16 CapitalPress.com
February 6, 2015
USDA cannot restrict GMO pine
Agency says it lacks
authority to regulate
biotech tree
By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Press
A pine tree genetically engi-
neered for greater wood density
can be grown without restric-
tions after the USDA decided
it lacks authority to regulate the
variety.
The finding has alarmed
critics of genetically modified
organisms who fear the new
cultivar will cross-pollinate
with trees in the wild, resulting
in unknown consequences for
forests.
ArborGen, a tree seedling
producer, altered the loblolly
pine variety with a “gene gun,”
inserting genetic material from
the Monterey pine, the Ameri-
Farmed Smart
certification
offers regulatory
‘safe harbor’
By MATTHEW WEAVER
Capital Press
KENNEWICK, Wash. —
The Pacific Northwest Direct
Seed Association is looking
for farmers to sign up for a
new certification program that
will provide farmers a “safe
harbor” from some regulatory
agencies.
Association executive di-
rector Kay Meyer described
the program, called Farmed
Smart, during the Pacific
Northwest Oilseed and Direct
Seed Conference in Kenne-
wick, Wash.
Third-party auditors would
certify farms that employ con-
servation practices and transi-
tion to direct seeding, Meyer
said.
“We’ve got our regulatory
agencies on board, saying if
farmers are getting certified,
they are achieving water qual-
ity standards because of these
practices that they are imple-
menting,” Meyer said.
The association is creating
a memorandum of understand-
ing with the Washington De-
partment of Ecology defining
management practices.
The program has credibil-
ity, said Chad Atkins, water
quality specialist for the de-
partment in Eastern Washing-
ton.
“We’re used to looking for
problems and then holding the
hammer over people in order
to get those fixed,” Atkins said.
“This provides an opportunity
to come at it from a different
direction — rewarding pro-
ducers for environmental pro-
tection.”
Campbell’s, Wal-Mart and
Pepperidge Farms already see
the program as a way to meet
their sustainability initiatives,
Meyer said.
The association hopes to
certify 200 farms, or roughly
400,000 acres, in the Pacific
Northwest. The first 10 farm-
ers would pay no certification
fee, and the next 30 would pay
a reduced fee.
Genesee, Idaho, farmer
Russ Zenner said he already
has Food Alliance certification
as a producer for Shepherd’s
Grain, and said Farmed Smart
is similar. Food Alliance cer-
tification concentrates on sus-
tainable farming practices.
Mark Sheffels, a Wilbur,
Wash., farmer, said some as-
pects of the program, such as
buffers along streams, poten-
tially represent a significant
economic sacrifice for farmers
because of maintenance costs
and weed problems.
“Our part of the world is
typically the most produc-
tive dirt (anywhere),” Zenner
agreed. “There’s going to
have to be significant incen-
tive to take that out of produc-
tion.”
Sheffels said the criteria
is tough, but doable. It’s also
timely, as farmers realize there
will be greater expectations
for agriculture in the future, he
said.
“Everybody expects more
regulatory scrutiny in the fu-
ture and being part of this pro-
gram says you recognize that
and you’ve already addressed
it,” he said.
Courtesy of Woodlot, Wikimedia Commons
Loblolly pines are used for
lumber, plywood and paper.
Arborgen, a tree seedling
company, has developed a ge-
netically modified cultivar of the
tree that’s higher in density and
will not be regulated by USDA.
can sweetgum tree, mouse ear
cress and E. coli bacteria.
None of these organisms are
plant pest risks, so the USDA
has determined the pine is not
a regulated article and can be
freely cultivated without under-
going environmental studies,
unlike crops that rely on plant
pathogens for their transforma-
tion.
Higher density in wood
is generally associated with
strength and durability in lum-
ber as well as higher energy
content for biomass uses, said
Steven Strauss, a forest bio-
technology professor at Oregon
State University.
Biotech cultivars that rely
on plant pests for gene transfer
often undergo lengthy govern-
ment scrutiny before they’re
brought to market, he said.
“The regulatory process
is highly political. It’s not just
based on science,” Strauss said.
For this reason, companies
are seeking alternative ways
of commercializing genetical-
ly engineered crops, he said.
“That’s understandable from
the commercial point of view.”
Arborgen, for example, has
tried to gain USDA’s approval
since 2008 for a freeze-toler-
ant eucalyptus tree, which was
transformed with a soil patho-
gen and thus must receive the
agency’s permission for wide-
spread commercialization.
Environmental groups filed
a lawsuit to block the compa-
ny from field testing the trees,
but that request was denied by a
federal judge.
Even so, Arborgen was asked
to submit additional data about
the biotech tree in 2011 and the
variety remains regulated while
the USDA conducts an in-depth
environmental review.
Critics of genetically modi-
fied organisms such as the Cen-
ter for Food Safety worry that
Arborgen was able to circum-
vent field trial permits and other
regulatory procedures with its
loblolly pine cultivar.
The group claims it’s un-
precedented for USDA to allow
a genetically engineered tree to
be cultivated without any gov-
ernment oversight.
“This is a genetically engi-
neered organism that is going
completely unregulated,” said
Martha Crouch, biotechnology
consultant for the organization.
