A4
Opinion
Blue Mountain Eagle
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
Oregon wolf
decision based on
facts, not fears
W
olves are thriving
across the West. In
Montana, Idaho,
Washington and Oregon they
are becoming a ¿[ture on the
landscape. A wolf pack has
even turned up in Northern
California.
In that conte[t, the Oregon
Fish and Wildlife Commission
made a solid decision last week
to take wolves off the state’s
endangered species list.
Four breeding pairs have
been in Eastern Oregon for
three consecutive years, as
is required in the state wolf
plan. Actually, the number
of breeding pairs is nine,
signaling that the population is
far healthier than the wolf plan
requires.
Add that to the fact that a
minimum of 82 wolves are
known to live in Eastern and
Southwestern Oregon and there
is little reason to worry about
wolves disappearing. Their
numbers have increased from 14
in 2009 to 82 this year.
And remember: Those are
minimum numbers that wildlife
managers have con¿rmed. The
actual population may be far
larger.
The criteria for delisting
the wolf in Oregon were in
the state’s wolf management
plan, which was the product of
prolonged and public debate
when it was written.
Now that wolves have met
those criteria for delisting, some
folks are looking for loopholes
to back out of the plan.
They are way out of line.
First, wolves in the western
two-thirds of the state remain
protected just as they have been
all along.
Only in the eastern one-
third of the state, where all but
seven of the wolves live, are
they affected at all, by allowing
wildlife managers more
Àe[ibility.
Second, Oregon ranchers,
who have been most affected
by the return of wolves, have
lived up to their part of the deal.
They’ve done it in the face of a
predator that as of the ¿rst of the
year had killed 114 cattle, sheep
and herding dogs and injured
many more.
That is only the number of
killings that wildlife managers
con¿rmed. /ast year, for
e[ample, 34 depredation
investigations resulted in only
11 con¿rmed wolf kills.
Though ranchers are
indemni¿ed for their livestock,
it doesn’t repay them for the
weight their other cattle lost
because of wolves or the e[tra
hours and effort required to
protect against wolf attacks.
Third, the Endangered
Species Act was aimed
at protecting plants and
animals that were in danger
of e[tinction. Wolves do not
¿t in that category. They are
robust predators that follow the
food and do not need special
treatment.
In fact, wolves were never
reintroduced in Oregon or
Washington state; they spilled
over from Idaho and British
Columbia, where the estimated
wolf population is 10,000.
More than 50,000 wolves live
in Canada and 30,000 live in
Alaska,
It de¿es logic to argue that
the wolf is on the brink of
e[tinction.
Yet earnest groups of activists
insist that, somehow, wolves are
getting short shrift in Oregon.
Some are saying the state’s
biologists didn’t jump through
an adequate number of hoops
before recommending that
wolves be delisted. They say
they might sue.
If they do, we’ll know
their concern isn’t for wolves,
which are continuing to thrive
and multiply despite all of the
fearful predictions activists
have made over the years.
L ETTERS TO THE E DITOR
Thanks for the
veterans ceremony
To the Editor:
On Monday, Nov. 9, Grant Union
students and faculty honored coun-
ty veterans. The sincere ceremony,
from the Pledge of Allegiance, stu-
dents singing “The Star-Spangled
Banner” and “God Bless America”
to the background of a beautiful
large American Àag that unrolled
from the ceiling of the gym, was im-
pressive and appreciated.
The event was completed with
the students and teachers passing in
line to shake our hands and present
each vet with hand-written notes of
appreciation for our military ser-
vice.
From an old WWII and Korean
War veteran, I want to say “Thanks”
to those who made the event possi-
ble, and realize freedom isn’t free.
Joseph E. Schmitz
John Day
Commissioners need
a spokesperson
To the Editor:
The three county commissioners
each speak their own opinion. That’s
friction. With that attitude, the coun-
ty is always a loser.
They need a secretary or spokes-
person who makes a statement to the
press, the three of them represented
as a whole, undivided public elected
unity.
W. Toop
Canyon City
W HERE TO W RITE
GRANT COUNTY
Grant County Courthouse — 201
S. Humbolt St., Suite 280, Canyon City
97820. Phone: 541-575-0059. Fax: 541-
575-2248.
Canyon City — P.O. Box 276, Canyon
City 97820. Phone: 541-575-0509. Fax:
541-575-0515. Email: tocc1862@centu-
rylink.net.
Dayville — P.O. Box 321, Dayville
97825. Phone: 541-987-2188. Fax: 541-
987-2187. Email:dville@ortelco.net
John Day — 450 E. Main St, John Day,
97845. Phone: 541-575-0028. Fax: 541-
575-1721. Email: cityjd@centurytel.net.
Blue Mountain
EAGLE
P UBLISHED EVERY
W EDNESDAY BY
/ong CreeN — P.O. Box 489, Long
Creek 97856. Phone: 541-421-3601. Fax:
541-421-3075. Email: info@cityoÀong-
creek.com.
