PORTLAND — A return to moderate weather has blessed Oregon’s early strawberry crop with good size and flavor, growers report, and bodes well for state’s other signature berries as the summer unfolds.

“The quality is really good now,” said Matt Unger of Unger Farms west of Portland.

Unger said his berries came through a winter that brought record rain to the Portland area, then withstood an early April heat wave that included a record 85 degrees measured April 7 at Portland International Airport.

The warm weather was good for pollination, however, as bees were active, and a return to more typical spring weather after the unseasonable hot spell has improved sizing, Unger said. “Seventy-five to 80 (degrees) gives you the most sweet, beautiful berries,” he said.

The farm specializes in Hood strawberries that it sells to the New Seasons grocery chain in the Portland area. Hoods, known for their superior taste, have achieved cult status with some consumers thanks in part to a public relations campaign that annually trumpets their appearance in New Seasons stores.

Tom Lodge of Townsend Farms, a grower and processor in the Portland area, said the company’s berries were small and green when the heat wave hit and so weren’t effected. The farm grows the Tillamook variety of strawberries, most of which go through IQF (Individually Quick Frozen) processing and are bagged for store sale under various labels.

“This year should be a very good year,” Lodge said. “I think yields will be up a little over the past couple years; the quality should be good.”

The company also grows and processes blueberries, blackberries and raspberries, all of which are “coming along really good,” Lodge said.

He said blueberries should be ready for picking by mid-June or slightly after. “By June 25 or June 28 we’ll be inundated with blueberries,” he said.

Oregon ranks first nationally in blackberry production, primarily Marionberries, and ranks third in raspberry and strawberry production and fourth nationally in blueberries and cranberries. Berry crops are worth about $165 million annually.

Lodge said the reason for Oregon’s berry success is “100 percent climate.”

“We have nice cool evenings — not cold, not hot but cool — and warm sunny days,” he said. “That combination, along with the rains the Pacific Northwest is known for, all of that added together makes this a prime area for growing berries.”

SALEM — The enforcement of Oregon’s labor laws for forest workers was criticized by employee advocates and industry representatives alike during a recent legislative hearing.

Unscrupulous labor contractors were roundly cast as the culprits in offenses ranging from wage theft to unsafe working conditions during the May 24 informational meeting before the Senate Interim Committee on Workforce.

Two reforestation workers testified they’re routinely not provided with adequate equipment, not paid for overtime and intimidated into lying about workplace injuries.

Meanwhile, labor law inspections rarely occur and employers are often forewarned when they do, the workers said.

“They don’t treat us like we were people,” Andres Cortez, one of the workers, said through an interpreter.

However, it wasn’t only workers and their advocates who spoke about enforcement problems in the reforestation industry.

Michael Wheelock, owner of contracting company Grayback Forestry, said he’s been appalled by the treatment of some workers, which he compared to modern-age slavery.

Not all labor contractors are unethical, but there are “horror stories” of exploitation among employers seeking to cut costs and underbid competitors, Wheelock said.

“There’s a lot of them abusing the situation,” he said.

It would help to “level the playing field” among contractors if enforcement authorities made an example of a few bad actors who disregard overtime and workers compensation requirements, he said.

“There needs to be enforcement of those regulations. We don’t need more,” Wheelock said.

Avel Salgado, who owns the Oregon Forest Management Services contracting firm, said he tries to treat employees fairly because he was a forest worker for a long time.

However, Salgado said there needs to be better enforcement, particularly unannounced inspections of work sites.

Holding employers accountable for following the law is an “issue of prioritization” for agencies charged with enforcement, said Scott Dahlman, policy director of the Oregonians for Food and Shelter agribusiness group.

The regulatory system on the books is robust, he said. “There seems to be some gaps in enforcement that need to be addressed.”

Michael Wood, an administrator at the Oregon Occupational Health and Safety Administration, acknowledged that his agency only conducts about 18 investigations of reforestation crews a year.

“That’s not an enormous presence,” he said.

While some industries receive less regulatory scrutiny, construction and other high-risk businesses are generally subject to more inspections, he said.

The presence of labor regulators among workers in Oregon is high relative to other states, but it has decreased in recent decades, Wood said.

In the early 1990s, for example, an average company’s chances of being inspected by OR-OSHA was once in 15 years, but it’s now closer to once in 32 years, he said. The number of inspectors hasn’t grown in proportion to the state’s economy, he said.

The agency also faces a challenge in inspecting mobile work sites, since it’s difficult to find out their location without alerting the employer, Wood said.

Having employers constantly apprise regulators of their whereabouts would be immensely expensive, but the agency is examining more effective ways of conducting unannounced inspections, he said.

When inspectors show up at a work site, contractors in nearby areas also quickly learn of their presence, Wood said. “It didn’t used to be as bad because people didn’t used to all have cell phones.”

A judge has declared a mistrial in a lawsuit that claims multiple residents of Curry County suffered health problems from off-target pesticide spraying.

Pacific Air Research, an aerial applicator, and landowner Joseph Kaufman were accused of negligence by 15 plaintiffs who sought $4.2 million in damages for physical ailments allegedly caused by herbicides sprayed in 2013.

A jury trial was underway when Curry County Circuit Court Judge Cynthia Beaman declared a mistrial and dismissed the case on May 23 under a provision of Oregon law that will allow the complaint to be refiled.

The case was dismissed because an attorney for the plaintiffs was hospitalized for medical problems, according to a spokesperson for the court.

Advocates for the agriculture and forestry industries were concerned about the dispute because the constitutionality of Oregon’s “right to farm” law was called into question during the litigation recently.

Under the “right to farm” statute, farmers and foresters are protected from lawsuits accusing them of nuisance and trespass for performing generally accepted industry practices.

The defendants in this case raised the “right to farm” law as a defense and asked the judge to throw out the lawsuit.

Plaintiffs responded by requesting that the “right to farm” law be declared unconstitutional because it deprived them of a legal remedy for an injury.

