PAGE LABEL
AROUND THE REGION
Running with the big dogs
Oregon ranchers turn to
bigger guard animals to
protect livestock from wolves
By KRISTIAN FODEN-VENCIL
Oregon Public Broadcasting
BAKER CITY — For the last few
weeks, rancher Kim Kerns has been
living in a 1970s trailer, up on a high
meadow, with 550 sheep as they fatten
up on spring grass.
Her family has used livestock pro-
tection dogs up here since the 1980s
when she fi rst got a Maremma guard
dog from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture.
But that was before wolves
returned.
“We’ve actually kind of changed
the type and size of dog we use,” she
said. “We’re using a bigger and more
aggressive guard dog now than we did
in the ’80s and even the ’90s.”
Now, her dogs are a mix of Akbash,
Kangal and Anatolian, three massive,
ancient breeds out of Turkey. All of
them can be 100 pounds or more and
have a bite pressure of 740 pounds
per square inch. Statistics vary, but a
wolf’s bite force is between 400 psi
and 1,500 psi.
Kerns runs eight guard dogs at a
cost of $500 a month in feed. But she
said the animals pay their ways by
reducing the labor of controlling sheep
and reducing predator kills.
Over the last couple of decades,
Oregon and much of the West has
been conducting an enormous ecolog-
ical experiment by allowing wolves to
once more roam the landscape.
For ranchers, wolves are another
predator to guard against. But unlike
coyotes, bears, bobcats or mountain
lions, wolves hunt in packs and can be
very persistent. They’re also smart. So
they learn quickly that a sound cannon,
a bunch of fl ags, or even gunfi re into
the air aren’t a real danger. And they
return.
Kerns remembers a two-week
period last year when wolves were
picking off her sheep, one by one.
Even her dogs weren’t a match.
“We weren’t getting any sleep, the
guard dogs weren’t getting any sleep,
everybody was run ragged,” she said.
“And it was terrifying. Like it was fl at
scary.”
She tried everything, from spot-
lights and electrical fences at night, but
the wolves kept coming.
“Finally we just decided that we
couldn’t take it anymore. We moved
the sheep a couple of miles,” she said.
“It seemed to be outside of where the
wolves were.”
Now, Kerns relies on the dogs to
alert her to wolves. They can smell
or see a wolf well before she can, and
they start to bark and get agitated.
Kerns surrounds her sheep with a
Port lands
$2 million
expansion
grant
By MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Press
Kristian Foden-Vencil/Oregon Public Broadcasting
Shirley Shold greets her livestock protection dogs out on her ranch just east of Baker City.
Kristian Foden-Vencil/Oregon Public Broadcasting
Rancher Shirley Shold breeds Akbash Kangal dogs for ranchers who want
bigger livestock protection animals, now that wolves are in Eastern Oregon.
sturdy electric fence at night or moves
them to another pasture. She is per-
mitted to shoot a wolf if it’s actively
attacking. But since they’re federally
protected, she needs really good proof.
Also, shooting a wolf in a herd would
just as likely result in the death of a
sheep.
The Oregon Department of Agri-
culture has a compensation program to
reimburse ranchers. But Kerns said it
pays little and the loss of just one ewe
can cause real damage, even though it
might only fetch $200 at market.
“There are some 5- or 6-year-old
ewes in there that know every single
camp we go to. Every single water-
hole,” Kerns said. “That ewe is really
irreplaceable in my fl ock.”
Kerns thinks the compensation pro-
gram just gives the public permission
to turn a blind eye to the problem.
Unlike many ranchers, Kerns
doesn’t want to see wolves elimi-
nated again. But she’d like a quicker
response from the government when
she sends in a kill request.
Another rancher in the Baker City
area, Shirley Shold, agrees: “I think it
would be better for everyone, and the
packs, if they were spread out more.”
She started breeding dogs that are
suitable for herds after fi nding freshly
killed calves and lambs.
“Seeing the loss of a newborn
life was very hard,” said Shold, who
moved from Portland 12 years ago.
