Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Capital press. (Salem, OR) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (Dec. 6, 2019)
10 CapitalPress.com Friday, December 6, 2019 Washington launches online reporting of cattle sales By DON JENKINS Capital Press Washington beef ranchers can now report cattle sales online, pro- viding they use electronic ear tags, a way of tracking livestock resisted by some producers as labor inten- sive and intrusive. The state Department of Agricul- ture touts “electronic cattle transac- tion reporting” as cheaper and eas- ier than calling out a state inspector to verify ownership. The system was launched this month and shown to industry rep- resentatives. “It looks as simple as ordering something on Amazon,” said Danny DeFranco, executive vice president of the Washington Cattlemen’s Association. The department inspects sales to prevent theft and record cattle movements. The department hopes online reporting will hold down its costs and help it quickly identify cattle exposed to disease. The agriculture department has allowed dairy farmers to electron- ically report sales of unbranded cows for several years. The Legisla- ture this year extended the option to beef ranchers selling branded cattle. Agriculture Director Derek Sandison said in a statement that expanding the system is a “major step toward simplifying and stream- lining reporting requirements.” “It demonstrates important progress toward synchronizing the industry and government with today’s technology,” he said. Lab administrator: ‘Hot’ hemp more likely under USDA rule By DON JENKINS Capital Press A high percentage of hemp will test “hot” and have to be destroyed under testing proce- dures adopted this month by the Washington State Depart- ment of Agriculture, the chief operating officer of a Spokane laboratory said Monday. The state’s procedures are patterned after a USDA rule adopted in October intended to catch hemp too high in THC. In one change, the state agriculture department will stop testing whole plants and instead take a cutting just underneath the flowers at the top one-third of the plant. Trace Analytics COO Jason Zitzer said the proto- col will zero in on the part of the plant with the most THC, excluding other useful parts such as the stalk. “I’m not sure anybody is going to pass,” he said. The Spokane business was the only private labora- tory used this year by Wash- ington to test hemp. Only one sample failed, and that sample was retested at a state lab and passed. The USDA’s interim hemp rules took effect Oct. 31 and will be enforce until at least Nov. 1, 2021. The agency will take public comments until Dec. 30 on whether to revise the regulations. “If the USDA changes its rules, we’ll change our poli- cies accordingly,” state agri- culture department spokes- man Chris McGann said. “Our intent is to have some- thing compatible with USDA rules.” The 2018 Farm Bill removed a major obstacle to growing hemp in the U.S. by legalizing cannabis plants low in THC, the main psy- choactive compound in mar- ijuana. The USDA, however, will require states to continue to license hemp growers and test plants before they are harvested. Washington will test one plant or less per acre. If the THC level is above 0.3%, the entire field must be burned, plowed under or composted. Marijuana generally has THC levels of 3% to 15%, according to the USDA. The Alcohol and Drug Abuse Richard A. Howard/USDA NRCS Hemp grows in a field. Institute at the University of Washington reported this year that some retail mari- juana products are labeled as having THC content of more than 30%, though the labels are not reliable and results vary from laboratory to laboratory, according to the institute. Zitzer said he doubts any- one in Washington, where marijuana is legal, would bother to intentionally cul- tivate hemp high in THC. Farmers, however, could unwittingly plant varieties that exceed the limit. “Some of these farmers are not going to know about the genetics. They’re only going to know what they’re being told,” he said. The USDA’s new rules also will change when hemp is tested in Washington. Plants must be tested within 15 days of harvest. Previ- ously, Washington required testing within 30 days. The shorter time frame will cause problems, Zitzer predicts. Several days can pass before a state inspector deliv- ers plants to the labora- tory, he said. Plants have to be dried before testing and that can take up to 10 days, he said. “Some of it is coming in sopping wet,” he said. “I think the 15 days, espe- cially as wet as the North- west is, is not great for our region.” The USDA says 15 days will allow for delays caused by weather or equipment breakdowns, but still give accurate results. The longer hemp stays in the ground, the higher its THC, according to the USDA. Electronic reporting is not man- datory. Ranchers can still call out state brand inspectors. While elec- tronic reporting has been virtually unused by dairy farmers, DeFranco said he expects beef producers to try it. “Essentially everything is the same, except we have this other option,” he said. “Like any new thing, it will take some time to get some traction.” The USDA has backed off requiring electronic ear tags on cat- tle moving between states. Last month, the Trump administration canceled plans to make the tags mandatory by 2023. The USDA’s position has been that tracking a cow from birth to slaughter by electronic tags would help contain animal diseases and protect producers from trade sanc- tions. Critics said the technology was unproven and would require produc- ers to report every time they move a cow from one place to another. Cattle Producers of Washing- ton President Scott Nielsen said the organization supports electronic reporting, as long as it’s voluntary. “We’ll continue to resist the mandatory implementation,” he said. “We’re really pleased to see what’s happening at the national level.” To use the electronic system, ranchers must obtain a “premises identification number,” pinpointing where they have cows. Each cow must be fitted with a USDA-ap- proved 840 radio frequency identi- fication tag. Ranchers pay an annual fee of $33 to use ECTR. The per-head fee is $1.30. For in-person inspections, ranch- ers pay a $20 call out fee, plus mile- age, and a per-head fee of $1.21. To promote the system, the department is giving away elec- tronic tags. Producers with herds of 50 head or fewer are eligible to receive 40 tags. Those with herds of more than 50 qualify for 100 tags. Lawmakers also approved