The Oregon Farm Bureau, the Coos-Curry County Farm Bureau and the Oregon Forest & Industries Council submitted “friend of the court” arguments supporting the statute, but the judge didn’t come to a decision on its constitutionality.

Judge Beaman allowed the case to proceed so the facts could be decided by the jury while taking under advisement the plaintiff’s motion to declare the “right to farm” law unconstitutional.

Opponents of the “right to farm” law have criticized it for preventing people harmed by pesticide trespass from having their day in court.

Natural resource attorneys, on the other hand, have said the statute doesn’t protect unlawful pesticide applications.

A 3,000-acre brush fire swept across the Umatilla Chemical Depot west of Hermiston, Ore., on Monday, closing Interstate 82 to traffic after smoke blocked visibility and caused a wreck that sent four people to the hospital for treatment.

Fire departments from around the region responded to fight the fire, which burned over the top of the hundreds of cement igloos that once held munitions. Two buildings also were destroyed.

Smoke from the fire limited visibility, causing a crash involving four motorcycles, a Mini Cooper, an SUV and a sedan.

A LifeFlight helicopter flew one victim from the scene and ambulances took three other injured people to Good Shepherd Hospital in Hermiston.

Flames flared up along the side of the road, at one point jumping the interstate and burning the sagebrush. All four lanes were closed to traffic for several hours.

Hermiston Fire spokesman J.W. Roberts said about 70 responders fought the fire and helped with the accident. They were from fire agencies in Umatilla and Morrow counties, plus members of the Oregon Military Department, state police and transportation department and the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Nineteen engines and seven water tenders were dispatched, according to Hermiston Fire Chief Scott Stanton.

The spark of the fire may have come from an Oregon Army National Guard member training with an “artillery simulation round,” Roberts said, though the state military department considered the cause under investigation.

The U.S. Army is transferring the Umatilla Chemical Depot land to the Columbia Development Authority, a partnership of local government entities. Part of the land will be used for a National Guard training base, part of it will function as a nature preserve and some of it has been zoned industrial and will be marketed for economic development.

A reservoir expansion project in Oregon’s Hood River County has obtained $3 million as part of a bevy of water supply proposals recently funded by state regulators.

The money will cover roughly 70 percent of the cost of raising the Upper Kingsley Dam by nine feet, increasing its capacity by 50 percent, and replacing about two miles of leaky irrigation pipeline, which will reduce water losses by 15 percent.

The project is one of nine proposals to receive $8.9 million in grants from the state’s water supply development fund, which was created by lawmakers three years ago.

The Oregon Water Resources Commission signed off on the funding at its May 19 meeting, marking the first time that cash from the $14 million fund has been committed to projects.

Funding for the Kinglsey reservoir’s expansion was the largest investment made in the initial round of grant awards and represents the only project to create new water storage.

To receive the money, the project must release 25 percent of the newly stored water to increase streamflows and is subject to a “seasonally varying flow” analysis that may restrict its operations.

Most of the funding focuses on water conservation:

• $1.5 million to convert about 1,000 acres in Wallowa County from flood irrigation to sprinkler irrigation through the installation of center pivots, pumps and other equipment.

• $2.36 million to replace 12.5 miles of open canals with irrigation pipelines and make other improvements as part of three separate projects in the Tumalo, East Fork and Vale irrigation districts.

• $900,000 to install two deep water wells, pipelines and pumps in Wasco County.

• $600,000 to pay for fish passage and flow restoration modifications to the La Grande Reservoir in Union County.

• $250,000 to buy water rights and dedicate them to instream flows in Sun Creek to improve native fish habitat in Klamath County.

• $270,000 for equipment that would allow about 16,200 acre feet of drainage water to be recycled for irrigation in Klamath County.

Before the commission voted to approve the grants, the Middle Fork Irrigation District asked for its rejected application to be reconsidered.

The project, which would upgrade facilities to allow sediment-rich water to be used for irrigation, was ranked 10th in a list of 37 grant proposals, received many letters of support and had a significant amount of matching funds, said Craig DeHart, the district’s general manager.

“Our project was just as strong as other projects that were recommended for funding,” DeHart said.

The request sparked a discussion among commission members about how much money should be dispensed for projects, since $5.1 million was left in the fund for a second round of funding in 2017.

Commissioner Jeanne Lejeune questioned whether the remaining funds will hinder new appropriations from lawmakers.

“The legislature could say, ‘We gave you money, you had good applications, you didn’t spend all of it, and now you want more,” Lejeune said.

The Oregon Water Resources Congress, which represents irrigation districts, urged the commission to fund as many projects as possible during the first round.

The money will allow these projects to seek matching funds from other sources, said Lauren Smith, the group’s policy coordinator. “It gives them that leverage to go after those other funding programs.”

However, the commission ultimately rejected the idea of funding additional projects and voted to approve the nine proposals recommended by the Oregon Water Resources Department, which regulates state water.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — A defense lawyer in the Oregon wildlife refuge occupation case argued Monday that a federal conspiracy charge leveled against over two dozen people is constitutionally vague, could threaten free speech and should be dismissed.

Attorney Amy Baggio made that argument and others on the first day of legal motions in the case stemming from the Ammon Bundy-led 41-day armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge that started Jan. 2, The Oregonian/OregonLive reported.

The conspiracy charge provides a “sphere of protection” for federal employees, but it’s so broadly worded that it could restrict free speech and assembly designed to criticize the federal government, Baggio said.

“This statute can chill, it can threaten not only First Amendment expression but the Second Amendment right to bear arms,” Baggio said.

The occupiers in their takeover of the refuge wanted the government to relinquish public lands to locals and free two imprisoned ranchers.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Ethan Knight challenged Baggio’s statements, saying the conspiracy statute in this case is not about speech but about conduct. Knight said what makes their conduct criminal is the conspirators’ agreement to prevent federal officers from doing their work at the refuge.

U.S. District Judge Anna Brown said the statute does not criminalize mere criticism or mere protest.

