Fridays

Oregon regulators are working to finalize a proposal that would protect farmworkers from drifting pesticides by allowing them to take shelter indoors.

The rule, developed by the Oregon Occupational Health and Safety Administration, or OSHA, seeks to address “application exclusion zones” introduced by the Environmental Protection Agency in its 2015 update of the Agricultural Worker Protection Standard.

Application exclusion zones require farms to evacuate workers within 100 feet of where trucks or planes are spraying pesticides, returning only after the equipment passes. The measure is intended to add another layer of protection against drift, which itself is illegal though it does sometimes occur.

Grower groups, however, argue the EPA did not account for worker housing on the farm when it came up with the exclusion zones, and called for a compliance alternative rather than having to rouse workers from their homes.

Michael Wood, Oregon OSHA administrator, said the issue is especially problematic for tree fruit growers in the Columbia River Gorge, where orchards may spray pesticides at 2 or 3 in the morning when the air is most calm.

“The growers came to us and said, you know, this is going to be something that’s a problem in our labor camps,” Wood said. “The challenge for us is to come up with an alternative that would protect the workers, but not be as disruptive to them and the growers.”

Statewide, Oregon has 309 labor camps registered under OSHA, including 1,262 buildings and 9,283 residents. Nearly two-thirds of those camps are in Wasco and Hood River counties.

For the last two years, Oregon OSHA has worked with growers and farmworker advocates to come up with a workable solution. The current proposal would allow workers to remain indoors while pesticides are sprayed, unless the chemicals pose a respiratory hazard. If the label requires use of a respirator, Oregon OSHA would enforce a 150-foot exclusion zone — stricter than what is required by the EPA — and would not allow workers to return home for 15 minutes.

“Obviously, the exposure potential is real,” Wood said.

Public comment on the rule was scheduled to end Dec. 15, but has been extended through the end of January. Wood said he expects a decision sometime in February.

The rule is being criticized on both ends of the spectrum of opinion, with some groups saying it does not do enough to protect workers and others saying it goes too far.

Mike Doke, executive director of the Columbia Gorge Fruit Growers, said remaining indoors is more safe for workers compared to moving everyone outside in the early morning hours. He said housing in the area is subject to high building standards, capable of withstanding harsh winters and plenty of rain.

Doke said the 150-foot exclusion zone, however, is not based on any scientific evidence, and may result in growers pulling trees, which will result in lost production and lost wages.

“I think it just makes people feel good, but there’s no data to support that,” Doke said. “The whole process hasn’t shown us any data that this (requirement) is going to make anybody safer.”

Lisa Arkin, executive director of the environmental justice group Beyond Toxics based in Eugene, said the exclusion zones do not do enough to protect workers and do not consider pesticide residue left over after spraying. She is advocating for a no-spray buffer zone to safeguard labor camps.

“Science tells us over and over again, when pesticides are sprayed, there is a drop-off the farther you get away from the spray operation,” Arkin said. “The need to increase the distance from humans to spray is critical for minimizing exposure.”

Concerns about disturbing workers at night misses the point that, without a buffer, workers will potentially be exposed to pesticides where they eat, sleep and play, Arkin said.

Doke reiterated that a buffer zone would force growers to pull out acres of trees, which may actually hurt workers more in the long-term.

Jenny Dresler, director of state public policy for the Oregon Farm Bureau, said the organization is “very concerned” about the Oregon OSHA proposal.

Furthermore, Dresler said, the Trump administration has signaled it may pull back or withdraw parts of the federal Worker Protection Standard. If that happens, Oregon would be the only state to have such stringent rules, and would make farms in the state less competitive.

A spokesman for the EPA in Washington, D.C., said much of the regulation is already in effect, and the rest will be phased in by Jan. 2. He did not indicate whether the administration is planning any changes in the standard.

Wood said the potential risk to workers from pesticides is real, regardless of what the EPA is doing.

“We’re certainly not bound to wait and see what decision the EPA makes on it before deciding whether or not to adopt a rule that applies in Oregon,” he said.

Nearly 35,000 acres of farmland and forestland in Oregon’s Douglas County would become available for rural housing under a plan that may be approved in January.

The county’s commissioners are considering changing the designation of these acres from farm and forest zones to “non-resource transitional lands” where 20-acre home sites could be developed.

While the county believes this revision is needed to meet demand for “rural lifestyle” dwellings in the area, state land use regulators and farmland preservation advocates are concerned by the proposal.

The alleged need for rural housing isn’t actually backed up by analysis, said Greg Holmes, Southern Oregon advocate for the 1,000 Friends of Oregon conservation group.

“There’s a lot of assertions that aren’t supported by material in the record,” Holmes said.

Douglas County currently has land that’s classified for agriculture and forestry uses but is actually of low quality for commercial production, said Keith Cubic, the county’s planning director.

