A federal grand jury indicted Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and four others Wednesday on felony charges related to a 2014 armed standoff at Bundy’s ranch.

Bundy led that standoff near Bunkerville, Nev., after the Bureau of Land Management attempted to seize his cattle as restitution for unpaid grazing fees.

“The rule of law has been reaffirmed with these charges,” wrote U.S. Attorney for Nevada Daniel Bogden. “Persons who use force and violence against federal law enforcement officers ... will be brought to justice.”

Bundy and his sons — Ammon and Ryan Bundy — as well as Montana resident Ryan Payne and Ohio conservative Internet radio show host Pete Santilli were charged with a total of 16 felonies.

The charges were:

• 1 count of conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States.

• 1 count of conspiracy to impede or injure a federal officer.

• 4 counts of using and carrying a firearm in relation to a crime of violence.

• 2 counts of assault on a federal officer.

• 2 counts of threatening a federal law enforcement officer.

• 3 counts of obstruction of the due administration of justice.

• 2 counts of interference with interstate commerce by extortion.

• 1 count of interstate travel in aid of extortion.

All of the defendants listed in the indictment are currently being held in Oregon. They were arrested in relation to the armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

Other than Cliven Bundy, all those charged in the Nevada standoff Wednesday also face charges in the Oregon standoff.

“Today marks a tremendous step toward ending more than 20 years of law-breaking,” said Bureau of Land Management Director Neil Kornze in a statement, referring to Cliven Bundy’s longstanding dispute with his agency.

If convicted of the charges in the indictment, Bundy and the other four men could be forced to forfeit any property they gained as a result of the alleged crimes — totaling at least $3 million, according to prosecutors — and any firearms or ammunition used during the 2014 standoff.

Wednesday’s indictment identifies Cliven Bundy as the “leader, organizer, and chief beneficiary of the conspiracy,” and states that he “possessed ultimate authority” over the 2014 standoff. 

“The remaining defendants are charged as leaders and organizers who conspired with Bundy to achieve his criminal objectives,” Bogden wrote in a statement.

The maximum penalties for each of the charges against the men range from five to 20 years in prison. Each charge carries a maximum fine of $250,000.

Salem-based attorney Noel Grefenson, who is representing Cliven Bundy in Oregon, said via text message Wednesday night that he hadn’t yet seen the indictment. “That being said, I have every confidence Mr. Bundy will immediately plead not guilty and will welcome the opportunity to have a jury of his peers decide what really happened,” Grefenson wrote.

Ammon Bundy’s defense attorney, Mike Arnold, also said that he hadn’t yet read the indictment, but added he wasn’t surprised by it because the criminal compliant against Cliven Bundy filed last week listed four unnamed co-conspirators. “It’s what we expected,” Arnold said. “It’s something we’ve learned about this last week. We’ve just been waiting for the indictment.”

Arnold later said by text message that “it’s important for the public to remember that there is a constitutional presumption of innocence in America.”

“A government charge is proof of nothing,” Arnold wrote. “That’s what courts and trials are for.”

SALEM — A proposal to give local governments more control over farm-to-wetland conversions has won the approve of the Oregon Senate, although in scaled-back form.

Under the original language of Senate Bill 1517, Oregon farms could not be converted into wetlands unless the local county government agreed the change wouldn’t disrupt nearby agricultural operations.

The scope of the bill has now been narrowed to a pilot project in Tillamook County, which needs to preserve farmland for its dairy industry and is a “big center of the most pressing issues” involving wetland conversions, said Mary Anne Nash, public policy counsel for the Oregon Farm Bureau, which supports SB 1517.

This amended version of SB 1517 was approved 25-3 by the Senate on Feb. 18 and will now be considered by the House Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources, with a hearing scheduled for Feb. 23.

However, some lawmakers have expressed misgivings about the bill’s reduced scope.

While Tillamook County certainly needs the pilot program, farmers elsewhere in Oregon also experience problems created by wetland conversions, said Sen. Doug Whitsett, R-Klamath Falls.

“It’s distressing to know the rest of the state won’t be able to protect themselves from being flooded out by a rampant neighbor,” he said.

These concerns were echoed by Sen. Michael Dembrow, D-Portland, who voted against the bill because the issue is statewide, as well as Sen. Alan Olsen, who voted in favor of SB 1517 despite wanting “to see this go further.”

Wetlands are currently allowed outright in Oregon farm zones, but Senate Bill 1517 would first require Tillamook County to consider whether new wetlands will significantly change local farm practices or disrupt agriculture.

Wetland developers could also opt to undergo a “collaborative process” with concerned stakeholders instead of the regular county conditional use permit process.

The Oregon Farm Bureau supported a change in land use rules for wetlands because the current approach doesn’t provide farmers with a “meaningful opportunity” to weigh in on such projects, said Nash.