“It criminalizes force, intimidation or threats against public employees preventing them from doing their jobs,” the judge said. Brown added that it’s OK to criticize U.S. Bureau of Land Management employees, but preventing them from doing their work on their property isn’t allowed under law.

The defense also wants a weapons charge against some of the occupiers dropped. It accuses some of the defendants of using or carrying a firearm to further a crime of violence. They contend that the underlying conspiracy isn’t a “violent crime.”

Knight argued the underlying conspiracy represents a violent crime, but he conceded that determining that presents a “close call” for the court.

Defense lawyers also asked prosecutors to give more specifics on the allegations against each defendant, to help determine who might go to trial together.

Brown says she’ll rule on the motions in the near future.

A Nevada man who participated in the Oregon occupation pleaded guilty last week to a federal conspiracy charge. In exchange for Corey Lequieu’s plea, prosecutors agreed to drop weapons charges.

The trial for the other 25 defendants is set for Sept. 7.

SALEM — Advocates and opponents of a proposed 2.5 million-acre national monument in Eastern Oregon tried to enlist the support of state lawmakers during a recent legislative hearing.

The two sides are mounting competing public relations campaigns to influence the possible designation of the Owyhee Canyonlands National Monument, which will ultimately be decided by President Barack Obama.

Critics say the area is bigger than the Yellowstone, Yosemite or Grand Canyon national parks and would cover 40 percent of Malheur County.

Ranchers and other natural resource users in the region have objected to the proposal, fearing the establishment of a national monument will entail new regulations on public land and invite additional environmental lawsuits.

“We see it as a rash and somewhat of a belligerent move to force a monument in this area,” rancher Elias Eiguren told the House Committee on Rural Communities, Land Use and Water on May 23.

While grazing could theoretically continue within the national monument, the details of livestock management within its boundaries would surely be subject to costly litigation, Eiguren said.

Rep. Cliff Bentz, R-Ontario, questioned why it’s necessary to designate the area as a national monument when it’s already protected under several federal environmental laws as a property of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.

“This land is so protected that nothing has happened on it for 150 years, that’s how protected it is,” Bentz said. “It’s already been frozen in place. Why add another layer?”

The Oregon Natural Desert Association and other environmental groups that support the monument proposal say they’re not trying to eliminate grazing, but instead want to prevent mining, transmission lines and oil and gas development.

The Owyhee Canyonlands currently aren’t protected from these threats under existing laws, said Brent Fenty, executive director of ONDA.

For about 30 years, the region has been a “wilderness study area,” which offers temporary protections that won’t become permanent unless approved by Congress, Fenty said.

He likened the situation to a marital engagement that hasn’t actually led to a wedding for decades.

“We have not made a commitment to holding this landscape together,” said Fenty.

Environmental groups have pushed for Congress to designate the Owyhee Canyonlands region in southeast Oregon as a “national conservation area,” but the effort hasn’t gained traction, which led to the national monument proposal, he said. National monuments can be established with an executive action by the president.

“You can only bring people to the table if they agree to come to the table,” he said of the Congressional proposal.

Supporters touted a poll they commissioned that showed 70 percent of Oregon residents supported permanent protections for the Owyhee Canyonlands, including 66 percent in Oregon’s 2nd Congressional District where the national monument would be located.

Tourism in the region would be boosted by such permanent protections, said John Sterling, executive director of the Conservation Alliance, which represents outdoor recreation companies.

“Protecting a place literally puts it on a map,” he said.

Monument opponents responded with their own poll results, which showed 73 percent of Oregonians believe that national monument designations should be approved by Congress rather than the president.

More than 60 percent of that poll’s respondents said the Owyhee Canyonlands area already has enough protections.

The surrounding community has only now begun to heal after the standoff at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge earlier this year, so the monument proposal threatens to reignite those tensions, said Brian Wolfe, Malheur County’s sheriff.

Wolfe said he feared for public safety if the monument proposal attracts militants to return to the region. “I fear they will not be reasonable,” he said.

SALEM — A proposed tax on the sales of large businesses would generate more than $6 billion in biennial state revenue starting in 2017-19, but it also would slow income, employment and population growth during the next five years, according to a state analysis of the initiative.

The report projects that the tax, which likely will be on the November general election ballot, would amount to a $600 per capita increase in state taxes each year. The tax would reduce private-sector employment from what otherwise would occur, while it would increase the number of government jobs. The net reduction in employment — private and public — would be about 20,000 statewide by 2022, according to the analysis.

“We don’t have any delusions. We know this won’t be the final word on it,” Legislative Revenue Officer Paul Warner said Monday morning. “We know there will be a lot more work and analysis to do, but hopefully this will be a starting point.”

Known as Initiative Petition 28 (IP 28), the proposed gross receipts tax measure backed by public employee unions and others around the state would increase the corporate tax by 2.5 percent on businesses with annual sales above $25 million.

The initiative would not affect the taxes directly paid by thousands of smaller corporations in the state.

It would, however, be the largest tax increase in state history.

An analysis of IP 28 by Oregon’s Legislative Revenue Office presented Monday morning to the Senate Interim Committee on Finance and Revenue in Salem, showed the measure would stabilize the state’s budget. At the same time, the costs of the tax would likely trickle down to consumers, increasing prices on daily items.

“The impact of IP 28 on consumer prices means that the marginal impact of the tax will be regressive,” the report states.

A household with median income of $51,075 would lose an estimated $613 in income in the form of higher prices and slower economic growth, the report shows. Job growth would slow by 1.6 percent in the private sector, but increase by 5.8 percent in the public sector.

“If it were in place for the 2012-13 fiscal year (the most recent year with complete state-by-state census data), IP 28 would have increased Oregon’s per capita state and local tax burden by roughly $600 to $4,501,” according to the state analysis. “At this level the state could have had the 20th highest per capita tax burden in that year compared to an actual rank of 28th. As a percent of income, IP 28 would have raised taxes from an actual 10.1 percent in 2012-13 to 11.6 percent. This would have moved Oregon to the ninth highest taxes as a percent of income versus an actual ranking of 26th.”