Strauss, of OSU, said he
would like to see more “nim-
ble” regulations governing bio-
tech crops but is nervous about
USDA’s lack of authority over
GMOs produced without plant
pests.
While the USDA may not
consider such crops to be reg-
ulated articles, other countries
may disagree — creating the
potential for “chaos in the mar-
ketplace,” he said.
The Center for Food Safe-
ty is concerned about potential
environmental impacts, alleg-
ing that changes in wood den-
sity could affect decomposition
rates and forest species.
Because the USDA decid-
ed it lacks regulatory authority
over the tree, the agency only
considered the method of trans-
formation without assessing
any other potential risks that it
might pose, said Crouch.
“This is an end run around
that,” Crouch said.
Little information is avail-
able to the public in Arborgen’s
request letter seeking regula-
tory clearance or the USDA’s
response, she said. “We don’t
really know how they did it or
how big of a change it is.”
Arborgen was formed in
2000 by combining the biotech-
nology divisions of three forest
products companies.
In 2010, the company filed
reports with U.S. financial
regulators in preparation for
an initial public offering of its
stock.
Idaho House OKs dust rule change
By SEAN ELLIS
Capital Press
BOISE — A temporary rule
that ensures Idaho farmers and
ranchers won’t be fined for cre-
ating dust has been approved by
a House committee. It still needs
to pass a Senate committee be-
fore it becomes permanent.
The new rule clarifies Ida-
ho’s fugitive dust law as it ap-
plies to agricultural activities,
Tiffany Floyd, air quality divi-
sion administrator for the Idaho
Department of Environmental
Quality, told lawmakers Jan. 26.
Idaho’s dust law requires all
reasonable precautions be tak-
en to prevent particulate matter
from becoming airborne, she
told members of the House En-
vironment, Energy and Technol-
ogy Committee.
The proposed rule states that
if a farmer or rancher operates in
accordance with generally rec-
ognized agricultural practices,
that “constitutes reasonable con-
trol of fugitive dust,” Floyd said.
Idaho’s agricultural commu-
nity asked for the amendment
to Idaho’s fugitive dust law last
year after a Southwestern Idaho
lawmaker was contacted by a
farmer who was fined by DEQ
for creating dust while grinding
hay on a feedlot.
Sean Ellis/Capital Press
A dry bean field is harvested last August in southwestern Idaho. The Idaho House has approved a
temporary rule that would ensure farmers and ranchers aren’t fined for creating dust. The Senate still
has to approve the rule.
DEQ officials told farm in-
dustry leaders they had no in-
tention of using the law to target
normal agricultural practices,
but there was some disagree-
ment between the two sides on
what normal farming practices
were.
Under the current rule, farm-
ing and ranching operations are
“subject to violations and pen-
alties every time a wheel turns
in a field or someone feeds their
livestock,” said Roger Batt,
executive director of the Ida-
ho Heartland Coalition, which
is made up of several farming
groups.
The new rule, which was
hammered out after three meet-
ings held under Idaho’s negoti-
ated rulemaking process, lists
what generally recognized agri-
cultural practices are.
The definitions were taken
largely from Idaho’s Right to
Farm Act and include preparing
land for agricultural production,
applying or handling pesticides,
herbicides or other chemicals,
planting, irrigating, growing,
fertilizing, harvesting or pro-
ducing agricultural, horticultur-
al, floricultural and viticultural
crops.
It also includes breeding,
hatching, raising, producing,
feeding and keeping livestock,
dairy animals, swine, fur-bear-
ing animals, poultry, eggs, fish
and other animals, animal prod-
ucts and by-products, animal
waste and compost, and bees.
The new rule states that the
DEQ shall consult with the Ida-
ho State Department of Agri-
culture in determining whether
an activity is a generally recog-
nized agricultural practice.
“We see them as more of an
expert in this field than we are,”
Floyd said.
The amendments to Idaho’s
dust law are simple, Batt said:
“They clarify that as long as you
are following generally recog-
nized agricultural practices, then
you are reasonably controlling
fugitive dust and not found in
violation of the rules.”
“The overall result is good
for agriculture,” said Milk Pro-
ducers of Idaho Executive Di-
rector Brent Olmstead. “We
needed some clarity ... because
agriculture is different from any
other industry (DEQ) regulates
on fugitive dust.”
The rule faced some tough
questions from a few lawmak-
ers, including whether groups
representing sensitive popula-
tions, such as people in care
homes or school children,
participated in the rulemak-
ing process. The answer was,
“no.”
Oregon projects awarded $22 million in federal grant funding
By ERIC MORTENSON
Capital Press
Six Oregon conservation
projects have been awarded
$22 million in grants from the
federal Natural Resource Con-
servation Service, an arm of
the USDA.
Almost half the money, $9
million, will fund greater sage
grouse habitat improvement
on private land in eight eastern
and southeastern Oregon coun-
ties. Other grants will help re-
store native oak and prairie
habitat, remove fish barriers,
help establish carbon markets
and improve rangeland.
The Oregon sage grouse
work, with local soil and water
conservation districts serving
as the go-between for ranchers
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, has become a national
model.