“It’s not well addressed under current state law,” but the county believes it can make the “non-resource” concept fit within existing land use parameters, he said.

The 35,000 acres identified for minimum 20-acre rural lots have been selected because they’re not high-value farmland, rangeland or forestland, Cubic said.

Areas with wetlands and big game habitat have been excluded from the “non-resource” designation, as have properties two miles outside of existing cities and rural communities.

The county wanted to avoid new development in the “middle of nowhere” that’s difficult to reach for firefighters and other service providers, Cubic said.

In all, only about 1 percent of the county’s farmland and forestland would be eligible for rural lifestyle housing, he said.

The plan would allow for about 2,300 new 20-acre parcels, but the county expects only 25 percent to 50 percent would be developed.

Even so, Oregon’s Department of Land Conservation and Development has raised several concerns about the proposal that are shared by 1,000 Friends of Oregon.

Douglas County is misapplying a state land use provision that allows parcels to “go below” standard acreage sizes for farmland and forestland under certain circumstances, said Holmes.

This provision is appropriate for certain uses, such as vineyards, but not for rural housing, he said. “They’re not allowed to use that process.”

The county has also set the threshold too high for what is considered commercially feasible forestland and grazing land, allowing for rural housing development in areas where livestock and tree production are viable, Holmes said.

Surrounding existing cities with low-density rural housing is also problematic when those communities seek to expand, he said. Developers must then consolidate properties and work around or remove existing infrastructure, such as roads and septic tanks.

“When and if the urban areas expand, it’s inefficient,” Holmes said.

Compared to farms, which are inexpensive for local governments to service, smaller rural housing parcels can end up costing more than the added tax revenue they bring in, he said. “It’s a net loss to the county usually.”

Cubic, of Douglas County, said the plan relies on appropriate analysis of commercially-viable forestland and rangeland and complies with statewide land use planning goals.

Under Oregon law, counties must submit amendments to their comprehensive land use plans — such as the “non-resource” idea — to the Department of Land Conservation and Development for comment, said Tim Murphy, DLCD’s farm and forest lands specialist.

DLCD doesn’t approve or reject such plans, but they can be challenged before the state’s Land Use Board of Appeals, he said.

A new president is saddling up at the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association.

Nathan Jackson, general manager for sales and administration at K-Bar Ranches in Myrtle Creek, stepped into the position Dec. 2 during the organization’s annual convention in Bend.

Jackson, who served the last two years as president-elect, takes over for John O’Keeffe, who wrapped up his term. The OCA also tabbed Tom Sharp as the next president-elect and Todd Nash as treasurer, maintaining the line of succession.

O’Keeffe, a third-generation rancher from Adel in south-central Oregon, said he was honored to represent the cattlemen, and believes they made progress on key issues at the state and federal levels — including the removal of wolves from the Oregon endangered species list in late 2015.

The delisting applies to wolves east of highways 395, 78 and 95, though wolves in western Oregon remain protected under the federal Endangered Species Act.

“We hope to shortly have these wolves delisted statewide,” O’Keeffe said. “They’re definitely here, and it’s time to manage them. We’re getting a lot of depredation, and quite a bit of hardship.”

The status of wolves remains a hot-button issue for cattlemen, as the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission considers a long-awaited update to the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan. O’Keeffe said the plan needs to have reasonable criteria for lethal control of wolves that make a habit of preying on livestock.

“These wolves, if they get in a pattern of preying on livestock, it tends to accelerate,” he said. “We would like to get away from that.”

O’Keeffe said the new administration in Washington, D.C. is also working to fine-tune protections for sage grouse habitat while balancing the interests of ranchers.

As OCA president, Jackson said he recognizes that he will be the face of the organization and will work to ensure cattlemen have a strong voice at the Legislature. In particular, he said there are restrictions being pushed by groups that “aren’t interested in finding a compromise, but that want to put natural resource users out of business.”

“Those are the most egregious things we have to look out for,” Jackson said.

In addition to legislative work, Jackson said he hopes to strengthen the connection between the OCA and 26 county or regional cattlemen’s associations across Oregon.

“We’re going to do a fair amount of organizational stuff,” Jackson said. “Some of our county organizations need some support and capacity.”

The three-day OCA annual convention was held Nov. 30 through Dec. 2 at the Riverhouse on the Deschutes. The event drew more than 350 attendees, 45 trade show exhibitors and 50 presentations on topics ranging from wild horses to public lands.

Jerome Rosa, OCA executive director, said the wild horse program — led by Robert Sharp, supervisory wild horse and burro specialist with the Bureau of Land Management — was especially well attended.

“The room was packed,” Rosa said. It’s a real problem in some parts of our state, in particular southeast Oregon. They’re really causing a lot of problems on private and public lands, the way the population is really expanding.

Rosa said turnout at the convention was the best it’s been in a few years, which he attributed in part to a greater diversity of speakers.