The heaviest impact from the tax would fall on wholesalers and retailers, Warner said.

The union-backed campaign, Our Oregon, submitted 130,000 signatures in support of the measure to the secretary of state’s office May 20 for verification. Only 88,184 are needed to qualify for the November ballot.

In a statement, Our Oregon said the report shows that by stabilizing the state budget, the measure will help hire back thousands of teachers, reduce health care costs and enhance senior services.

“Oregon’s unstable revenue stream has meant that economic crises consistently put vulnerable Oregonians at risk,” the statement says. “By making large corporations pay their fair share, IP 28 will better position the state to weather a future recession without making deep cuts.”

At the same time, Our Oregon spokeswoman Katherine Driessen questioned whether the analysis gives an accurate picture of the tax’s impact.

The Legislative Revenue Office “couldn’t model IP 28, so they, instead, applied a lower rate to all businesses,” Driessen said. “Of course, what IP 28 would really do is apply a 2.5 percent rate on sales above $25 million to fewer than 1,000 corporations. We appreciate the hard work that went into the report, but I think that’s a very important distinction to note.”

Warner acknowledged the techniques his office used to analyze the measure’s impact does not capture micro-level details at the individual industry or company level.

“However, we believe they do capture broad overall effects on the state economy pretty well,” Warner said.

Pat McCormick, a spokesman for a coalition of 500 businesses opposing the measure, disputed Our Oregon’s claim.

“This was specifically about IP 28,” McCormick said. “We have great confidence in the capability of the LRO to accurately present information with the best possible modeling, and they spent years building this model to accurately represent the state’s economic structures.

“The impact on the economy is going to be very difficult on Oregonians, especially those who are unable to bear those costs,” he added. “All of the aspects of the economic impact on those most struggling in our economy and the impact overall on the economy, the loss of jobs and so forth is of significant concern.”

“IP 28 would be a multi-billion dollar blank check for state lawmakers to spend with no plan or accountability for how the billions in new tax revenues would be used,” a statement from the business coalition, Defeat the Tax on Oregon Sales said.

Lawmakers in the Senate had been interested in offering an alternative to the tax measure during February’s session, but have encountered resistance from the House.

Sen. Mark Hass, D-Beaverton, chairman of the interim committee hearing the analysis Monday, proposed a smaller tax on corporations in February, but his bill never gained traction.

On Monday, he renewed his call to lawmakers to offer an alternative to the tax.

“There will be potent forces at work here to keep it from passing so that $6 billion could be zero, and yet our revenue issues will remain When I look at this and … the regressive nature of it makes me think if we can do this and guarantee revenues without that force, without that fight, why wouldn’t we do that? We can do that. I know members of this committee would like to do that without going to a world war.”

He called on House Speaker Tina Kotek, Gov. Kate Brown and lobbyists to find a way to compromise.

“We can do this and try to avoid this divisive fight in the fall. The last thing the state needs is a bitter campaign.”

Kotek, D-Portland, made it clear at the end of the session that she supports the measure. Brown has not taken a strong position on the measure or offered to negotiate an alternative. On Monday, she indicated her focus is now on making sure revenue from the tax goes to education.

“I greatly appreciate the analysis provided by the Legislative Revenue Office, which helps inform our understanding of the impacts of IP-28,” Brown said in a statement. “As I have said previously, the problem I remain focused on is how to improve our graduation rate and fund essential services while sustaining economic growth and protecting Oregon jobs. I will begin discussions with my legislative colleagues about a way forward that, should the measure pass, would safeguard new revenue for education while sustaining economic growth and protecting Oregon jobs.”

House Republican Leader Mike McLane issued a harsh statement Monday against the measure.

“Come November, Oregonians will see IP 28 exactly for what it is: an ill-conceived, disingenuous measure that would have dramatic consequences for family budgets and the economic future of our state,” McLane said.

Any compromise that comes at this stage could dampen the campaign for the measure, but it would do nothing to keep the measure off the ballot. Once signatures are verified, the measure cannot be withdrawn.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — A recall petition against a Harney County official who didn’t support the armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge has gathered enough signatures to force him to resign or face a recall election.

The Oregonian/OregonLive reports that the Oregon Secretary of State’s Office notified Judge Steve Grasty Thursday in a letter that the petition had been validated. He has until Tuesday to resign or submit a “statement of justification” that would appear on the recall election ballot.

Grasty, who acts as chairman of the county commission, says he won’t step down.

He has been criticized for demanding that Ammon Bundy and his supporters leave Harney County during their 41-day occupation of the refuge to protest federal land-use policies.

A recall election will be held by June 28.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — A Nevada man who participated in the armed occupation of an Oregon bird sanctuary pleaded guilty Thursday to a federal conspiracy charge, the first of Ammon Bundy’s 25 co-defendants to admit criminal responsibility.

“Damned if I do, damned if I don’t,” Corey Lequieu, 46, said when telling a federal judge why he was giving up his right to a trial.

In exchange for the plea, prosecutors agreed to drop two weapons charges, one of which carries a penalty of five years to life.

Authorities in Nevada also had a hand in the settlement, agreeing not to pursue charges against Lequieu for his role in the April 2014 standoff with federal agents at Cliven Bundy’s ranch. Lequieu also avoided a potential charge of being a felon in possession of a firearm.

U.S. District Court Judge Anna Brown scheduled sentencing for Aug. 25. Assistant U.S. Attorney Craig Gabriel said prosecutors will recommend 2½ years in prison.

The Ammon Bundy-led takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge began Jan. 2, lasted nearly six weeks and included the fatal shooting by police of rancher and occupation spokesman Robert “LaVoy” Finicum.

The occupiers wanted the federal government to relinquish public lands to locals and free two southeast Oregon ranchers imprisoned for setting fires.

