NAMPA, Idaho (AP) — Land management officials say they have begun reseeding the giant burned area along the Idaho-Oregon border where a wildfire scorched valuable sage grouse habitat and grasslands needed by ranchers.

KIVI-TV reports that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management has started drilling grass, forbs and shrub seeds into the ground. The agency plans on dispersing 2.4 million pounds of seed.

Cindy Fritz, a natural resource specialist for the BLM, says that reseeding will help reduce the spread of invasive grass species. However, she added that it will take at least 15 years for the area to return to normal.

The fire earlier this summer charred a 443-square-mile area, often fueled by invasive cheatgrass and burning up to 125 square miles in a day. It easily leapt fire lines put down by retardant bombers.

SALEM – After nearly 11 hours of emotional testimony, back and forth discussion and two timeouts for legal advice from a state attorney, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Commission voted 4-2 Monday to take gray wolves off the state endangered species list.

In making the decision, commission members agreed with an ODFW staff appraisal that the state’s wolves have expanded in number and range to the point that they no longer need protection under the state Endangered Species Act.

Oregon’s wolves remain covered under the federal ESA in the western two-thirds of the state, and ODFW officials say the state wolf management plan remains in effect and will protect wolves from illegal hunting.

The decision doesn’t close the book on Oregon’s work to manage wolves. Some commission members made it clear they preferred to delist wolves only in the eastern third of the state, where most of Oregon’s 82 confirmed wolves live, but were prevented from doing so by language in the state law.

Meanwhile, conservation groups are expected to file a lawsuit over the commission’s decision.

“I think that’s very likely,” said Amaroq Weiss of the Center for Biological Diversity. “I think they’re in violation of the law. They didn’t pay attention to the science.”

Conservation groups believe Oregon’s wolf population is too small and too fragile to delist, and is present in only 12 percent of its potential territory.

“There’s no other species we would delist when it’s absent from almost 90 percent of its habitat,” Weiss said.

Oregon’s ranchers, who had urged the ODFW commission to follow the guidelines of the wolf plan and the recommendations of the department’s biologists, cheered the decision.

“I’m relieved,” said Todd Nash, wolf committee chairman for the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association. “This sends a message to cattle producers that the ODFW Commission will stand by its commitment.”

Nash said ranchers would not have supported a partial delisting.

“When we were paying the price (of livestock attacks) in Eastern Oregon, we fully believed we were doing it for the whole state,” Nash said. “And we were proud to do it.”

More than 150 people packed the ODFW hearing room and 106 signed up to testify. Activists opposed to delisting wolves, many of them wearing matching orange T-shirts, made up a majority of the audience. A sprinkling of men in cowboy hats – Eastern Oregon cattle ranchers who have borne the stress and cost of wolf attacks on livestock – clustered on one side of the hearing room.

The testimony echoed the arguments that have been made since Oregon’s wolf population reached the number of breeding pairs that trigger consideration of delisting under the management plan.

Conservation groups and their allied argue that the state’s biological status report on wolves was flawed and should have been peer-reviewed by other scientists. ODFW staff belatedly circulated the report to biologists they knew, but conservationists said that was insufficient.

“If this commission chooses to delist it will make a very sad and powerful statement about who and what it serves,” said Jonathan Jelen, development director for the conservation group Oregon Wild.

Livestock producers, however, argued they’d followed the wolf plan in good faith and expected the ODFW Commission to to the same.

“Oregon ranchers honored their obligation to follow the plan,” said Jerome Rosa, executive director of the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association. “This is one of the reasons wolves multiplied in our state.”

SALEM — A packed meeting room is expected today as the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Commission decides whether to remove gray wolves from the state’s endangered species law.

Livestock producers strongly favor the idea and conservation groups are just as deeply opposed, and a full day of emotional, conflicting testimony is likely. The wolf delisting is the only item on the commission’s agenda.

State wildlife biologists recommend delisting wolves. Under the state’s wolf recovery plan, the commission can take wolves off the endangered list if they determine:

Wolves aren’t in danger of extinction in any portion of their range; their natural reproductive potential is not in danger of failing; there’s no imminent or active deterioration of their range or primary habitat; the species or its habitat won’t be “over-utilized” for scientific, recreational, commercial or educational reasons; and existing state or federal regulations are adequate to protect them.