“We tried to appeal to a little more of a broad spectrum of folks than we had in the past,” Rosa said. “There was a little bit of something for everybody.”

The Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife has confirmed wolves killed an alpaca Sunday on private land in Union County.

Investigators found tracks and blood in the snow as evidence of an attack by three wolves in the Starkey area southwest of La Grande. GPS data also placed OR-30, a collared male wolf, about 130 yards from the carcass at 5 a.m. the same morning.

The incident comes just a few weeks after ODFW ruled that wolves “probably” killed a llama in a different area of Union County, which evoked sharp criticism from landowner and retired rancher Howard Cantrell about the investigation findings.

The OR-30 pair was most recently documented in 2016, occupying a large territory spanning the northern Starkey and Ukiah units south of Interstate 84. OR-30 originally dispersed from the Snake River pack and spent most of 2015 in the Starkey, Ukiah and Mount Emily units of northeast Oregon.

This is the first livestock predation attributed to the OR-30 pair.

An Oregon State University professor and department head has been named dean of the College of Agriculture and Biological Sciences at South Dakota State University.

John Killefer, who created the Department of Animal and Rangeland Sciences at OSU by merging the departments of animal sciences and rangeland, ecology and management, will begin working at South Dakota State in late March 2018.

“I am truly appreciative of the many opportunities that have been provided me at Oregon State University,” Killefer said in a statement. “I am honored to have worked with so many outstanding professionals and colleagues that have allowed us to make tremendous progress within our programs.”

As a researcher into production animals and beef products, Killefer’s programs have secured more than $6.3 million from federal and industry sources. He was inducted into the Oregon Beef Council Hall of Fame in 2014 and served as a fellow from 2013-15 for the Food Systems Leadership Institute.

“It has been exciting to see the individual and programmatic growth throughout our department and I anticipate a bright future moving forward,” Killefer said. “I thank the many colleagues that I am now able to call friends.”

Killefer came to OSU in 2011 after working at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champagne and West Virginia University. He has a doctorate in animal science with an emphasis in growth and development from OSU.

Several farm groups have filed protests against the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife’s proposal to obtain instream water rights in the Hood River Basin.

Fourteen of the agency’s applications for instream water rights, which are meant to protect flows, were met with objections from the Oregon Farm Bureau, Columbia Gorge Fruit Growers, local irrigation districts and county Farm Bureaus.

The Oregon Water Resources Department had proposed approving the applications, but the protesters argue the agency wrongly determined the instream water rights served the public interest.

Farmers are concerned that new ODFW-owned instream water rights could prevent the development of irrigation water rights under the Oregon Department of Agriculture’s 83,000 acre-feet of “water reservations” in the basin, said Mary Anne Cooper, public policy counsel for Oregon Farm Bureau.

“We’re not clear on how they stack up with these instream water rights,” Cooper said.

When Oregon lawmakers passed a law to protect instream flows 30 years ago, they also allowed the Oregon Department of Agriculture to “reserve” water for economic development.

Last year, the Hood River Basin’s water reservations were renewed for another two decades, as they generally haven’t yet been used to develop water rights.

However, such water reservations may play an important role in storing irrigation water if the Hood River Basin sees lower future snowpack accumulations.

Another concern is that instream water rights may impede the transfer or lease of senior water rights, said Cooper.

New instream rights would be junior to those of existing water users, but Cooper said problems can arise when those irrigators want to move a point of diversion further upstream.

In such a situation, ODFW may claim injury because the water remains instream for a shorter distance, she said.

If water rights within Hood River Basin were canceled, the water would be “swallowed up” by the instream rights instead of becoming available to other irrigators, according to the protesters.

Conversations about these worries did not take place “on the front end,” before the agency sought new instream rights, which necessitated the protests, Cooper said.

“At that point, our only recourse was to file the protest,” she said.

Capital Press was unable to reach Anna Pakenham Stevenson, ODFW’s water program manager, for comment.

WaterWatch of Oregon, an environmental group, also lodged protests against four of the proposed instream rights in the basin.

Contrary to the irrigators, the organization complained the amount of water protected by instream rights would be insufficient to guarantee a healthy habitat for fish.

When a protest is filed, the Oregon Water Resources Department can still approve an instream water right or modify it, said Dwight French, administrator of the agency’s water right services division.

The other two options are to move forward with a contested case hearing or allow the parties to settle the case, he said.

If OWRD issues a final order after a contested case process, the decision can be challenged before the Oregon Water Resources Commission, which oversees the agency, and then the Oregon Court of Appeals, he said.

BOISE, Idaho (AP) — Authorities have released recovery plans for federally protected Snake River chinook salmon and steelhead with the goal of making sure each species is self-sustaining in the wild.

The plans released Tuesday by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries include spring and summer chinook, fall chinook and steelhead. Authorities listed the three runs as threatened in the 1990s.