Gabriel said the conspiracy thwarted Interior Department employees from doing their jobs for much of the winter. “They were scared and it was impossible to go to work,” he said.

The judge spoke with Lequieu at length Thursday about his decision to plead guilty, making sure he was of sound mind and understood his options.

One of the charges prosecutors agreed to drop — the carrying of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence — has been contested by defense attorneys for all the men charged with it.

Lequieu pointedly took exception to the wording: “In this whole case, the only violence was the government murdering LaVoy Finicum.”

The trial for the 25 others charged with conspiracy is set for Sept. 7. Lequieu’s plea bargain doesn’t require him to testify against fellow occupiers.

Friends of Family Farmers, an Oregon nonprofit that supports small-scale and beginning producers, will soon have a new website that will help farmers find land, advice and other support.

The site, oregonfarmlink.org, goes live May 24.

The intent is to serve as an information portal for the next generation of farmers, said Molly Notarianni, an organizer with Friends of Family Farmers.

The site will help link aspiring farmers to landowners who have land for sale, lease or rent. It also will carry job listings, partnership opportunities and a resource library to help with training, equipment and financial resources.

The ultimate goal is to keep farmland in production for another generation, Notraianni said.

She cites some familiar statistics: The average age of Oregon farmers is nearly 60. With many nearing retirement age, it’s projected that up to half the state’s farmland could change hands over the next decade.

To Friends of Family Farmers, that represents “a looming crisis around who will grow our food and who will own the land in the future,” the group said in a news release. The organization advocates on behalf of what it considers “socially and environmentally responsible family-scale farmers and ranchers.”

The new website replaces Friends of Family Farmers “iFarm” land link program, which has been in place since 2009. For more information about the organization, visit http://www.friendsoffamilyfarmers.org/about/mission/.

With demand for organic products continuing to accelerate, the Oregon Department of Agriculture is stepping in to help growers, processors and handlers meet the cost of USDA certification this year.

The department will reimburse up to 75 percent of certification expenses — up to $750 — incurred between Oct. 1, 2015, and Sept. 30, 2016.

Approximately 770 organic producers and handlers are potentially eligible, the department said in a news release. The idea is to help them meet growing consumer demand for organic products, which shows no sign of slowing.

Application for the reimbursement is online at http://go.usa.gov/cuePJ. Reimbursements will be on a first-come, first-served basis until the money is gone. All applications must be received by Oct. 31, 2016.

To be eligible, applicants must be an organic operation in Oregon that paid fees to become newly certified or to renew certification. They also must possess current USDA certification; operations with suspended or revoked certifications are ineligible for reimbursement.

According to USDA, the number of U.S. certified organic operations grew by nearly 12 percent from 2014 to 2016, and has increased nearly 300 percent since the USDA began counting organic certifications in 2002.

As of April 2016, there were 21,781 certified organic operations in the U.S. and 31,160 worldwide. The retail market for organic products is more than $39 billion in the U.S. and $75 billion worldwide, according to the USDA’s Agriculture Marketing Service.

Retailers are well aware of the demand. In April, the Seattle Times newspaper reported that retail giant Costco was seeking to lock in access to organic products by helping a producer buy 1,200 acres in Mexico. The company also bought beef cattle and contracted with owners of organic pastures to raise them in Nebraska.

The USDA maintains a website with market and pricing information on about 250 organic products, www.usda.gov/organic. The department allocated $11.5 million in 2015 to help producers, handlers and processors with certification costs.

Questions about the constitutionality of Oregon’s “right to farm” law, which shields growers from some lawsuits, have been resurrected in a pesticide dispute in Curry County.

Nuisance and trespass complaints against Oregon’s farmers and foresters are barred under the law, which has been challenged in court several times.

A previous case that opposed the “right to farm” statute was dismissed in 2013 on jurisdictional grounds without resolving the constitutional question.

In the current lawsuit, the outcome may depend on conclusions reached by a jury.

A group of residents in Cedar Valley, Ore., claim they were harmed by off-target herbicide sprays in 2013 conducted by Pacific Air Research, an aerial applicator, on forestland owned by Joseph Kaufman.

The 15 plaintiffs are seeking $4.2 million in damages from the company and the landowner in a Curry County jury trial that’s set to end on May 20. The county is in far southwestern Oregon.

However, the defendants recently asked a judge to dismiss the case because they’re immune from liability under the “right to farm” statute.

In response to that motion, the plaintiffs argue that Oregon’s constitution should preclude “right to farm” protections because people must be allowed to seek a legal remedy for a harm they’ve suffered.

“The right to protect private property from invasions by other parties is one of the most fundamental rights recognized by the common law of Oregon,” the plaintiffs said in a court brief.

Curry County Circuit Judge Cynthia Beaman denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the case on May 16 without opining on the constitutionality of the “right to farm” law, said Heath Curtiss, director of government affairs for the Oregon Forest & Industries Council.

Curtiss said it’s possible the judge could still reach a conclusion on that issue, but he doesn’t think it’s likely.

Before making any decision on the “right to farm” law, the judge seemed inclined to answer the factual question of whether the plaintiffs were harmed, he said.

“If the plaintiffs were actually harmed, then it seems unlikely that the application complied with applicable laws and was ‘reasonable and prudent’ as required by the statute,” Curtiss said in an email. “Alternatively, if the plaintiffs were not harmed, then the immunity would not be needed as the verdict would return in defense’s favor.”

It’s possible the defendants would seek “right to farm” protection if a jury finds them liable, but this would be an “awkward” use of the statute, said Tim Bernasek, an attorney who heads the natural resources team at the Dunn Carney law firm.

Improper pesticide usage isn’t shielded from liability under the law, which only protects “generally accepted” farming practices, Bernasek said.

“If you have an off-label application, that’s not generally accepted, so there’s no coverage,” he said.

Ralph Bloemers, an environmental attorney with the Crag Law Center, said the “right to farm” law hinders access to justice because people fear being defeated in court and having to pay the prevailing party’s attorney fees, as the statute requires.

