February 12, 2016  3 CapitalPress.com Key committee approves Oregon wolf delisting Environmental groups fear bill will hamstring lawsuit By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI Capital Press SALEM — The removal of wolves from Oregon’s list of endangered species has been approved by a key legislative committee, potentially jeopar- dizing a lawsuit that challenges the delisting. Last year, Oregon wildlife regulators found that wolves had suficiently recovered to delist them under the state’s version of the Endangered Spe- cies Act. Because wolves remain protected by the federal Endan- gered Species Act across much of Western Oregon, the state delisting only has effect in the eastern portion of the state. Several environmental groups, which worry that delis- ting will eventually lead to wolf hunting, iled a legal complaint accusing the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission of ignor- ing the best available science. That lawsuit prompted two lawmakers from Eastern Or- egon to propose House Bill 4040, which would ratify the commission’s delisting decision as having properly followed the state’s endangered species law. On Feb. 9, that bill passed the House Committee on Agri- culture and Natural Resources 8-1 and is now heading for a vote on the House loor with a “do pass” recommendation. Chair Brad Witt, D-Clats- kanie, noted that H.B. 4040 was amended from its original ver- sion to eliminate language that would require wolf populations to decline substantially before the species could be re-listed as endangered. Rep. Sal Esquivel, R-Med- ford, said that worries the del- isting will lead to “automat- ic slaughter” of wolves are unfounded. “This does not mean we’re going to hunt wolves to extinc- tion again,” he said. Rep. Chris Gorsek, D-Trout- dale, was the committee’s only member to vote against the bill. While he doesn’t have a problem with the delisting, Gorsek said he was concerned about the precedent set by the Legislature inserting itself into the process. Environmental groups that are ighting the delisting in court — Oregon Wild, Casca- dia Wildlands and the Center for Biological Diversity — fear that a ratiication by the Legis- lature will hamstring their law- suit. Sean Stevens, executive di- rector of Oregon Wild, recently argued that if the commission’s decision was scientiically sound, there is no reason to pass H.B. 4040. While the plaintiffs groups seek judicial review to deter- mine if the commission acted correctly, they have not asked for an injunction and so the delisting will remain effective while the litigation is pending, he said. Laurel Hines, a member of Oregon Wild, said that wolf management in Oregon has emphasized the protection of the livestock industry, so con- servationists should be allowed to proceed with the lawsuit to protect their interests. The Oregon Cattlemen’s Association disagrees with the claim that H.B. 4040 will pre- clude environmental groups from obtaining judicial review, said Rocky Dallum, the group’s political advocate. H.B. 4040 would not pre- vent the plaintiff from iling a lawsuit, and since their com- plaint has already been iled, its merits will still be decided in state court, Dallum said. Vilsack: USDA budget down, but still ample Plan cuts $9 billion from current USDA expenditures By CAROL RYAN DUMAS Capital Press President Obama has pro- posed $130 billion in manda- tory spending and almost $25 billion in discretionary fund- ing of the Department of Agri- culture in his FY 2017 budget, a cut of $9 billion from the current budget. But during a conference call with reporters Tuesday, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the agency will do more with less. Nonetheless, the budget expands funding for agricul- tural research and infrastruc- ture, conservation and export opportunities and continues $9 billion a year, $3 investments in rural billion for private in- communities, food surance companies to safety, and supple- administer and under- mental nutrition, he write the program and said. $6 billion in premium It cuts funding for subsidies to farmers crop insurance by Tom Vilsack and other expenses. $1.26 billion. The proposed bud- While the budget proposal might not result in get includes two proposals to fewer farmers with crop in- reform the program, according surance, its going to cost them to USDA’s fact sheet on the more. USDA has been crit- budget. The irst would reduce sub- icized in reports by the Gov- ernment Accountability Ofice sidies for revenue insurance for its management of crop policies that insure the price insurance programs and has at harvest. The second would received requests to improve reform prevented planting prevented planting coverage, coverage, including removing optional buy-up coverage. he said. The reforms would still Vilsack said USDA crop insurance should be a bal- provide a strong safety net anced partnership between for farmers while saving an taxpayers, farmers and in- expected $18 billion over 10 surance companies. Federal years, according to USDA. Nutrition assistance, al- crop insurance costs the gov- ernment an average of about ways the biggest piece of the USDA budget pie, is expect- ed to garner 71 percent of USDA’s outlays in FY 2017. The budget will put more fo- cus on elderly participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Program (SNAP) and boost USDA’s summer feeding pro- gram for children. The budget puts emphasis on export opportunities and invests in establishing trade re- lationships with Cuba, which imports 80 percent of its food. The budget will provide for USDA in-country staff to cul- tivate relations Cuba and work through issues, Vilsack said. At home, the budget will better support agricultural research, with $700 million appropriated for competitive, peer-reviewed research tar- geted at such issues as climate change, pollinator