Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Capital press. (Salem, OR) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (Dec. 6, 2019)
6 CapitalPress.com Editorials are written by or approved by members of the Capital Press Editorial Board. Friday, December 6, 2019 All other commentary pieces are the opinions of the authors but not necessarily this newspaper. Opinion Editor & Publisher Managing Editor Joe Beach Carl Sampson opinions@capitalpress.com | CapitalPress.com/opinion Our View William Ruckelshaus — a voice for reason I n an era of bare-knuckled pol- itics, it is instructive to reflect on the career of William Ruck- elshaus, the first director of the Envi- ronmental Protection Administration. He died in Seattle last week at age 87, leaving behind an unblemished career as a voice for environmental reason. Ruckelshaus was no stranger to pitched political battles. His career in the administration of Richard Nixon abruptly ended when Ruckelshaus resigned his job at the U.S. Jus- tice Department instead of firing the Watergate special prosecutor. But after two turns as the EPA administrator — as the agency’s first chief under Nixon and again under President Ronald Reagan —Ruck- elshaus probably knew more about how the EPA and statutes such as the Endangered Species Act work than anyone else. In 2011, Capital Press interviewed Ruckelshaus about the EPA, the ESA and issues related to the protection of species. Edited for space, here are some of his thoughts: On the ESA: If the law is working properly, the “how to” is an agreement by the people who will be impacted Capital Press File William Ruckelshaus in his Seattle office in 2011. by the necessary changes. It doesn’t work as well as it ought to, because a lot of time the government comes in and imposes habitat requirements that the manager of the land doesn’t find completely reasonable. On the Clean Air Act: After a couple of years of administering it, I knew it needed change. ... What has proven really hard is to get these laws changed, and the reason is, I think, the people who lobbied the laws through were primarily outside the govern- ment, and the government agencies that administered these laws and the staffs on committees remain in place for a long time — they get a vested interest in the law and they fight furi- ously against any changes. The scope of the ESA: (Con- gress) wrote the law broadly enough, and of course it’s been interpreted broadly enough, it encompasses a lot more than they probably originally intended. Changes needed in the ESA: If I’m a landowner and someone is run- ning a highway through my land, I may not like it, but at least I’m being compensated for it. If I’m forced to put buffers alongside streams that run through my land in order to protect salmon, sometimes those buffers take a significant amount of my land, and I think they should be compensated for that.... If that’s a public good and it’s being asserted against a private property owner, then why shouldn’t the public pay for it the same way they do with a highway? On environmental regulations: In the first place, some guy writing the regulation down in Olympia or in Salem, and not being on the actual land itself, can’t possibly draft a regu- lation that makes sense on every piece of land. So the landowner has the reg- ulator from the government com- ing on their land, starting to tell him how to manage it. He’s been manag- ing for five generations and this guy’s maybe six months out of school. Well, Why all farmland leases need to be in writing Our View W Hemp Norrthwest File A field of hemp. USDA should rework its hemp testing rules F armers have been poring over the details of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s interim rules governing the production of hemp. They haven’t liked a lot of what they see. If nothing else, the rules have ended a lot of people’s dreams of quick, big money in the hemp business. It’s not all bad news. Now that hemp is legal growers can access USDA programs such as crop insurance, farm loans and conservation pro- grams. Farmers can also use water from federal irrigation projects to grow the crop. But the rub comes in rules designed to keep legal hemp from becoming an illegal source of delta-9 THC, the psychoactive substance found in cannabis. And here you may require a brief tutorial in cannabis chemistry. Both marijuana and hemp contain various compounds — delta 9 THC, THCA, CBD, CBDA and CBG to name a few. Several of these compounds have commercial purposes, some more legal than others. Marijuana remains illegal under federal law, but “legal” in some states for medicinal and rec- reational purposes. Growers select varieties with high delta-9 THC levels. The more THC, the bigger the buzz, the more valuable the crop. Industrial hemp, on the other hand, has rela- tively low levels of delta-9 THC. It is most often grown to extract CBD oil, which is sold for its alleged medicinal value. Under USDA rules, legal hemp becomes ille- gal marijuana when it contains more than 0.3% THC. How that level is measured is the detail that can make or break an otherwise legal hemp crop. Over the last few years, state ag departments they’re not going to be very pleased with what they’re told to do. ... (Let) the individual landowner have a lot more authority about what he should do to manage the land in such a way that it doesn’t adversely impact the environment. And compensating them where there are significant costs involved. On collaboration: If they’d see themselves as part of a family, they’d begin to make progress. But if they see themselves as adversaries, as ene- mies, then you don’t make any prog- ress. ... My experience of listening to farmers and environmentalists when they finally let their guard down, they are not nearly as far apart as they think they are. I’ve heard farmers say, “Well, if that’s what you want us to do, that’s not so hard.” And here the environmentalists would say, “Well, I guess that’s not really the problem, is it?”