Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Capital press. (Salem, OR) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (Nov. 9, 2018)
November 9, 2018 CapitalPress.com 3 Washington Fish and Wildlife targets 2 more wolfpacks Conflicts build in northeast corner By DON JENKINS Capital Press Washington Fish and Wild- life Director Kelly Susewind Wednesday authorized the killing of wolves in two packs attacking cattle in the northeast corner of the state. The orders come as the department con- tinues to try to remove the rest of a third wolfpack. The department plans to kill one or two wolves in the Smackout pack in Stevens County. Susewind also gave permission to a rancher in Fer- ry County to shoot the remain- ing three wolves in the Togo pack in Ferry County if the wolves enter a private fenced pasture with cattle. Fish and Wildlife is con- tinuing an effort to remove the remaining two wolves in the Old Profanity pack, also in Ferry County, the department’s wolf policy coordinator, Don- ny Martorello, said Wednes- day. The department killed wolves in the pack in Septem- ber and resumed targeting the pack Oct. 26 because of dep- redations on cattle continued. Fish and Wildlife won’t immediately undertake remov- ing the Togo pack because it’s occupied with the two other packs, but may in the coming weeks, according to the de- partment. Fish and Wildlife shot one Togo pack wolf in early Sep- tember, but the pack has con- tinued to attack cattle. The wolf already had been wound- ed by the rancher, who said he was approached by the wolf and shot in self-defense. The department protocol calls for removing one or two wolves initially and waiting to see whether wolf depredations on livestock stop. Fish and Wildlife won’t start the lethal-removal op- eration against the Smackout pack, or allow the shooting of Togo pack wolves, until Nov. 8 at the earliest. The early morn- ing directives Wednesday give environmental groups one day Courtesy photo The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife confirmed Sept. 7 that wolves in the Togo pack attacked this calf. The calf survived but was euthanized to end its suffering. Fish and Wildlife issued a permit Nov. 7 allowing the rancher to shoot the pack’s remaining three wolves if caught in a private fenced pasture with cattle. to go to court to challenge the order. The notice is fallout from a lawsuit by environmental groups challenging an order last year to kill wolves. A Thur- ston County Superior Court judge dismissed the lawsuit, but said the department should give time for courts to review future lethal-removal orders. Oregon ranchers volunteer to test new wolf deterrence strategy By GEORGE PLAVEN Capital Press Two Eastern Oregon ranch- ers have volunteered to test a new strategy aimed at prevent- ing further conflicts between wolves and livestock. Rodger Huffman, president of the Union County Cattle- men’s Association, and Cyn- thia Warnock, president of the Wallowa County Stockgrow- ers Association, will work with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to devel- op site-specific wolf plans at their respective ranches, em- phasizing the use of non-lethal deterrents up front to minimize predation. The proposal was outlined by a group of stakeholders tasked with finding common ground on a five-year update of the state’s Wolf Conserva- tion and Management Plan, which is now three years past due. Participants in the work group include a mix of farm- ing, ranching, hunting and en- vironmental interests, led by Deb Nudelman, a professional mediator hired from Portland. ODFW staff wrote a draft seven-step strategy, which they presented back to the group during a conference call Nov. 5. It essentially calls for wildlife biologists to meet with farmers and ranchers on the ground, selecting non-lethal wolf deterrents such as range riders, alarm boxes and electri- fied fencing based on individ- ual operations and geography. Courtesy of ODFW Two adult wolves from the Wal- la Walla Pack were caught on remote trail camera in northern Umatilla County, Ore., in this file photo. Ranchers Cynthia Warnock and Rodger Huffman have agreed to test a new pro- posal for deterring wolf attacks on livestock in Eastern Oregon, where most of the state’s wolf population resides. If wolves continue to attack livestock — what the state terms “chronic depredation” — then ranchers could ask ODFW to kill the offending predators. Producers would not be eligible for a kill order if they do not have a conflict