Conservation groups aligned as the Pacific Wolf Coalition have described the staff recommendation as flawed. They believe state law requires that the study be peer reviewed by other scientists. The coalition includes Oregon Wild, Cascadia Wildlands and the Center for Biological Diversity.

If the ODFW commission agrees with the staff recommendation, it would mean wolves in the eastern third of the state are not protected under either state or federal endangered species laws. Federal ESA protection would still be in force in Oregon west of Highways 395, 78 and 95.

Delisting wouldn’t mean open season on wolves in Eastern Oregon, however. The state wolf plan would remain in force, and it allows ODFW-approved “controlled take,” or killing, of wolves in cases of chronic livestock attacks or if wolves cause a decline in prey populations, chiefly elk and deer. Ranchers, as they can now, would be able to shoot wolves caught in the act of attacking livestock or herd dogs. None have been killed in that manner.

Oregon’s wolf plan does not allow sport hunting of wolves in any phase of the recovery timeline, department spokeswoman Michelle Dennehy said.

Oregon has 82 confirmed wolves. The number stood at 85 in July, but the Sled Springs pair was found dead of unknown cause in Wallowa County, and a man hunting coyotes shot a lone wolf, OR-22, in Grant County. ODFW’s wolf program coordinator, Russ Morgan, estimates Oregon has 90 to 100 wolves and said the population might reach 150 within three years.

Paul Hughes jokes that he hasn’t caused an accident on the road yet. So far, so good, when you’re accustomed to driving on the left in Great Britain and have to adjust to American traffic patterns.

When it comes to making whiskey, vodka and other distilled spirits, however, Hughes will be happy to share his way of doing things.

Hughes, a chemist who spent the past 10 years teaching at a university in Scotland, has been hired as a researcher and instructor at Oregon State University’s Fermentation Center. The program teaches students how to make wine, beer and cheese, and is branching out into the fast-growing distilled spirits industry.

According to OSU, distilled spirits made in Oregon now account for $69 million in gross annual sales, nearly 13 percent of the state’s liquor revenue. Oregon has close to 80 distilleries, up from 12 eight years ago, said Christie Scott, spokeswoman for the Oregon Liquor Control Commission.

Hughes said one of his priorities is to meet with distillers and establish good relations with the industry.

Hughes also is setting up the first distilling course, which will be offered in January.

“There’s a lot of commonality around the fermenting techniques used in brewing, wine-making and distilled spirits production,” he said in an OSU news release. “But distilling requires additional steps. So there will be a need for additional courses about those techniques.”

Hughes most recently taught and did research at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh, Scotland,

At OSU, the fermentation sciences program is part of the Food Science and Technology department.

The Oregon Legislature provided money for the distilled spirits position on campus.

PORTLAND — Visiting this foodie city to promote her book and to learn about food system changes, Chelsea Clinton, the daughter of one president and potentially a second, declined to delve into her mom’s ideas on agriculture.

Clinton, daughter of Bill Clinton, the 42nd U.S. president and Hillary Rodham Clinton, who seeks the 2016 Democratic Party’s nomination, suggested people visit her mother’s website for her views on agriculture. Hillary Clinton, the former senator and Secretary of State, has been spending time in Iowa, a key primary state and where farming is “hugely important,” Chelsea Clinton noted.

She said her mother helped start a micro-financing program in Arkansas when Bill Clinton was governor, and the first clients were small farmers.

Chelsea Clinton didn’t mention it, but her mother has another agricultural connection in Iowa. In August, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, a former Iowa governor, endorsed Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination. Vilsack has been mentioned as a possible vice president pick, but downplayed that during a visit to Portland in August. Vilsack said he simply believed Clinton is the best candidate.

The younger Clinton, who spent her teenage years in the White House, is 35 now, married and has a 13-month-old daughter. It was while pregnant that she became more acutely aware of the world her daughter and other children will inherit.

Clinton said proper nutrition and exercise are crucial for young people.

“When I was in public school in Little Rock (Arkansas), we had P.E. every single day,” Clinton said. Now, fewer than 10 percent of school children have gym every day, she said, and recess has “largely gone away.”