Farmers cited numerous problems created by wetlands during earlier hearings on the original version of SB 1517.

Wetlands can increase the frequency of flooding and impede the drainage of nearby farmland, as well as attract birds and noxious weeds to an area, according to growers who support the proposal.

Joe Rocha, who farms near Tillamook Bay, said the changes in hydrology can kill grasses that dairies depend on for feed.

“They brought the saltwater closer to us,” he said.

Kathy Hadley, a farmer in Oregon’s Willamette Valley, said a 500-acre wetland bordering her property increases erosion during the wet season and attracts elk that damage fences.

Such problems can discourage potential buyers when farmers are looking to sell property, said Sharon Waterman, whose farm in Coos County is near a 400-acre wetland.

“Can we even sell our property? I don’t know,” she said.

Supporters of the bill emphasized that it would not block wetland conversions, but would enable a collaborative process in how they’re sited and designed.

“This bill allows rural Oregon and local governments to have a say in what happens in their communities,” said Mark Labhart, a Tillamook County commissioner.

A favorable ruling won by an Oregon farm in a legal dispute over radish seed may have positive consequences for other operations involved in the lawsuit.

Several farms in Oregon are fighting a legal complaint filed by Northwest Bank of Warren, Pa., that claims it has a security interest in radish seed they grew in 2014.

The bank claims the radish seed serves as collateral for a $7 million loan taken out by Cover Crop Solutions, a seed company that contracted with Oregon growers to produce a proprietary variety.

Radish seed is used as a cover crop in the Midwest, but weather in 2014 reduced demand among farmers in that region and resulted in an oversupply.

Northwest Bank’s lawsuit contends that its security interest in the radish seed has priority over that of the growers, but a federal judge in Portland has disagreed with that argument in regard to at least one farm.

U.S. Chief District Judge Michael Mosman has found that Hawman Farms of Hermiston, Ore., agreed to grow roughly $180,000 worth of seed and has a “possessory lien” on the crop that takes precedence over the security interest held by the bank.

Under a possessory lien, a party can retain possession of property until a debt has been paid.

Northwest Bank claimed the contract between Hawman Farms and Cover Crop Solutions invalidated all such liens, but Mosman decided that it only barred liens against the licensed radish cultivar — which was owned by another company — and not the physical seed crop.

Sanford Landress, attorney for Hawman Farms, said Mosman’s opinion may also be consequential for other farms, which claim they have possessory liens on the seed.

Hawman Farms grew, cleaned and stored the radish seed, which puts the company in a different legal position than growers who had another firm clean and store the crop, Landress said.

“People with continuous possession of the seed, like Hawman, are going to beat the bank,” he said.

Several other farms that also possessed the radish seed without interruption have filed similar motions citing the Hawman Farms ruling and asking the judge to declare that their possessory liens have priority.

Farms that did not retain possession of the seed still have other valid legal arguments aside from a possessory lien, Landress said. “The jury is still out as to whether they will prevail or not.”

Capital Press was unable to reach James Ray Streinz, the attorney representing Northwest Bank, for comment.

BEND, Oregon (AP) — U.S. Forest Service officials are preparing to take public comments on a plan that would create an off-road vehicle trail system in Oregon’s Ochoco National Forest.

The Bulletin reports that the plan was developed after a 2005 rule limited off-road recreation on federal forestland.

The federal plan is separate from a new proposal by Oregon Wild, a Portland-based conservation group. Their plan would limit vehicles to roads, rather than trails. It would also designate about 312,000 acres as a national recreation area.

The Forest Service says its proposal would allow regulated off-road use in the Ochoco Mountains and would rely primarily on existing trails and road segments. The system would be open to motorbikes, quads and other off-road vehicles for a four-month summer period.

SALEM — A three-tiered minimum wage plan cleared its last hurdle Thursday when the House of Representatives approved the measure 32 to 25.

Gov. Kate Brown said she plans to sign the bill. The Senate approved the bill last week.

“Today’s action advances one of my priorities for 2016: raise the minimum wage,” Brown said in a statement Thursday.

The plan increases wages to $14.75 in the Portland metro area, $12.50 in rural and coastal areas with struggling economies and $13.50 in the rest of the state by 2022.

The first pay bump starts in July, from $9.25 to $9.75 statewide.

“Thousands of working families are in poverty,” Rep. Paul Holvey, D-Eugene. “They can’t make ends meet. We have the opportunity to address this issue, which hasn’t been addressed in 25 years.

“It is time for us as a state to do everything we can to help the needy,” he said. “This is another tool to make that happen.”

The controversial measure has stirred fears that the increase could threaten the survival of the state’s small businesses.

