Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Capital press. (Salem, OR) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 20, 2015)
6 CapitalPress.com February 20, 2015 Editorials are written by or approved by members of the Capital Press Editorial Board. All other commentary pieces are the opinions of the authors but not necessarily this newspaper. Opinion Editorial Board Publisher Editor Managing Editor Mike O’Brien Joe Beach Carl Sampson opinions@capitalpress.com Online: www.capitalpress.com/opinion O ur V iew Return due process to Ecology’s vocabulary W ashington legislators are offering a lesson in due process to the folks at the state Department of Ecology. The department currently has a policy that allows its personnel to take action against a rancher or other citizen if they believe there is a “potential to pollute.” Legislators, in the form of Senate Bill 5584, want to realign that policy with the U.S. Constitution, which provides for due process. That would require Ecology personnel to find actual pollution before declaring that a rancher is violating the law by allowing his cattle to be too close to a stream. Joe Lemire, a rancher from southeastern Washington, found himself at the business end of that policy, when an Ecology inspector determined that his cattle had the “potential” to pollute Pataha Creek, a seasonal stream that runs through his property. The agency never provided proof that any pollution occurred. Lemire took Ecology to court, arguing that his rights were violated and that ranchers are assumed to be polluting if they have cattle near a stream. “We’re guilty until we can prove our innocence,” Cattle Producers of Washington President Lee Engelhardt told a Senate hearing last week. That’s precisely the problem. When state agencies are allowed to operate on the assumption that they may be correct, citizens lose their rights. The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Brian Dansel, R-Republic, said Ecology’s policy is akin to allowing state troopers to write tickets to any drivers based on their potential to speed. The lack of due process is a problem for other government agencies as well. Just recently, the U.S. Department of Labor settled a case in which its inspectors assumed that two Oregon blueberry farmers were underpaying their pickers and forced them to pay a fine without an opportunity to defend themselves. When DOL failed to provide any proof of such activities, two federal judges ordered the agency to repay the fines, plus expenses. But in Washington state, assumptions are still adequate. When Lemire’s case reached the state Supreme Court, the justices said Ecology was following the state law. In its ruling, the court never even considered the U.S. Constitution. That’s why the state law needs to be fixed. Washington legislators on both sides of the aisle should support fundamental O ur V iew Damage continues at West Coast ports W For the Capital Press T Rik Dalvit/For the Capital Press Raw farm commodities — hay, onions, peas, grass seed, potatoes, Christmas trees — and processed products, such as french fries, are barged downriver and transferred at the port for shipment to Asia. A slowdown at West Coast ports in recent months as part of a labor dispute between port operators and longshoremen has disrupted this trade, causing farmers and processors to lose sales. Still, some shipments are getting through. Over the weekend, President Obama waded in, sending his secretary of labor to determine what, if anything, can be done to expedite an agreement. But Hanjin’s decision will effectively eliminate export opportunities for some agricultural products, experts say. While ports in Seattle and Tacoma remain viable options for some ag exporters, the extra cost of shipping to those sites will be prohibitive to others. Those producers and processors will have to look for other markets, other commodities. Some won’t survive. We agree with Bill Wyatt, the port’s executive director, who described Hanjin’s decision as a “very devastating blow.” The port and its operator, ICTSI Oregon, blame work slowdowns by the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, while longshoremen claim inadequate equipment and safety concerns are causing the problem. Potayto, potahto. The damage is done. If the ongoing slowdowns at the other ports aren’t soon addressed, we fear far more devastating blows. Readers’ views Capital Press reported that we in Washington had record crops this year, with wine be- coming a key player. Let’s all drink to that! We’d all like to keep it that way. But the yield of much of our agricultural crops could be threatened by water shortages because of the changes in our climate that are now causing a decline of mountain snowpack. Oregon’s snowpack is at re- cord lows, reports ABC News. “Oregon’s mountain snow- pack, vital for farms, fish and ski resorts, is in the midst of another miserable year, posting record low depths despite nor- mal precipitation. The reason is persistent warm weather, which is turning up