July 29, 2016
CapitalPress.com
3
Wolfpack reaches three confi rmed kills, three probable
Capital Press
If wolves in the Profanity
Peak pack are confi rmed to
kill livestock one more time,
the state’s Washington De-
partment of Fish and Wildlife
will begin considering killing
problem wolves in the pack.
Area in
WASH. detail
21 COLVILLE
NAT’L
FOR. 395
25
Republic
20
FERRY
Colville
Approximate
site of Profanity
Peak wolfpack
395
COLLVILLE
CONFEDERATED
21
TRIBES
um bia River
By MATTHEW WEAVER
The department investi-
gated a calf carcass July 21 in
the Profanity Peak pack area
and classifi ed it as a “proba-
ble” wolf kill. A calf carcass
investigated July 23 was ruled
a “confi rmed” wolf kill.
These bring the Profanity
Peak pack to three confi rmed
livestock kills and three prob-
able kills. Under the state
wolf plan, the department
considers killing problem
pack wolves after four con-
fi rmed livestock kills.
“We’re going to continue
monitoring the area, working
with the producer to continue
with the deterrence measures
that are in place,” said Donny
C ol
Aff ected ranchers
meeting
department
expectations,
offi cial says
STEVENS
25
N
Capital Press graphic
Martorello, wolf policy lead
for the agency.
If a fourth kill is confi rmed
and the rancher has met deter-
rence expectations, WDFW
Director Jim Unsworth would
begin considering killing
wolves in the pack.
“We’re hoping no more
livestock are attacked, but if
that outcome does happen and
those expectations are met,
we can look to the director
for a decision or authorization
of lethal removal and initiate
that in a timely manner,” Mar-
torello said.
The department is plan-
ning so that there would not
be a big delay after authoriza-
tion, Martorello said.
Two ranchers have been
affected by the livestock loss-
es. They have met the depart-
ment’s expectations for pro-
active measures to deter the
wolves and are ramping up
activities in response to the
recent depredations, includ-
ing the use of range riders,
Martorello said.
“If we have another con-
fi rmed depredation event by
wolves and we have those
things in place, that’s a cue
to us that those deterrence
measures have failed to stop
repeated depredations,” Mar-
torello said.
The department believes
the Profanity Peak pack has
11 wolves. Martorello said
the department is not setting
a specifi c number to remove
that it will share publicly until
after the action is completed.
Doing so creates an expec-
tation that a set number of
wolves will be killed, he said.
“The reality is that we
have to be able to fi nd wolves
to get to wolves, and that’s not
always a guarantee,” he said.
“We don’t start at full pack
removal.”
The department would
determine if the attacks stop
after killing several wolves in
the pack, Martorello said.
The department updated a
chronology of the Profanity
Peak’s activities on its web-
site.
Cities pan county’s bid to change zoning of ag land
By ERIC MORTENSON
Capital Press
USDA photo by Ken Hammond
The Jamie L. Whitten Federal Building houses the U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture in Washington, D.C. A lawsuit that accused the
USDA of censoring its scientists in violation of their free speech
rights has been dismissed by a federal judge.
Lawsuit charging
USDA censorship
gets dismissed
Complaint accused
USDA of muzzling
its scientists
By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Press
A lawsuit that accused
the USDA of censoring its
scientists in violation of
their free speech rights has
been dismissed by a federal
judge.
Last year, the nonprofit
Public Employees for En-
vironmental Responsibility,
or PEER, filed a complaint
claiming that USDA’s “sci-
entific integrity policy”
unconstitutionally muzzled
scientists to appease “cor-
porate stakeholders.”
The USDA policy, issued
in 2013, states that “scien-
tists should refrain from
making statements that
could be construed as being
judgments of or recommen-
dations on USDA or any
other federal government
policy, either intentionally
or inadvertently.”
According to PEER, the
policy effectively prohibit-
ed USDA researchers from
making public statements
about controversial sub-
jects, stifling scientific dis-
course about agriculture.
Specifically, the com-
plaint pointed to Jonathan
Lundgren, an entomologist
for USDA’s Agricultural
Research Service, who was
prevented from speaking
publicly about certain sub-
jects.
For example, USDA
barred Lundgren from
speaking to the media about
the impact on non-target
insects from crops that are
genetically engineered to
have pesticidal qualities,
the complaint said.
The agency also did not
allow Lundgren to publish
a study about trends in bio-
technology and U.S. biofuel
policies, according to the
lawsuit.
PEER asked a federal
judge to void the “scientific
integrity policy” because it
violates the U.S. Constitu-
tion and administrative laws
that require public notice
and comment.
However, U.S. District
Judge Christopher Cooper
has thrown out the lawsuit
because Lundgren has quit
the USDA since the law-
suit was filed, which means
PEER no longer has the le-
gal standing to challenge
the agency’s policy in court.
“At a minimum, what
PEER must show is that at
least one of its members is
a USDA employee, subject
to the policy, who is suffer-
ing or will in the near future
suffer some injury as a re-
sult of the policy,” Cooper
said.