“So I started thinking, we’ve got
to do something diff erent. And I was
talking to a fellow rancher and she
said, ‘If you’ve got wolves, you want
Kangal dogs.’”
So Shold got a Kangal and Akbash
pair and now breeds them for other
ranchers at about $800 a head.
How good the dogs turn out to be
depends largely on their nature, said
Shold. Some dogs are more nurturing
and remain in the middle of their herds.
While other dogs become perime-
ter dogs, scouting outside the herd for
predators.
Watching them is like watching a
sheep dog trial. Except that instead of
a human issuing orders, these dogs fol-
low their inner natures.
But many traditional ranchers
aren’t convinced the dogs can keep
wolves away and, they point out, the
dogs are expensive to feed.
But Shold thinks attitudes are
changing as more wolves appear
and ranchers see others in the busi-
ness using large dogs to protect their
livestock.
“Everybody started paying atten-
tion,” she said. “People really started
… watching the dogs because they can
observe them from the highway, and I
know it’s making an impact. They’re
seeing that this can help.”
The dogs’ ability to manage a sheep
herd is well recognized. But Shold
wants to integrate them into cattle
herds as well.
Others aren’t so sure. They point
out that cows don’t herd together
like sheep. That means the dogs have
to patrol much larger areas. But on
Shold’s ranch, the cattle do seem toler-
ant of the dogs.
Brian Ratliff , with the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife, said
some ranchers are seeing success with
the large dog breeds.
“Livestock protection dogs will
work or have some noticeable benefi ts
on certain operations. So, sheep and
goats. Also in confi ned areas, smaller
pastures, with cattle,” he said.
But it’s not about having the dogs
fi ght the wolves.
“The most important thing I think
that livestock protection dogs do … is
they alert the producer to what’s going
on,” he said.
Back on the slopes of Kim Kerns’
ranch, she watches her dogs move the
herd to greener pastures. She said yes,
the dogs are useful: ”They’re another
tool in the tool box.”
But they’re not a silver bullet.
Greater Idaho map shrinks
By JOE SIESS
The Bulletin
BEND — The long-shot Greater
Idaho movement reconfi gured its
map after two coastal and south-
ern Oregon counties rejected bal-
lot measures last week that would
have required county commission-
ers to study becoming part of a dif-
ferent state.
While the setback does not spell
the end for the Greater Idaho move-
ment, which seeks to move the bor-
der of Idaho to include all of Eastern
Oregon, it is a sign most of the peo-
ple who hope to see the movement
succeed are in rural counties east of
the Cascades.
The likelihood the border would
be changed is remote, as it would
require the approval of both the Ore-
gon and Idaho legislatures in addi-
tion to approval by Congress, but for
the movement’s leaders, part of the
point is to send a message to Salem
and to get more rural Oregonians to
the ballot box.
The movement’s new map now
excludes Douglas, Coos, Curry,
Josephine and Jackson counties, but
includes nearly everything east of
the Deschutes River. The Bend area
would remain in Oregon, but other
parts of Deschutes, Jeff erson, and
Wasco counties would be annexed
to Idaho. Most of Klamath County,
which in Tuesday’s election became
the ninth county to support the move-
ment, would be annexed as well.
Jeff erson County narrowly
WEDNESDAY
June 1, 2022
Submitted Image
A redrawn map by the Greater Idaho movement.
approved the Greater Idaho ballot
measure in 2020. It asked county
residents if they wanted the Jeff erson
County Commission to meet twice a
year to discuss the initiative.
Kelly Simmelink, a Jeff erson
County commissioner, said while he is
willing to do what he can to honor the
people’s vote, he does not have high
hopes for the movement’s success.
“I applaud the eff orts of peo-
ple that want to be represented,”
Simmelink said. “I get it. Eastern
Oregon, anything east of the Cas-
cades, has a long record of being
underrepresented.
“We need to make Oregon work
for all of us … I want my Oregon to
be the best it can be. The state is run
in a fashion that it is a one size fi ts
all, and what works in Multnomah
County doesn’t work in Jeff erson...”