Supporters of a ballot initiative to raise wages to $15 in the next three years said the legislative plan raises wages too slowly given skyrocketing costs.

They have yet to decide whether to pursue placing the initiative on the 2016 ballot. They are continuing to gather signatures but plan to meet in the next couple of weeks to discuss whether there is enough support and resources for the ballot measure to succeed, said Justin Norton-Kertson, campaign manager for Oregonians for $15 Now.

“We think this bill is grossly inadequate,” Norton-Kertson said.

The halls of the Oregon Capitol echoed with fury while the House debated the legislation.

Demonstrators supporting the $15 Now ballot initiative repeatedly disrupted the debate.

First, demonstrators filled the gallery of the House before House Speaker Tina Kotek, D-Portland, ordered them to be removed for interrupting Rep. Duane Stark, R-Grants Pass, during a floor speech and displaying signs.

Then, the demonstrators assembled in the front of Gov. Kate Brown’s office, located between the House and Senate chambers, and chanted slogans demanding higher wages and affordable housing.

A flier distributed around the demonstration indicated participants came from 15 Now, Portland Tenants United and several other groups.

Later, the demonstrators started pounding on the doors of the House chamber. Legislators in the back of the chamber said they couldn’t hear the debate, and some expressed concern for their safety. She said Oregon State Police were addressing lawmakers’ security concerns.

The debate stopped for about 20 minutes until demonstrators quieted down.

The bill increases wages to $14.75 in the Portland metro area, $12.50 in rural and coastal areas with struggling economies and $13.50 in the rest of the state by 2022.

The first pay bump would start in July, increasing the wage from $9.25 to $9.75 statewide.

During more than five hours of debate Thursday, the House rejected proposals by Republicans to send the proposal to the ballot.

“Let the 2.2 million voters decide what is best for Oregonians and for themselves,” said Rep. Bill Kennemer, R-Oregon City.

Lawmakers also rejected a proposal by Republicans to send the measure to the Joint Committee on Ways and Means for a fiscal analysis.

The legislative fiscal office has said the total cost of the bill to state government is indeterminate because the plan is phased-in and it’s unknown how many wages will be affected each year.

“The decision by the majority party to bypass our budget committee in favor of an expedited approach to passing this bill is nearly unprecedented,” said Rep. Greg Smith, R-Heppner. “We owe it to Oregonians to fully vet this proposal, figure out what it is going to cost taxpayers and make sure we have a plan for addressing those costs.”

Rep. Tobias Read, D-Beaverton, said raising the wage also would save revenue because fewer people would need public assistance.

The minimum gradually would climb to $14.75 in 2022 in the Portland urban growth boundary, which includes parts of Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties. It will rise to $13.50 in Benton, Clatsop, Columbia, Deschutes, Hood River, Jackson, Josephine, Lane, Lincoln, Linn, Marion, Polk, Tillamook, Wasco and Yamhill counties, and parts of Multnomah, Clackamas and Washington counties outside Portland’s urban growth boundary.

In rural areas, the minimum would increase to $12.50. Those areas include Malheur, Lake, Harney, Wheeler, Sherman, Gilliam, Wallowa, Grant, Jefferson, Baker, Union, Crook, Klamath, Douglas, Coos, Curry, Umatilla and Morrow counties.

LANGLOIS — Bandon’s girls didn’t panic when they trailed Gold Beach by 13 points in the first half of a must-win Sunset Conference tiebreaker game Wednesday at Pacific High School.

LANGLOIS — A stingy defensive performance and a big night from Austin Smith put Bandon’s boys basketball team in the Class 2A playoffs as the Tigers beat co-champion Toledo 47-36 in a Sunset Conference tiebreaker game at Pacific High School…

SALEM (AP) — The Oregon House has passed a bill to protect the identity of the officer who fatally shot refuge standoff spokesman Robert “LaVoy” Finicum in January.

The Oregonian reports representatives voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to approve allowing a judge to bar for 90 days the disclosure of the name of an officer who uses deadly force. The bill heads to the Senate for consideration.

Oregon State Police requested the bill, saying they have received death threats against the officer who shot Finicum.

The 55-year-old rancher died after law enforcement officers initiated a traffic stop near the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

Finicum was a leader of an armed group that took over the refuge to protest federal land restrictions and object to prison sentences of two local ranchers convicted of setting fires.

Some against the bill say it could protect officers from public scrutiny.

SALEM, Ore. (AP) — Oregon is trailblazing a national debate with a proposal that would not only make the state’s minimum wage for all workers the highest in the U.S., but also set the threshold through a unique tiered system based on geography.