allow- ing self-employed field inspectors to supplement state inspectors. The inspectors must be trained by the department and not have a financial stake in the sales. No one has applied to be certified, a depart- ment spokesman said Tuesday. Farmers, cities appeal Oregon airport master plan By GEORGE PLAVEN Capital Press AURORA, Ore. — A coalition of Oregon cities and residents is push- ing back against plans to expand the Aurora State Airport south of Port- land over its potential impacts to high-value farmland. The State Aviation Board met Oct. 31 to adopt findings that the airport’s 2012 master plan complies with Mar- ion County and statewide land-use planning goals. The master plan includes a 1,000-foot runway exten- sion, which some farmers worry will take prime agricultural land out of production. Opponents filed challenges with the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals, or LUBA, on Nov. 21, including the cities of Aurora and Wilsonville and Friends of French Prairie, a nonprofit group of local farmers and neighbors. With approximately 80,000 take- offs and landings every year, Aurora State is the fourth-busiest airport in Oregon, behind Portland Interna- tional, Portland-Hillsboro and Bend. It is one mile northwest of Aurora, out- side the city’s urban growth boundary. Last year, the airport applied for a $33.3 million grant through the Federal Aviation Administration to extend the runway from 5,000 to 6,000 feet. The coalition, however, argues the project would violate Ore- gon’s land-use planning laws by encroaching on “exclusive farm use” land. “We deserve reasonable farmland protections that allow us to predict- ably use the lands we have invested in,” said Mike Iverson, who grows 200 acres of vegetables adjacent to Mateusz Perkowski/Capital Press File An airplane departs the Aurora State Airport near Aurora, Ore. A plan for a 1,000-foot runway extension has nearby farmers worried that it will take prime agricultural land out of production. the airport. “The boondoggle airport expansion is a nontransparent and dangerous threat to Oregon’s agricul- tural economy and its valued land use planning.” Groups have previously contested the airport’s master plan, which was originally adopted in 1976. It was last updated by the State Aviation Board in 2011, but that is under challenge. Betty Stansbury, director of the Oregon Department of Aviation, said the master plan was in fact approved in 2011, but the coalition claims that is not backed up by public records. The matter is currently before LUBA on a separate appeal. Stansbury said the agency cannot comment on pending legal challenges. Wilsonville Mayor Tim Knapp said the result is that thousands of residents were effectively shut out of public participation in talks to expand the airport. “The city has to take action to defend our community’s ability to participate in necessary, required intergovernmental land use and trans- portation planning that affects our cit- izens’ quality of life, jointly used sur- face transportation facilities and other key public interest concerns,” Knapp said in a statement. At the heart of the issue is Ore- gon’s statewide land use planning laws adopted in 1976 — specifically Goal 3, which established an “exclu- sive farm use” zone that limits devel- opment on agricultural lands. Declining farmland continues to be an issue in Oregon, especially around the Portland metro area in Multnomah, Washington and Clacka- mas counties. Statewide, Oregon lost 1.7 million acres of farmland between 1997 and 2017, according to figures from the latest USDA Census of Agri- culture. That’s an average of 85,000 acres, or 132.8 square miles, of farms each year. Four Oregon water projects win $2.5 million in grant funding By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI Capital Press Four water projects have won nearly $2.5 million in grant funding from the Ore- gon Water Resources Com- mission while 10 other pro- posals seeking $9.8 million were rejected. The 2019 grants mark the fourth cycle of funding from Oregon’s water sup- ply development fund and also the lowest total amount awarded since the program was enacted. The commission awarded $8.9 million to nine appli- cants in 2016, $6.3 million to four applicants in 2017 and $6.3 million to eight applicants in 2018. Oregon’s water supply development fund currently contains more than $10 mil- lion and another $15 million was authorized by lawmak- ers during the most recent legislative session. The relatively modest field of proposals and low number of projects recom- mended for funding raised some questions about the selection process during the commission’s Nov. 21 meet- ing in Salem. “That’s not a lot of appli- cants for the type of money we’re talking about,” said Joe Moll, commissioner and executive director of the McKenzie River Trust. Proposals are scored by a “technical review team” of experts who evaluate them based on their economic, environmental and social benefits to the public. Staff members from the Oregon Water Resources Department then make fund- ing recommendations to the commission, which makes the final decision. Following are the four projects awarded funding this year: • More than $980,000 was approved for a project that would install a bypass channel for fish around the Upper Phillips Dam in Jack- son County while piping nearly two miles of irriga- tion ditch. • About $155,000 was approved for the conversion of about 80 acres in Doug- las County from hand-line irrigation to a drip system, allowing the farm operation to switch from hay and cattle to higher-value crops. Conserved water would be dedicated to in-stream flows in Calapooya Creek to benefit federally protected steelhead, trout and salmon, while the property would operate as a demonstration farm for local high school FFA students. • More than $670,000 was approved for the comple- tion of a second deep water irrigation well in Wasco County that’s intended to relieve pressure on the shal- lower aquifer to the benefit of junior water rights holders. The project is also expected to stabilize ground- water levels and potentially improve flows in Mosier Creek. • About $660,000 was approved for a relocation of the City of Chiloquin’s water supply well in Klam- ath County, which aims to boost surface flows in the Williamson River. The fund- ing would also pay for new water meters that better mon- itor usage and help reduce waste. Ask your dealer about our year-end specials on financing and installation. IntelligentAg.com 406-946-2377 S157694-1
