10
CapitalPress.com
Friday, April 2, 2021
Phosphate imports ‘materially injured’
U.S. producers, trade regulators say
By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Press
Phosphate fertilizers from
Morocco and Russia have
“materially injured” U.S.
manufacturers,
justifying
tariff s on government-sub-
sidized imports from those
countries, according to trade
regulators.
The U.S. International
Trade Commission’s mate-
rial injury determination,
affi rmed by a 4-1 vote on
March 11, means that coun-
tervailing duties of about
20% will be imposed on
Moroccan phosphate, while
Russian producers will face
duties of 9-47%, depending
on the company.
Several U.S. farm orga-
nizations urged the ITC and
the Department of Com-
merce — which investi-
gated subsidy levels — not
to impose tariff s on phos-
phate imports because it
would raise prices on fertil-
izers needed by growers.
“If these duties are
imposed, production costs
to farmers across the coun-
try for corn, soybeans, cot-
ton, wheat and other crops
will increase for the next
planting season,” the Ameri-
can Farm Bureau Federation
said in written testimony.
Before the tariff s could
even be implemented, how-
ever, manufacturers from
Russia and Morocco drasti-
cally pulled back on phos-
phate exports to the U.S.,
according to ITC’s trade
data.
Imports from Morocco,
Capital Press File
Phosphate ore is processed at an Idaho mine. U.S. trade
regulators have determined that imports of phosphate
fertilizer hurt domestic manufacturers, justifying tariff s
on shipments from Morocco and Russia.
the largest phosphate ship-
per, dropped by half, from
roughly 2 million met-
ric tons in 2019 to about
1 million metric tons in
2020. Similarly, Russian
imports decreased from
about 843,000 metric tons to
422,000 metric tons.
Imports from both coun-
tries have also continued to
fall during early 2021 com-
pared to last year.
The Mosaic Co., a
domestic fertilizer pro-
ducer that urged trade regu-
lators to investigate imports
from Morocco and Rus-
sia, believes it’s in the best
interest of the U.S. agricul-
ture industry to have robust
domestic production of the
key crop nutrient.
If domestic supplies were
jeopardized, farmers would
be at the mercy of foreign
manufacturers who could
then raise prices, said Ben
Pratt, Mosaic’s senior vice
president of government and
public aff airs.
“We’re not in this to get
any special treatment, we
just want to compete on a
level playing fi eld,” he said.
Pratt said that Moroccan
and Russian manufacturers
stopped exporting phosphate
to “make a point” about the
impact on domestic prices,
causing U.S. phosphate
prices to temporarily rise
above global benchmarks
for the fertilizer.
However, domestic phos-
phate prices have since
fallen back in line with the
norm as markets had time to
“shake out,” with Mexico,
Egypt and Australia ship-
ping more of the fertilizer
into the U.S. while Morocco
and Russia have continued
adding to global supplies, he
said.
“They didn’t stop pro-
ducing phosphates, they just
started shipping them else-
where,” Pratt said.
Morocco subsidizes phos-
phate production by off er-
ing artifi cially cheap min-
ing rights, inexpensive loans
and tax incentives, while
Russia provides manufactur-
ers with natural gas at “dis-
torted” prices intended to
spur economic development,
according to the Department
of Commerce.
The OCP Group, Moroc-
co’s major phosphate pro-
ducer, argued that it stepped
up exports of the fertilizer
in reaction to U.S. market
forces, such as distributors
wanting to hedge against
supply disruptions.
“We further understood
that at the time, the domes-
tic industry had been consol-
idating down to only a few
producers, creating a need
for diversifi cation of supply
sources,” the company said
in written testimony.
PhosAgro, a major Rus-
sian producer, also argued
that Mosaic misrepresented
the global industry’s market
dynamics and didn’t accu-
rately account for the vola-
tility in phosphate prices.
“The price comparison
provided by the Petitioner
fails to compare prices in
the U.S. and prices of other
imports with prices of Rus-
sian imports on an apples-
to-apples basis,” the com-
pany said.
Stakeholders send letter opposing
Simpson dam plan to NW political leaders
By MATTHEW WEAVER
Capital Press
A coalition of 45 stakeholders has sent
a letter to Northwest lawmakers voicing
their opposition to Idaho Rep. Mike Simp-
son’s $33.5 billion proposal to remove
four dams on the Lower Snake River.
The proposal, which is aimed at help-
ing the salmon population recover,
includes a 35-year moratorium on dam lit-
igation, among other actions.