As the federal minimum wage has sat unchanged since the start of the Great Recession, Oregon is expected to follow the lead of more than a dozen other states that have raised the rate within their borders since 2014. Another dozen or so are considering taking up the issue this year, either through legislative action or ballot initiative, as issues of wage inequality and middle-class incomes have climbed to the forefront of presidential campaigns by Democratic candidates Bernie Sanders and Hilary Clinton.

State lawmakers in Oregon are set to vote Thursday on whether to start a series of gradual increases over the course of six years. Oregon’s current $9.25 an hour minimum — already one of the highest in the nation — would jump to $14.75 in metro Portland, $13.50 in smaller cities and $12.50 in rural communities by 2022.

Those minimums would dethrone Massachusetts — where the statewide rate will climb to $11 an hour next year — from the top spot, according to D.C.-based Economic Policy Institute, which has been tracking wage increases across the nation.

Oregon’s regional approach aims to balance the needs of the rapidly growing urban powerhouse of Portland with the state’s struggling farming communities, which have long been deeply divided by their economic, cultural and political differences.

“Oregon has always been at the forefront of new ideas in the country. We were the first to actually have a minimum wage,” said Rep. Paul Holvey, a Democrat from Eugene, Ore. “We’re trying to move people to where they can reach closer to that self-sufficiency.”

Division over the minimum wage — currently at $7.25 in federal law — is often split along party lines and pits low-wage workers against business groups, as has been seen in Oregon this year.

The Oregon plan would follows moves in states such as Massachusetts, California and Vermont that recently boosted statewide minimums above $10. That stands in stark contrast to more conservative states such as Idaho, which has blocked previous efforts to raise its minimum beyond the federal level, and Arizona, where lawmakers are considering a bill that would cut state funding to municipalities that set a local minimum wage.

David Cooper, an economic analyst the Economic Policy Institute, said he applauds the Oregon Legislature for its creative tiered approach, but did express hesitation.

“I think any time you create these sorts of somewhat arbitrary geographic districts, that’s when you can create opportunities for some sort of economic disruption,” he said. “I would prefer the whole state got to the same wage level but at a slower pace by region so that everyone is held to the same standard.”

We would like to thank the following businesses and individuals and our golfers who generously supported our recent invitational golf tournament at Bandon Crossings Golf Course on New Year’s Day. With their generous support, we raised more than $2,600 plus…

A bill aimed at increasing affordable housing by easing Oregon’s land use requirements within two pilot projects is making headway in the House.

Under House Bill 4079, the process for expanding “urban growth boundaries” would be expedited by exempting local governments from certain land use rules or goals on two 50-acre parcels — one next to a city with fewer than 25,000 residents and the other with more.

On Feb. 17, the House Committee on Rules passed an amended version of the bill 5-3 and referred it to the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

The committee’s amendment changes the size threshold of the pilot project cities to 25,000 residents, down from 30,000 residents.

Pilot projects are excluded from Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington Counties under the newest version of the bill.

Previously, the pilot projects were also barred in Marion, Polk and Yamhill counties, as well as a portion of Jefferson County, in addition to the Portland metropolitan area.

The bill previously won the unanimous approval of the House Committee on Rural Communities, Land Use and Water on Feb. 10.

The Oregon Farm Bureau and conservation groups have opposed HB 4079, arguing that new housing developments should occur within existing urban growth boundaries where roads, power and water are more readily available that in rural areas.

Another proposal to expedite urban growth boundaries more broadly across Oregon — Senate Bill 1575 — while allowing limited “inclusionary zoning” of housing tied to local incomes has died in committee.

In January, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife began carrying out a three-year plan to kill 95 cougars annually in four wildlife management areas.

In three of the areas — Interstate, Warner and Steens — cougars will be killed to rescue decimated mule deer or big horn sheep populations. In the Umpqua region, the intent is to “reduce conflict” with livestock, pets and humans.

Is that what the future holds for Oregon’s wolves?

That is, will Oregon eventually manage them like cougars, with targeted killings of problem wolves, and a sport hunting season? Is that where the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Commission headed when it removed wolves from the state’s endangered species list in November?

It’s way too early to make a call on that, said Derek Broman, who coordinates ODFW’s carnivore and fur bearer wildlife programs.

They are very different animals, he said, and the numbers aren’t comparable. An annual ODFW survey due out in March is expected to show the state has perhaps 100 confirmed wolves, while Oregon’s cougar population is estimated at more than 6,200.

Still, the question arises as Oregon wildlife officials review the state’s cougar plan this year.

Some who follow Oregon’s wolf recovery program believe sport hunting may be allowed eventually. Oregon’s wolf plan, which remains in place even though they were taken off the state endangered species list, allows “controlled take” of wolves in cases of chronic livestock attacks or decreases in prey. ODFW hasn’t ordered any wolves killed since two in 2011, however.