Clinton’s book, “It’s Your World: Get Informed, Get Inspired & Get Going!” details some of the world’s problems and shares stories of young people who are helping their communities find solutions.

Clinton said her first turn as an activist came when she was a youngster and learned wildlife sometimes choked on discarded plastic beverage container rings. She began “obsessively” cutting them up — “Which I still do,” she said — and convinced her classmates to do the same.

Clinton spoke Nov. 5 at Ecotrust, a Portland nonprofit that researches and seeks sustainable solutions in farming, forestry and economics. Among other things, the organization produced a report this year on problems hindering “Ag of the Middle,” the small- to mid-size producers and processors who are too big to survive by selling at farmers’ markets but too small to compete in the commodities markets.

At Ecotrust, Clinton heard a three-member panel detail work they’re doing to ensure nutritious local food finds its way to schools and to programs that serve needy populations. About two dozen children were in the audience, in addition to adults.

Clinton was introduced by Amanda Oborne, Ecotrust’s vice president of food and farms, who told students in the audience that the “food system riddle” would be theirs to solve.

“The food system you’re inheriting is kind of a mess,” she said.

Children today, when they become adults, will figure out how to feed 9 billion people, adapt to a changing climate and engage in farming, ranching and fishing techniques that replenish natural resources, Oborne said.

A calf was killed and eaten in Klamath County and two others were badly mauled in the first confirmed wolf attacks on livestock outside Northeast Oregon.

Tracking collar data showed a wolf designated OR-25 was at the attack site five times between Oct. 28 and Nov. 2. The calves were attacked in a 100-acre pasture on private land in the upper Williamson River area, according to Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

OR-25 is a male wolf that dispersed from the Imnaha Pack and traveled through the Columbia Basin, Southern Blue Mountains and Northern and Central Cascades. He’s been in the Sprague wildlife management area of Klamath County since May, according to ODFW.

In August, the department designated the region an Area of Known Wolf Activity and encouraged livestock owners to take defensive measures, part of the process required under the Oregon wolf plan. The wolf wears a GPS tracking collar that emits a location signal to a computer at regular intervals.

The livestock attack comes as the ODFW Commission is set to decide Nov. 9 whether to remove gray wolves from the state endangered species list.

The wolf and the Klamath County attack site are physically outside the state endangered species jurisdiction, but the de-listing decision is expected to attract a large crowd and emotional, conflicting testimony. The attack may be seen as additional evidence wolves are expanding in numbers and range, as state wildlife biologists said when they recommended wolves be removed from the state endangered species list.

State Endangered Species Act protection applies to wolves east of Oregon Highways 395, 78 and 95, roughly the eastern one-third of the state. Federal ESA jurisdiction covers the rest of the state west of the highways.

Investigation of the Klamath County attacks began when an unidentified livestock producer reported finding an injured 350-pound heifer in the pasture Oct. 31, the carcass of a dead calf Nov. 1 and another injured calf Nov. 2. The injured calves had severe bite wounds and “massive tissue damage” to their hind legs, according to an ODFW report.

Of the carcass, “very little remained of the dead calf for examination,” ODFW reported. The department confirmed a wolf was responsible for all three.

OR-25 is believed to be alone. The department has no evidence he has a mate or pups, said Michelle Dennehy, ODFW spokeswoman.

Online

ODFW’s depredation report http://dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/docs/dep_inv/151103_Klamath_Depredation_Report.pdf

Oregon State University’s College of Agricultural Sciences has submitted an application to the federal Drug Enforcement Administration seeking permission to conduct research on industrial hemp production, according to an OSU announcement issued Nov. 5.

Jay Noller, head of the college’s Crop and Soil Science Department, said the university hopes to secure approval from the DEA and the Oregon Department of Agriculture in time to begin the research next year.

The 2014 Farm Bill included a provision allowing higher educational institutions to conduct industrial hemp research in states where hemp production is legal.

The Oregon Legislature in 2009 legalized the production and possession of industrial hemp.

Noller said the research will focus on agronomic production of industrial hemp in Western Oregon.

He said the College of Agricultural Sciences hasn’t identified a particular individual interested in conducting the research, but believes researchers are available that would be interested.