de- terrence plan in place, though they could still apply for state compensation for lost or dead animals. Wolf advocates say the site-specific plans will priori- tize and make the best use of non-lethal tools, while ranchers hope the proposal gives them a quicker and clearer path to dealing with problem wolves. “I think we all want to make sure that whatever end product we have is as clear and transpar- ent as possible for everybody,” said Amaroq Weiss, West Coast wolf advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. Questions, however, contin- ued to loom among the group about whether ODFW has the money or manpower to imple- ment such a program. That is where Huffman and Warnock come in, agreeing to test the strategy at their own ranches in the heart of Oregon’s wolf country. Huffman, who ranches in Union, Ore., where wolves from the Catherine pack are active, said it remains to be seen who will pay for non-le- thal tools and whether ranchers themselves would bear the add- ed cost. “I think it comes down to (ODFW) staff, and where they are at the time,” Huffman said. “It may be a whole new pro- gram within the agency, when it’s all said and done with.” Before wolves returned to Oregon, Huffman said he checked on cattle once every few weeks. Now, he checks on cattle at least three times per week, and sometimes even that is not enough. ODFW has investigated one dead calf on Huffman’s property, in 2016, though by the time they found the animal after five days it was too late to confirm it as a wolf kill. “There really wasn’t much left of it,” Huffman said. Warnock’s ranch near Im- naha, Ore. is also frequented by wolves in far northeast Wal- lowa County. The Smackout pack has killed four heifers and injured one calf on private land since Aug. 20, according to Fish and Wildlife. Four of the attacks occurred between Oct. 14 and Nov. 1. Fish and Wildlife consid- ers lethal removal after a pack attacks three times in 30 days or four times in 10 months. The department policy calls for ranchers to do whatever they can to prevent the attacks and for wildlife managers to conclude that the attacks will continue unless the state inter- venes. The Smackout pack has four or five adult wolves, ac- cording to recent surveys by the department. The pack in- cludes one female wolf that had been trapped and fitted with a radio collar that trans- mits her location. The depart- ment has not seen evidence that the pack produced pups this year. The Togo pack has attacked cattle at least six times in the past 10 months, according to Fish and Wildlife. Two of the attacks were confirmed after the department shot one of two adults in the pack. The depart- ment confirmed the first attack Sept. 7, but held off restarting lethal removal because the de- partment was concerned that killing the last adult would doom the pups given their size at the time. Fish and Wildlife con- firmed Oct. 26 that the pack had attacked another calf. The latest depredation indicates the pack will continue to prey on livestock, according to the de- partment. Fish and Wildlife said in a statement today that it did not expect the lethal-removal operations to harm the state’s overall recovery objectives. The goal is to have wolves established and regularly re- producing at least as far west as the Cascades. Washington wolves now are mostly con- fined to Eastern Washington, particularly in four northeast counties. The wolf population in the eastern one-third of Washing- ton is more than three times the recovery goal for that re- gion, according to Fish and Wildlife. As the wolf population has grown in that corner of the state, so has attacks on live- stock. The department has re- moved wolves before, dating back to 2012, but has never had three lethal-removal oper- ations active at the same time. Wash. Ecology proposes new fees on wineries Wastewater regulations on tap By DON JENKINS Capital Press New wastewater-dispos- al regulations imposed by the Washington Department of Ecology will collectively cost 68 of the state’s larger wineries more than $200,000 the first year, under a depart- ment proposal. Beginning July 1, the wineries must obtain permits to use wastewater on land or discharge to most sewer plants. Ecology can’t cite any case of a winery pol- luting groundwater, but the agency says water laced with cleansers, stems, leaves and wine sediment has the poten- tial to pollute. Wineries that produce fewer than 17,835 gallons of wine and juice a year are exempt from the rules. Win- eries