Strategies in the 366-page fall chinook plan include reintroducing them above Idaho Power’s Hells Canyon Complex of hydroelectric dams.

The 284-page recovery plan for spring and summer chinook and steelhead include protecting existing tributary habitat and restoring degraded habitat.

Salmon and steelhead are important as both a commercial and sport fishery, and are also important to tribes in the region that hold treaty rights concerning salmon and steelhead.

Over the objections of farmers, a federal judge has stayed a lawsuit that accuses a bank of unlawfully interfering with the sale of radish seed.

Earlier this year, the Radish Seed Growers’ Association — which represents nearly 40 Oregon farms — filed a complaint seeking $6.7 million in lost crop value and added storage costs from Northwest Bank of Warren, Pa.

Northwest Bank had claimed about 7.4 million pounds of radish seed as collateral for a loan taken out by Cover Crop Solutions, a financially defunct seed broker.

However, the company’s attempt to take ownership of seed in the farmers’ possession was rejected by a federal judge in 2016. That ruling is now being challenged before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The growers allege that Northwest Bank filed meritless liens, pursued a meritless lawsuit and discouraged potential buyers from buying the seed they’d grown for Cover Crop Solutions.

However, the bank counters that these actions were permissible under the “absolute litigation privilege” of its complaint, even if the legal action has so far proven fruitless.

During a court hearing in September, the company asked a federal judge to dismiss the farmers’ lawsuit.

“It’s clear the bank had a good faith basis to assert a security interest in the seed,” said Peter Hawkes, the bank’s attorney. “They had a right to go to court and have that adjudicated.”

Paul Conable, attorney for the growers, argued that Northwest Bank wasn’t protected by the absolute litigation privilege because the meritless liens and interference with customers occurred before the lawsuit.

“You don’t immunize yourself from the effects of your actions by later filing a lawsuit,” he said.

However, U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken will postpone any decision on these matters until Northwest Bank’s original lawsuit is resolved in the 9th Circuit, based on legal precedents.

“In addition to being consistent with the weight of authority, waiting for the resolution of the pending appeal has obvious benefits: it minimizes the risk of conflicting judicial decisions, conserves judicial resources, and will aid the court in reaching the correct result in this case,” Aiken said.

The farmers had opposed the stay, arguing they’d suffered million of dollars in losses by having to wait years to sell the radish seed due to Northwest Bank’s unlawful actions.

“This lawsuit is their only means to recoup those losses,” Conable said in a court brief. “Forcing them to wait another significant period of time for this litigation to proceed would be unfairly prejudicial.”

WEDNESDAY, DEC. 13

EUGENE, Ore. (AP) — In late 2016, Eugene resident Jim Kocher and his wife, Sally, began hearing strange knocking and pitter-patter sounds in the ceiling and walls of their home.

An exterminator quickly identified the culprits as rats and, over the course of six months, trapped about 10 of them. But after a year of lost sleep and increased anxiety, rodents still are running free somewhere inside their Friendly-area neighborhood home.

Kocher, who has owned his house for 30 years, said he’d never seen a rat inside his home before last year.

“We’re traumatized,” said Kocher, who estimated the couple have spent well more than a $1,000 on pest control. “If we hear a sound in the middle of the night now, it’s just a horrible feeling.”

The Kochers are hardly alone.

About 100 people in the neighborhood in south-central Eugene have reported seeing or hearing rats in their homes or around the neighborhood within the past few months.

In response, the neighborhood association has formed a group, known as the Rodent Action Team, or RAT, to coordinate efforts to best the pests.

“Rats have been present all along,” said Jason Blazar, a landscape ecologist who lives in the neighborhood and leads the group. “We hit this tipping point, and it’s kind of added up.”

Blazar and other neighbors say the problem is bigger than they can handle and are seeking help from City Hall. Eugene city councilors, at the request of Councilor Emily Semple, who represents the neighborhood, have agreed to have a discussion Monday night.

Residents “have been doing a good job with responding, but it’s too big,” Semple said.

The Friendly area isn’t unique. There are reports all over the city of an increased rat population, including along River Road, downtown and the northern and western neighborhoods of the city.

Rodents are well-known as carriers of infectious diseases.

Dr. Patrick Luedtke, Lane County’s health officer, said there has been no increase in reports of infectious diseases that can be traced to rats. They include bubonic plague, hantavirus, leptosporosis and rat-bite fever. Humans can get these diseases if they are bitten by an infected rat or inhale or ingest microorganisms in the rat’s feces or urine.

“We’re not seeing that, which is good,” Luedtke said.

He added the risk of bubonic plague spreading in the community is theoretical.

“It certainly would be possible here, but it would be unlikely to happen.”

Lane County Public Health does not have a rodent eradication program.

Representatives of four local pest control companies told The ­Register-Guard last week that they’ve seen a marked increase in calls about rats over at least the past year. City officials also have noted a similar increase in public complaints about rodents.

