6
CapitalPress.com
August 12, 2016
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
File predator study under ‘Junk Science’
S
traight from the Department
of Wishful Thinking comes
a new study that offers the
theory that predators are good for
people.
Why? Because they eat deer,
and a deer that’s been eaten can’t
jump in front of a car and cause
a wreck.
Such tortured logic is popular
these days, as some researchers
desperately try to paint a “Happy
Face” on even the most serious
problems.
In this case, the problems are
cougars and wolves. They have
taken up residence in many parts
of the West and commenced to
eating whatever other critters are
around.
Because they reside at the top
of the food chain, they eat just
about anything that moves. Mice,
squirrels, deer — all are on the
menu. So are sheep and cattle.
In the recent “Predators Are
Our Friends” study, researchers
wanted to prove that having
cougars and wolves around isn’t
all bad. In fact, these predators
do good by eating those pesky
deer that station themselves
along roads at night waiting for a
car to jump at.
There is no argument that
deer are rural traffi c hazards,
especially during rut, when the
males go looking for love in all
the wrong places.
Some years ago, a particularly
amorous deer saw his refl ection
in the plate glass window of a
Stayton, Ore., restaurant. He
crashed through the window and
slid across the fl oor. The impact
broke the jaw of a customer
who had been sitting at a table
drinking coffee.
Others tell the story of a
deer that charged the side of a
minivan that had stopped on the
road to avoid hitting him.
In those cases, the deer would
have been much better off
staying in the woods.
Or better yet, hunters should
be allowed to thin the ranks of
cougars, wolves, deer — and elk,
too, for that matter. We would
prefer a regulated hunting season
over an unregulated population
of predators tearing through
ranchers’ livestock and deer.
To make the case that any
predator that kills a deer —
unless it was getting ready
to jump through a restaurant
window — is a benefi t to
mankind is a stretch.
Many humans have problems
with cougars and wolves. They
are called ranchers, and they
have to clean up the mess after a
cougar or wolf has torn a sheep
or cow to shreds. They also pay
for the honor by losing valuable
members of their fl ocks or herds.
Predators cost Western ranchers
many thousands of dollars each
year.
We admire the efforts of the
researchers who attempted to
create a happy story about
predators.
But the reality remains
that ranchers continue
to have many problems
with predators, including
cougars and wolves. A well-
regulated hunt would go a
long way toward solving
those problems.
A ‘Better Way’ forward
for Oregon and America
O UR V IEW
By GREG WALDEN
For the Capital Press
A
Courtesy of Save Family Farming
An advertising sign on a Whatcom County, Wash., transit bus promotes an Environmental Protection Agency-funded campaign to get the
state Legislature to mandate 100-foot buffers between all farm fi elds and waterways. The sign shows cows standing in a stream that was
not in or near Washington state.
EPA could have been more forceful
in suggesting moderate course
A
nd now, a few good
words about the U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency. Really.
Regular readers may well be
trying to detect a cool breeze
emanating from the nether regions.
While we have no evidence of
any significant change in those
environs, we can document that
the EPA tried to steer the people
behind the What’s Upstream
campaign in Washington state on a
more realistic course.
The Swinomish Indian tribe
used an EPA grant to contract with
Strategies 360 to survey voter
attitudes and “create media pieces”
for the What’s Upstream advocacy
campaign. The campaign’s goal
was to convince Washingtonians
to press for increased regulation to
protect their water.
But first, the campaign’s backers
had to convince Washingtonians
that there was a problem with
their water. Strategies 360 noted
to the tribe and several allied
environmental groups that water
quality wasn’t a top-of-mind
problem for people in the state.
“There is no clearly defined
problem in people’s minds, as most
do not perceive a problem with
existing water quality.”
So they needed to trump up a
problem, and they needed a fall
guy. To keep it simple, they made
farmers the clearly defined cause of
the problem and posted billboards
and a website featuring pictures of
cows standing in a creek. It turns
out they were not Washington cows
standing in Washington streams,
but convincing nonetheless.
Strategies 360 developed a
marketing plan to build public
support for a “regulatory
remedy” — mandatory 100-foot
buffers between farm fields and
waterways.
Despite what EPA officials
suggested earlier this year when
critics of the campaign started
to complain, the agency was in
the loop from the get-go. “The
EPA was part of every step,” Jeff
Reading, Strategies 360’s vice
president of communications, said.
“The EPA was very intimately
involved as the campaign
emerged.”
But not entirely happy with what
was going on.
Records obtained by Capital
Press reporter Don Jenkins through
the Freedom of Information Act,
mostly emails between the EPA
and the fisheries commission, show
EPA officials were concerned that
What’s Upstream was too focused
on agriculture and regulations,
rather than taking a broader view
of pollution sources in Puget Sound
and the possibility of voluntary
actions.
The EPA thought the campaign
should draw attention to the many
sources of water pollution. It
worried the campaign conflicted
with another effort the agency
funded to foster collaboration
between stakeholders. It rejected
the campaign’s assertion that
agriculture is unregulated.