Wildlife biologists believe wolves’ migration from Idaho, establishment in Northeast Oregon and now their dispersal to the further reaches of Oregon is a success story. Wolves rapidly increased in numbers and range, much to the ire of many cattlemen. Only 14 wolves were confirmed in 2009; there were 85 by summer 2015, and the final 2015 count is expected to be above 100.

Broman said cougars also are a conservation success. They were nearly wiped out in Oregon, dropping to an estimated 214 animals in 1961, but recovered as ODFW classified them as a game mammal in 1967 and took over jurisdiction. The population rose to 3,114 by 1994 and has doubled since then.

A healthy population allows more management options, Broman said.

“I would love for wolves to have a robust population, where they’re not as fragile,” he said. “Cougars were kind of non-existent; now they’re back and healthy but we’re trying to find a balance. It would be great if we find the same with wolves.”

Both species prey on elk and deer, however, and that becomes part of the management puzzle. If both reduce ungulate populations, they will seek other prey, including livestock. Wolf packs go after sheep and cattle, while cougars are solitary ambush hunters and less wary of venturing into developed areas to take pets. Tales abound of startled suburban residents seeing cougars on their decks or near outbuildings.

Cougars can swiftly devastate prey populations and disrupt wildlife recovery work. In 2000, three of 17 Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep released in the Minam River area were killed by cougars within a week. The remaining sheep left the release area within 30 days, and ODFW’s transplant work failed.

In 2004, five of 10 radio-collared bighorn ewes released on Steens Mountain were killed by cougars and the rest scattered. A seven-year study in Northeast Oregon tracked the fate of 460 radio-collared elk calves. Of those that died young, 70 percent were killed by cougars.

Under the ODFW plan, approved last October, up to 50 cougars will be killed annually in the Interstate management zone, 10 in Steens Mountain, five in the Warner area and 30 in the Umpqua region. Cougars killed by legal hunters, struck by vehicles or other means will count toward the target totals in each zone. Broman said the management areas are large, ranging from 1,000 to 2,200 square miles.

Killing targeted numbers isn’t a permanent fix. Studies indicate cougars can multiply rapidly, with population increases of 15 to 20 percent per year.

Broman said Oregon has compiled 30 years of research on cougars and projects are continuing, including a Northeast Oregon study that looks at the interaction and competition between cougars and wolves.

“The body of work we have on cougars is unmatched by any western state,” Broman said. “As the science continues to get better, we can answer more specific questions.”

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who came to Oregon to support the armed occupation of a national wildlife preserve led by his sons, will remain in jail pending trial after prosecutors called him “lawless and violent.”

U.S. Magistrate Judge Janice Stewart said Tuesday that Bundy should not be released ahead of trial because there is a risk he won’t show up for future court dates.

“If he is released and he goes back to his ranch, that is likely the last the government will see of him,” Stewart said.

Bundy, 69, was arrested in Portland last week on charges stemming from a 2014 armed standoff with federal officials who were rounding up his cattle over unpaid grazing fees.

He came to Oregon to support a weeks-long occupation at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, which his sons, Ammon and Ryan Bundy, launched Jan. 2 to demand the federal government turn over public lands to local control.

His sons were arrested Jan. 26 and remain in jail, but four holdouts extended the occupation until Thursday, when they surrendered.

The elder Bundy was not charged in connection with the Oregon occupation. All his charges stem from the 2014 Nevada standoff: conspiracy, assault on a federal officer, obstruction, weapon use and possession, extortion to interfere with commerce, and aiding and abetting.

Bundy’s attorney, Noel Grefenson, said his client could not be a danger if authorities waited to charge him for 22 months. The judge dismissed that argument and set his next hearing for Friday.

Bundy said nothing in court. He sat for much of the short hearing with his arms folded across his chest, occasionally swiveling in his chair to gaze sternly at spectators in a courtroom filled to capacity.

A family member said the patriarch isn’t dangerous or a criminal and should be released to his home.

“Cliven believes in the proper role of government and proper jurisdiction. Where’s the jurisdiction?” daughter-in-law Briana Bundy told The Associated Press by telephone from Bunkerville, Nevada.

“He’s not a flight risk. This is his home. This is where his livelihood is,” she said.

Cliven Bundy is accused of unlawfully directing more than 200 followers to stop federal agents and contract cowboys who were trying to enforce a court order to round up about 400 of his cattle two years ago.

“Witnesses have described the level of threatened violence as so intense that something as innocent as the backfire of (a) vehicle, or someone lighting a firecracker, would have set off a firefight,” according to a 34-page document filed by prosecutors Tuesday.

They called him “lawless and violent” and say that Bundy and his followers set up traffic checkpoints on public roads and followed and intimidated federal officials trying to conduct plant surveys.