“We’re seeing an explosion in the rat population,” said Ed Byerly, the owner of Oregon Pest Control.

The pest control representatives said that typically there is a spike in calls about rats with the onset of cold weather as rodents seek warm shelter. But Byerly said he received two calls a week about rats last summer, compared with one a month in a normal year.

Grant Williams, who owns Ultimate Pest Control, said he’s receiving three times more calls about rats than normal, and his supply ordering is barely keeping pace.

The representatives all identity as a primary culprit the prevalence of chicken coops, compost piles and backyard gardens around Eugene. They noted that weather and increased development also can be factors.

In 2013, city councilors relaxed regulations for urban farming. The change increased the number of chickens that a resident within city limits can have from two to six. In addition, a resident now can have up to six chicks.

Robin Morrison, branch manager for Bug Zapper Pest Control, said the chicken coops, compost piles and fallen, rotting fruit are a magnet for rodents.

“That’s like a free buffet for rats,” he said.

Kocher, who has an enclosed compost bin, said there are open compost piles near his home.

Rats are prolific breeders, and they will spread out as the competition for food among a burgeoning rodent population grows. They also are adept at finding “chinks in the armor” of nearby houses, including a crack in the foundation or a hole in a crawl space vent, Williams said.

Byerly noted that a rat can fit through an opening the size of a quarter.

And once inside, rodents can create havoc, chewing on walls and wiring and urinating and defecating widely.

Steve Barron, who lives in the Gilham neighborhood in north Eugene, said he spotted his first rat in his garage in October. He has owned the house for 14 years, and the encounter was his first there.

He trapped one but kept seeing and hearing more of them, including one rodent that he observed scaling down the bicycle he hung from his ceiling like it was a jungle gym.

“I’m lying in bed, and I could hear them chewing” at 3 a.m., he said.

He said the rats likely were attracted to the dog food he kept in the garage, the door of which he regularly cracked open for ventilation. He now keeps the door shut.

The rats are now gone. Barron said he trapped six of them. But they might have damaged the home’s heat ducts. A contractor will come out Monday to evaluate.

“It’s been a bit of a headache,” he said. “The big concern is, what kind of damage are they doing?”

The formation of the Friendly RAT group began with Blazar commiserating with his neighbors about the rodents in early 2017.

Blazar and his neighbors all have chicken coops, so they discussed taking steps to keep rats out of them. Rats are attracted to chicken feed and also are known to steal the eggs for a later meal.

Not wanting to simply drive the rodents elsewhere, Blazar approached the neighborhood association’s board last summer to get their go-ahead on examining the breath of the issue. Two other neighbors soon joined to form the team.

At the neighborhood’s summer picnic, about 100 people told Blazar they’d seen or heard rats in their homes or around the neighborhood in the last few months. About 40 people placed dots on an aerial map of Friendly identifying where they’d seen rats, showing the wide sweep of the problem.

The RAT group mulled applying for a city neighborhood grant to buy enclosed compost bins as a first step to address the rat problem.

But more than that needed to be done, the team soon realized.

The group arrived for a Nov. 8 RAT meeting it had advertised in the neighborhood newsletter.

Blazar expected a few neighbors to show up for the meeting, in the upstairs dining area of the Market of Choice grocery store on Willamette Street. Nearly 30 people attended.

There, according to an email Kocher later sent to Eugene councilors, neighbors who had lived in Friendly a decade or longer said they’d never had rat problems until the past year.

One man said he’d seen a rat in his child’s bedroom. Another speaker claimed to have caught 100 rats. Other speakers were nearly in tears relating their stories, Kocher said.

Blazar said the meeting was cathartic in that it brought into the open the seriousness of the problem.

Blazar said people may have been reluctant to talk about rats because of shame and embarrassment.

“It’s a sign you’re living in turmoil or some sort of conditions that aren’t healthy,” he said, referring to common perception about rat-infested homes and properties.

Blazar said his team is pressing ahead with an informational website, a brochure and a data-gathering app that allows residents to report details about their encounters with rodents. The group has shared information with the River Road Community Organization, whose residents also have noted an uptick in rats.

What can Eugene officials do about rats?

The city generally leaves it up to individual property owners to deal with rats — with some exceptions.

City code specifically prohibits conditions that attract rats. It requires “rodent-proof” chicken coops and other outbuildings where food is present. It prohibits owners from storing garbage and other items. It also gives city employees the authority to make inspections and issue notices of violation.

Rachelle Nicholas, the city’s code compliance supervisor, said the number of rat-related complaints have increased in recent years with a spike last summer. The exact number of complaints wasn’t available last week.

Inspectors who respond to these complaints seek to identify the source of the problem and then educate homeowners, she said.

The city also baits its sanitary sewer lines with rat poison if a resident makes a request and an employee finds evidence of rats. The city does not bait its stormwater pipes.

