How Oregon’s legislative session impacts farmers
SALEM — With the conclusion of Oregon’s 2015 legislative session, numerous bills impacting agriculture will go into effect.
Some of the most controversial proposals — including a prohibition against aerial spraying, new restrictions on antibiotics in livestock and regulations for planting genetically engineered crops — failed to pass muster at the committee level.
Of the bills that passed, some required major revisions to overcome opposition while others moved through the legislature with little controversy.
Following is a summary of legislation that will impact Oregon’s farmers and ranchers:
House Bills 5005 and 5030 provide $50 million for water supply development through loan and grant programs. Among the most significant pieces of legislation for agriculture, they were also among the last to receive approval, with lawmakers passing the bills on July 6, the final day of the session. The bond-backed funds will be used for feasibility studies, project construction and technical assistance positions at the Oregon Water Resources Department.
House Bill 5024 provides an additional $14 million for Oregon State University agricultural research and extension programs, which represents the first major increase in funding in more than a decade. OSU’s original proposal would have funded 40 positions with an additional $16 million, so some needs will continue to be unfulfilled under HB 5024. Nonetheless, a university official referred to the bill as “a glass that’s 88 percent full.”
House Bill 2509 encourages farmers with conflicts over biotech crops to seek mediation through the Oregon Department of Agriculture or the USDA. The bill initially met with little controversy but biotech critics later rallied against it, claiming it would prevent organic and conventional farmers from obtaining legal remedies. In response, the language was toned down. Originally, farmers who refused mediation would be liable for legal costs if they lost a lawsuit. Now, their refusal will simply be considered by a judge when imposing sanctions.
House Bill 3549 represents several ideas that were agreed upon by environmental and agribusiness groups, though pesticide critics claim the bill doesn’t go far enough to protect people from health risks. Aerial applicators must pass specific tests and obtain special certification under the bill. Fines for pesticide violations double, procedures for investigations must be established, and a new hotline for complaints will be created. Forestry applications are now subject to 60-foot buffers around schools and homes. However, the bill doesn’t require prior notification of applications, which environmentalists supported.
House Bill 341 absolves farmers from liability for accidents that occur at their agritourism operations, as long as they post notices informing visitors of dangers. House Bill 2038 extends similar protection to farmers for aviation-related injuries that occur on their land. Both bills were opposed by trial lawyers until revisions specified that farmers who act negligently could not avoid liability.
Landowners can petition their county governments for enhanced predator control under House Bill 3188. Areas with enough support will become special districts in which landowners are assessed $1 an acre to raise additional funds for USDA Wildlife Services, which provides predator control. Those landowners who choose not to pay cannot benefit from the program. The bill was opposed by animal rights advocates who argued that wildlife management decisions should not be made at the local level.
Under House Bill 3382, canola growers in Oregon’s Willamette Valley will be able to grow 500 acres of the crop through 2019 despite an overall moratorium in the region. In 2013, lawmakers decided to halt most canola production in the area for six years while OSU studied the potential for cross-pollination and diseases affecting related seed crops. The research required 500 acres a year to be grown. With the passage of HB 3382, that limited production is extended for another three years. Specialty seed growers opposed the bill, claiming it will expand the “seed bank” of potential canola volunteers.
Harvest of juniper trees, which is intended to improve sensitive habitats and create rural jobs, won broad bipartisan approval with the legislature allocating $1.15 million to assist with the undertaking. House Bill 2997 provides $900,000 in loans, grants and technical assistance to companies that cut and process the trees. House Bill 2998 designates $250,000 for cooperative efforts run by Portland State University.
A $3.3 million increase in funding for the farm-to-school food program was included in Senate Bill 5507, a broader appropriations bill. The farm-to-school program, which reimburses schools for part of the cost of buying from local producers, will now be available in every school in the state. Previously, school districts competed for grant funding.
A longstanding ban on advertising raw milk was overturned with the passage of House Bill 2446, which came as the result of a dairy farmer challenging the law as unconstitutional. Under a legal settlement, the Oregon Department of Agriculture recognized that the advertising prohibition likely violates free speech rights and lobbied lawmakers to remove the provision from statute. All other restrictions on raw milk, such as herd size limits, remain in place.
House Bill 206 gives farmers in the Klamath Basin more flexibility at a time they’re struggling with drought. They may now lease or transfer water rights before formal adjudication of water rights in the region is complete. The benefit of such leases is that water can be designated for in-stream uses without endangering the farmer’s water rights due to forfeiture. Companion legislation, House Bill 264, provided state regulators with authority to engage in a water use settlement in the Upper Klamath Basin. Both bills faced opposition from critics of the proposed removal of four dams in the region, who claimed the legislation was a necessary component of that deal.
Oregon farm regulators will be able to revoke the shipping permits of nurseries they find to violate plant health standards under Senate Bill 256. The legislation was supported by the Oregon Association of Nurseries, which believes this new authority is necessary to prevent negligent companies from causing disease outbreaks in other states. Increased license fees for nurseries are also authorized by the bill.
Cities and counties will be encouraged to standardize their rules for beekeeping in urban and residential areas under House Bill 2653. OSU will draft “best practices” to minimize the potential for nuisance problems, which will be distributed to local governments. The bill was intended to create uniformity across the state, which currently has rules of varying stringency depending on city and county. Beekeeper groups opposed the original version of HB 2653, which would have made the rules mandatory. They feared it would result in new fees and other restrictions, so the bill was amended to make the “best practices” voluntary.