health, an- ti-microbial resistant bacteria and bioenergy, he said. Dean J. Koepler/The News Tribune via AP This photo taken March 13, 2015, shows U.S. Forest Service land near Greenwater, Wash. A controversial fund in the federal budget allows federal agencies to purchase parcels of land. Federal land acquisitions get budget boost Critics of controversial $450 million fund oppose automatic appropriations By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI Capital Press Federal agencies got more money to spend on land ac- quisitions in the 2016 fed- eral budget, which hasn’t satisied either supporters or opponents of a controversial fund used for such purchases. The Land and Water Con- servation Fund, initially au- thorized in 1965, was recent- ly resurrected by Congress. After initially allowing it to expire after 50 years, and then considering major reforms, Congress reautho- rized the fund for three years. Lawmakers appropriated $450 million for the fund in 2016, which is a 47 percent increase over the prior year but only half of what the Obama administration and conservationists wanted. Nearly $227 million will be divided among federal agencies for land acquisi- tions, while the rest will go to state parks and conservation projects. The fund’s reversal of fortunes wasn’t welcomed by opponents such as the American Land Rights As- sociation, which considers it a “slush fund” to buy private property for the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service — often at the behest of environmen- tal groups. “They never saw a piece of land they didn’t want to own,” said Chuck Cushman, the group’s founder and ex- ecutive director. With LWCF receiving temporary re-authorization, the next three years will be spent in a battle over wheth- er to make the program per- manent and set a mandatory funding level of $900 million per year, as environmental- ists want, Cushman said. In its 2017 budget re- quest, the Obama adminis- tration has again requested $900 million for the fund. Cushman said the fund has been a “boondoggle” for private landowners since its inception. Rather than create parks for people near urban areas, the fund has been focused on the expansion of federal territory in rural areas, often taking land out of produc- tion to the detriment of local economies, he said. Idaho House, Senate panels split on wheat commission name rule By SEAN ELLIS Capital Press BOISE — A proposed rule that would help the Idaho Wheat Commission better educate and inform growers has been ac- cepted by the Idaho Senate but rejected by the House. The rule’s future is uncer- tain, and House and Senate law- makers are trying to determine how to resolve their disparate decisions. The pending rule would re- quire purchasers of Idaho wheat to provide the commission with the names and addresses of wheat growers who deliver wheat to them each year. Only about half of the businesses that purchase wheat from Idaho farmers do that right now, said Idaho Wheat Commission Ad- ministrator Blaine Jacobson. One of the commission’s main statutory duties is to edu- cate Idaho wheat growers, but “it is dificult to fulill that part of our charge without knowing who the growers are,” Jacobson told Capital Press in an email. “If we are able to get this information down the road, we will be able to provide more information about markets and where premium prices are paid for certain classes or proteins of wheat,” he said. “We can also get information on fast-moving diseases out quicker.” Estimates of the number of wheat farmers in Idaho vary widely, from 2,500 to well over 3,000. “The commission is try- ing to igure out better ways to communicate with growers,” said Rich Garber, governmen- tal affairs director for the Idaho Grain Producers Association. The rule, which includes technical amendments to the state statute that governs the wheat commission, was ap- proved by the Senate Agricul- tural Affairs Committee, but the House Agricultural Affairs Committee rejected the part that would require wheat purchasers to report the names and address- es of wheat growers. Several House ag commit- tee members said they were uncomfortable with that re- quirement since the information would be subject to the state’s public records law. “It seems like there should be another way for the commis- sion to get grower names,” said Rep. Steven Miller, a Republi- can farmer from Fairield. “I’m uncomfortable with this method of obtaining names.” Family Fun Adults: $5 CASH ONLY Under 18: FREE FREE PARKING Saturday Feb. 27th • 9-4 Sunday Educational Events • Farmer’s Bounty Market • Local Farm Seminars • Artisan Vendors • 4-H Petting Zoo • Ag Tech Feb. 28th • 10-4 Mid-Valley Winter Ag Fest & Farmer’s Bounty Market Take a new look at an old friend. Lori Pavlicek, Oregon Aglink President Lori is a 4th generation farm girl and co-owns 4 B Farms, Inc. with her parents, Jim and Donna Butsch, and brother Jeff. The farm grows garlic, hops, hazelnuts, grass seed, and a variety of row crops on 2600 acres around the Mt. Angel, Gervais, and Hubbard areas. Lori is a member of NORPAC and the Nut Growers Society of Oregon, in addition to being a past Marion County FSA Board member. After an 18 year run on the Mt. Angel Oktoberfest board she continues her community work by being the President of the Mt. Angel Community Foundation Board and Secretary of the Providence Benedictine Nursing Center. Lori and her farm became members of Oregon Aglink because “We believe the ‘Link’ between rural and urban consumers is the education and use of our natural resources. Oregon Aglink is the voice of the Natural Resource community, and we need to spread the word.” Become a member today! Polk County Fairgrounds and Event Center 520 S. Pacific Hwy West • Rickreall, OR 97371 7360 SW Hunziker St., Suite 102 See seminars at mvwagfest.com. Portland, OR 97223 • 503-595-9121 www.aglink.org 7-1/#T4D 7-1/#13