Rats can get into homes through cracks and holes in aging sewer lines.

The number of baiting requests by residents has exploded in the past two years. Brian Richardson, spokesman for the city’s public works department said there were 15 requests in 2015, 24 in 2016 and 84 so far this year.

Blazar said the city could take some steps to improve the situation.

First, it could make its pilot food waste collection program in certain neighborhoods permanent and citywide, giving residents the option of throwing food waste that can draw rats into a covered bin rather than onto an open compost pile.

Second, it could organize workshops to teach residents about how to keep chicken coops and compost piles rodent-free.

“Education is key here,” he said.

Third, it could prioritize the replacement of older sewer lines that rats can get into through cracks and holes.

He said the city needs to be to be cautious about the use of code enforcement as it could lead to disputes between neighbors.

“I hope that’s a last resort where we have to go to code enforcement,” he said.

Kocher said the city could subsidize the cost of enclosed compost bins. But he also offered more far-reaching ideas, including banning chicken coops and outdoor compost piles and even declaring a public health emergency due to the potential for rats to spread infectious disease.

Semple said the city could require enclosed bins for compost but noted that tightening regulations for chickens would be controversial.

“But if that’s where the rats are, that’s something we have to look at,” she said. “We can’t have a rat infestation.”

Four water projects in Oregon have won nearly $6.3 million from state regulators, though only $5.1 million is available on hand to spend.

The $1.2 million shortfall is expected to be covered by the sale of $15 million in lottery bonds in 2019, which was approved by Oregon lawmakers earlier this year.

Three of the projects approved by the Oregon Water Resources Commission on Dec. 7 involve irrigation piping, while one aims to build a fish ladder to allow stream access past a hydroelectric dam.

Because the projects will take time to plan and build — and developers have access to matching funds from other sources — officials with the Oregon Water Resources Department felt confident in approving all four.

Members of the commission, which oversees the agency, debated the wisdom of allocating more money for projects than was readily available in Oregon’s water supply development fund, which lawmakers authorized in 2013.

Commissioner Carol Whipple, a rancher near Elkton, Ore., initially said she’d feel more comfortable approving the top-ranked three projects rather than all four.

However, the manager of the Middle Fork Irrigation District, Craig DeHart, said he’d be willing to wait until 2019 to seek reimbursement for the district’s pipeline project, which was the lowest-ranked of the four recommended by OWRD officials.

Fully allocating available money also sends a message to lawmakers about the strong demand for water supply funding, said April Snell, executive director of the Oregon Water Resources Congress.

In the end, the seven commissioners voted unanimously to approve all four projects:

• North Fork Sprague conservation piping: Trout Unlimited, a conservation group, was approved to receive $2.7 million for the project, which will cost $3.9 million in full to replace an irrigation canal with a pipe.

Currently, the ditch loses 35 percent of the water it conveys to seepage. About 90 percent of the water saved by the project will be dedicated to instream flows in the North Fork Sprague River within the Klamath Basin.

More than 3,000 acres will be served by the pipeline, which create enough water pressure to allow farmers to convert to sprinklers from flood irrigation. However, those changes aren’t included in the project’s cost.

• Powder Valley Connector: The Powder Valley Water Control District was approved to receive about $1 million of the total $1.4 million needed to replace an irrigation ditch with a pipe, conserving about 1,350 acre-feet of water that will instead remain in the Wolf Creek Reservoir. The system serves 17 farms that cultivate roughly 6,800 acres in Northeast Oregon.

While the project is expected to reap ecological benefits by storing more water in the reservoir, it was opposed by the WaterWatch of Oregon environmental group because the district isn’t formally allocating the water to instream flows. However, the Oregon Water Resources Department said this factor was taken into account in the review process and doesn’t disqualify the project from funding.

• Opal Springs fish passage: The Deschutes Valley Water District was awarded $1.5 million toward the $10.7 million cost of building a fish ladder to open up 100 miles of habitat for salmon and steelhead upstream of the Opal Springs hydroelectric facility in Central Oregon.

The environmental benefits of the fish ladder would qualify the facility for certification by the Low Impact Hydro Institute, allowing for the sale of renewable energy credits.

• Coe Branch pipeline: The Middle Fork Irrigation District will obtain more than $900,000 to build a pipeline from a stream to a sediment settling pond, which will cost $1.7 million in total. The district, which primarily serves orchards in the Hood River Valley, draws water from the Coe Branch, a tributary of the Middle Fork Hood River that’s high in sediment.

By allowing the sediment to settle in the pond, it won’t plug up highly efficient drip irrigation systems. Farmers who already have such systems wouldn’t have to “backflush” them out as often — saving water — and other growers would be more likely to invest in drip irrigation.