Monument — P.O. Box 426, Monu-
ment 97864. Phone and fax: 541-934-
2025. Email: monument@oregontrail.net.
Mt 9ernon — P.O. Box 647, Mt.
Vernon 97865. Phone: 541-932-4688. Fax:
541-932-4222. Email: cmtv@ortelco.net.
Prairie City — P.O. Box 370, Prairie
City 97869. Phone: 541-820-3605. Fax:
820-3566. Email: pchall@ortelco.net.
Seneca — P.O. Box 208, Seneca
97873. Phone and fax: 541-542-2161.
Email: cityseneca@centurytel.net.
Wolf supporters use delisting
as a means of fundraising
By Doug Whitsett
For the Blue Mountain Eagle
Some of the ¿rst governance
meetings held in Oregon were con-
vened in 1843, due to concerns over
wolves killing livestock. It required
more than 100 years of concerted
effort before the last Oregon wolf
was presented for bounty in 1946.
Due entirely to their ill-advised re-
introduction, the same issue is be-
ing actively debated today, more
than 10 years after the ¿rst control
efforts began.
/ast week, the Oregon Fish and
Wildlife Commission voted 4-2 to
delist the Canadian gray wolf from
the state’s endangered species list.
The commission’s decision came
following an entire day of testimo-
ny.
People from throughout the state
attended the meeting, including
wolf advocates primarily from Port-
land and Eugene. Their perspective
was countered by representatives
of the Oregon Hunters Association,
the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association
and many other residents of Eastern
Oregon. Recent commission ap-
pointee Jason Atkinson was once
again absent from the proceedings.
The commission heard presenta-
tions from the Oregon Department
of Fish and Wildlife’s wolf program
coordinator, as well as one of the
program’s original architects, a bi-
ologist who has since retired. The
presentations included maps of the
areas in which wolves are known to
e[ist in Oregon. It clearly showed
that the ape[ predators are found
nowhere near Portland or Eugene,
but largely in the northeastern part
of the state.
The commission then began
hearing arguments representing
both sides of the issue including
oral testimony from my of¿ce. We
testi¿ed that according to recent
press accounts, constituent oper-
ators of a century ranch located in
northern Klamath County awoke
on three consecutive mornings to
¿nd that wolves had maimed or
killed their cattle. Also placed into
the record by my of¿ce was written
testimony provided by representa-
tives of Oregon Wild and the Sierra
Club during a meeting of the House
Agriculture and Natural Resources
Committee last April.
That committee had considered
a bill that would have authorized
the /egislature to be in charge of
the wolf delisting decision. At that
time, environmentalists testi¿ed
they believed the /egislature did
not have the e[pertise to make a
delisting decision and that the Fish
and Wildlife Commission was the
only body capable of making such
a determination:
“Managing our state’s wildlife
is the role and responsibility of the
Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife, and decisions regarding
listing or delisting species are en-
trusted to the Oregon Department
of Fish and Wildlife, and decisions
regarding listing or delisting spe-
cies are entrusted to the Oregon
Fish and Wildlife Commission.
These entities have the necessary
Grant County’s Weekly Newspaper
P UBLISHER ............................... M ARISSA W ILLIAMS , MARISSA @ BMEAGLE . COM
E DITOR .................................... EDITOR @ BMEAGLE . COM
A DMINISTRATIVE A SSISTANT ........ K RISTINA K REGER , KRISTINA @ BMEAGLE . COM
E DITORIAL A SSISTANT ................ C HERYL H OEFLER , CHERYL @ BMEAGLE . COM
C OMMUNITY N EWS .................... A NGEL C ARPENTER , ANGEL @ BMEAGLE . COM
S PORTS ................................... A NGEL C ARPENTER , ANGEL @ BMEAGLE . COM
M ARKETING R EP ....................... K IM K ELL , ADS @ BMEAGLE . COM
O FFICE M ANAGER ..................... L INDSAY B ULLOCK , OFFICE @ BMEAGLE . COM
MEMBER OREGON NEWSPAPER PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION
scienti¿c, policy
and legal e[per-
tise to make these
decisions, and the
processes to ensure
full
compliance
with the law and
Sen. Doug opportunities for
public participa-
Whitsett
tion.”
Now that the commission has
made its decision, we believe it
is important for them to hear and
understand that quote. It would be
much more dif¿cult for environ-
mentalists to successfully overturn
a delisting made by the /egislative
Assembly than a delisting made by
the commission.
We understand that environ-
mental organizations are unhappy
with the commission’s decision
and believe they are likely to sue
the commission, even though they
nuanced their delisting decision
by suggesting that the /egisla-
ture should limit the delisting to
Eastern Oregon and signi¿cantly
enhance the penalty for killing a
wolf. Under current Oregon law,
that penalty is a 6,250 ¿ne and up
to one year in jail.