Neither the Constitution nor any other law “gives anyone the right to use or carry, let alone brandish, raise or point, a firearm” at federal law enforcers performing official duties, “whether one thinks the officer is acting constitutionally or not,” prosecutors wrote.

To diffuse the standoff, the government released the cows.

Federal authorities have said Bundy owes more than $1 million in fees and penalties for letting cows graze illegally for decades on public land near his ranch.

If convicted of all six charges, he could spend the rest of his life in federal prison.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Federal prosecutors say investigators combing through an Oregon wildlife refuge occupied for nearly six weeks by an armed group discovered firearms, explosives and trenches dug near artifacts.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ethan Knight and Geoffrey Barrow also said in a court filing Tuesday that the FBI is concerned vehicles at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge might be booby-trapped.

Prosecutors say the occupiers appear to have dug two trenches near “sensitive artifacts.” The refuge contains artifacts and burial grounds sacred to the Burns Paiute Tribe.

Investigators also found significant amounts of human feces and spoiled food.

The FBI expects to take three weeks to process the preserve seized by occupiers demanding the government relinquish control of public lands. More than two dozen people were arrested.

Prosecutors provided the information in a response to a motion from defense lawyers who want access to the site.

Despite losing control of his nursery company last year, Bob Terry isn’t eager to exit the industry.

In fact, Terry said he hopes to regain ownership of Fisher Farms, a nursery in Gaston, Ore., which he ran for nearly 20 years before his lender, Rabobank, seized the operation in 2015 as collateral for debt.

“I’m not the typical 70-year old,” he said. “Bob Terry is not going to sit on the front porch and whittle whistles.”

Management of the nursery was turned over to a receivership firm, Global Ventures, Inc., which was appointed to recoup as much as possible of the $16 million that Rabobank claims it’s owed by Fisher Farms.

Though a stipulated court agreement prevents him from becoming involved in the company’s management until mid-2016, Terry said he wants to take an operational role — potentially with the backing of investors — once that provision expires.

“I took it from a small farm to a large business,” he said.

The financial pitfalls of the nursery industry are nothing new for Terry, who was introduced to the industry in the late 1980s when he was recruited as a turnaround expert for the ailing Oregon Garden Products nursery.

Though he came into the business with practically no experience with plants, he was intrigued enough by the industry to buy his own nursery, Fisher Farms, in 1996. For the past five years, he’s also served on the Washington County Board of Commissioners.

Terry said he’s proud of his company’s accomplishments: It’s one of a handful of plant producers certified by USDA for overseas exports and owns numerous licenses for plant varieties. At its peak size, the company produced nursery stock across 250 acres in Gaston, Sherwood and Dayton.

According to court records, Fisher Farms took out an operating line of credit from Rabobank in 2011 for $10.5 million, using the nursery’s assets as collateral. That line of credit was extended several times, with the last extension ending Dec. 31, 2014.

Ownership of the nursery’s real estate was conveyed in 2011 under a forbearance agreement to a subsidiary of Rabobank, which sold off all the sites except for the Gaston location.

Fisher Farms then began renting that land back from Rabobank’s subsidiary to continue production, but the lender claims that by 2015 the nursery defaulted on the lease.

According to court records, the nursery failed to repay its loans and in June 2015 the bank petitioned the court to appoint a receiver to take over the nursery’s inventory, equipment and accounts, which served as collateral. At that time, Rabobank asserted that Fisher Farms debt had grown to more than $15 million.

The receiver, Global Ventures, later reported that the company had debts of $15.9 million debt and assets of $7.1 million.

It also fired the nursery’s operations manager for “lack of proper inventory controls and a willful act of insubordination.” Global Ventures said that Fisher Farms was missing more than 200,000 plants in its inventory, which it attributed not to theft but to a lack of paperwork maintenance.

Terry objects to this characterization, countering that the company meticulously tracked its inventory, including physically taking stock of plants twice a year.

Global Ventures’ executives terminated the operations manager for knowing more than they did, not because any plants were actually missing, Terry said.

Terry also claims that his company owed slightly less than $15 million, but the amount was inflated by expenses incurred by the Global Ventures.

“The receiver likes to make it look worse than it is, because it makes them look good,” he said.

Mark Boyd, president and CEO of Global Ventures, said that, as a court-appointed receiver, it wouldn’t be appropriate for him to comment on the situation. An attorney representing Rabobank, Joe VanLeuven, said the bank could not comment about a borrower due to confidentiality laws.

Fisher Farms sustained losses of $2.4 million in 2013, less than $1 million in 2014 and more than $1 million during the first half of 2015, according to a receiver’s report. By late 2015, Global Ventures claimed that the nursery had generated a profit of roughly $1 million.

The losses were caused by a plunge in demand for nursery stock following the housing meltdown, which the nursery industry began to feel as early as 2007, said Terry.

