Friday, February 11, 2022
Editorials are written by or
approved by members of the
Capital Press Editorial Board.
CapitalPress.com 7
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
A path to better relationships with farmers, ranchers
W
ashington Gov. Jay
Inslee recently granted
Capital Press reporter
Matthew Weaver a lengthy inter-
view covering topics of interest to
farmers and ranchers in the Ever-
green State.
An edited transcript of that inter-
view appears elsewhere in this edi-
tion. We appreciate that Inslee took
the time to answer our questions.
Nothing in the interview was sur-
prising, as Inslee has been consis-
tent in his views during his tenure as
governor. But we did find ourselves
agreeing with Inslee when he dis-
cussed his wish that he had a bet-
ter relationship with farmers and
ranchers.
“I wish that I had a
one-on-one relation-
ship with every single
farmer and rancher. It
would be great. Unfor-
tunately, there’s quite a
Washington
number of folks.
Gov. Jay
“I would like to have
Inslee
a sit-down conversa-
tion over tea, or even a cold one at
some point, with hundreds of thou-
sands of people. That could improve
it, but time doesn’t permit that,
unfortunately.”
We think politicians of all stripes
would benefit from having more one-
on-one conversations about the pol-
icies they advocate with the people
they serve.
From a practical standpoint, it
would be impossible for a sitting
governor to have a one-on-one with
every voter. And we appreciate the
demands elected officials have on
their time.
Governors such as Inslee make
public appearances all the time. Most
often these are carefully crafted
events to highlight favored policy
initiatives to supportive audiences.
There’s not much discussion, cer-
tainly no debate.
For example, in November, Ins-
lee — along with other governors,
including Oregon Gov. Kate Brown
— traveled to Glasgow, Scotland,
to attend the United Nations climate
summit. While there, he advocated
policies that will have a big impact
on the people of Washington.
What’s the
right amount of
carbon dioxide?
S
Our View
IDFG
A gray wolf.
States can best
manage West’s wolves
F
or all of the gnashing of teeth
and worries about the impending
decline of Idaho’s wolves, any
predictions of their demise are greatly
exaggerated.
Last year, the Idaho Legislature mod-
ified the law related to hunting and trap-
ping wolves. Since it’s the state’s job
to manage them, such laws were well
within the purview of lawmakers.
Wolf advocates said the legislators
were threatening the state’s 1,500 wolves
and any efforts to reduce that number
would mark the beginning of the end for
the predators.
In the year since the law was passed,
not much has happened. The state’s wild-
life managers keep tabs on the wolves
that have taken up residence in Idaho.
What they found is — drum roll, please
— the wolf population is about the same
as before.
The wolf population peaks in the sum-
mer, after the pups are born. After that,
any deaths are counted. The population’s
annual low point is about 900 in the early
spring, before the next batch of pups is
born.
State wildlife managers say that if
for some reason the population began to
decrease too far, they could make mid-
course adjustments.
That’s the sort of thing wildlife man-
agers do.
Montana’s Legislature passed simi-
lar legislation. For the vast majority of
the state the new hunting and trapping
rules had little impact on the overall pop-
ulation. However, they found that some
Elected officials are in a unique
position to speak out and to be heard.
Theodore Roosevelt called it the
bully pulpit.
We think that they also have a
unique responsibility to listen to the
governed.
If the governor wants to have more
one-on-one contact with farmers,
maybe he could carve out a block of
time — the same amount of time it
takes to fly to Scotland and back —
to drop into local coffee shops, live-
stock auctions and grain elevators
across the state. He could add in a
tavern or two for good measure.
We think he would be well
received if he sat back and enjoyed
a cup of coffee, or a cold one, while
listening to the people he serves.
wolves from Yellowstone National Park
had a tendency to drift outside the park
and were killed by hunters and trappers.
When wildlife managers saw this, the
hunts in that area were called off. The
Yellowstone wolf packs will no doubt
rebuild.
There is a concept that continues to
be circulated about wolves: They are
timid creatures that need the help of man
to survive in the wild. Environmental
groups use that concept to build a case
for protecting wolves, and raising money.
Unfortunately for them, wolves are
robust, smart and reproduce rapidly.
Idaho started with 35 wolves imported
from Canada in the mid-1990s. Now
the population peaks at 1,500 each year,
even with hunting, trapping and culling
wolves that attack livestock.
Similarly, the wolf populations in
Washington state and Oregon are healthy,
yet the way they are managed has frus-
trated many ranchers.
Idaho and Montana have shouldered
the responsibility of managing wolves in
those states. They are held accountable
and able to make changes as needed to
maintain the health of the wolf popula-
tions without sacrificing the livelihoods
of farmers and ranchers.
Our hope is that, some day, political
leaders in the nation’s capital, Washing-
ton state and Oregon will allow wildlife
managers to do the same statewide.