At this point, six farms with 300 acres have committed to making irrigation efficiency improvements as part of the project. The district expects the project will eventually spur similar investments by other growers in the full 6,300 acres served by the system.

Tuesdays

The Union County, Ore., landowner who recently discovered two of his llamas killed in a forested pasture near Five Points Creek is confident wolves are to blame for their deaths.

Howard Cantrell, a fifth-generation retired rancher, believes the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife erred when investigators stopped short of ruling either incident a confirmed wolf kill, based on evidence including trail camera photos of wolves in the area.

“It’s very frustrating,” Cantrell said. “People in northeast Oregon, they’re getting tired of all this stuff getting shoved under the table.”

Cantrell, whose property is about 12 miles west of La Grande, began rescuing llamas in 2006. He now owns 13 llamas, along with three horses, six goats and 25 chickens.

The first dead llama, named Sabra, was found dead Nov. 13 on a slope above Cantrell’s house. ODFW arrived the next day to investigate, reporting that most of the carcass was consumed except for the neck, head and shoulder. There was no sign of a chase or struggle, and without further evidence the death was ruled a “possible/unknown” attack.

After that, Cantrell said he began checking on his llamas every day. A second llama, Chrisy, was found dead Nov. 24 approximately 150 yards from the house, and ODFW again came the next day. This time, investigators found much more evidence of a predator attack including bite marks and at least two sets of wolf tracks in the mud on a road about 20 yards away, which appeared to be a day or two old.

Wolves were also spotted in several photos taken from a trail camera mounted 300 yards from where the carcass was found. But according to ODFW, the wounds were not consistent with extensive wolf-caused injuries and the death was ruled a “probable” wolf attack.

“There was sufficient evidence to confirm predation on the llama by a large predator, but not enough evidence to confirm which predator,” the investigation report states.

Michelle Dennehy, ODFW spokeswoman, said the injuries were “somewhat atypical” from what is usually seen in wolf depredation. She said the agency has investigated more than 300 potential wolf-livestock conflicts, and uses an evidence-based process to arrive at a conclusion.

The “probable” ruling still means Cantrell is eligible for compensation, Dennehy added. But Cantrell said he just wants to ensure ODFW is being truthful to the public.

“I’m not going to let this lie,” he said. “I want them to tell it like it is.”

On Friday, the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission met in Salem to begin its revision of the state’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan. Representatives of livestock, hunting and conservation groups were on hand, though public testimony won’t be taken on the plan until the commission meets again Jan. 19.

In the meantime, Cantrell said he has moved his llamas from the pasture and into a 10-acre pen closer to the house. Wolf attacks on llamas are not unheard of in Oregon — ODFW did confirm members of the Shamrock pack killed a llama last year in Wallowa County.

LANGLOIS — The Bandon/Port Orford KOA Journey Campground has earned the prestigious 2018 KOA President’s Award from Kampgrounds of America, the world’s largest system of family friendly, open-to-the-public campgrounds. The award was presented Nov. 17 at KOA’s Annual International Convention…

March 9, 1922 – Nov. 29, 2017

SUNDAY, DEC. 10

The Oregon Water Resources Department will host a pair of meetings in Umatilla County to discuss new water metering requirements for farmers in the Walla Walla sub-basin.

Informational meetings are scheduled for Monday, Dec. 11 from 5-8 p.m. at the Milton-Freewater Community Building and Tuesday, Dec. 12 from 9 a.m. to noon at Weston Memorial Hall.

On May 11, the Oregon Water Resources Commission designated the 300,000-acre Walla Walla sub-basin as a “serious water management problem area,” meaning OWRD will no longer approve new agricultural wells within the boundary.

The designation also requires farmers and ranchers with permitted basalt wells to install flow meters and report water usage to regulators by no later than Jan. 1, 2019. Cost sharing opportunities are available through OWRD and the Natural Resource Conservation Service, which will be discussed at both meetings.

Justin Iverson, groundwater section manager for the department, said the designation was made to address declining groundwater supplies in the sub-basin, which includes Milton-Freewater and Weston.

“We’re pumping more than the aquifer is recharging,” Iverson said.

Iverson emphasized that exempt groundwater uses are still allowed in the area, including domestic use and stock water wells.

For more information, contact Iverson at 503-986-0933 or local watermaster Greg Silbernagel at 541-278-5456.

BURLEY, Idaho – While potato production nationwide in 2017 fell less than 1 percent, things were very different in the Pacific Northwest.

Combined production in Idaho, Washington and Oregon this year fell 6.3 percent on 21,000 fewer planted acres, according to the December crop production report by USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service.

In 2016, PNW production accounted for 60.9 percent of national production. That dropped to 57.5 percent in 2017, Bruce Huffaker, a potato market analyst, told growers attending the University of Idaho’s annual Idaho Ag Outlook.