as the new normal as the climate heats up.” “We are really kind of star- ing climate change right in the eye right now,” said Kathy Del- lo, associate director of the Ore- gon Climate Change Institute at Oregon State University.” Recently, the California Farm Bureau Federation pres- Ag youth programs grow next generation of leaders By ROBERT GIBLIN ord that Hanjin Shipping Company will stop doing business at the Port of Portland is bad news for farmers and processors throughout the Columbia Basin who export products to Asia. Ongoing labor trouble at the port is cited as the primary reason for the company’s decision. The South Korean shipping company is the Port of Portland’s largest container carrier. It handles nearly 80 percent of the container volume at the port’s Terminal 6. It will terminate its service with the city March 9, but it will continue to use rail and truck transportation, port officials said. The company has been unhappy with the operation of the port for some time. Two years ago it said it would pull out, but port officials sweetened its deal and it stayed on. Apparently the port’s inability to quickly off load and reload ships made Hanjin’s Portland operation unviable. In recent years farmers have benefited greatly from the export market. The growing Chinese middle class is hungry for U.S. farm products, as are South Korea and Japan. These are markets West Coast producers are ideally situated to serve. The trans-Pacific container ships sailing from Portland have been a boon to farmers and processors, not just in the Willamette Valley and other adjacent areas, but also up the Columbia River Basin and the Port of Lewiston on the Snake River. The need to price carbon principles such as due process. If Ecology had produced evidence that Lemire was polluting, he would have rectified the problem. As it stands, the case turned on an Ecology official’s assumptions. In defense of the policy, an Ecology representative and an environmentalist told the committee hearing that the policy is convenient and cost-effective. We’re in favor of convenience and saving money, but not at the expense of a rancher’s rights under the Constitution. It’s time to change that policy. Ecology should spend its time stopping actual pollution, not the “potential to pollute.” ident said: “As climate change comes, we have to adapt, and that means we’d better have lower-level capturing systems to be able to capture that water, because it’s going to come as rainfall, not snowpack.” In the Yakima Valley, plans are to build storage reservoirs at a cost of $4 billion or more. Build- ing reservoirs is an adaptive strategy to treat the symptoms, but, faced with this problem of climate change, what can we do to treat the root cause and reduce our greenhouse gas emissions? The American Farm Bureau prefers “market-based solu- tions, rather than federal or state emissions limits, being used to achieve a reduction in (green- house gas) emissions from any sources.” Fortunately, for farmers and for Congress, the nonpartisan Citizens’ Climate Lobby (www. citizensclimatelobby.org) has a national market-based solution that not only reduces emissions, but also creates jobs and grows the economy. The policy, called Carbon Fee and Dividend, calls for a phasing-in of fees to transition our economy off burning car- bon-based fuels and on to clean energy sources. George Shultz, Ronald Reagan’s secretary of state, and other economists have endorsed this proposal. Here’s how it works: A fee is placed on car- bon-based fuels at the source (well, mine, port of entry). This fee starts at $15 per ton of carbon dioxide emitted, and increases steadily each year by $10 so that clean energy is cheaper than fossil fuels within a decade. That $15 per ton fee translates to roughly a 15-cent increase at the gas pump and 1 cent per kilowatt-hour on elec- tricity bills. All revenue from the fee is returned to American house- holds on an equitable basis in the form of monthly dividend checks or direct deposits. This ensures that consumers have the income necessary to pay for in- creased energy costs. Except for administrative costs that can be handled with less than 1 percent of the revenue, not one dime goes to the government, and no new government bureaucracy is created. Border adjustment tariffs on imports from countries that do not have an equivalent car- bon-pricing mechanism are included in CCL’s proposal. This ensures that U.S.