June 30, 2017
Oregon will
not suspend
operations
at new dairy
Petition for state
reconsideration
is pending
By GEORGE PLAVEN
EO Media Group
BOARDMAN, Ore. —
State regulators have denied
a request by several envi-
ronmental and animal rights
groups to suspend operations
at Lost Valley Farm, the con-
troversial new 30,000-cow
dairy permitted earlier this
year near Boardman.
The Oregon Department of
Agriculture and Department
of Environmental Quality are
jointly responsible for admin-
istering Oregon’s confined
animal feeding operation, or
CAFO, program. The agen-
cies issued a hotly contested
water pollution permit for
Lost Valley Farm on March
31, which became final on
April 20.
CapitalPress.com
Dow-DuPont deal not necessarily
harbinger of Trump antitrust strategy
Monsanto-Bayer merger likely to come
under closer scrutiny, experts say
By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Press
The approval of a merger
between agribusiness giants
Dow and DuPont isn’t nec-
essarily a harbinger of the
Trump administration’s anti-
trust policies for agriculture,
experts say.
Specifically, experts say
the decision by U.S. reg-
ulators to sign off on the
Dow-DuPont deal isn’t a clear
signal they’ll adopt a simi-
lar approach to the planned
combination of Monsanto and
Bayer, which would create
another seed-and-chemical
colossus.
“Those are much more
substantial competitors,” said
Peter Carstensen, a law pro-
fessor specializing in agricul-
tural antitrust at the Universi-
ty of Wisconsin.
The review of the
Dow-DuPont merger began
earlier under the Obama ad-
“Petitioners have failed
to provide any evidence
of exactly what harms,
if any, their members
will sustain during the
reconsideration period.”
Opponents of the dairy
farm have filed what’s known
as a petition for reconsider-
ation, urging ODA and DEQ
officials to change their minds.
The coalition also asked for a
stay of Lost Valley’s permit.
The request was rejected in a
ruling handed down June 23.
“Petitioners have failed to
provide any evidence of ex-
actly what harms, if any, their
members will sustain during
the reconsideration period,”
the ruling reads in part.
Petitioners include the
Animal Legal Defense Fund,
Center for Biological Diver-
sity, Center for Food Safety,
Columbia Riverkeeper, Food
& Water Watch, Friends of
Family Farmers, Humane
Oregon, the Humane Society
of the United States, Oregon
Physicians for Rural Respon-
sibility and Oregon Rural Ac-
tion. They argue Lost Valley
threatens to contaminate lo-
cal groundwater and surface
water as the dairy ramps up
to full capacity over the next
three years.
So far, Lost Valley has
brought in just more than
half the cows it is permitted
to handle — 16,000 total,
with about 8,700 milking
cows. Estimates show that, at
30,000 cows, Lost Valley will
produce 187 million gallons
of wastewater and manure ev-
ery year.
ODA and DEQ claim they
crafted a permit that will be
the most protective of water
quality to date.
For example, Lost Valley
is required to have 11 ground-
water monitoring wells on
site, which is seven more than
usual.
The facility will also be in-
spected at least three times as
often as other dairies.
Tarah Heinzen, staff attor-
ney for Food & Water Watch,
previously told the East Ore-
gonian newspaper they knew
it was unlikely the state would
stay Lost Valley’s permit.
The groups may still con-
sider a formal appeal in court.
Greg te Velde, owner of
Lost Valley Farm, previous-
ly said that suspending his
operation would have just as
harmful an effect on the cows
as it would his business.
Without the CAFO permit,
te Velde said he would have
nowhere else to go with the
cows. It is entirely possible
they would have to be sold for
slaughter, he said.
In addition, te Velde said
he would likely face foreclo-
sure in Oregon after roughly
$100 million worth of invest-
ment since 2003. Previously,
te Velde ran Willow Creek
Dairy on land leased from
nearby Threemile Canyon
Farms.
A spokeswoman for Lost
Valley said the farm is pleased
with the latest decision, and
continues to focus on its op-
erations.
7
ministration, so most details
were likely already ironed
out when the Trump adminis-
tration came into power, said
Bob Young, chief economist
of the American Farm Bureau
Federation.
The
Monsanto-Bayer
merger, on the other hand,
is likely to come under more
scrutiny from officials who
have been hired to carry
out the Trump administra-
tion’s antitrust policies, said
Carstensen.
The fact that Bayer, a Ger-
man company, is taking over
an American firm makes the
proposal particularly sensitive
politically for Trump, he said.
If Trump’s antitrust regu-
lators conclude the Monsan-
to-Bayer deal would be harm-
ful to farmers — an important
base of support for the ad-
ministration — they may still
decide against blocking the
merger outright, he said.
AP Photo/Pat Sullivan
This Dec. 10 photo shows a Dow Chemical plant in La Porte,
Texas. Dow Chemical and the DuPont are attempting to merge in
an all-stock deal that would create a colossal chemical producer
worth $130 billion, before splitting into three separate companies.
an argument for the formation
of a rival Monsanto-Bayer
with the same size and advan-
tages, said Young.
“There will be markets
where they will be ripping
each others’ lungs out, I’m
sure,” he said.
While the American Farm
Bureau Federation would like
to see more competitors in the
agribusiness field, not fewer,
it’s undeniable that economic
realities are driving such con-
solidation, Young said.
Another possibility would
be to propose a “draconian”
settlement requiring the sale
of such valuable assets as
to make the deal unfeasible,
Carstensen said.
Or, the Trump administra-
tion could simply sit back and
let regulators within the Euro-
pean Union put up barriers to
the deal, thereby avoiding the
appearance of hostility to busi-
ness interests, he said.
