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