Financial problems were widespread in the nursery industry after the financial crisis, said Bob Boyle, senior vice president at Northwest Farm Credit Services, who said he could not comment on Fisher Farms in particular.

“It went through a very brutal cycle,” Boyle said.

Even so, Terry contends that his fortunes were improving in 2015 and the company would have generated a strong profit in 2016.

He attributed Rabobank’s decision to place Fisher Farms into receivership to the Netherlands-based company’s own financial quandaries related to turmoil in the eurozone, which prompted it to divest nursery assets, he said.

“They had to make some big worldwide decisions about how to manage their own issues,” Terry said.

SALEM — A bill to ratify removing wolves from Oregon’s endangered species list came under sharp questioning Tuesday in a key Senate committee.

House Bill 4040, which declares that Oregon wildlife regulators followed the law when delisting wolves last year, was approved 33-23 in the House on Feb. 12 and is now under consideration by the Senate Committee on Environment and Natural Resources.

Proponents of HB 4040 say it would buttress the credibility of the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission’s decision, while critics say the bill is intended to derail an environmentalist lawsuit against the delisting.

During a Feb. 16 hearing, Sen. Michael Dembrow, D-Portland, and Floyd Prozanski, D-Eugene, expressed reservations about the purpose of the bill.

The delisting was part of a three-step process described in Oregon’s management plan for wolves, which does not require the Legislature to ratify the commission’s decision, said Prozanski.

“Why are we doing that, if it was never part of the plan?” Prozanski asked Sen. Bill Hansell, R-Athena, who testified in support of HB 4040.

While the Legislature may not have previously ratified a delisting, it’s not unprecedented for lawmakers to ratify decisions by the state’s executive branch, Hansell replied.

The bill isn’t intended to preclude the environmentalist lawsuit, which claims the wolf delisting was not based on the best available science, he said. “If people want to sue, they’ll have the ability to do that.”

If the purpose of HB 4040 is simply to affirm that wildlife regulators have done a good job, then “it doesn’t seem like an appropriate use of our time,” Prozanski said.

Dembrow said he discussed the bill with the Office of Legislative Counsel, which advises lawmakers on legal issues, and was told HB 4040 would effectively force a judge to dismiss the environmentalist lawsuit.

Ratification by the Legislature would cure any legal deficiency in the delisting decision, which Dembrow said he found troubling due to the scientific issues involved.

“Essentially, what we’re being asked to do is say the science is right, the process is right,” he said. “I don’t how many of us in the legislature can say that.”

Dembrow also noted that he’s proposed an amendment to the bill clarifying that the legislature ratifies the delisting as long as the decision is in compliance with the law and administrative rules, which would cause HB 4040 to have no legal effect.

If the bill’s purpose isn’t to void the lawsuit, then “perhaps this amendment would be in order,” Dembrow said.

Hansell said the bill was intended to shore up the commission’s decision in court.

“I would never say it has no effect or would not make any difference,” he said.

Rocky Dallum, political advocate for the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association, said HB 4040 wouldn’t preclude a lawsuit but acknowledged that the legislature’s ratification would “go a long way” toward resolving the legal dispute.

If the Legislature doesn’t ratify the delisting, the policy decision will be made by a court or through a settlement between state officials and the environmental plaintiffs, he said.

“We do see this will have an effect on the litigation,” he said.

Opponents of the bill said they were worried that HB 4040 will set a dangerous precedent by having the legislature interfere in the delisting process.

“This bill opens the door for the Legislature to make political decisions about the fate of imperiled species across Oregon,” said Quinn Read, Northwest representative for Defenders of Wildlife, an environmental group.

SALEM — Oregon hemp growers would be free to propagate the crop from cuttings and grow it in greenhouses under a bill that’s won the approval of the House.

Under current law, hemp can only be seeded directly outdoors in fields at least 2.5 acres in size, which was intended to facilitate industrial production but proved too inflexible for growers.

At the time Oregon lawmakers originally legalized hemp production in 2009, they enacted these restrictions with the expectation the crop would be used for oilseed and fiber instead of human consumption.

Since then, the Oregon Department of Agriculture found that many hemp producers were more interested in growing the crop for cannabidiol, a compound used for medicinal purposes, than for such traditional products.

To this end, they wanted to use greenhouses, clone desirable plants and produce the crop on a smaller scale.

Under House Bill 4060, which was passed 54-4 by the House on Feb. 16, the minimum 2.5 acre field requirement would be scrapped and hemp farmers would be given the same flexibility in production and propagation methods as growers of other crops.

The Oregon Farm Bureau supports HB 4060 because it wants hemp treated like other crops.

The bill includes an amendment approved by the House Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources that clarifies hemp would be subject to the same Oregon Department of Agriculture water and pesticide regulations as other crops.

