Business AgLife
B
Thursday, June 25, 2020
The Observer & Baker City Herald
Wolf criteria frustrates ranchers
Oregon cattlemen decry
restrictions, delays in
identifying wolf kills
By George Plaven
Increase in Oregon’s
minimum wage takes
effect July 1
Capital Press
ENTERPRISE — Two
days after Easter, rancher Rod
Childers rode on horseback down
Joseph Creek Canyon in far
northeast Oregon, herding cattle
through the steep and remote
countryside.
His dogs were the first to spot
the dead calf, its carcass chewed
down to the bones. Instinctively,
Childers suspected wolves. But
rather than report the gruesome
discovery to state wildlife biolo-
gists, he simply cursed to himself
and kept going.
The reason, he would say later,
was the rigid criteria state biol-
ogists use to confirm whether
wolves had indeed killed the
calf. That, plus the fact that evi-
dence of wolf-related trauma was
already lost to scavengers or the
elements, made the effort futile
despite the fact the Chesnimnus
Pack had been seen in the area.
“You can go murder some-
body and be convicted quicker
than you would convict a wolf,
with the criteria they have,” said
Childers, owner of RL Cattle Co.
in rural Wallowa County, where
livestock and poultry sales totaled
more than $23 million in 2017.
“It just makes it so difficult that
ranchers have given up on it.”
The issue boiled over again
April 16, when the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife
released its annual wolf report
documenting 158 wolves state-
wide in 2019 — a 15% increase
from the previous year.
Yet the report also showed the
number of confirmed attacks on
livestock decreased 43%, which
agency officials described as an
indication that modern manage-
ment techniques and non-lethal
deterrents are helping wolves and
ranchers peacefully coexist.
Some Eastern Oregon cat-
tlemen, however, say it is less
about coexistence and more about
being hamstrung by ODFW and
its requirements for investigating
depredations. By the time a state
biologist arrives at the scene,
what little remains of a dead cow
or calf often cannot be defini-
tively linked to wolves.
Whether wolf depredation
is confirmed may impact how
much, if any, money ranchers
receive in compensation from
the state. In some cases, ranchers
say it isn’t even worth calling the
state to investigate, certain they
will not be fully compensated.
“I’m pretty bitter over it,”
Childers said. “I’m 20 years into
this stuff. It’s not fun. It’s not
right.”
Investigations
ODFW investigated 50 sus-
pected cases of wolves attacking
livestock in 2019. Of those, 16
were confirmed. One incident
was ruled a “probable” wolf dep-
redation, 12 were “possible or
unknown,” and 21 were deter-
mined to be not wolf-related.
That is a sharp reduction from
the 71 investigations and 28 con-
firmed attacks in 2018, when the
Business
owners react
to upcoming
minimum
wage hike
J
By Dick Mason
EO Media Group
Rodger Huffman, who
ranches 23 miles southeast of La
Grande, had a similar experience.
In April 2016, Huffman turned
out his cattle to graze on a 167-
acre pasture along Catherine
Creek, where the forest meets
the meadows. Five days later, he
returned to check on the herd,
finding one calf eaten all the way
through its rib cage. Trampled
grass around the carcass indi-
cated a struggle took place.
By that time, though, it was
too late. Without enough evi-
dence remaining at the scene,
ODFW ruled it a “possible/
unknown” wolf attack.
Huffman is no stranger to
predators. He worked as a trapper
LA GRANDE — Local busi-
ness owners have mixed feelings
about Oregon’s fast approaching
minimum wage jump.
The increase is set to take
effect July 1 when the minimum
wage in the state’s non-urban
counties, which includes all of
those in Northeast Oregon, will
jump from $11 an hour to $11.50
an hour.
The jump is part of a series
of 50 cent per hour minimum
wage step increases the Legisla-
ture put in place when it passed
Senate Bill 1532 in 2016. The
annual increases will continue
each year through 2022. The
raises are being made throughout
the state and are roughly based on
geography.
Sandy Sorrels, owner of
Ten Depot Street restaurant in
La Grande, strongly opposes
the increases, particularly the
upcoming one.
“I think that the Legislature
does not realize how hard this
hits small businesses in Eastern
Oregon. Especially now (because
of COVID-19 driven recession), it
is crippling,” Sorrels said.
Sorrels noted the Oregon
Restaurant & Lodging Associa-
tion is attempting to get the Leg-
islature to delay putting the min-
imum wage increase into effect.
Representatives of the association
are trying to persuade lawmakers
to postpone the increase during
the special session, which was to
start Wednesday and is set to end
Friday.
The La Grande restaurant
owner said she believes the state
law raises the minimum wage
too quickly. She said this pre-
vents business owners from being
able to make up the difference by
raising prices. Sorrels noted if a
minimum wage increase forces
her to raise the price of a ham-
burger to $15, diners will shy
away because they are not accus-
tomed to paying that much for the
entrée.
“They will go someplace else
or find something cheaper on the
menu,” Sorrels said.
Beau Willadsen, owner of
the La Grande McDonald’s, will
not have to worry about raising
the minimum wage his restau-
rant pays. Willadsen boosted
his restaurant’s minimum wage
to $11.50 an hour on Jan. 1, six
months before it was to become
mandatory. He said he was
inspired to do this because it
would help him recruit more
employees before summer hit, a
time when it is hard for him to
hire staff.
Willadsen also made the Jan. 1
move because he wanted to give
his employees a boost.
See, Wolves/Page 2B
See, Increase/Page 3B
George Plaven/Capital Press
Rod Childers, of RL Cattle Co., runs livestock during the summer about 40 miles north of Enterprise in
Joseph Creek Canyon.
