Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Capital press. (Salem, OR) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (April 14, 2017)
April 14, 2017 CapitalPress.com 11 Washington State legislature seeks to shield wolf-plagued ranchers from threats Bill to prevent WDFW from disclosing records By DON JENKINS Capital Press OLYMPIA — The Wash- ington Senate and House have approved legislation to with- hold records that name ranch- ers who report that wolves are attacking livestock or sign agreements to prevent depre- dations. House Bill 1465 stems from threats ranchers and public employees received last sum- mer as the Department of Fish and Wildlife shot wolves prey- ing on cattle in the Colville National Forest in northeast Washington. The region’s senator, Shelly Short, R-Addy, said she hoped holding back the identity of ranchers would encourage pro- ducers to work with WDFW. “I don’t take lightly that this bill allows this information to be exempt from the Public Records Act,” she said. “What this bill doesn’t do is (prevent) folks from having access to de- partment decisions.” The Senate passed the bill 40-7 on Friday after making Courtesy of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife A wolf walks in the snow. State lawmakers are moving a bill to with- hold records that identify ranchers who help state wildlife manag- ers investigate and prevent attacks by wolves on livestock. The bill stems from threats against ranchers from people angry with state’s use of lethal control to stop depredations. minor changes to a version the House passed last month. Ranchers along with state and local officials reported being harassed and receiving death threats from people an- gry with the shooting of seven wolves in the Profanity Peak pack. No suspects were identi- fied or arrested. The bill originally pro- posed withholding records that would identify state wildlife managers or contractors con- nected with responding to dep- redations. The original bill also would have allowed WDFW to withhold where wolves were attacking livestock, beyond citing the pack’s territory. Washington wolfpacks range over territories as large as 635 square miles, according to WDFW. The department now reports the township where attacks occur. Townships are normally 36 square miles. The bill was narrowed to focus on withholding WDFW records that identify ranchers who report depredations or have signed agreements spec- ifying how they will prevent conflicts between livestock and wolves. The agreements make ranchers eligible for state funding. WDFW reported entering into 54 agreements with live- stock producers in 2016 and spending $410,000 to help them guard their animals. Some ranchers who work informally with WDFW to prevent depredations say they’re concerned that signing an agreement implies they’re satisfied with the state’s poli- cy of encouraging wolves to recolonize the state. WDFW estimates the state has at least 115 wolves and anticipates the population will grow by about one-third a year. Most wolves are in Ferry, Okanogan, Stevens and Pend Oreille counties. Short said lawmakers whose constituents support having a stable and wide- spread wolf population should back the bill. “I believe this bill becomes an important tool to increase the willingness of folks who are dealing with recovering populations,” Short said. “It will encourage them to work more directly with the depart- ment.” Washington hemp rules near finish line Licenses may be available by mid-May By DON JENKINS Capital Press OLYMPIA — Washing- ton’s rules for hemp were crit- icized Friday as too restrictive and expensive, but also praised for keeping the state and pro- spective growers on the right side of federal authorities. If state Agriculture Director Derek Sandison signs the rules April 13 as scheduled, the state could issue licenses to grow or process hemp as soon as May 15. “It’s hard to say with any certainty who will pull the trig- ger and plant. I know there’s a lot of interest,” WSDA hemp coordinator Emily Febles said. The rules, which went through a final public hearing Friday, hew to the leeway the 2014 Farm Bill gave states to test hemp as a commercial crop, even though it remains a federally controlled substance. As a result, Washington rules for buying and planting seeds, and selling, transporting and processing plants likely will be more restrictive than in some states. WSDA inspectors will have access to hemp farms and pro- cessing plants, and their re- cords. The state will test hemp fields to make sure the plants aren’t too high in the chemical compound that makes marijua- na popular. WSDA and some hemp ad- Don Jenkins/Capital Press Hemp consultant Joy Beckerman, left, and farmer Ellen Russo of Centralia talk after a Washington De- partment of Agriculture hearing on rules for growing and processing hemp April 7 in Olympia. WSDA could start issuing licenses as soon as May 15. vocates say the industry will profit in the long run by stay- ing within federal law. The advantages include be- ing eligible for USDA research grants and organic certifica- tion, federal water and finan- cial services, hemp consultant Joy Beckerman said. “This is the beginning. To