KATHRYN B. BROWN
Owner
ANDREW CUTLER
Publisher/Editor
ERICK PETERSON
Hermiston Editor/Senior Reporter
ThURSDAy, NOVEMBER 4, 2021
A4
Founded October 16, 1875
OUR VIEW
Oregon
agency
bosses get
religion
I
n Oregon, the deadline for state work-
ers to be fully vaccinated has passed.
Gov. Kate Brown imposed the mandate
in an attempt to increase the number of
Oregonians who are fully vaccinated.
Unvaccinated state workers faced being
put on administrative leave — unless
they received either a religious or medical
exemption.
It appears state agencies applied the
prerogative liberally. Oregon granted reli-
gious exemptions to at least 11% of state
executive branch workers.
Our reporting shows that out of 40,056
total executive branch employees state-
wide, 203 workers, or 0.5% of the state
government’s workforce, were put on
administrative leave due to not meeting the
vaccination deadline.
According to the Oregon Department
of Administrative Services, of the employ-
ees subject to the mandate, 4,514 received a
religious exception, 323 received a medi-
cal exception and roughly 180 religious or
medical exception requests are waiting to
be processed.
Washington state, by contrast, lost 3% of
its state employee workforce and offered far
fewer exemptions. Officials say the contrast
is likely because Oregon left the work of
approving religious exemptions mainly up
to agencies, while in Washington, exemp-
tion decisions were made at the state human
resource office level.
We are not in a position, nor are we in
any way qualified, to judge the sincerity of
any individual’s religious convictions when
it comes to COVID-19 vaccinations or any
other doctrinal questions. We take these
declarations of faith at face value.
But, in the Northwest, there are at least
two other ways of approaching the evalua-
tion of employee declarations of faith.
Centralized bureaucrats in Washington
who didn’t know the employees and who
didn’t have to keep the trains running are
pretty skeptical of the piety of state employ-
ees. But when push came to shove, Oregon
state supervisors faced with putting their
colleagues and critical workers on admin-
istrative leave, while maintaining services,
saw the light.
We have said at the outset that people
who are able should get vaccinated for the
coronavirus. While we respect the right of
informed adults to weigh their own options
and decide what is right for themselves, we
think the vaccine is the best way to reduce
infections and serious illness.
At the same time, we think government
vaccine mandates are wrongheaded and
counterproductive.
While they probably wouldn’t say it out
loud, it looks as though the bosses at vari-
ous state agencies in Oregon agree.
EDITORIALS
Unsigned editorials are the opinion of the East
Oregonian editorial board. Other columns,
letters and cartoons on this page express the
opinions of the authors and not necessarily
that of the East Oregonian.
LETTERS
The East Oregonian welcomes original letters
of 400 words or less on public issues and public
policies for publication in the newspaper and on
our website. The newspaper reserves the right
to withhold letters that address concerns about
individual services and products or letters that
infringe on the rights of private citizens. Letters
must be signed by the author and include the
city of residence and a daytime phone number.
The phone number will not be published.
Unsigned letters will not be published.
SEND LETTERS TO:
editor@eastoregonian.com,
or via mail to Andrew Cutler,
211 S.E. Byers Ave., Pendleton, OR 97801
Making a place for predators
BILL
ANEY
THIS LAND IS OUR LAND
T
his year I had two opportunities
to visit a remote location at the
very western tip of the Aleutian
Peninsula. The little village of Cold Bay,
Alaska, is about 100 people surrounded
by tribal, military and state and federal
wildlife refuge lands. Among the nonhu-
man residents of this area is a healthy
population of brown bears, and while
there I was impressed by how humans
and bears coexist in this environment.
Alaskans consistently teach brown
bears to steer clear of people. These
bears are hunted during the fall, and a
portion of the Cold Bay economy is tied
to guiding and outfitting bear hunters
with some hunters paying up to $40,000
for the opportunity. Bears that get into
trouble in town are quickly hazed away
or killed by residents, as allowed by
Alaska law. We witnessed one young
female brown bear killed in Cold Bay
after she broke into an outbuilding hold-
ing game meat.
The humans of Cold Bay have also
taken steps to coexist with bears. They
clean all fish and game on the town
dock, which is more than 600 yards
down a long pier. Every resident is
required to haul and immediately burn
their household garbage in a town dump
site. One doesn’t go hiking or fish-
ing without carrying some sort of bear
deterrent, with the most common choice
being a short-barreled shotgun loaded
with slugs.
The philosophy seems to be that a
good brown bear is one that runs away
at the sight of humans and avoids areas
where people live.
In the Pacific Northwest, wildlife
managers have a similar, but differ-
ent, challenge in the way they manage
wolves. This spring and summer the
Oregon Department of Fish and Wild-
life approved what they euphemisti-
cally call “lethal removal” of at least
13 wolves from mostly private pasture-
lands in Northeastern Oregon. These 13
wolves include eight of the 11 wolves in
the Lookout Mountain Pack southeast
of Baker City. Developing a taste for
domestic livestock is a bad habit if you
are a wolf that wants to survive in the
Blue Mountains.