The last thing any of those states need
is for the federal government to take over
all management of wolves. Idaho and
Montana have demonstrated that it’s not
needed, or wanted.
chool teachers like to see
their students alert, attentive
and engaged, so when some
of the students start to get drowsy,
the teacher (hopefully) knows
that it’s not due to a boring lesson
or inadequate sleep, but because
the classroom air is stale from all
those students exhaling carbon
dioxide with each respired breath.
At 1,000 molecules of carbon diox-
ide (CO2) per million molecules of
air (parts per million or ppm) some
people begin to feel drowsy, rest-
less and stifled.
Reactions differ, but above
2,000 ppm people begin to expe-
rience headaches, poor concentra-
tion, loss of attention, increased
heart rate, nausea or dizziness,
worsened asthma or allergy symp-
toms. Opening a window and let-
ting in a breeze at the current out-
door CO2 level of about 412 ppm
solves the stagnation (alternatively,
the school may need to ventilate
better).
In one Canadian study, 43%
of the classrooms had CO2 lev-
els above 1000 ppm. A Chinese
classroom studied had an average
school day CO2 concentration of
2,080 ppm with a noon peak over
3,000 ppm. A Harvard study found
increasing indoor CO2 levels by
400 ppm would result in a decrease
in cognitive functioning by 21%
and at 3,000 ppm students could
experience up to an 80% decrease.
What a drag on student grades
to struggle to pay attention to your
teacher or to concentrate on your
test or to be disciplined for wiggli-
ness; what a frustration for teach-
ers; what a waste of tax dollars.
Then again, adults have to consider
their home or office conditions.
Above 5,000 ppm, toxicity or
oxygen deprivation could occur;
40,000 ppm is immediately harm-
ful due to oxygen deprivation. Cur-
rent trends project that in 2100
average global outdoor CO2 levels
would reach 800 ppm.
Before the Industrial Revolution
started in the mid-1700s, global
atmospheric CO2 was about 280
ppm — really fresh air.
Plants use CO2 as the raw
material for photosynthesis, and
increased CO2 levels increase
plant growth, leading some indoor
plant-growing facilities to supple-
ment CO2.
However, when CO2 levels are
high:
• Plants can become less nutri-
tious. For example, increased CO2
levels can increase plant growth
and fiber levels, thereby lowering
digestibility.
• A part of the plant that is not
marketed could be favored more
(have more yield increase) than the
marketed part (e.g. the seed, the
leaf or the root).
• Less valuable plants in an eco-
system can gain a competitive
advantage over preferred plants.
For example, higher levels of CO2
can increase the invasion of cheat-
grass along with other annual
grasses and juniper, which can
reduce more desired native species
(overgrazing further increases the
competitive advantage of weeds).
GUEST
VIEW
Elizabeth
Graser- Lindsey
Cheatgrass can also increase fire
frequency and extent (a problem
made worse because cheatgrass is
fire adapted). Because cheatgrass
has a much shorter period of good
nutritional quality compared with
native perennial grasses, the qual-
ity of rangelands may decrease
with increases in CO2 levels (com-
pounded by the other factors).
• Outbreaks of some insects and
infectious diseases may increase.
The earth’s atmosphere lets
through light and other forms
of radiative energy in different
amounts depending on wavelength.
The groups of wavelengths where
the atmospheric gases are trans-
parent (not absorbing or scattering
radiation) are like an atmospheric
window, whereas the greenhouse
gases like water and CO2 absorb
the energy passing through in cer-
tain unique wavelength ranges
and reduce the transparency of the
atmosphere completely or partially.
The atmosphere lets visible sun-
light through but it blocks or traps
much of the energy at other wave-
lengths we don’t see (heat) that is
emitted from the earth back toward
space, creating a greenhouse effect
and a warm earth.
Because CO2 obscures/reduces
the atmosphere’s transparency in a
unique wavelength range, as CO2
increases, heat builds up on earth.
Current CO2 concentrations have
increased enough to heat the earth
and make changes in the earth’s
weather systems; drought, heat
waves and reduced snowpack are
some of the outcomes that impact
agriculture.
It is wise for people to pro-
tect their home and habitat, for
their own health and well-be-
ing. A price on carbon combined
with cashback payments and bor-
der adjustment would encour-
age us to use low CO2-emitting
products and to reduce harm-
ful carbon dioxide emissions.
This approach is market-based
and leaves the decisions on what
changes to make to individuals.
By the fee (assessed at the well-
head, mine and border and passed
along) being 100% refunded as
a monthly, equal dividend to all
Americans, it protects the poor
and middle classes (even gives
them a boost) and it does it with-
out growing government.
Studies show that rural Amer-
icans would be affected similarly
to other Americans. The border
adjustment protects American busi-
ness from unfair competition from
countries that haven’t yet enacted a
carbon fee.
Elizabeth Graser-Lindsey is a
volunteer with the Citizens’ Cli-
mate Lobby and has a Ph.D. in
bio-environmental engineering
(agricultural meteorology and cli-
matology). She and her husband
own and operate a small farm in
Beavercreek, Ore.