are
issues in this case,” he said.
“This is not a case about pri-
vate property rights ... This is
a speech-repressing and whis-
tle-blowing repressing law.”
Rather than chilling free
speech, the law is “protecting
property from wrongful con-
duct,” countered Deputy Idaho
Attorney General Carl Withroe.
There is no First Amend-
ment right to engage in free
speech activities on private
property, he said, and added
that the statute was written “to
protect agricultural operations
and not target journalists or
would-be whistle-blowers.”
Marceau said agriculture
enjoys a lesser expectation of
“This is not a case about private property
rights ... This is a speech-repressing and
whistle-blowing repressing law.”
— Justin Marceau
Constitutional Law Professor
privacy because it’s a highly
regulated industry and food
safety and animal welfare are
major public concerns.
The industry, he said, “has
one of the lowest expectations
of privacy one can imagine.”
Winmill took the motion
for summary judgment under
advisement and said it might
take some time for him to is-
sue a written decision.
He also said briefings
from both sides were first
class and have helped him
greatly in the case, which he
said is on the cutting edge of
First Amendment law.
“This is not an easy case”
and the briefings “really clar-
ify what the points of conten-
tion are very nicely,” he said.
After the hearing, Dan
Steenson, an attorney for the
Idaho Dairymen’s Associa-
tion, which wrote the law, said
plaintiffs have argued abstrac-
tions and have not adequately
addressed what the statute ac-
tually does.
He said the statute doesn’t
affect free speech at all.
“The only activity it affects
is going onto someone’s prop-
erty that is not open to the pub-
lic and recording what’s going
on there without their consent,”
Steenson said. “The question
then is, is that specific conduct
protected by the First Amend-
ment? The answer is, ‘no.’”
He said lying to gain ac-
cess to an agricultural oper-
ation is also not protected by
the First Amendment.
“In my view, they’re at-
tacking a bill that we didn’t
write,” Steenson said.
Feedlot inventory masks continued tight supply Raw milk advertising
closer to legality
By CAROL RYAN DUMAS
Capital Press
Both cattle on feed num-
bers in large U.S. feedlots on
April 1 and March placements
are slightly higher year over
year, USDA National Agricul-
tural Statistics Service report-
ed on Friday.
But the numbers belie the
reality of extremely tight sup-
plies, said Derrell Peel, live-
stock marketing specialist with
Oklahoma State University.
Cattle on feed are up 5,000
head year over year, and
March placements were up
8,000 head, but cattle placed
into large feedlots over the
last four or five months are
down about a half million
head, he said.
Placement numbers sur-
prised industry analysts, who
had expected placements to
be 4.4 percent lower than a
year ago.
Some of the high-
er-than-expected placements
came from Southern Plains
cattlemen waiting for the mar-
ket to recover from the Janu-
ary slump and February lows
after having paid record-high
calf prices last fall, Peel said.
December through March
placements, however, were
down 441,000 head, 6.2 per-
cent, over year earlier levels,
he said.
Fewer cattle are going into
feedlots overall but they are
staying longer, adding to the de-
ceptive inventory levels, he said.
Feedlots are putting more
weight on cattle trying to bal-
ance record-high feeder cattle
cost with lower feed prices
and the prices of fed cattle go-
ing to slaughter, he said.
Packers are going along
with the higher weights to off-
set the decrease in cattle num-
bers, he said.
Ban on hunting
with drones also
advances in Senate
By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Press
Carol Ryan Dumas/Capital Press
Steers graze in southern Twin Falls County, Idaho, on April 22. Cattlemen are feeding cattle longer
before sending them to feedlots to take advantage of record feeder cattle prices.
Online
Cattle of feed report: http://
www.nass.usda.gov/
Year to date, cattle slaugh-
ter is down 7.5 percent and
beef production is down 5.3
percent, Peel said.
Despite the most recent
report, the number of cattle
moving through the system is
not as big as a year ago. The
inventory reflects holding cat-
tle longer in the feedlot, but
feedlot production is down,
he said.
Marketings have been de-
layed to increase weights and
have been down even more
than placements, giving the
appearance of steady on-feed
inventories, he said.
March marketings were
down 29,000 head and the
lowest for March since the
reporting series began in
1996. December through
March marketing were down
306,000 head year over year,
USDA-NASS reported.
Heifer and heifer calves on
feed were also down, 10 per-
cent and the lowest quarterly
number since 1996, Peel said.
That’s both a testament to
heifer retention for herd rebuild-
ing and the overall extremely
tight cattle supply, he said.
Cow/calf operators are do-
ing great in the current envi-
ronment, and good rain and
forage in the Southern Plains
are allowing stockers to put
weight on the cattle before
selling to feedlots, he said.
Cattlemen in California,
Nevada, Utah and East-
ern Oregon, however, are
dealing with extremely dry
weather, he said.
“Feeders and packers by
and large have been struggling
with pretty tough margins
much of this year,” he said.
With the high cost of feed-
er cattle, feedlot breakevens
are quite high, with most cal-
culating losses at $150 to over
$200 a head, he said.
Packer margins are a lit-
tle more up and down, but
they are being squeezed by
boxed beef prices relative to
fed cattle prices and a drop in
byproduct values due to lower
global sales and a strong U.S.
dollar, he said.
SALEM — Advertising
raw milk is one step closer
to becoming legal in Oregon
while hunting and fishing
with drones is a step closer
to being outlawed.
The Oregon Senate Com-
mittee on the Environment
and Natural Resources vot-
ed unanimously to approve
House Bill 2446, which re-
peals the state’s longstand-
ing prohibition against raw
milk ads.
The bill was referred
to the Senate floor with a
“do-pass” recommendation
by the committee on April
27 after previously being
passed by the House, 56-1.