In short, the EPA tried to be the
voice, albeit a passive voice, of
moderation and reason. Who would
have thought?
The tribe and its allies didn’t
listen, and EPA didn’t pull the
plug on the $650,000 venture until
Congress took notice of a Capital
Press story exposing the campaign.
The EPA could have been
more forceful in its objections.
Suspected polluters know the EPA
can be far more direct when it suits
its purpose.
Nonetheless, we appreciate the
difficulty of standing up to one’s
friends.
Readers’ views
Pastures should
be part of
organic farming
The editorial “Proposed
organic livestock rules must
be rewritten” (Capital Press
July 29) misses one import-
ant aspect of livestock care.
From an organic point of
view, a healthy animal must
get regular exercise and
sunshine. An animal raised
in confi nement is not really
of organic quality, regard-
less of the feed the animal
receives.
As an organic farmer and
a mostly organic food buy-
er and consumer, I prefer
conventionally raised beef
grown on pasture or forage
to an organically fed beef
raised in confi nement.
Open pasture is a critical
part of natural farming, and
should be a requirement for
organic designation.
Jonathan Spero
Lupine Knoll Farm
Grants Pass, Ore.
s I listen to people
during
meetings
throughout our state
(I recently held my 51st
town hall since the begin-
ning of last year), Orego-
nians too often voice the
same concerns: an over-
reaching federal govern-
ment that ignores our pleas,
overregulates our lives and
depresses job growth in our
communities.
That’s why I put forward
legislation that positively
addresses the problems we
face. Seven of my proposals
have passed the U.S. House
so far this term — most
with unanimous support —
including my bills to help
bring commercial air ser-
vice back to Klamath Falls,
provide needed funding for
bridges in the Columbia
Gorge and to improve rural
internet service for consum-
ers.
Within the past year,
Congress has given law
enforcement and drug pre-
vention advocates new tools
to help fight addiction in
our communities. We’ve
passed plans to help veter-
ans get better health care
in the communities where
they live. Seniors no longer
face a planned drastic spike
in Medicare premiums or a
cut for Social Security dis-
ability recipients. A long-
term transportation funding
plan and a major education
reform proposal have also
become law.
While I’m proud of these
successes, there is still
much to be done to push
back against an overreach-
ing federal government.
That’s why House Repub-
licans have proposed a new
agenda — called “A Better
Way” — to offer solutions
to some of the biggest chal-
lenges we face in Oregon
and America. I encourage
you to go read it yourself on
my website: www.walden.
h o u s e . g o v / a b e t t e r w a y.
Some highlights of our plan
include:
Growing jobs and the
economy: Too many small
businesses, farmers, and
ranchers in Oregon face
overbearing federal regu-
lations that are often writ-
ten by agencies far away
in Washington, D.C. Last
year alone, federal reg-
ulations cost the nation-
al economy about $1.89
trillion in lost growth and
productivity.
Our plan makes sure the
regulatory regime works
for us — not against us.
For instance, we’d re-
quire that the Congress,
accountable to the people,
approve all major regula-
tions. Our plan would also
help boost affordable, re-
liable energy and preserve
internet innovation so that
Guest
comment
Rep. Greg Walden
jobs can flourish.
Combating poverty: Fif-
ty years ago, the U.S. gov-
ernment launched the “War
on Poverty.” American tax-
payers have invested $22
trillion since then, yet you
are just as likely to stay
poor if you were born poor
today as you were then. And
according to a state report
last year, Oregon’s poverty
rate is higher than the na-
tional average (and the rate
is even higher in many rural
counties).
The current system too
often replaces work, instead
of encouraging it. There’s
a better way to help the
over 46 million Americans
who are trapped in a cycle
of poverty. Our plan offers
solutions to expand oppor-
tunity and reward work.
Implementing real health
reform: The new health care
law, known as Obamacare,
is driving up insurance costs
and reducing choices for too
many Oregonians. The state
wasted hundreds of millions
of taxpayer dollars on Cov-
er Oregon and now is mired
in costly litigation.
Meanwhile, people are
left to cope with more insur-
ers leaving the market, and
two new health “co-ops” set
up by the law have already
folded.
There’s a better way to
give everyone access to
quality, affordable health
care. Our plan would re-
place Obamacare with a
new one that provides con-
sumers more choices, low-
ers costs, focuses on curing
deadly diseases like cancer,
and strengthens and pre-
serves Medicare.
Our “Better Way” plan
upholds our constitution
rights and makes govern-
ment more accountable and
transparent to the people.
We have ideas to boost our
national security, combat
terrorism, and ensure our
troops and veterans have
what they need. And we
propose reforming the na-
tion’s tax code to make it
simpler and fairer for Or-
egon families and small
businesses.
I’d encourage you to go
read the entire plan, with
hundreds of ideas to solve
problems in our communi-
ties, on my website. There,
you can let me know what
you think of these ideas or
offer some of your own. To-
gether, there’s a better way
to get Oregon and America
back on track.
Rep. Greg Walden
represents Oregon’s second
congressional district,
which covers 20 counties
in southern, central and
eastern Oregon.