Under voluntary plans
called Candidate Conservation
Agreements with Assurances,
or CCAA, landowners agree
to manage their land in a way
that benefits sage grouse. The
work includes such things as
removing western juniper so
that native sage and grasses re-
turn, marking fences to avoid
bird strikes, keeping cattle out
of breeding grounds called
leks and putting escape ramps
in water troughs.
In return, landowners get
30 years protection from addi-
tional regulation even if great-
er sage grouse are listed under
the Endangered Species Act
this year. The federal wildlife
service will decide on the sage-
grouse listing in September.
The model began in Harney
County, where 54 landowners
have now signed letters of in-
tent to develop site-specific
plans for their property. The
agreements now cover about
330,000 acres of private land
in the county, including 87 per-
cent of what’s considered pri-
ority habitat for sage grouse.
The $9 million grant, which
must be matched locally, covers
work in Harney, Baker, Crook,
Deschutes, Grant, Lake, Mal-
heur and Union counties.
Marty Suter, manager of
the Harney County Soil and
Water Conservation District,
said she’s had inquiries from
North Dakota, Montana and
Idaho about how to establish
the agreements.
“I think the appeal was
the collaboration and the
grass roots effort,” Suter said.
“CCAAs are a model for the
West.”
She said trust between
landowners, the district and
federal wildlife officials is the
crucial ingredient. In particu-
lar, she credited the leadership
of Paul Henson, supervisor of
the USFWS office in Portland.
“The agency in charge of
the (endangered species) list-
ing really wants to help,” she
said.
The other projects receiv-
ing funding are:
• $3 million to restore oak
habitat in the Klamath and
Rogue River basins.
• $5 million for juniper re-
moval and range restoration in
the John Day River basin.
• $2 million to remove fish
passage barriers in two Wasco
County watersheds.
• $2 million to restore oak
and prairie habitat in the North
Willamette Valley.
• $1 million to establish
carbon markets on private for-
estland, allowing for credits to
offset industrial carbon emis-
sions.
Potato leaders address port slowdown impacts
Long-term export
demand worldwide
‘still outstanding’
By MATTHEW WEAVER
Capital Press
KENNEWICK, Wash. —
The best thing potato farmers
can do about the labor slow-
down at West Coast ports is pro-
vide numbers about the impacts
on their industry, says the head
of Oregon’s Department of Ag-
riculture.
“Use real examples — how
are you being directly impacted
or how is your industry being
directly impacted?” department
Director Katy Coba said during
the Washington-Oregon Pota-
to Conference in Kennewick,
Wash. “That makes a differ-
ence.”
Coba urged growers to share
their concerns with federal con-
gressional representatives as
well as state representatives.
Mediations appeared to be
Matthew Weaver/Capital Press
Washington State Potato Commission Executive Director Chris
Voigt accepts the Potato Bowl trophy from Oregon Potato Com-
mission executive director Bill Brewer, right. WSU beat OSU in
a football game in November 2014, and the two commissions
donated more than 100,000 pounds of potatoes to local food banks
as part of a friendly competition, Brewer said. Brewer and Oregon
hope to take the trophy back this fall.
moving forward with reso-
lution of a contentious issue,
Coba said, but she received a
text Jan. 27 that no Internation-
al Longshore and Warehouse
Union workers reported to duty.
“It’s going to take years to
overcome what’s going on right
now,” said Bill Brewer, Oregon
Potato Commission executive
director.
Brewer said the commission
was 20 percent ahead of col-
lections of assessments in No-
vember, compared to the same
time period the year before. In
December, it was back to even.
As of Jan. 15, the commission
is 20 percent behind, he said.
“That is directly related to
the amount of potatoes being
processed that should be export-
ed,” Brewer said. “The proces-
sors can’t process them, they
don’t have any more storage or
freezer space available. Their
customers are wanting product,
we cannot get it to them.”
John Toaspern, chief market-
ing officer for the U.S. Potato
Board, said the port slowdown
is one of three issues impacting
potato exports, alongside a large
European potato crop and the
strength of the U.S. dollar com-
pared to the euro, Japanese yen
and other currency.
Before the slowdown, U.S.
frozen potato exports from July
to October of the present mar-
keting year were off 8 percent,
Toaspern said. With the slow-
down, frozen exports are off
38 percent. Ports are running
at 50 percent capacity at best,
Toaspern said.
“We are going to see some
tough numbers this year, but
hopefully those three factors can
be corrected moving forward,”
he said. “The long-term pros-
pects for exports are still out-
standing. Demand for potatoes
and products worldwide contin-
ues to grow.”
Also during the conference:
• Washington Potato Com-
mission executive director Chris
Voigt urged farmers to ask seed
growers for plant health certifi-
cates, in effort to better control
viruses. The industry is begin-
ning to see more strains of po-
tato virus Y producing necrotic
symptoms in tubers.
“We have an opportunity to
solve that problem now, but it’s
really important you know the
quality of the seed you have,”
Voigt said.
• Coba expects more leg-
islation in Oregon related to
pesticides, particularly aerial
applications, citing public con-
cerns about human health and
drinking water impacts.