Unless the nonprofit
identifies such an employee
and revises its complaint,
the harm to PEER is merely
speculative, he said.
Jeff Ruch, PEER’s ex-
ecutive director, said that
it may be able to identify
another USDA employee
affected by the policy but
naming the person publicly
would be problematic due to
the potential for retaliation.
“We wouldn’t advise
them to do it unless they
feel like they have nothing
to lose,” Ruch said.
The agency’s policy
hasn’t improved scientif-
ic integrity but it has “in-
creased paranoia” and effec-
tively serves as a gag order
on research that may affect
federal policy, he said.
Lundgren, who now
heads the Ecdysis Founda-
tion research nonprofit, said
the policy impedes scien-
tists from interpreting study
results and putting them
into context for the public.
There are other USDA
scientists who are “fed up”
with the policy, but many
fear speaking out against it,
he said.
“You’re throwing away
a potentially long-term ca-
reer with the agency if you
challenge this,” Lundgren
said.
A spokesperson for
USDA said the integrity of
its research is “paramount”
to instilling confidence in
the agency among poli-
cy-makers, the public and
the scientific community.
“For these reasons,
USDA has put in place a
strong scientific integrity
policy to promote a culture
of excellence and transpar-
ency, including procedures
for staff to report any per-
ceived interference with
their work, seek resolution,
and receive protection from
recourse for doing so. We
stand by our policy,” the
spokesperson said in an
email.
WILSONVILLE, Ore. —
Clackamas County’s bid to
review the status of three
land parcels now set aside
for agriculture is a concern
to farm groups, and the cit-
ies that would have to service
new development aren’t hot
for the idea either.
Charlotte Lehan, a former
county commissioner, former
Wilsonville mayor and now
member of the city council,
said it would be “very diffi -
cult and very expensive” for
the city to provide water and
sewer to new development
south of the Willamette Riv-
er.
She said development in
the area Clackamas Coun-
ty seeks to review would
increase congestion on the
Boone Bridge, which car-
ries Interstate 5 traffi c across
the river. She said a clogged
bridge would be “disastrous”
for the city.
“I-5 is Wilsonville’s life-
line,” she said. “When the
Boone Bridge isn’t working,
nothing works. We have to
protect the functionality of
Interstate 5.”
The arguments back and
forth are part of a long-run-
ning disconnect over Or-
egon’s unusual statewide
land-use planning system,
which was designed to pro-
tect farm and forest land from
urban sprawl. Under the sys-
tem, cities are held in check
by urban growth boundaries
that can be amended in a con-
trolled manner. But develop-
ment pressure at the edges of
cities remains a continuing
issue all over the state.
In the Portland area, land-
use planning for Clackamas,
Multnomah and Washington
counties is done by Metro,
which has an elected board.
Seeking to end ceaseless ar-
guments, the counties and
Metro agreed to a system of
urban and rural reserves that
was intended to set growth
patterns for 50 years.
Clackamas
County’s
Board of Commissioners
now wants to know whether
three areas south and south-
east of the Portland urban
center, previously set aside as
rural reserves and thus open
to farming, would be more
benefi cial as “employment
lands.”
The county commission-
ers cite a study by a consult-
ing fi rm, Johnson Economics
and Mackenzie, that said the
county is short between 329
and 934 acres of industrial
land and up to 246 acres of
commercial land, an overall
shortage of up to 1,180 acres
over the next 20 years.
A majority of the com-
missioners want to review
the status of 800 acres south
of the city of Wilsonville;
400 acres adjacent to the
urban growth boundary of
the city of Canby; and 425
acres south of the Clacka-
mas River along Springwa-
ter Road, outside Estacada.
County officials believe the
land should revert to “un-
designated” rather than rural
reserves.
County officials have
dismissed concerns as over-
wrought. They point out that
any land-use change would
take years to accomplish and
would be subject to legal re-
view or appeal.
Nonetheless, the pro-
posal has reopened a can of
worms. Friends of French
Prairie, a farming advocacy
group, maintains that allow-
Eric Mortenson/Capital Press
Producers south of Wilsonville, Ore., grow nursery crops, Christmas trees, berries, vegetables and
grain. Clackamas County commissioners, seeking more industrial and commercial land, want to
review land-use designations in the area.
ing development to jump
across the Willamette River
south of Wilsonville would
crack open the state’s prime
agricultural areas.
In a guest editorial written
for the Capital Press, Friends
of French Prairie President
Ben Williams questioned the
validity of the county’s em-
ployment lands report and
some of the land is owned by
people who have contributed
heavily to commissioners’
election campaigns.
Board members of the
Clackamas Soil and Water
Conservation District took
the unusual step of publicly
warning against a land-use
change. “The District be-
lieves the County’s current
initiative to create employ-
ment lands may not adequate-
ly consider the long-term val-
ue of high-value farmland,”
the district said in a letter to
Clackamas commissioners.
“A signifi cant amount of the
land proposed for reconsider-
ation as employment land is
high-value farmland, an irre-
placeable natural resource.”