Simpson announced the proposal
in February but has not introduced
legislation.
“It is a speculative and costly plan that
assumes we must choose between produc-
tive, fi sh-friendly federal projects and our
Northwest salmon and steelhead runs,”
the March 23 letter states. “We believe
this is a false choice, and ignores the
broad commitment to salmon recovery
that must be region-wide and sustained
for generations.”
“Congress typically doesn’t dedicate
billions of taxpayer dollars without know-
ing exactly how it will be allocated fi rst,”
Washington Grain Commission CEO
Glen Squires told the Capital Press. “His
concept proposal is so broad in scope that
dozens of congressional committees and
Associated Press File
The Ice Harbor Dam on the Snake River. A coalition of stakeholders has sent a
letter to the region’s political leaders opposing a plan to remove it and three
other dams.
executive branch agencies probably have
jurisdiction over parts of it.”
Many Pacifi c Northwest members of
Congress are also opposed to the plan,
Squires said.
“Those supporting removal have been
seeking removal of the four specifi c dams
for decades, so nothing really new there,”
he said.
Ag groups will continue to voice their
concerns about removal of the dams and
cite their role in agriculture, irrigation and
movement of goods, Squires said.
Dam removal would have impacts
on the environment, hydropower and
increase freight rates for wheat. Squires
points to the added road damage costs and
eff ect on timely delivery of other freight
and services.
“Removal is not a silver bullet to
salmon recovery for Snake River salmon,”
Squires said. “There is more to it than four
lower Snake River dams.”
Squires and other stakeholders point
to ideas and actions identifi ed in NOAA
Fisheries’ salmon recovery plan.
Courtesy of Howard Neibling
Pivot irrigation will be installed in three fi elds us-
ing Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board grants,
which cover a portion of the cost.
Grants will help
ag-related projects
in Malheur watershed
By BRAD CARLSON
Capital Press
The Oregon Watershed
Enhancement Board has
awarded fi ve grants sup-
porting
agriculture-re-
lated projects in the Mal-
heur River Basin.
Malheur
Watershed
Council Executive Direc-
tor Ken Diebel said three
grants involve converting
fi elds from fl ood to sprin-
kler irrigation, one will
protect wet-meadow hab-
itat for sage grouse and
one will support stream-
bank restoration planning.
Improving irrigation
systems has been a prior-
ity of the council since it
formed 25 years ago, he
said.
“It’s an important issue
for water quality and for
stream enhancement, and
it’s also important for the
economics of farming
these days,” Diebel said.
Converting from fl ood to
pivot-sprinkler irrigation
increases water effi ciency
while decreasing runoff
and nutrient and bacteria
loads.
The irrigation-related
grants are:
• About $190,000 for
a project near Harper, on
the main stem of the Mal-
heur River.
• $109,000 for work at
Jacobsen Gulch north of
Ontario.
• $67,000 for a project
next to Malheur tributary
Bully Creek near Vale, he
said.
The amounts do not
include the landowners’
contributions. Diebel said
the grants cover one-third
to one-half of a project’s
total cost; the landowner
pays the rest.
The grant for the wet-
meadow project is about
$32,000, not including the
landowner contribution.
The project is planned in
the Westfall area, near the
headwaters of a branch of
Indian Creek. It aims to
benefi t sage grouse hab-
itat and provide a more
consistent water supply
for livestock.
“The
landowner
is going to fence the
meadow off to keep the
cows away,” Diebel said.
“In exchange, since the
meadow is a source of
water for livestock, we are
going to put in a spring
development.”
That part of the project
involves capturing some
water near the meadow’s
upper end and piping it
to troughs in lower, drier
spots cattle can occupy.
A separate $43,000
technical-assistance grant
will be used to hire an
engineer to work with
the council in develop-
ing a project that aims to
stop bank erosion on part
of the Malheur River near
Harper. The landowner
will contribute money and
work.
River fl ow is damag-
ing banks and eroding the
landowner’s hay fi elds.
“We also want to do
this in a way that benefi ts
water quality, the stream
and the environment,”
Diebel said.
He said the win-
ter of 2016-17 produced
extraordinarily high run-
off “and motivated a lot
of people to do something
about bank-stabilization
and bank-erosion prob-
lems to prevent damage to
the farming infrastructure,
but in a way that benefi ts
the stream — water qual-
ity and stream habitat.”
Cultivating the Future
S238186-1