MyEagleNews.com
STATE
Environmental groups oppose
$1M wolf compensation bill
By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Press
SALEM 4 Environmental groups
oppose providing Oregon ranchers
with an additional $1 million in com-
pensation for wolf problems, arguing
the bill sends a bad message about the
predators.
Supporters of House Bill 4127
counter that as wolves spread across
the state, it9s necessary to devote more
money to pay ranchers for lost live-
stock and for preventive measures.
<We need to ensure this fund
doesn9t go dry,= said Rep. Bobby
Levy, R-Echo, referring to the Wolf
Management Compensation and Pro-
active Trust Fund created in 2011.
<We have over twice as many con-
¿UPHG GHSUHGDWLRQV DV ZH VDZ LQ
2020,= Levy said, noting that wolves
killed 41 cows, 23 sheep, 9 goats and
a guard dog last year.
Based on previous levels of com-
pensation, that means ranchers would
need more than $750,000 in compen-
VDWLRQIRUODVW\HDU¶VFRQ¿UPHGORVVHV
she said.
For the current biennium, Oregon
has $400,000 per year in federal and
state money authorized for wolf com-
pensation, said Jonathan Sandau, spe-
cial assistant to the director at the Ore-
gon Department of Agriculture.
On average over the past three
years, the wolf compensation fund
has annually received $425,000 in
requests and paid out $185,000,
Sandau said.
At least 30% of the funds must be
dedicated to prevention, but usually
that proportion is much higher, hov-
ering at about 70% per year, he said.
Coalitions of environmental non-
SUR¿W JURXSV KDYH FRPH RXW DJDLQVW
HB 4127, saying it will provide funds
for missing livestock not necessarily
killed by wolves.
The Oregon Conservation Net-
work, a coalition of 30 organizations,
opposes <throwing more money at
missing livestock,= partly because it
ZLOO FRQÀDWH ZD\ZDUG DQLPDOV ZLWK
wolf depredations, said Julie McGraw,
the network9s representative at a
recent House Agriculture, Land Use
and Water Committee hearing.
<The more it appears that wolves
are killing livestock, the worse it is
going to be in terms of the quality of
the relationship with people trying to
raise livestock,= she said.
The number of livestock that have
allegedly gone missing due to wolves
IDUVXUSDVVHVWKHQXPEHURIFRQ¿UPHG
depredations, said Julie Moser, wildlife
program coordinator for the Oregon
:LOGQRQSUR¿W
Meanwhile, livestock go missing
for any number of reasons, so those
FODLPVIRUFRPSHQVDWLRQDUHQ¶WYHUL¿
able, Moser said.
<Blaming wolves for any unac-
FRXQWHGOLYHVWRFNQRWRQO\VXSHU¿FLDOO\
LQÀDWHV ZROIOLYHVWRFN FRQÀLFW EXW LW
perpetuates a problematic stigma about
wolves,= she said.
Critics of the bill also argued the
wolf compensation fund is prone to
misuse and should be reformed, while
adding more money to it will create a
<moral hazard= by encouraging ranch-
ers not to look for missing animals.
<Making the fund easier to abuse is
not a solution,= said Bethany Cotton,
conservation director for the Cascadia
:LOGODQGVQRQSUR¿W
The bill9s supporters pointed out
that despite the critics9 focus on miss-
ing livestock, the added funding would
go to the wolf compensation program
as a whole.
<There9s a lot of conjecture on this,
but there are really no facts,= said Rep.
David Brock-Smith, R-Port Orford.
With wolf depredations reaching
a record level in 2021, it9s worth ade-
quately funding the wolf compensation
program to encourage acceptance of
state policies for the species, said Rep.
Mark Owens, R-Crane.
<It9s a trend that9s starting to possi-
bly erode the social tolerance we started
to develop with the wolf management
plan,= Owens said of rising depreda-
tions. <Nothing in this bill changes the
wolf management plan. Nothing in this
bill harms wolves. In fact, this bill is
there to support that social tolerance of
wolf interactions with our public.=
Wolves cause problems for the live-
stock industry that go beyond dep-
redations, such as lower conception
rates and weight loss, said Todd Nash,
president of the Oregon Cattlemen9s
Association and a Wallowa County
commissioner.
<If we paid for the missing live-
VWRFNDQGWKHFRQ¿UPHGGHSUHGDWLRQV
it wouldn9t come close to capturing the
cost incurred by ranchers,= Nash said.
<If there9s going to be fraud in the sys-
tem, the fraud is that we have a com-
pensation system and there are not
funds available.=
Wednesday, February 16, 2022
A7
Oregon ranchers decry wolf ruling
By GEORGE PLAVEN
Capital Press
SALEM 4 A federal judge9s
decision to renew endangered spe-
cies protections for some gray
wolves in the Lower 48 states is
drawing criticism from Oregon
ranchers who say they feel defense-
less to protect their livestock from
chronic attacks.