LEGAL
CHERRY AVENUE STORAGE
2680 Cherry Ave. NE
Salem, OR 97301
(503) 399-7454
Sat., August 13th • 10 A.M.
• Unit 29
Luis Aguilar
• Unit 85
Angela Kinzel
• Unit 96
Kimberly Munz
• Unit 109
Babette Frutas
• Unit 166
Steven Shuck
Cherry Avenue Storage
reserves the right to refuse
any and all bids
legal-31-2-1/#4
LEGAL
PUBLIC NOTICE
The SWCC will hold its regu-
lar quarterly meeting on
Tuesday, August 16, 2016,
from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
The regular quarterly meeting
will be held at the Hilton
Garden Inn Eugene/Spring-
field, 3528 Gateway St.,
Springfield, OR, 97477. The
meeting agenda covers SWCC
reports, advisor reports, Soil
and Water Conservation Dis-
trict programs and funding,
Agriculture Water Quality
Management Program up-
dates, and other agenda
items.
The Oregon Department of
Agriculture complies with the
Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA). If you need special
accommodations to partici-
pate in this meeting, please
contact Sandi Hiatt at (503)
986-4704, at least 72 hours
prior to the meeting. 31-1/#4
Lehan, the Wilsonville
council member critical of
the land-use review, said her
fast-growing city has planned
for additional industrial
growth in its Coffee Creek
and Salt Creek areas, and for
residential development in an
area called Frog Pond. The
city doesn’t need more “em-
ployment land,” she said.
“I know how develop-
ment works and what it
takes for a city to support
it,” Lehan said. “I’m not an-
ti-growth by any means.”
Lehan was Clackamas
County board chair until de-
feated in 2012 by the current
board chair, Commissioner
John Ludlow, who is often
critical of Metro and of Port-
land’s influence on its subur-
ban neighbors.
Canby City Administrator
Rick Robinson made a point
similar to Lehan’s: the city
has an existing industrial
park that isn’t full. The 400
acres Clackamas County
wants to revert to undesig-
nated status is outside the
city limits and outside the
city’s urban growth bound-
ary, he said. Some of it is
farmed now, and much of it
is Class 1 agricultural soil,
he said. Robinson said the
Canby City Council hasn’t
taken a position on the
Clackamas review propos-
al.
The third area considered
by Clackamas County is out-
side the city of Estacada.
The mayor and city manager
were unavailable to discuss
the issue.
LEGAL
Applications sought for the Oregon Forest Resources Institute
(OFRI) Board of Directors.
Pursuant to OAR 629-065-0400, the purpose of this notice is to
solicit applications for the Oregon Forest Resources Institute
(OFRI) Board of Directors. Applicants meeting all the
qualifications will be maintained on a list to be used by the State
Forester for filling existing vacancies and to fill vacancies caused
by expiration of an existing member’s term. Each applicant must
certify in the application that he/she meets the qualifications for
the position.
Each “producer” applicant for the board of directors shall have
the following qualifications: 1) be a citizen of the United States;
2) be a bona fide resident of this state; 3) be a “producer” in this
state, an employee of such a producer or own between 100 and
2,000 acres of forestland in this state on which harvest taxes are
paid, but have no direct financial interest in any forest products
processing activity; 4) have been actively engaged in producing
forest products for a period of at least five years; 5) derive a
substantial portion of income from the production of forest
products (“substantial portion of income” means that 50 percent
or more of the gross income of a member of the board of
directors is derived from timber or timber products ownership or
affiliation); 6) have demonstrated, through membership in
producers’ organizations or organizations representing
landowners who meet the requirements of ORS 526.610(4), a
profound interest in the development of Oregon’s forest
products industry; 7) is available to fulfill the duties and
responsibilities of the OFRI Board of Directors; and 8) meets the
producer class eligibility requirements for the position to which
nominated. Each “employee” applicant shall be: 1) a citizen of
the United States; 2) a bona fide resident of this state; and 3) an
hourly wage employee of a producer or a person who represents
such employees.
The “producer” class eligibility requirements are:
Class 1 Producers having paid forest products harvest tax on
20 million board feet or less per year in the most recent year
preceding the appointment.
Class 2 Producers having paid forest products harvest tax on
more than 20 million board feet but less than 100 million board
feet per year in the most recent year preceding the
appointment.
Class 3 Producers having paid forest products harvest tax on
100 million board feet or more per year in the most recent year
preceding the appointment.
Small Woodland Owner
An owner of between 100 and
2,000 acres of forestland in this state on which harvest taxes
were paid in at least one of the five years preceding the
appointment, and who has no direct financial interest in any
forest products processing activity.
Persons wanting to apply for the OFRI Board of Directors must
request application materials from Kathy Storm at OFRI,
storm@ofri.org or 971-673-2953. Send completed application
packets to the State Forester: Attention Stacy Miller, 2600 State
Street, Bldg. B, Salem, Oregon 97310, or via email at
stacy.miller@oregon.gov. Applications must be received no later
than 5:00 p.m. on August 31, 2016.
31-1/#4