expect to go from prohibition to utopia right away is unreal- istic,” she said. Fees and location restric- tions are two possible obsta- cles for hemp farms. The Legislature instructed WSDA to make the regulato- ry program self-supporting. WSDA can only make a rough estimate for how high the fees need to be. To start, prospec- tive hemp pioneers must pay a nonrefundable $450 appli- cation fee and then $300 for a license good for one year. Farmers and processors also must pay for field inspec- tions, and seed and plant tests, likely costing hundreds of dollars, according to a WSDA analysis. Centralia vegetable farmer Ellen Russo said she’s interest- ed in planting hemp, but won’t be able to afford the fees. “No way,” she said. “I think it’s pushing small farmers away. The fees are so high.” Also, Washington already has a thriving, tax-gener- ating marijuana industry. Hemp farms must be at least 4 miles from the nearest mar- ijuana grow to guard against cross-pollination. Febles said the department would be inter- ested in research to determine whether a 4-mile buffer is too much or too little. “We don’t want to create in-fighting between our indus- tries,” she said. “If we can play nice with everybody, it would be best both for industrial hemp and marijuana.” Other rules include: • No one with a felony drug conviction in the past 10 years will be issued a hemp license. • Processing hemp won’t be allowed in homes. Some peo- ple said Friday this will pre- vent hemp from developing as a cottage industry. Febles said the department was concerned about requiring unrestricted access to private homes. • Growers must immediate- ly plant hemp seeds delivered to their farm. • The federal Drug En- forcement Administration re- cently gave the state permis- sion to import hemp seeds. Growers can order seeds now and have them delivered to WSDA’s storage locker in Spokane in anticipation of planting in May. “You will be taking a risk,” Febles said. “If you’re not licensed, you would never be able to access your seeds.” Courtesy of Tim Murray/Washington State University Snow mold on a wheat field. Some farmers in southeastern Wash- ington say they are seeing pink snow mold, an unusual occurrence in that region. SE Washington wheat farmers face pink snow mold By MATTHEW WEAVER Capital Press Wheat farmers in south- eastern Washington state are dealing with pink snow mold following the unusually hard winter. Snow mold is most com- mon in wheat crops on the northern tier of the state, said Tim Murray, Washington State University Extension plant pathologist. The disease isn’t typical for the southeastern corner of the state, which tends to be a little warmer, he said, adding that pink snow mold is a first for the farmers in the area. “It’s certainly uncommon to have two solid months of snow cover with no let up,” Murray said. Prolonged snow cover promotes snow mold. Wheat varieties tended to vary in their response to the disease, Murray said. Most tended to be more suscepti- ble. “Up (north), the growers know this is a chronic prob- lem and so would typically have planted a variety that’s resistant,” he said. “Whereas down in the Prescott-Waits- burg-Walla Walla area, this is not a problem that grow- ers are thinking about. Their variety selection is based on other problems.” Prescott has a lot of rolling hills. The fields showing the most damage were north-fac- ing slopes, Murray said. “In some fields there were a lot of smallish areas with damage, but collective- ly they add up,” he said. Brad Tompkins, who farms in northern Walla Wal- la County, estimates the dis- ease has impacted 20 percent of his fields. “It’s the first time we’ve ever seen it,” he said. “Our family’s farmed in this area over 100 years, so it’s un- usual.” It wasn’t clear how much the fields would recover, Murray said. He typically advises growers to wait three to four weeks to see what re- grows. “When the snow comes off, everything looks bad,” he said. Tompkins said his fields were not recovering. “We’re a 70-bushel ranch, and in those places I’d be lucky to get 10 bushels,” he said. “It’s pretty devastat- ing.” One farmer told Murray the spots in his field were 10 percent regrown, but he was electing not to re-seed. “With the (price) of wheat at $4, he figured it wasn’t really worth it to try to till in these little spots,” Murray said. “It’s a lot eas- ier to get in and reseed a large area than it is a small area.” A farmer with 90 acres did plan to reseed. Tompkins doesn’t plan to reseed, due to spring weath- er delaying planting. He doesn’t expect many neigh- bors to opt to reseed either, he said. Crop insurance will help if Tompkins has a yield loss. Snow is still coming off fields in some of the more usual snow mold areas far- ther north. “This was a very unusual winter,” Murray said. “If we get back to a normal weather pattern, I would not expect it to be a problem again right away.” Tompkins plans to keep in contact with Murray throughout the rest of the crop year. “It’s hopefully a once in a lifetime thing,” he said. “From a farmer standpoint, you just add it to anoth- er bunch of problems that could potentially happen, I guess. It wasn’t on the shelf, but it is now.” 15-2/#6