Proving that pesticide trespass caused an injury is difficult enough, so the attorney fee provision has a chilling effect on neighboring property owners who feel they’ve been harmed, he said.

“I could lose my house and everything I’ve ever saved if I lose this case,” Bloemers said.

The plaintiffs in the Curry County case have previously challenged the “right to farm” statute without success.

Their lawsuit originally asked a judge to declare from the outset that the law violated the state’s constitution.

However, that request was denied because their challenge of the “right to farm” statute was premature, since Pacific Air Research and Kaufman hadn’t yet raised it as a defense — a situation that has since changed.

In the 2013 challenge to the “right to farm” statute, the Oregon Court of Appeals said it had no jurisdiction to decide the case because the conflict was merely speculative.

The Court of Appeals upheld the statute in 1993, rejecting a challenge to its constitutionality, but opponents have called that ruling “worthless” because the court didn’t explain its legal reasoning.

Opponents of “right to farm” also claim the 1993 ruling has effectively been overturned by a more recent Oregon Supreme Court decision related to tort law.

Capital Press

PINGREE, Idaho — Top chefs from throughout the world vow they’ll return home with a new appreciation for U.S. potatoes and several creative menu ideas featuring the vegetable following a comprehensive tour of the Idaho and Oregon potato industries.

The group, led by Potatoes USA, included about 30 chefs, culinary research and development officials and organizational staff members from the U.S., China, Taiwan, Korea, Japan, Mexico, Philippines, Central America, Malaysia and Vietnam.

The group started the tour May 16 with stops at the Wada Farms fresh potato packing facility in Pingree and the Basic American Foods dehydrated potato facility in Blackfoot. Their Idaho itinerary also included visits to Miles Willard Technologies in Idaho Falls for a demonstration in preparing dehydrated potatoes, a look at frozen potato processing at the J.R. Simplot and Lamb Weston plants in Treasure Valley and time with the Idaho Potato Commission.

In Portland, they were scheduled to head to Le Cordon Bleu cooking school for potato cooking demonstrations and hands-on experimentation. Most of the group members planned to finish the tour at the National Restaurant Association’s annual trade show May 21 in Chicago.

“They’ll go back with a much stronger understanding of the U.S. potato industry from field, to storage, to shed and dehydration and frozen processing,” said John Toaspern, Potatoes USA chief marketing officer. “In Portland, they’ll get to experience Le Cordon Bleu and really get to experience using potatoes in ways they haven’t in the past, and I’m sure that will result in increased sales.”

Federico Michieletto, an Italian chef working in the Malaysian fine dining industry, said chefs and consumers in his country noticed a “big-time” difference when they were forced to buy European or South American spuds last summer due to a labor dispute at West Coast U.S. ports.

“To see the quality of the products is amazing,” Michieletto said. “After the upset of a few months ago, I guess this is the proof that these are the best products.”

Eugene Chew, an official with Red Lobster, Olive Garden and Longhorn Steakhouse in Malaysia, said it’s been tough for him to find potatoes with consistent quality, as some suppliers have stopped importing U.S. spuds due to the strong dollar.

In China, Potatoes USA staff member Nicole Chen explained, the government recently declared spuds to be the “fourth staple food,” which has led to new export possibilities.

“Many companies have begun to develop new usage of potatoes to produce potato noodles and potato dumplings,” Chen said.

Shin Chung, a staff member in Korea, brought chefs representing California Pizza Kitchen and the major food service company, Ashley’s. Chung said frozen potato wedges are among the most popular pizza toppings in Korea.

“The potato is not considered as a carb; it is considered as a vegetable, so we eat bread and rice with potatoes,” Chung said.

Toaspern said foreign potato exports started the year strong and should finish the year 5 to 7 percent above last year, despite having softened in recent months. Toaspern said he’s pleased by progress toward opening fresh access to China, where he made a recent trip, Korea and Indonesia.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Oregon’s scenic Columbia River Gorge is the stage for one of the hottest disputes in Oregon’s Tuesday primary — a proposal by Nestle to build a bottled water plant in Cascade Locks, using water from a mountain spring.

Town leaders and many of the residents support the idea because it would create badly needed jobs and generate annual revenue of hundreds of thousands of dollars. But Nestle’s plan has drawn opposition from orchard owners, Native American tribes, some residents and others.

Farm and orchard owners have noted Hood River County experienced drought in 2015. Water bottlers would compete with their orchards and farms for the growing population of the town of Hood River and its shrinking water supply, they said.

But City Manager Gordon Zimmerman says Cascade Locks has water to spare.

Nestle hopes to use 118 million gallons of water per year by 2020.

The company would pay Cascade Locks an undetermined amount for the water. But the town must first swap well water for spring water with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. The department, which uses the spring-fed Little Herman Creek for its Oxbow Hatchery, has already agreed to trade.

The city would sell its new share of spring water to Nestle for its Arrowhead bottled water, branded as sourced from mountain springs.

Studies by the fish and wildlife department and one commissioned by Nestle say hatchery fish and wild salmon won’t be affected.

Many folks aren’t buying it. Opponents also object to trucks making 200 trips a day to and from the plant. And Native Americans have cited global warming, salmon die-offs and water conservation as reasons to reject the bottling plant.

SALEM, Ore. (AP) — Conservation and fishing groups and an Indian tribe announced Monday they have filed protests against a draft federal proposal to manage 2.5 million acres in Western Oregon — a plan that would allow logging to increase by more than a third and for trees to be felled closer to streams.

Earthjustice and the Western Environmental Law Center, which filed a formal protest on Monday on behalf of 22 conservation and fishing groups, charged that the plan would increase clearcutting and harm streamside forests.

In its four-volume, 2,010-page proposal, the Bureau of Land Management said a revised plan is needed because of changes in timber management.

Under the plan, timber that can be harvested will be increased by about 75 million more board feet to 278 million board feet, BLM spokesman Jim Whittington told Jefferson Public Radio, a station based in the Southern Oregon town of Ashland. Whittington emphasized that the acreage available for timber harvest would not increase.