Environmental groups sued the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
former Interior Secretary David
Bernhardt after the Trump admin-
istration removed wolves from the
endangered species list in 2020,
arguing the delisting was premature.
86'LVWULFW-XGJH-H൵UH\:KLWH
UXOHG LQ IDYRU RI WKH SODLQWL൵V RQ
Feb. 10.
<Restoring federal protections
means that these vitally import-
ant animals will receive the neces-
sary support to recover and thrive
in the years ahead,= said Jamie Rap-
paport Clark, president and CEO of
Defenders of Wildlife, one of six
JURXSVWKDW¿OHGWKHODZVXLW
Oregon9s minimum wolf popu-
lation was 173 at the end of 2020.
An updated estimate from the state
Department of Fish & Wildlife is
expected later this spring.
The Oregon Cattlemen9s Asso-
ciation, which represents ranch-
ers statewide, released a statement
blasting the ruling.
OCA President Todd Nash said
that while environmental groups
such as Defenders of Wildlife and
the Center for Biological Diversity
have seats at the table for develop-
ing Oregon9s Wolf Conservation
and Management Plan, <they are
QHYHU VDWLV¿HG ZLWK WKH EURNHUHG
compromises.=
Gray wolves were reintroduced
in Central Idaho and Yellowstone
National Park in the mid-1990s,
and since then the species has
expanded both in population and
geographical area beyond expecta-
tions, Nash said.
<This decision to re-list beyond
that experimental area builds mis-
trust in our legal system and com-
promises the integrity of the
Endangered Species Act,= Nash
said.
The ruling does not cover
wolves in Eastern Oregon, where
the majority of packs are. State
ZLOGOLIH R൶
FLDOV ZLOO FRQWLQXH WR
manage wolves east of highways
ODFW
Wolves caught by an Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife trail camera.
395, 78 and 95.
Wolves in the western two-
thirds of Oregon, however, will
be returned to the federal ESA 4
including the Rogue pack, which
was responsible for more than half
RI DOO FRQ¿UPHG ZROI DWWDFNV RQ
livestock in 2020.
Veril Nelson, a cattle rancher in
Oakland and co-chair of the OCA
Wolf Committee, said producers
are frustrated by the about-face in
wolf management.
<The bottom line is, we9re hung
out to dry,= Nelson said. <Our
options are very few.=
Upon delisting, wolves in West-
ern Oregon were placed under
Phase I of the state wolf plan,
which allows for killing wolves
in defense of livestock in limited
circumstances.
Wolves could be killed if caught
in the act of chasing or biting live-
stock, or if a pack incurred four
<qualifying= depredations in a six-
month period. To qualify, ranchers
must be using some kind of non-le-
thal deterrents 4 such as range rid-
ers 4 and remove all carcasses or
bone piles that might attract wolves.
With federal protections back
in place, those options are now
R൵ WKH WDEOH 1HOVRQ VDLG DGGLQJ
that non-lethal tools are not 100%
H൵HFWLYHDQGFRVWO\WRPDLQWDLQ
<How many range riders do you
need to cover 40,000 acres? It9s not
doable,= he said. <You can be out
there and do the best you can, but
all of those things cost money.=
OCA is supporting House Bill
4127 in the Legislature that would
provide an additional $1 million
for the state9s wolf compensation
fund to reimburse ranchers for
dead and missing livestock, as well
as non-lethal prevention. A public
hearing for the bill was held Feb. 9.
Jonathan Sandau, a special
assistant to the director at the Ore-
gon Department of Agriculture,
said the wolf compensation fund
has annually received on average
$425,000 in requests from ranchers,
while paying out just $185,000.
Critics argued the wolf compen-
sation fund is prone to misuse, and
increasing funding may encourage
ranchers not to look for missing ani-
mals but instead default to blaming
wolves
GOT INVASIVE ANNUAL GRASSES?
Grant SWCD Weed Control Dept.
Working for You in 2022
|anks to the Grant County Court and Northeast Oregon Forests Resource
Advisory Committee, Grant Weed Control is able to oûer a 25% Cost
share program for Invasive Annual Grass Control on Private Grazing
Lands, through a Title II funded Grant Project. |is program will provide a
maximum $10,000 of invasive annual grass control services with a $2,500
maximum landowner contribution to qualifying participants. To be eligible
for participation, the treatment property must not be actively irrigated and
must be primarily managed for livestock grazing, minimum of 20 acres in
size, located within Grant County, and must contain invasive annual grass
species. Applications for this limited weed control assistance opportunity
will be ranked and funded on a ûrst come ûrst serve basis.
Contact: Grant Soil and Water Conservation District Office at
(541) 575-1554 or visit 721 S. Canyon Blvd., John Day, OR
97845 for applications and additional information.
|e application deadline for this program is March 11th, 2022.
S280965-1