... Once you see those interests come together, it really is remarkable. These words, spoken from expe- rience, offer wisdom to all sides of many issues, whether they involve the environment or other topics. Maybe, just maybe, the world needs more voices for reason like Wil- liam Ruckelshaus. We’ve seen plenty of the alternative. regulating the crop have measured only delta-9 THC. But the USDA’s new rules would mea- sure “total THC,” taking into account THCA — which converts into delta-9 THC when heated. Under that standard some cannabis that quali- fied as hemp in previous years would exceed the threshold and need to be destroyed. The USDA also wants the plants tested within 15 days of harvest. That’s a pretty tight window given the unpredictability of fall weather in the Pacific Northwest and the USDA’s requirement that testing be performed only at labs approved by the Drug Enforcement Administration. Sens. Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden, both Oregon Democrats and long-time hemp advo- cates, have asked the USDA to adopt less strict testing protocols that would consider only delta-9 THC levels, give farmers a longer win- dow to test plants, and more labs to do the testing. “Farmers in Oregon and across the coun- try are on the precipice of an agricultural boom that, with the right regulatory framework, stands to boost rural economies in every corner of the country,” they wrote to Ag Secretary Sonny Perdue. We think they’re right in asking for a more favorable testing regime. The chances peo- ple will grow hemp for illicit THC seem pretty small given the availability of somewhat legal marijuana. Whether hemp is a boon for rural economies remains to be seen. But farmers don’t need the USDA throwing up unnecessary roadblocks. hen it’s time to sign a new farmland rental agreement, both par- ties can bring a lot to the table to make sure the cash rental agree- ment meets everyone’s needs. A few of the pieces of informa- tion that should be included also serve to demonstrate that you’re committed to fairness, sustainable farming, and the stewardship of the land. Sustainable farming prac- tices aren’t just another trend- ing phrase: your farmland rental agreement is that document where you get to outline your shared expectations for soil health and tillage practices. Here’s how both sides of this negotiation can approach this conversation: What should landown- ers bring to the table? Terms and conditions. Farmland own- ers should make sure their lease includes language that explic- itly describes the farmer and landowner relationship. Is your farmer agreeing to expand or maintain tillable acres? Are they also be contracted to maintain restricted grass waterways or mow alleys? Make sure these expectations are captured in the agreement. Data delivery requirements. Your written agreement should include requirements for sharing information on yields and fertil- ization. This is a normal condi- tion that helps ensure that every- one is educated about the land’s health and use. Commitment to sustain- able farming practices. This is an easy way to put your money where your mouth is. For exam- ple, Landlords should be ready to reimburse their farmer for appli- cations of lime that support the land over multiple years when the nutrient hasn’t been entirely utilized by the end of the lease. They should receive a reimburse- ment for the estimated remainder of that application’s value. Soil health. Especially if your farm is no-till, be sure you out- line your expectations for till- age practices and soil health. This ties into more about data delivery above, but it can’t be overstated; make sure you get receipts for fertilizer application. Proof of insurance. Finally, be sure to include insurance requirements. You should be pre- pared to demonstrate that you have an appropriate amount of general liability insurance on the land you’re renting. Your tenant should also be prepared to pro- vide proof of adequate crop insurance to make sure no one loses their shirt in the season ahead. What should farmers bring GUEST VIEW Corbett Kull to the table? Farmers must be willing to show landowners how the asset is performing. Enter this negotiation with the under- standing that you are asking to be the steward of what’s likely one of the landowner’s great- est assets. The farmland rental agreement is an opportunity to demonstrate that you’ll be atten- tive to the soil’s health and a reliable tenant. You should list out your expectations of the landowner, especially communication-wise. Your farmland rental agreement should include: • That you’ll notify your landlord when the crops are planted and when the harvest has been completed. Your preferred method of communication — if snail mail doesn’t work for you, or you’d rather hear from someone in an email than on the phone, be sure to say so. • Bring a plan for the year ahead. When negotiating a one- year lease, be ready to present your plan for the year ahead. It may be helpful to frame this task for yourself as a question: How do I set the expectations for that season so that this landowner will want to renew with me? Make sure that expectations are aligned so that when lease renewal comes up, you find yourself meeting or exceeding the benchmarks you’ve laid out. Your farmland negotiation doesn’t need to happen in per- son — a call or email is no problem, especially if you’re not living in the same town. But all leases need to be in writing. In 2019, there’s no good rea- son not to have your farmland rental agreement in writing to support the value of your land. Put your expectations for the land’s performance in ink and create a record of your agree- ments to strengthen everyone’s understanding of the land’s health. Demonstrate to future farm- ers and landlords that you’re committed to sustainable farm- ing practices, and protect all parties by communicating as much information as pos- sible around your cash rent agreement. Corbett Kull is co-founder and CEO of Tillable, the farm- land rental management plat- form, which helps landown- ers optimize returns and helps farmers access land to expand operations.