Mike McCarter, president of the
Greater Idaho eff ort, said the move-
ment intends to push forward, and the
main goal at this point is to start the
conversation in the state Legislature.
“We are working hard trying to
fi nd the champions in the state Leg-
islature that want to start the discus-
sion,” McCarter said. “I think that
what we are doing does send a mes-
sage to the Oregon Legislature that
they need to work across the state.”
McCarter said the movement’s
intention from the beginning was
never to force an issue on anybody,
but getting it on the ballot was an
important step in fi guring out where
the focus should be moving forward.
“Our move right now, we have
ready to turn in the signatures for
Morrow County, to get them on the
ballot in November,” McCarter said.
“And we have signatures lined up to
put Wallowa County on next May’s
election. And we are trying to work
with Wheeler and Gilliam counties
to get them a petition going so we
can get them on the ballot.”
“So, we are going to continue on.
This is not a step back. It’s maybe a
change of direction a little more,” he
added.
BOARDMAN — A unique
rail-to-barge grain facility at Ore-
gon’s Port of Morrow is expanding
with help from a $2 million grant
recently approved by state trans-
portation offi cials.
The Morrow County Grain
Growers cooperative has won
approval from the Oregon Trans-
portation Commission for funding
that will cover about two-thirds of
the $3 million project’s cost.
“It’s worked great so far and
we hope it will give us that much
more capability,” said Kevin Gray,
the cooperative’s CEO, of the grain
handling operation.
Originally completed in 2019,
the facility is the only one of its
kind along the Columbia River that
can unload grain from rail cars and
then load it into barges headed for
downstream export elevators.
“It’s a time saver just because
of the congestion on the railroads,”
Gray said.
The expansion project will
install a new 600,000-bushel grain
bin and associated conveyors
that will connect it to the existing
facility.
Six grain bins already stood at
the location when the cooperative
built the $7.5 million rail-to-barge
system, whose cost included instal-
lation of a seventh bin.
The project recently approved
for Connect Oregon grant funding
will bring the number of bins to
eight, with room for fi ve more and
a grain bunker left at the site.
Gray said the additional bin
is meant to improve the facility’s
fl exibility, since until now it’s occa-
sionally been forced to reject pro-
posed grain loads because the exist-
ing bins were in use.
Even if the bins have storage
capacity left, they’re still limited
to storing the type of grain each
one already contains, he said. “You
can’t put corn in the same bin you
put wheat in.”
Grain shippers benefi t from
using the facility because their
loads can bypass backed-up rail
traffi c in Portland, Gray said.
By switching to a river barge,
shippers can have their grain loaded
into export elevators in Portland,
Ore., and Vancouver, Wash., within
18 hours, versus a couple days with
rail cars, he said.
“It’s a great way to get grain
to access the Pacifi c Northwest
export markets without having to
get a train into Portland,” he said.
“It gave them another path to their
export elevator.”
Local grain farmers can also rely
on the rail-to-barge facility, but its
connection to two major railroads
is primarily intended for loads from
distant sources, such as Minnesota
and North Dakota, Gray said.
Unlike some grain storage facil-
ities, which are dedicated to grain
from certain major traders, the
cooperative’s bins can be used by
any shipper, he said. “We’re not
tied to any one grain company. We
have fl exibility.”
Grain grown in the central U.S.
commonly reaches Asian markets
by traveling via rail to export facil-
ities along the Columbia River,
where it’s picked up by ships
headed across the Pacifi c Ocean,
he said.
Another options is for the grain
to be shipped to Gulf of Mexico
export facilities, where it’s loaded
onto ocean carriers that must fi rst
pass through the Panama Canal —
a route that’s typically more expen-
sive, Gray said.
The cooperative saw a surge in
demand for its facility in 2020 after
storms shut down export facilities
along the Gulf of Mexico, he said.
Aside from serving as a tran-
sit point for Asian-bound grain, the
facility is also useful for local dair-
ies and feedlots, since it can import
and store feed grains, Gray said.
Shipping feed grains by rail is less
expensive than trucking it into the
area.
“This provides a way to meet
the local livestock demand as well
as help our customers save on
transportation costs,” he said.