The amended version of the bill also clarifies that growers can cultivate all varieties of hemp and that the crop won’t be considered a food adulterant, among other provisions.

Growers can also send crop samples to accredited laboratories for required testing, which is expected to be cheaper than using ODA staff and facilities.

The Senate will now consider H.B. 4060, though it has yet to be assigned to a committee.

Another bill that was approved by the House Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resource, House Bill 4007, passed the House 59-1 on Feb. 15. The bill creates a new way to form rangeland protection association that fight wildfires.

Landowners must currently win approval from the Oregon Board of Forestry to create such associations, but HB 4007 would also allow them to be approved by county governments.

Currently, 20 rangeland protection associations staffed by volunteers protect 4.6 million acres in Eastern Oregon.

New associations organized by counties would still have to submit annual budgets to the Oregon Board of Forestry and enter into cooperative agreements with the Oregon Department of Forestry.

The Senate Committee on Environment and Natural Resources will now review HB 4007.

May 28, 1935 – Feb. 10, 2016

May 28, 1935 – Feb. 10, 2016

SALEM — A controversial proposal to set three regional minimum wage rates in Oregon is headed for a vote by the House of Representatives.

After holding a three-hour public hearing, the House Business and Labor Committee voted 6-to-5 Monday to recommend passage of the bill. The vote was along party lines, and Republicans said they plan to offer a minority report and alternative to the proposal on the House floor.

The vote could come as early as Thursday.

“I think what you have before you in this particular legislation is a policy decision and that is whether we expect that Oregonians who are working full time should be living in poverty,” Gov. Kate Brown told lawmakers Monday. “The answer for me is no.”

The Senate approved the measure 16-to-12 Thursday, also largely along party lines.

The bill hikes wages from $9.25 to $14.75 in the Portland metro area, $12.50 in rural and coastal areas with struggling economies and $13.50 in the rest of the state by 2022. The rates are based on median income and cost of living in those regions and what it takes to be “self-sufficient” – to pay basic expenses such as food, housing and transportation, said Sen. Michael Dembrow, D-Portland, who proposed the measure.

Rep. Jim Weidner, R-Yamhill, moved to amend the bill to slow its effective date and to allow Oregonians to vote on the measure, but the committee defeated the motion 6-to-5.

He also moved to send the bill for review by the Joint Committee on Ways and Means to determine how the measure would impact state and county budgets in future years.

He said the bill would drive costs up for businesses and drive businesses out of state to Washington and Idaho.

Rep. Peter Buckley, D-Ashland, co-chairman of Ways and Means and vice-chairman of the business and labor committee said such a review would be limited to the current budget and not future budgets. He said referring the bill to Ways and Means would delay the bill but would not necessarily provide any additional information.

“I find it amusing that we are essentially saying we don’t know yet the full impact on this and because it isn’t going to have a big impact on this budget we are just going to ramrod it through,” said Rep. Dallas Heard, R-Roseburg.

Rep. Paul Holvey, D-Eugene, said studies conflict on the impact of minimum wage hikes. He said the state has failed to reform the tax system to help income inequality and one of the only other ways to address the problem is raising the minimum wage.

Brown said Monday she supports the proposal because it “takes into account the economic reality in Oregon that some areas are growing faster than others.”

“It also gives businesses the time and certainty to prepare to implement a new minimum wage, and although the increase is phased in gradually, the increase starts right away giving hardworking Oregonians a much-needed boost,” Brown said in prepared comments she read to committee members. “Finally, it offers a middle ground between nothing and two problematic ballot measures that expedite increases with absolutely no accommodation for regional economic differences.”

Her comments refer to initiatives that would hike minimum wage to $13.50 and $15 per hour within three years and would lift a ban on cities and counties setting higher wages.

“We heard from a lot of business people who felt that would be really disruptive for them because it would be hard for them to predict when the next increase would come,” Dembrow said. “What they valued was predictability.”

The proposal hikes wages beginning in July from $9.25 to $9.75 statewide.

The minimum gradually would climb to $14.75 in 2022 in the Portland urban growth boundary, which includes parts of Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas counties. It will rise to $13.50 in Benton, Clatsop, Columbia, Deschutes, Hood River, Jackson, Josephine, Lane, Lincoln, Linn, Marion, Polk, Tillamook, Wasco, and Yamhill counties, and parts of Multnomah, Clackamas and Washington counties outside Portland’s urban growth boundary.

In rural areas, the minimum would increase to $12.50. Those areas include Malheur, Lake, Harney, Wheeler, Sherman, Gilliam, Wallowa, Grant, Jefferson, Baker, Union, Crook, Klamath, Douglas, Coos, Curry, Umatilla and Morrow counties.