One of the primary developers of
the Oregon wolf management plan told
me once that if we want to have wolves,
we must be committed to killing those
individuals that habitually prey on live-
stock. This pragmatic approach recog-
nizes the economic and social realities
of living with predators. Just like a good
brown bear is one that avoids humans, a
good wolf (and pack) avoids livestock,
as slow and tasty as they might be. I do
want wolves in Northeastern Oregon, so
I accept that problem wolves need to be
killed.
Immediately to our east, the state of
Idaho has taken a ruthless approach that
goes too far. This year the state allo-
cated $200,000 from hunting and fishing
license and tag fees to pay as much as
$2,500 bounties to hunters and trappers
who kill a wolf. So, if you are an elk
hunter deep in the Frank Church River
of No Return Wilderness and you see a
wolf, the state of Idaho will reward you
with cold hard cash for killing the animal
without any regard for whether the indi-
vidual has a history of eating livestock.
The state also removed a whole suite
of restrictions on hunting and trap-
ping methods for wolves including
night-hunting, using bait and dogs, and
hunting from motor vehicles.
The logic seems to be that wolves eat
deer and elk; hunters want more deer and
elk to hunt; so wolves should be killed
at every opportunity to give us more
deer and elk to hunt. I find this to be an
extremely selfish and arrogant approach
to managing our wildlife.
Last month I made the case that
public lands are the best place for elk,
and that by managing habitat on public
land we can make these areas more
attractive to elk — where they belong. I
would extend that same logic to wolves;
public lands, especially back country,
are the best places for wolves. We should
do all we can to encourage them to live
as wolves were intended, eating rabbits,
squirrels, and yes, deer and elk. I am a
deer and elk hunter, and I am willing to
give wolves their share first.
My personal ethic is informed both
by my faith and by my profession as a
biologist. Predators (and elk) are part of
creation, and as good stewards of this
creation we need to make a place for all
native creatures. The place isn’t in town,
and probably not on private pasture-
land. But to kill predators wherever
and whenever we can as part of some
misguided mission to increase deer and
elk numbers is selfish and ignores our
stewardship responsibilities.
Wolves in the back country? Let them
be.
———
Bill Aney is a forester and wildlife biol-
ogist living in Pendleton and loving the
Blue Mountains.
with city hall management. Will they
accept responsibility? Will those incon-
venienced be compensated? Will they
once again be rewarded for a less than
stellar performance?
Rick Rhode
Pendleton
Oregon regardless of political affiliation.
The latest example was redistricting
process. The house speaker originally
suggested a bipartisan approach but later
recanted under political pressure. There
is a laundry list of initiatives approved
by the voters only to be circumvented
by the governor and the democratic
controlled Legislature.
Everything from driver licenses for
illegal aliens to the corporate activity
tax. When the Oregon Legislature passed
a bill granting driver licenses to illegal
aliens it quickly overturned through the
referendum process. Over 85% of the
voters did not want to let illegal aliens
have driver licenses in Oregon. Brown
pushed the Legislature to pass another
bill granting the licenses disregarding
the will of the people. They attached the
emergency clause to the bill so it could
not be referred to the voters. Over 45%
of all bills passed during the last session
had the emergency clause attached.
Just my thoughts.
Joe Mesteth
Hermiston
YOUR VIEWS
The Urban Renewal
District blame game begins
The street replacement program in
Pendleton’s Urban Renewal District
appears to be in complete disarray, and
now the blame game begins. It wasn’t
all that long ago that Pendleton’s public
works director was boasting how costs
for replacing streets in the URD were
much lower than originally expected. To
achieve those lower costs, it appears that
timeline language allowed contractors to
work at a pretty leisurely pace.
That pace has stretched the time
frame of the project far beyond any
reasonable length, leaving residents and
businesses unable to use their streets, not
for days, but weeks, and in some cases
months.
Ultimately, as with any city project,
success depends on adequate planning,
planning for the very situations incurred
that resulted in the delay’s experienced.
After all, despite appearances, this is not
their first rodeo.
I submit that the blame rests directly
Oregon leaders have failed
to earn the public’s trust
I would like to respond to a column
in the Oct. 26 edition of the East Orego-
nian, titled “Vaccination falls prey to
political beliefs.” In essence, it alludes
the reason that Eastern Oregon lags
behind the rest of the state in vaccination
rates is due to political affiliation and
lack of trust in state government.
I don’t think political affiliation plays
as an important role as lack of trust in
state government.
Gov. Kate Brown, house Speaker
Tina Kotek, and Senate President Peter
Courtney have proven time and time
again a blatant disregard for the voters of