The Oregon Dairy Farm-
ers Association, which
generally opposes looser
restrictions on raw milk
due to safety concerns, did
not take a position on HB
2446.
While the ban is still law
in Oregon, it hasn’t been
enforced since state farm
regulators settled a lawsuit
filed by a raw milk produc-
er in 2014.
Christine Anderson of
Cast Iron Farm in McMin-
nville was instructed by
an Oregon Department of
Agriculture inspector that
raw milk prices, pathogen
test results and information
posted on her website were
unlawful, prompting her to
file a lawsuit claiming free
speech violations.
Producers who violate
the raw milk advertising
ban face up to a year in jail
and a $6,250 fine.
Attorneys from the state
advised ODA the advertis-
ing prohibition was likely
unconstitutional,
leading
the state to stop enforcing
the statute and seek a legis-
lative fix this year.
All other restrictions on
raw milk — such as a limit
on herd size and an on-farm
sales requirement — will
remain in place if HB 2446
goes into effect, said Mi-
chael Bindas, an attorney
for the Institute for Justice
nonprofit law firm, who
represented Anderson.
“The bill is not intend-
ed to expand access to raw
milk,” he said.
During the same hear-
ing, committee members
also voted unanimously to
approve House Bill 2534,
which bans the use of drones
for tracking or locating
wildlife while hunting or
angling. The legislation has
already passed the House.
The bill is intended to
preserve “fair chase” in
the sports, said Rep. Brad
Witt, D-Clatskanie, who in-
troduced HB 2534. “There
simply is no room for this
technology in hunting and
fishing.”
Lobbyists representing
hunter and angler groups
supported the bill, which
creates exemptions for us-
ing drones to manage wild-
life.
The Oregon Department
of Fish and Wildlife would
need to endorse such use
of drones, such as scaring
birds away from airports or
landfills, said Witt.
Agritourism bill overcomes trial lawyer opposition
Bill would limit liability for growers who post warnings
By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Press
SALEM — Proponents of a
bill limiting the legal exposure of
agritourism operations in Oregon
have overcome the objections of
trial lawyers who initially fought
the proposal.
Under Senate Bill 341, farm-
ers aren’t liable for the death or
injury of agritourism participants
as long as they post warnings of
possible dangers, with some ex-
ceptions.
The legal protection wouldn’t
cover growers who have “wanton
and willful disregard” for safety,
purposely hurt visitors or fail to
properly inspect the property or
equipment.
Friends of Family Farmers
and the Oregon Farm Bureau
claim the bill would provide more
certainty for agritourism opera-
tions and their insurers, but the Or-
egon Trial Lawyers Association
had opposed the legislation for
allegedly immunizing negligent
farmers from lawsuits.
During an April 21 work ses-
sion, however, the group dropped
its objections to an amended ver-
sion of SB 341 and the Senate
Judiciary Committee referred the
bill to the Senate floor with a “do
pass” recommendation.
Arthur Tower, political direc-
tor for OTLA, said his group is
wary of legislation that seeks to
erode consumer protections and
the ability of citizens to have their
day in court.
SAGE Fact #113
Center-pivot irrigation makes up 65% of the
irrigation used in Umatilla and Morrow Counties.
Center-pivot systems are very efficient as they
automatically irrigate large areas of land while
conserving the amount of water used.
18-1/#6
The latest revisions to SB
341 have “struck the right bal-
ance” by providing more in-
formation about safeguards
for landowners and consumers
while ensuring “bad actors”
would still be held responsible,
he said.
Ivan Maluski, policy director
of Friends of Family Farms, said
the changes have made the leg-
islation more specific than the
original about growers’ respon-
sibilities.
“I’m pretty excited,” Malus-
ki said. “This is a neat step for-
ward if we can get it through the
entire legislative process.”
The goal of SB 341 isn’t just
to give more peace of mind to
agritourism providers, but to
clarify the legal landscape for
insurers, he said.
LEGAL
18-1/#6
SECRETARY OF STATE
NOTICE OF PROPOSED
RULEMAKING
Oregon Department of
Agriculture, Market Access
& Certification Program,
Administrative Rules Chapter
#603, Sue Gooch, Rules
Coordinator, (503) 986-4583.
Amend: OAR 603-052-0051,
603-052-0385
RULE SUMMARY:
603-052-
0051: Removes a treatment
requirement that is no longer
needed and, per industry’s
request, adds a virus to the list
of regulate organisms. 603-
052-0385: Corrects a typo in
one section that was leading
to confusion about inspection
requirements for Trial Grounds.
These are considered house-
keeping changes to the rules.
Last day for public comment is
May 22, 2015.
18-2/#4
Mateusz Perkowski/Capital Press
Peter and Carin Sherman help
their children pick out pumpkins
at a farm last fall on Sauvie
Island near Portland, Ore.
The legislation will hopefully
convince more insurers to cover
agritourism operations, spurring
competition and ultimately reduc-
ing rates, Maluski said.
As more states adopt such
bills, it will also help create legal
uniformity that reassures insur-
ers, he said. “Almost no insur-
ance company wants to touch
agritourism right now.”
LEGAL
CHERRY AVENUE STORAGE
2680 Cherry Ave. NE
Salem, OR 97301
(503) 399-7454
Sat., May 16, 2015 • 10 a.m.
• Unit 7
Cheryl Fries
• Unit 41
Mike San Felipe
• Unit 161
Tonya Newman
• Unit 217
Tiffanee Valenzuela
• Unit C-2
Pete Fitzpatrick
Cherry Avenue Storage
reserves the right to refuse
any and all bids
Legal 18-2-2/#4