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.