that discharge wastewa- ter to one of about 20 sewer plants in the state equipped to treat industrial waste also are exempt. Washington has more than 900 wineries. Ecology adopted the rules last May, but delayed implementing them to give wineries time to prepare and for the department to decide how much permits will cost. Ecology anticipates mak- ing a formal proposal in March, but has given winer- Courtesy Washington State Dept. of Agriculture Grapes grow in a vineyard in Walla Walla, Wash. The Wash- ington Department of Ecology will impose new fees on some wineries to regulate wastewater. ies two options to mull. One option would assign the 68 wineries into seven categories. At the top end, four wineries that produce more 1.2 million gallons of wine and juice a year would pay $25,786. At the bot- tom end, 16 wineries that produce fewer than 25,000 gallons but are above the exemption threshold would pay $383. The second option would divide the wineries into 10 categories. The three largest wineries, which each pro- duce more than 2 million gallons, would pay $33,196. The 16 smallest wineries would pay $296. The fees will raise about $211,000 the first year, ac- cording to Ecology. The per- mits are good for one year and will increase with infla- tion. According to a depart- ment fact sheet, most fees rise by 4 to 5 percent a year. The permits will set rules for irrigating with water that has been used to clean bot- tles, tanks, barrels and other equipment. The rules also regulate storage ponds and watering dusty roads. Wineries can be exempt- ed from the rules by put- ting wastewater in a storage tank and having it hauled to a treatment plant. Another way is to put wastewater in a double-lined lagoon to evap- orate. The lagoon must have a leak-detection system. A winery can be fined up to $10,000 a day for violat- ing its permit. Dairy family claims feds reneged on relocation Capital Press A Washington dairy fami- ly claims the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation reneged on an agreement to help them relo- cate when condemning their property for an irrigation project. The Dieringer family of Moses Lake, Wash., allege in a lawsuit it agreed to sell its dairy for $1.9 million sep- arately from any relocation services the federal agency is required to provide to dis- placed farms under law. Discussions about seiz- ing the family’s land through eminent domain began about seven years earlier, when the Bureau of Reclamation de- cided another “feed route” was necessary to supply water to the Potholes reser- voir of the Columbia Basin Project. “In the ensuing 12 years, the Dieringers have lived and operated their dairy under a pending threat of condem- nation, foregoing opportuni- ties to expand their herd and increase their revenue,” the complaint said. For years, the agency was unable to find a suitable site for relocating the dairy and negotiations eventually sputtered until the two sides agreed to a mediated settle- ment by a federal judge in 2014, according to the com- plaint. Apart from selling their property, the deal entitled the Dieringers to buy 160 acres of federal land that was near their 600 irrigated acres on which the family grows cattle feed, the complaint said. “Believing the Bureau would honor its end of the bargain, the Dieringers im- mediately set out to con- struct the new dairy,” the complaint said, noting that they also planned to move some pieces of equipment and replace others. The Dieringers claim that under the Uniform Reloca- tion Act, under which federal agencies must assist landown- ers displaced by public proj- ects, the relocation benefits are supposed to be negotiat- ed separately from property transactions. Weekly Fieldwork Report ® Ore. (6-10 day outlook as of Nov. 4) However, the complaint al- leges the Bureau of Reclama- tion hasn’t followed through on its obligations under that law or the mediated agree- ment they’d struck in 2014. A spokesman for the Bu- reau of Reclamation said the agency cannot comment on pending litigation. Presented by Item/description (Source: USDA, NASS; NOAA) • Days suitable for fieldwork (As of Nov. 4) 5.7 • Topsoil moisture, surplus 0 • Topsoil moisture, percent short 61% • Subsoil moisture, surplus 0 • Subsoil moisture, percent short 83% • Precipitation probability 40-50% Below 45-3/108 By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI Wash. Idaho Calif. 5 2% 44% 2% 53% 5.7 1% 22% 0 44% 40-50% Below 40-50% Below 7 0 75% 0 75% 33-50% Below/ Normal (South)