However, the combination
of Dow-DuPont may provide
Not only have lower crop
prices diminished farmer
spending on inputs, but the
cost of bringing new chemi-
cals and genetic traits to mar-
ket has risen, he said.
“It takes years and lots of
money, so deep pockets make
sense,” Young said.
As regulators contemplate
the Monsanto-Bayer proposal,
fallout from the Dow-DuPont
merger is expected to continue.
To gain the U.S. Depart-
ment of Justice’s approval,
Dow-DuPont agreed to sell
off a line of broadleaf herbi-
cides applied on winter wheat
fields and a line of insecticides
that West Coast specialty crop
growers spray to kill chewing
pests.
Whether these “divesti-
tures” preserve competition
will depend on the company
buying these assets, which
is yet to be determined, said
Carstensen.
The buyer must be skilled
in the manufacture and distri-
bution of agricultural chemi-
cals to successfully integrate
those products, he said.
Farmers warned to clean sprayers to avoid crop damage
Active ingredient
dislodges residues,
leading to reaction
By MATTHEW WEAVER
Capital Press
Matthew Weaver/Capital Press File
Washington State University
weed science professor
Drew Lyon is advising farm-
ers to thoroughly clean their
sprayers as they switch from
one type of crop to another.
Washington State Uni-
versity has received several
phone calls from growers re-
porting damage to their pea
crops, prompting researchers
to issue a warning that farmers
should clean their sprayers as
they switch between different
crops.
Herbicides used for broad-
leaf weeds in a wheat crop can
also damage a broadleaf crop
such as peas, said Drew Lyon,
WSU weed science professor.
More farmers planting peas
this year could be part of the
reason for the increase in prob-
lems, Lyon said. Some farmers
might not be used to the idea of
cleaning their sprayer before
moving between crops, he said.
For the farmers reporting
damage, an active ingredient,
clethodim — used to control
grass weeds in broadleaf crops
— works in sprayer tanks to
dislodge old herbicide resi-
dues, according to WSU.
“Just running some water
through (a sprayer) generally
isn’t enough,” Lyon said. “You
need to do more to make sure
it gets cleaned out, especially
on some of these big sprayers.
There’s lots of places stuff can
hide. If you have rubber hoses,
you can have chemicals hung
up in there. If you’re using a
dry formulation, they tend to
build up a little bit more than
some others.”
It’s “understandable” that
farmers may not believe they
have the time for such a thor-
ough cleaning in the rush of
the season, Lyon said.
“Sometimes you’re a penny
wise and a pound foolish if you
don’t,” he said.
The dose isn’t usually
heavy, so the damage isn’t
usually too serious. A portion
of the field can be “fairly seri-
ously damaged” but the chem-
icals are typically gone by the
second tank, Lyon said.
“You’ll notice it and you’ll
wonder what went on,” he
said.
It’s unclear how wide-
spread the problem is, but a
post of Facebook received
more than 1,200 views in less
than 24 hours and a post on the
university’s Small Grains web-
site had 160 views, Lyon said.
“Take a little extra time,”
he said. “You should probably
do it every time, but especially
when you’re switching from
one crop to the next.”
Columbia-Snake River Irrigators Association
Request for formal U.S. Inspector General Investigation
June 26, 2017, OPEN LETTER
Engineer Inspector General Kevin Elliott
Office of the Engineer Inspector General
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Inspector General Peggy E. Gustafson
Office of the Inspector General
U.S. Department of Commerce (NOAA Fisheries
SUBJECT: Request for Formal Investigation –
What Happened to the Fish?
The Columbia-Snake River Irrigators Association (“CSRIA”) requests that you formally investigate the
Columbia River Fish Managers’ decision in 2015, to allow Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed salmon
and steelhead migrations to remain in the Lower Snake River, during extremely poor in-river
conditions, rather than rely on the Corps’ juvenile fish transportation program. The fish were
exposed to adverse river conditions that almost certainly proved fatal, and have contributed to the
low adult fish returns now occurring in 2017.
Records show that the Fish Managers deviated from the legally required, ESA BiOp “spread the risk”
policy, in the spring 2015, when they transported only 13% of juvenile salmon and steelhead during
low flow and high temperature conditions — when young fish are the most vulnerable to the adverse
effects of remaining in the river. This was the lowest percent transported since records were first
kept in 1993. The action defied sound judgement.
In addition to failing to meet their legal, ESA obligation to optimize fish survival, the Fish Managers
overlooked their obligation to create a transparent administrative record showing why they made
this unusual decision. The available records show that NOAA Fisheries’ scientists attempted to obtain
agreement for an early start date to transportation--to get the juvenile fish out of the river during
poor survival conditions--but other state agency Fish Managers did not support this crucial action.
For reasons not reflected in the record, the Corps apparently felt helpless to act on NOAA Fisheries’
repeated requests.
In the long run, CSRIA believes the only practical alternative is to invoke a hydro project exemption,
allowed under the ESA statute, commonly called the “God Squad” review. We have requested the
U.S. Dept. of Interior to take the first step toward this process. In the short run, however, we will
need to live with the ESA litigation process and attempt to make intelligent management decisions
regarding ESA-listed fish. There is no more critical decision to make than when to transport juvenile
salmon and steelhead, and when to leave them in the river. Although it is too early to calculate the
precise effect of the 2015 decisions, initial indicators reveal that the Fish Managers’ judgement likely
killed significant quantities of ESA-listed fish.
3030 W. Clearwater, Suite 205-A, Kennewick, WA 99336
509-783-1623, E-Mail: DOlsenEcon@AOL.com
26-2/#6