Photo courtesy of Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
A gray wolf with a transmitter collar lopes along in Oregon.
state’s minimum wolf population
was 137.
While the state’s known
wolf population has increased
steadily over the last five years,
the number of confirmed depre-
dations on livestock has yo-yoed
over the same period. In 2015, the
agency confirmed nine attacks. In
2016, the total jumped to 24, and
in 2017 it fell again to 17.
Derek Broman, state carni-
vore biologist for ODFW, said
investigations are heavily evi-
dence-based. Biologists look for
telltale signs of wolves such as
tracks and physical trauma to
livestock.
A wolf’s bite mark is unmis-
takable compared to that of other
predators such as coyotes and
cougars, Broman said.
“If you’re trying to look for
wolf signs with a microscope,
then it’s not a wolf,” he said.
“You’re just going to see, it’s like
a bomb went off.”
Reports must be confirmed
by ODFW for ranchers to receive
direct compensation from the
state through a fund adminis-
tered by the Oregon Department
of Agriculture. The program also
pays for missing livestock and for
non-lethal tools, such as hiring
range riders or installing flashing
lights and alarm boxes to keep
wolves away from cattle.
Broman said he believes there
were two reasons for fewer calls
and confirmed depredations last
year.
First, ranchers are becoming
more experienced at recognizing
the evidence of a wolf attack, he
said. If it doesn’t fit the bill, they
don’t report it.
Second, ranchers are using
more non-lethal tools to prevent
conflicts.
“A lot of these folks are doing
things to keep depredations
down, which helps the bottom
line,” Broman said.
It also helps protect wolves
directly. Under Phase III of the
recently updated Oregon Wolf
Conservation and Manage-
ment Plan, ranchers can apply to
ODFW to kill wolves that prey on
livestock two times within nine
months — defined as “chronic
depredation.”
Losing faith
Eastern Oregon entered Phase
III of the wolf plan in 2017,
meaning the region had at least
seven breeding pairs of wolves
for three consecutive years.
Gray wolves were removed
from the state endangered spe-
cies list in 2015, though they are
still protected under the federal
Endangered Species Act in the
western two-thirds of the state,
west of highways 395, 78 and 95.
Childers was on the wolf com-
mittee of the Oregon Cattlemen’s
Association when the plan was
originally adopted in 2005. He
said Phase III was supposed to
be the benchmark when wolves
would be treated more like other
predators around the state, with
management zones and popula-
tion caps up for consideration.
Instead, Childers said,
ranchers were largely ignored
during the latest plan revision
adopted by the Oregon Fish
and Wildlife Commission last
summer.
“We didn’t get anything we
didn’t already have in that plan,”
he said.
RL Cattle runs about 400
mother cows and calves on both
public and private land. In June
2018, wolves injured three of
Childers’ calves in three days,
and ODFW granted him a 10-day
permit to shoot one wolf in the
same pasture. Two months later,
after wolves killed another calf,
ODFW reissued the permit for 30
days.
However, Childers was never
able to fire a single shot. He criti-
cized the permit for being overly
restrictive.
“It’s very rare you get a chance
to see these things,” Childers
said. “(ODFW) wouldn’t come
out and help me. I had to do
it myself, which is damn near
impossible.”
In the case of his dead calf in
Joseph Canyon, Childers said it
was already too degraded and
consumed for ODFW to confirm
it was killed by wolves.
“There’s not enough left for
them, by their criteria, to say yes,
a wolf killed this,” he said. “The
criteria is what needs to change.”
Local control
New version of salmon protection plan in the works
By Ellen Morris Bishop
EO Media Group
ENTERPRISE — More than
a quarter century ago, Wallowa
County produced one of the first
community-generated, county-
wide salmon plans in the nation.
The landmark Wallowa Coun-
ty-Nez Perce Salmon Plan laid
a foundation for restoration of
salmon habitat, and for some
revised practices in agriculture
and forestry.
The original 1993 docu-
ment addressed issues related
to salmon that were just listed
under the Endangered Species
Act. The Nez Perce Tribe col-
laborated with Wallowa County
farmers, ranchers, foresters, agen-
cies, environmentalists and com-
missioners to recognize problems,
and designate areas that would
benefit from habitat restoration. It
provided landowners and agencies
documentation for grants to fund
improvements.
The 1993 plan, updated in
1999, is being redone as a new
Wallowa County-Nez Perce Nat-
ural Resources Management Plan.
The 20-person Wallowa County
Natural Resources Advisory
Committee is taking the lead. A
related technical committee of
mostly agency and tribal-based
scientists and engineers is pro-
viding data and expertise. The
draft document should be ready
for public comment this coming
spring.
The plan is targeted for imple-
mentation in the summer of 2021,
according to Katy Nesbitt, Nat-
ural Resources Advisory Com-
mittee director.
The new version, like the old
one, will likely become part of
the Wallowa County Comprehen-
sive Plan, pending approval by the
Wallowa County commissioners.
“It is supposed to be a guiding
document for the commissioners
when they are working on nat-
ural resource issues,” said Jean
Jancaitis, the Wallowa Resources
Programs director who also coor-
dinates the advisory committee’s
grants. “It’s time to give them an
update.”
The management plan will help
plan for emerging threats to eco-
systems and the economy. Those
threats include climate change,
See, Salmon/Page 3B
Photo by Ellen Morris Bishop/EO Media Group
Alain Bonneville casts his fly into the Lostine River on Friday. The new
Wallowa County-Nez Perce Tribe Natural Resource Plan will consider
all river basins in Wallowa County. The plan will replace the aging Wal-
lowa County-Nez Perce Salmon Plan completed in 1993.