Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Capital press. (Salem, OR) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (Aug. 18, 2017)
6 CapitalPress.com Editorials are written by or approved by members of the Capital Press Editorial Board. August 18, 2017 All other commentary pieces are the opinions of the authors but not necessarily this newspaper. Opinion Editorial Board Editor & Publisher Managing Editor Joe Beach Carl Sampson opinions@capitalpress.com Online: www.capitalpress.com/opinion O UR V IEW Public needs ‘Fresh Look’ at GMO crops A malgamated Sugar Co. and Western Sugar Co. are preparing a $4 million campaign to try to change consumer perceptions about genetically modified crops. The proposed “Fresh Look” campaign will initially target three large urban areas. If successful, it will be expanded into a $30 million national campaign. It will focus on young mothers who make decisions about household food purchases. “We’re losing the online debate,” said Idaho sugar beet farmer Duane Grant. “We can’t just sit back and let this evolve independently. We have to engage.” We agree, and are impressed that the sugar industry is making such a large investment. We hope the campaign doesn’t come too late to change widely John O’Connell/Capital Press File Genetically modifi ed sugar beets grow in Idaho. Two sugar companies want to provide the facts about GMOs to consumers so they can make informed choices. held attitudes against genetic modifi cations that are based on a lot of misinformation. There are nine commercially available genetically modifi ed crops — sweet and fi eld corn, soybeans, cotton, canola, alfalfa, sugar beets, papaya, potatoes and squash. In the 20 years since they began to become available, the crops have been widely adopted by farmers. Less than 10 percent of the corn and soybeans planted in the United States are non- GMO varieties. No one has forced genetic modifi cations onto the market. Contrary to widely held belief, farmers have voluntarily adopted genetically modifi ed varieties over conventional seed stock because they offer economic benefi ts to growers. Certainly sugar beet growers are a prime example. Weed control is diffi cult with conventional varieties, requiring a great deal of manual labor. Varieties engineered to be resistant to glyphosate herbicide, though themselves more expensive, have greatly reduced labor costs and increased grower returns. Glyphosate-resistant varieties have also helped farmers reduce the amount of herbicides they have to spray on crops, not only improving their bottomline but also the environment. And despite what many people believe, the scientifi c community says there is no greater risk from foods produced with genetically modifi ed ingredients than there O UR V IEW is from food produced with conventional seed stock. The USDA, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration agree. New advances in the technology promise to increase yields, and improve crop tolerance to drought and changes in climate. Over the years we’ve seen that much of the opposition to genetically modifi ed crops is generated by animus toward the large companies, particularly Monsanto, that dominate the seed business. That’s based on a perception that big is bad, and won’t be easily changed. The campaign won’t change everyone’s mind. Some people will never accept genetically modifi ed crops. But an effort of this scale should at least provide consumers with facts to make an informed decision. Readers’ views Lack of capital Farm Bureau budget impacts stands up for conservation agriculture I am an 82-year-old districts retired cattleman and Federal government victimized Duarte in wetlands case about the problems the federal don’t allow any opportunity for John Duarte has been fi ghting government infl icts on them. an administrative appeal without with the U.S. Army Corps of They promised to help, to fi nd the expense of going to court. Engineers for the last four years. ways to change the laws and the Third, they offer a “deal” the The issue: plowing a farm fi eld. ways the bureaucracy works. landowners can’t refuse. The Corps said the fi eld was But when it came right down That’s the problem, not wetlands and the shanks used to it, Duarte faced the same whether Duarte moved around constituted fi lling in the low- treatment as before. a little dirt in his Northern lying areas. Whether the president’s name California wheat fi eld. The On Tuesday, Duarte accepted is Trump or Obama, we a settlement offer wonder if, in the end, that reduced his The settlement leaves in place the basic it really matters. When fi nancial exposure from potentially problem of how federal agencies steam roll the federal bureaucracy embraces poorly tens of millions farmers and other landowners. written laws such as the of dollars to $1.1 Clean Water Act, the million. Endangered Species Act or any fact that he was tagged with a We cannot fault him for his number of others that impose the multimillion-dollar fi ne with no decision to take the deal. Every federal will on landowners, the opportunity to present his side farmer has to make diffi cult outcome is no different. of the case is unAmerican. The decisions that are in the family’s President