The protesting groups said the 37 percent increase in logging levels “will boost carbon emissions and make the forest less resilient to climate change and other disturbances.”

Whittington said trees could be cut closer to streams under the plan, with the buffer shortening from double the height of an average tree in the area to the height of a single tree.

A fishermen’s group blasted that aspect of the plan.

“The last, best salmon habitat in Oregon is within these BLM-managed forests,” Glen Spain of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, among the 22 groups, said in a statement. “Productive salmon streams are far more valuable for the salmon-related jobs they create than for the market value of the lumber you could generate from logging them.”

The BLM said the new plan will provide a sustained yield of timber while protecting threatened and endangered species.

For its part, the Coquille tribe said it fears the plan threatens its ability to manage its own forest, linked under federal law to BLM lands.

“We are very proud of how we manage our lands,” tribal chairman Brenda Meade said in a telephone interview. She said her tribe, of just over 1,000 members, was the only one in the United States that is required to manage its lands by the same standards as adjacent federal lands, a situation the tribe hopes will end under a bill that passed the U.S. House of Representatives last year and is before the Senate.

PENDLETON, Ore. — Despite killing four wolves from the Imnaha Pack earlier this year for repeatedly attacking livestock, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife reiterated the value of non-lethal deterrents during a workshop here May 13.

Eastern Oregon ranchers and county officials gathered at Blue Mountain Community College to hear presentations on the science and economics of dealing with wolves. The workshop featured speakers from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services. ODFW also provided an update on the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan, which is now up for review.

Roblyn Brown, the department’s acting wolf program coordinator, said the wolf population is growing rapidly in Oregon — there were at least 110 wolves counted by the end of last year, compared to just 14 in 2009. Yet the number of confirmed attacks on livestock has stayed relatively flat, which Brown said is due in part to the use and effectiveness of non-lethal tools.

“We’re figuring things out,” Brown said. “Non-lethals can absolutely work in certain situations.”

The most important thing, Brown said, is for ranchers to make sure they clean up their bone piles to avoid attracting wolves onto their property in the first place. Things like fladry fencing, range riders, guard dogs and alarm boxes can be effective deterrents, at least temporarily, if they’re used correctly.

Ranchers are doing a much better job now than they were when the plan was first implemented, Brown said. The number of confirmed wolf depredations was even down slightly in 2015, compared to 2014. But non-lethals don’t work every time, which is why Phase II of the wolf plan allows wildlife officials to selectively kill problem wolves.

In the case of the four Imnaha wolves, Brown said there were a number of factors that prompted ODFW to use lethal control. First, the wolves had apparently changed their behavior and started moving outside of their usual territory. Second, the group’s alpha female had a back leg injury, which could have prompted the group to target easier meals. Finally, non-lethal deterrents had proven ineffective in keeping wolves away from sheep and cattle.

Brown compared that to another series of attacks last year by the Mount Emily Pack on sheep in the Umatilla National Forest. All five of those incidents came against a single band of sheep, and by the time the producer asked for lethal control, Brown said non-lethal tools had started to work.

“ODFW will evaluate each situation when they’re making a determination about when to go to lethal control,” Brown said.

The agency’s focus, however, continues to be on non-lethals first. With the evidence suggesting deterrents are effective, the workshop shifted to community-wide models for rural areas where wolves are re-established.

Suzanne Asha Stone, senior Northwest representative for the conservation group Defenders of Wildlife, pointed to a few successful programs across the West — most notably the Wood River Wolf Project in central Idaho, where there’s the largest concentration of domestic sheep in the region.

Stone said the program pulls together ideas and funding from ranchers, agencies and wolf advocates alike to implement non-lethal solutions. More groups are starting to take this approach, she said, because it makes more resources more broadly available.

“The challenge is that it really requires a lot of good communication,” Stone said.

Between 2008 and 2015, Stone said they’ve had anywhere from 10,000 to 23,000 sheep on the land, yet they’ve only lost 30 of the animals to wolves over that period.

“Some of our best solutions have come from that mix of people that don’t usually talk to each other,” she said.

Stone said she was encouraged by how county wolf compensation committees were working together to ensure ranchers are made whole for dead or missing livestock due to wolves. Both Susan Roberts, of Wallowa County, and Jerry Baker, of Umatilla County, were on hand to discuss how their committees reach out to producers and submit applications for state grants.

Regardless of each individual’s opinion on wolves, Roberts said they have learned to check their attitudes and the door. Producers, meanwhile, are getting better at documenting everything, which means they stand a better chance of getting a slice of the funds.

Baker also emphasized the need for ranchers to provide as much documentation as possible to the committee. He said the county has developed a positive relationship with ODFW, especially when it comes to implementing non-lethal deterrents.

“I know the range riders have helped a lot, if they’re in the right place at the right time,” said Baker, who himself is a livestock producer. “I think we’re learning as we go.”

TURNER, Ore. — Cascade High School’s Agriculture Department moved into the final stage of their greenhouse restoration project recently, thanks to a $2,000 Northwest Farm Credit Services Rural Community Grant.

The money will be used to buy and install a new irrigation system.

A presentation was held in the greenhouse just before the FFA chapter’s annual Mother’s Day weekend plant sale.

Once the system is installed, the students will be able to incorporate new projects and grow plants they have not been able to grow before.

“The greenhouse was basically unusable when I came here 10 years ago,” FFA adviser Becky Bates said. “We did a complete renovation including leveling the floor and buying new tables. Now with separate irrigation systems including mister nozzles above all of the tables, we can grow plants by zone locations.”

The Cascade School District, Cascade FFA alumni, the Mid-Willamette Education Consortium and the Oregon Department of Education have also helped fund the greenhouse.

After touring the facility, Bob Boyle, Northwest Farm Credit Services senior vice president overseeing lending and grants, and Andrea Krahmer, young beginning-small farmer ag vision manager, presented the check.