Much of the testimony provided
by environmentalists at the hearing
appeared to be based on emotion
rather than reality. A frequent argu-
ment was that the delisting would
open the door for the wholesale
slaughter of wolves. This is simply
not true.
Although a giant step forward
for protection of some livestock,
the state delisting does not allow
the killing of any wolf in the area
designated as Western Oregon,
lethal action may only be taken
against wolves in the area des-
ignated as Eastern Oregon, and
then only when they are literally
“caught in the act” of killing or
maiming livestock.
The commission action will
provide little help to reduce wolf
depredation in Klamath County
because, absurdly, Western Ore-
gon is now de¿ned to include most
of Central and Southwestern Or-
egon. Therefore, only non-lethal
means are being deployed to dis-
courage the lone wolf that killed
and maimed the Klamath County
calves.
The Oregon Endangered Spe-
cies Act requires conservation that
brings a species to the point where
measures are no longer necessary.
It requires the commission to base
the delisting on scienti¿c criteria
related to the species’ biological
status in Oregon and mandates the
use of documented and veri¿able
scienti¿c information.
Oregon’s current wolf plan was
developed in 2009, and was a col-
laborative effort directly involving
all of the stakeholders, including
environmental groups. It was ap-
proved unanimously in the Senate
and had broad bipartisan support in
the House.
Under the plan, it was agreed that
the delisting could be considered
once the wolf population reached
a speci¿c threshold. That threshold
was reached nearly a year ago.
1 YEAR SUBSCRIPTION RATES
(including online access)
Grant County .....................................$40
Everywhere else in U.S. .....................$51
Outside Continental U.S. ....................$60
Subscriptions must be paid prior to delivery
Periodicals Postage Paid at John
'a\ and additional Pailing oIÀces
POSTMASTER
send address changes to:
Blue Mountain Eagle
195 N. Canyon Blvd.
John Day, OR 97845-1187
USPS 226-340
wwwMyEagleNewscoP
Ranchers and other people in
Eastern Oregon upheld their part of
the bargain. They endured the last
several years abiding by the terms
of the wolf plan, with the under-
standing that delisting would occur
once the wolf population reached
the milestone established under the
agreement.
/ast April, ODFW issued a draft
evaluation recommending delisting
of the wolf. ODFW staff made the
recommendation to delist the wolf
last month based on their best sci-
ence and reiterated the recommen-
dation during the hearing.
They based their recommenda-
tion on the fact that Oregon wolves
are not in danger of e[tinction, and
that e[isting programs and regu-
lations are adequate to protect the
species and its habitat. In short, the
plan was created, agreed upon, and
the criteria for delisting has now
been e[ceeded.
The Oregon wolf plan does not
allow for hunting or other unau-
thorized killing of wolves. It only
allows for taking of wolves as a
management tool, in response to
depredation. Nonetheless, environ-
mentalist organizations attempted
to use their typical tactics to pur-
sue their agenda. Their rhetoric is
reminiscent of the disastrous 1994
Northwest Forest Management
Plan, when stakeholders came to
an e[tensive agreement that was
almost immediately derailed by
environmental groups failing to act
in good faith. The lengthy trail of
lawsuits and devastated rural com-
munities is now the true legacy of
those efforts.
For wolf advocates, the delisting
represents a major setback in their
concerted, coordinated and contin-
ued efforts to eliminate the grazing
of cattle and sheep on public lands.
The most signi¿cant change result-
ing from the delisting is that envi-
ronmentalists would no longer be
able to use the Oregon ESA to ¿le
frivolous lawsuits under the guise
of protecting the wolves.
Within hours of the commis-
sion’s decision, the Center for
Biological Diversity was already
using the delisting for fundrais-
ing purposes. They are promising
to take the ODFW to court with-
in days to overturn the delisting.
Apparently, they now believe the
ODFW e[pert scientists are inca-
pable making a decision based on
sound science.
/ast week’s delisting decision
ultimately represents a hard-
fought victory for rural Orego-
nians who have lived under the
constant threat posed by these dan-
gerous and destructive predators.
Hopefully, common sense will con-
tinue to prevail, and the organized
wolf advocates will no longer be
able to use the wolves to advance
their agenda to deliberately destroy
the livelihoods of people outside the
Willamette Valley.
Please remember — if we do not
stand up for rural Oregon, no one
will.
Sen. Doug Whitsett represents
District 28 in the Oregon Legisla-
ture.
Copyright © 2015 Blue Mountain Eagle
All rights reserved. No part of this
publication covered by the copyright
hereon may be reproduced or
copied in any form or by any means
— graphic, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, taping or
information storage and retrieval
systems — without written
permission of the publisher.
wwwIaceEooNcoPMyEagleNews
@MyEagleNews