Trump has promised words kangaroo court come to best interests. Sometimes that mind. The old Soviet Union had a to change these and other federal means backing away from a laws. So far, his batting average similar form of “justice.” years-long battle. in Congress puts him in the minor The administration of But the settlement leaves leagues. It’s clear he needs to get President Donald Trump has in place the basic problem of his act together to prevent repeats some good people in it, many how federal agencies steam roll of what has happened to Duarte farmers and other landowners. In of whom promise to stick and his family. fact, it offers a perfect example of up for farmers, ranchers and Until then, citizens such as landowners. They are people what’s wrong with the system. like Agriculture Secretary Sonny John Duarte will be writing big First, the agencies stick their checks to the federal government Perdue and Interior Secretary victims with outrageously high — and the bureaucrats will be Ryan Zinke, who have met with fi nes — often tens of thousands giving each other high-fi ves. Western farmers and ranchers of dollars a day. Second, they Tim Hearden/Capital Press PHOTO: John Duarte, left, talks with his lawyer, Tony Francois of the Pacifi c Legal Foundation, on Duarte’s property south of Red Bluff, Calif. As you may know, the 2017 Legislative Session ended without passing a new capital budget. That means the Palouse Rock Lake Conservation Dis- trict/Kamiak Direct Seed Grant is one of several pro- grams that did not receive funding for the period of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2019. The cost share programs offered by the Washington State Conser- vation Commission will not be available until a new capital budget passes. Statewide 52 full-time employees with various conservation districts will be laid off due to the lack of the capital budget. Land- owners who have worked with conservation districts on projects that have taken years of planning not only are delayed but in some cases can lose matching funds from other sources. The lack of action on a capital budget has real cost impacts. Our district alone has six different pro- grams or grants that will not be funded for the next biennium (CREP; 3 DOE Grants; WSCC programs and the state portion of the Regional Conservation Partnership Program). This means landowners and re- source conservation will not be funded until a solu- tion to the Hirst court case has been agreed to by all parties. What does this mean for our district? The portion of PRLCD/Kamiak Direct Seed Grant funding cov- ered by the state will not be paid until the Legisla- ture reconvenes and pass- es a capital budget. The next scheduled legislative session is January-March 2018. This is not the end of state funding for the PRL- CD/Kamiak Direct Seed Grant. We view it as a tem- porary lull until the Legis- lature passes a capital bud- get. We appreciate patience and understanding of farm- ers as we delay as much work as possible until we have any funding again. We’re sorry for the stress and frustration this situation causes but we’re doing our best to let state elected offi - cials know the real impacts from not having a capital budget and urge them to take action soon. Dan Harwood District Coordinator Palouse Rock Lake Conservation District St. John, Wash. have been abused by the county, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and our irriga- tion district. I have won those battles at my own expense, however, it was not easy. I was just doing my job trying to make a living but the agencies did not see it that way. I purchased a place full of Russian ol- ives (that were brought in by WDFW). I cleaned them up and was leveling the land when I received a stop work order from the wetland people that I had destroyed a natural wet- land, and I must restore this natural wetland. The fine was $1,000 per day until I restored it. To make a long story short, after two years and $15,000 I won. The other stories are too long to tell. My point is everybody is after Ag. Therefore in my opinion we must find a way to unite! Basically you are assumed guilty and must prove otherwise at your expense. Environ- mentalists and govern- ment entities along with attorneys and judges, who have no agricultural back- ground, are going to de- cide your fate. My analysis of a judge is why should he be re- ferred to as honorable when as an attorney he has been dishonorable in his practice, therefore he should be referred to as a dishonorable judge! My point is that the odds are against you and we are being picked off one at time. When I was farming I was not a member of the Farm Bureau, however, when the wetland people came after me, a board member would help me if I joined. I agreed, and we beat the county. They then asked me to be on the board, where I have been ever since — they won’t let me retire! As I have observed, there is no one left with any clout to fi ght your fi ght except the Farm Bureau. This letter is only out of my concern for ag, as I have witnessed farmers and dairymen being put out of business one at a time and the others spend- ing thousands of dollars to comply in order to stay in business. Donald M. Young Crown Y Ranch Sunnyside, Wash.