-made goods remain competitive at home and abroad and provides an additional incentive for oth- er nations to follow our lead. Revenue from the tariffs would be used for rebates to U.S. com- panies exporting to nations that lack an equivalent carbon price so that U.S. goods can remain competitive. A study from the highly respected Regional Economic Models Inc., shows that, under this plan, we’d create 2-3 mil- lion jobs, and add $70 billion to $90 billion in annual GDP by 2035 and reduce our carbon emissions 90 percent by 2050. Not only must we adapt, we can, and must draw down our greenhouse gas emissions to save our mountain snow packs and stabilize our climate. The revenue-neutral fee and dividend proposal is the most efficient, transparent way to go about it. Please urge your members of Congress to enact it this year. Alexandra Amonette Richland, Wash. hey are eager to learn and getting ready to lead. They are the mem- bers of the National FFA Or- ganization. Fewer and fewer are from farms, but their ranks are growing — a lot. Millennials are often gen- erations removed from any direct connection to farming. Yet, record numbers of young people are putting on iconic, blue corduroy FFA jackets, as the organization has become a pipeline for highly attractive careers. Membership in FFA reached 610,240 in 2014 — that’s an increase of 30,000 in just two years. While the United States lost more than 100,000 farms between 2007 and 2012, FFA grew by 60,000 members. Increasing- ly, the organization is drawing membership from non-farm and urban youth. This growth outpaces other youth orga- nizations, including the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts. FFA has grown by more than 200,000 since mem- bership took a nosedive in the 1980s when the number of U.S. farms also declined dramatically. That low point pushed the organization into survival mode. In 1988, FFA changed its name to reflect the increasing diversity of agri- cultural careers: Future Farm- ers of America became the National FFA Organization. Since that time, FFA has expanded beyond “cows, sows and plows” to help those ages 12-21 explore and prepare themselves for more than 300 agricultural careers, ranging from vocational agriculture to law, business, marketing, life sciences, food science, com- munications, education, and other fields. FFA leadership opportunities and agricultural skills testing are now integral to a well-rounded, modern ag- ricultural education program. One of the greatest needs in modern agriculture is culti- vating future leaders who can navigate the complexities of farm management, business, and food and agricultural pol- icy. FFA has become widely recognized throughout the ag- riculture and food industries, and by youth, for its compre- hensive leadership training programs. FFA is not alone in in- creasing relevance for the next generation of agricul- tural leaders. 4-H has be- come the largest youth orga- nization in the United States, with 6.3 million members. More than half (57 percent) come from large urban ar- eas, inner cities and suburbs. The 4-H program scope has expanded as well, from fo- cusing on agricultural and home-making skills for rural youth, to cultivating lead- ership, developing career skills, maintaining global competitiveness, and pro- moting civic involvement and a healthy society. Guest comment Robert Giblin A recent Tufts Univer- sity study concluded that 4-H members are four times more likely than the rest of their peers to contribute to their communities during grades 7-12; twice as like- ly to be civically active in grades 8-12; and twice as likely to participate in sci- ence, engineering and com- puter technology programs during non-school hours in grades 10-12. By their se- nior year, 4-H girls are three times as likely to take part in extra-curricular science pro- grams. Trends in FFA and 4-H dispel many myths about career and education oppor- tunities and youth interest in agriculture. These myths include the notion that ru- ral children will not pursue higher education, except for vocational training; agricul- tural career opportunities are limited for all youth; no efforts are being made to bring agriculture into the classroom; ag-related youth organizations are dying; and rural people lack the leader- ship skills to deal with com- plex issues. While the number of farms is decreasing in the United States and fewer young people are likely to return to their family farms or actively engage in pro- duction agriculture, other trends continue to point to a bright outlook for youth in- terested in agricultural, food and life sciences. U.S. farm incomes reached record levels in recent years, stimulating growth in other agribusi- ness products. As a result, agribusiness and others in- volved in life sciences have been recruiting heavily from colleges and universities. With a brighter job outlook, undergraduate enrollment in agricultural programs increased 20 percent from 2006 to 2011, up to 146,000 students. Most colleges and universities report that this growth is continuing. The need to potential- ly triple food production to feed 9 billion people by 2050, while using less land, improving sustainability, and reducing environmen- tal impact, will require keen management skills, ad- vanced science and technol- ogy, and the ability to navi- gate policy issues. Addressing these needs will require more than class- room education: It requires leadership. FFA and 4-H are building a new corps of young leaders in agriculture by the thousands. Robert Giblin writes, speaks and consults about agricultural and food in- dustry issues, policies and trends.