Farm Credit has awarded 527 rural grants totaling more than $1 million since 2007.

“We so appreciate the NFCS grant,” Bates said. “It is exciting to know we can have a learning environment for my students that more closely matches current industry facilities.”

Once the greenhouse is fully functioning, the students will have hands-on skills that will be relevant in jobs they may have in the greenhouse and nursery industry.

“Everything for sale in the greenhouse is grown by the students,” Bates said of the Mothers Day sale. “Teachers, students and townspeople already line up just outside the door every year waiting to get in and buy them. Now we will be able to improve our quality and even grow more.”

For more information about the Cascade greenhouse program call Cascade High School at 503-749-8488 or email rbates@cascade.k12.or.us. For more information on the next Farm Credit rural grant, visit northwestfcs.com/Stewardship/Rural-Communities.

The deadline is June 1.

NAMPA, Idaho — Persistent winds for more than a month have created headaches for Treasure Valley growers in Idaho and Oregon, making it a struggle for them to spray their crops and keep the ground wet.

“The stinking wind blows every day,” said Nyssa, Ore., grower Paul Skeen, who said the winds have resulted in poor onion stands in some fields.

The wind also takes the wax off onions, which can be injured if they are sprayed before the wax builds back up, he said.

The wind is also creating problems in other crops, including sugar beets, corn and alfalfa, because farmers are struggling to find windows to spray.

“We always have wind in the spring but this year it just seems like it’s been non-stop for a month,” said Nampa farmer Kevin Tuckness. “We haven’t been able to spray very much because the wind’s been blowing non-stop.”

Richard Durrant, owner of Big D Ranch, which grows 1,100 acres of sugar beets, corn, wheat, beans and alfalfa near Meridian, Idaho, said he had to re-plant some sugar beets this year because the wind dried the soil out before there was water in the canals.

Trying to keep the ground wet has been a real challenge this year because of the wind, said Neil Durrant, Richard Durrant’s son.

“You couldn’t keep the ground wet enough,” he said. “It seemed like every time you would get it wet, the wind came and dried it all out again.”

The Big D operation wasn’t able to get its alfalfa sprayed this year and that crop has a lot of bug damage as a result, Richard Durrant said.

The farm’s biggest concern right now is trying to get its sugar beets and corn sprayed.

“I think we’ll suffer some on yields if we can’t get in and spray soon,” said Neil Durrant. “This year has been a lot worse than any year I can recount. You can’t spray when the wind is blowing 15 to 20 mph.”

Tuckness said the wind has made a lot of sugar beet fields in the area uneven.

“You have stuff that’s 4 inches and stuff that’s just coming up,” he said. “It dried out portions of the field so you have stuff that germinated and came up and other spots of the field where it’s dry (and) we had to water everything up.”

Some pre-emergent chemicals that growers were able to spray aren’t having their normal effect because of how dry the soil is, Tuckness said.

Bill Buhrig, an Oregon State University cropping systems extension agent in Ontario, said the wind has made it a challenge to apply some critical timing sprays.

He said it’s been a struggle for many farmers in the area, including himself, to spray their alfalfa fields for weevils this year.

If weevil spraying is pushed back a week, “That’s one more week that they’ve had the opportunity to damage your crop,” he said.

The prohibition against genetically engineered crops in Oregon’s Josephine County has been struck down by a judge who ruled the ordinance is pre-empted by state law.

Voters in the county approved the ban on genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, in 2014 even though state lawmakers disallowed local governments from regulating the crops the prior year.

Proponents of the GMO ban claimed that the pre-emption state was unconstitutional, but Josephine County Circuit Court Judge Pat Wolke has rejected that argument and held the county ordinance to be invalid.

“The state law says that the localities may not legislate in this area; and the voters of Josephine County have attempted to legislate in the exact same area. It is impossible to read the two enactments in harmony; so that the local ordinance must give way,” Wolke said in the May 16 ruling.

Farmers Robert and Shelley Ann White challenged the legality of the GMO ordinance last year, arguing it had prevented them from planting biotech sugar beets on 100 acres of leased property.

During oral arguments in the lawsuit, held in April, much of the debate focused on whether the Whites had legal standing to file the case.

Supporters of the GMO ban called them “hobby farmers” who filed a “manufactured lawsuit” on behalf of agribusiness lobbyists and didn’t have a valid lease to the 100 acres or a contract to grow biotech sugar beets.

Oregonians for Safe Farms and Families, a nonprofit, and Siskiyou Seeds, an organic seed producer, had intervened to defend the ordinance after the county government took a neutral position in the litigation.

The intervenors claimed the Whites had a “purely hypothetical” interest in growing GMOs, which isn’t enough to establish standing.

“They need more than their general disdain for this ordinance to get into court,” said attorney Melissa Wischerath, who represented the intervenors.

The judge disagreed with that characterization, ruling that “the plaintiffs have demonstrated that their conflict with the ordinance is not academic or speculative and that the determination in this case will have a practical effect on them.”

Proponents of the GMO ban also claimed the ordinance should not be pre-empted by state law because Oregon has a “regulatory void” in regard to biotech crops.

Because lawmakers had barred local restrictions on GMOs without establishing a statewide system to protect organic and conventional farmers from cross-pollination, the pre-emption statute is unconstitutional, the invervenors argued.

Wolke found that Oregon law doesn’t require a “replacement regulatory scheme” for a statute to pre-empt local rules.

He also rejected the argument that the pre-emption statute only applies to packaged seeds and not plants, calling this an “absurd interpretation” of the law.

Oregon’s Jackson County was allowed to prohibit GMO crops in 2014 because the initiative was already on the ballot when lawmakers passed the pre-emption statute.

Supporters of Josephine County’s ordinance claimed the limit was arbitrary, but Wolke said it was a “legislative prerogative” to set the cut-off date.

Wolke likewise refused to disregard an Oregon Supreme Court precedent dealing with conflicts between state laws and county ordinances, saying he lacked the authority to do so.