The decline is significant as the region produces 78 percent of all potatoes processed in the U.S. and 61 percent of fresh russets produced in the U.S. While there’s no hard data, Huffaker would guess russets make up about 85 percent of the PNW crop.

“I think we’re coming up to a situation with russet potatoes where we’re going to run into crunch time on supply,” he said.

PNW stocks on Dec. 1 are estimated to be down 9 percent year over year. Processing usage June through November was up slightly and fresh usage was down only 0.8 percent – meaning the crunch is ahead.

“We did not cut back on usage during the first six months; all that (shortfall) has to come in the next six months,” he said

Processors and fresh buyers are going to be competing with each other for supply. Fryers have locked in most of what they need, so the competition will be between fresh buyers and dehydrators, he said.

He’s expecting PNW stocks to be 31.4 million on May 31, down 16.7 percent year over year. There could be as much as a 22 percent decline in fresh shipments December through June but with processing flat, he’s expecting fresh buyers to pull some supply out of processing channels.

But there’s no way to make up for all of the shortfall on table potatoes. Fresh shipments aren’t going to be anywhere near what Idaho shipped last year, he said.

Markets are already reacting to the tight supply, boosting russet prices more than 50 percent compared with a year ago. Prices in Idaho for Russet Burbanks for the fresh market are averaging $18.57 a hundredweight, and Russet Norkotahs are running $17.34. Prices to growers are close to $9 a hundredweight, compared with about $4 this time last year, he said.

Production is down nearly 8 million hundredweight and 5.7 percent in Idaho, 6.6 million hundredweight and 6.3 percent in Washington and 2.2 million hundredweight and 9.4 percent in Oregon, NASS reported.

After the fifth year of prices below cost of production in 2016, growers — especially table potato growers — were faced with tough planting decisions last spring. In Idaho, there was also a lot of uncertainty with a large processing operation in eastern Idaho changing hands, Huffaker said.

While prices on competing crops were weak, the situation decreased planted acreage. In addition, yields weren’t quite as good as they have been, he said.

Growers planted 15,000 fewer acres in Idaho, 5,000 fewer acres in Washington and 1,000 fewer acres in Oregon. Yields per acre were down 5 hundredweight in Idaho, 25 hundredweight in Washington and 40 hundredweight in Oregon, NASS reported.

SALEM — Environmental groups are alarmed by a proposal that would authorize lethal control of wolves in Eastern Oregon after only two livestock kills under “extreme circumstances.”

The regular threshold would be three livestock kills in 12 months, but the current draft of the Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management Plan would reduce it to two kills if non-lethal methods proved ineffective or couldn’t be implemented.

“It moves too quickly to lethal control,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director for the Center of Biological Diversity, during a Dec. 8 hearing in Salem, Ore.

Wolves in Eastern Oregon have been delisted under the federal Endangered Species Act, but they’re still regulated by the state government.

Representatives of livestock and hunting groups also found plenty they didn’t like about the plan, which the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is updating.

For example, the plan sets a minimum population threshold of 300 wolves through 2022 but it doesn’t ensure that any particular zone doesn’t become overpopulated with the predators, said Todd Nash, wolf committee chairman of the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association.

“Nowhere does it address a maximum number,” Nash said.

Ranchers would like to see the agency create management units with caps on wolf numbers, but these suggestions have been largely disregarded, he said.

Currently, Oregon is estimated to have more than 100 wolves.

Based on trends seen in Idaho and Montana, however, that number can be expected to climb steeply in the coming years, for which the current draft plan fails to account, said Jim Akenson, conservation director for the Oregon Hunters Association.

“I don’t know why in the world we would not look to our neighbors to see what will happen here,” Akenson said.

The Oregon Farm Bureau would like to see the plan provide a greater allowance for lethal wolf control when they’re near homes or if they threaten livestock, pets and people, said Kevin Johnson, the organization’s representative.

The agency should also increase its focus on collaring wolves as their population increases, so their movements and potential livestock interactions would continue to be monitored, he said.

Ranchers feel the plan is overly prescriptive in its wolf management policies despite expectations of a surging population, Johnson said. “They don’t feel like their positions are being heard.”

Environmental groups, on the other hand, claim the plan is overly reliant on lethal wolf control, which they say is often ineffective.

“Lethal control has often not stopped depredations,” said Nick Cady, legal director for Cascadia Wildlands.

The loss of a top pack member can cause the remaining wolves to become increasingly desperate and more likely to attack domesticated livestock, said Greenwald of the Center for Biological Diversity.

“There’s increasing science that it creates more problems than it fixes,” he said.

The current draft plan doesn’t benefit anyone “whether they’re wearing cowboy hats or driving Priuses,” said Rob Klavins, Northeast Oregon field coordinator for Oregon Wild.

“This irresponsible and unscientific plan should be shelved,” he said.

Scientists who the agency found credible enough to cite in the plan have objected to how their research was applied, Klavins said. “Those scientists deserve a direct response.”