“I think there are agronomists, particularly those who just completed graduate school training, who could come in and perform the field trials,” he said. “My ideal sense is we would be able to secure enough external funds to make it worthwhile for somebody to study this.”

Asked if the college’s interest in hemp research could bleed into marijuana research, Noller said: “I wouldn’t rule that out in the long run if federal actions move that to where it is permissible.

“At this time we are just looking at the question of will industrial hemp varieties grow in Western Oregon,” he said.

According to the announcement, industrial hemp has many uses, including in paper, textiles, biodegradable plastics, fuel and health and food products. It also is an environmentally friendly plant that grows fast and requires few pesticides.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Forest officials have voted to expand no-logging buffers along streams on private timberland in Western Oregon to keep water cool enough for salmon.

The Oregon Board of Forestry adopted the rules on Thursday, despite protests from logging interests. Riparian zone buffers would increase to 80 feet on medium-sized streams and 60 feet on small streams, with the option to not cut any trees or to do thinning on part of the buffer.

The new rules won’t apply in the Siskiyou region, which was left out of the buffer expansion.

Currently trees must be left uncut 20 feet from streams on private timberland — though some additional feet are required where a number of trees must be maintained.

Removing too many trees leads streams to warm up, which can harm cold-water fish like salmon, steelhead and bull trout. Logging near streams also eliminates downed logs, which help create deep pools for salmon to escape predators and hide from the heat.

The bigger the no-logging buffers, the more shade, but the greater the economic impact on timberland owners.

Conservationists for years have been trying to get the board to boost the current buffers of 20 feet to 100 feet in order to meet the cold water standard. In recent years, record hot temperatures and drought have killed fish.

Earlier this year, federal regulators ruled that Oregon logging rules do not sufficiently protect fish and water in western Oregon from pollution caused by clear-cutting too close to streams, runoff form old logging roads, and other problems.

The Board of Forestry considered two proposals. One would have increased no-cut buffer zones to 90 feet, while the other would have left buffers unchanged, but would have require approaches such as thinning, sun-sided buffers or staggering harvests. The newly adopted rules were a compromise between the two.

“We feel it’s a modest step in the right direction, but we’re concerned it doesn’t go far enough,” said Bob Van Dyk with the Wild Salmon Center. Van Dyk said the new small stream buffers still won’t meet legal requirements to protect cold water for salmon.

Timber companies said the buffer increase would have big economic effects and is too expensive for loggers. Kristina McNitt, president of the Oregon Forest Industries Council, said the organization sees the new logging restrictions as political and arbitrary. The group represents private timberland owners.

“There is no evidence that modern forest practices harm fish,” McNitt said in a statement.

LANGLOIS — The Langlois Lions and the Friends of the Langlois Public Library will sponsor the 20th annual Holiday Crafts Fair 9 a.m.-4 p.m. Friday, Nov. 20, and Saturday, Nov. 21, at the Langlois Lions Hall on Floras Loop Road,…

LANGLOIS — The Langlois Lions and the Friends of the Langlois Public Library will sponsor the 20th annual Holiday Crafts Fair 9 a.m.-4 p.m. Friday, Nov. 20, and Saturday, Nov. 21, at the Langl…

LANGLOIS — A house cat tested positive for rabies in Curry County last month, the first feline to do so in Oregon since 1999, public health officials have confirmed.

LANGLOIS — A cat that tested positive for rabies in Curry County is the first feline to do so in Oregon since 1999, public health officials have confirmed.

BANDON — With the closing of Shindler's Pharmacy in early October came the end of an era of family-owned drug stores in Bandon.

BANDON — The Bandon Playhouse presents the return of the Christmas musical-comedy "Bethlehem Road" by Bandon playwright Neal Davis.

BANDON — With the closing of Shindler's Pharmacy in early October came the end of an era of family-owned drug stores in Bandon.

BANDON — The Bandon Playhouse presents the return of the Christmas musical-comedy "Bethlehem Road" by Bandon playwright Neal Davis.

LANGLOIS — A cat that tested positive for rabies in Curry County is the first feline to do so in Oregon since 1999, public health officials have confirmed.

LANGLOIS — A house cat tested positive for rabies in Curry County last month, the first feline to do so in Oregon since 1999, public health officials have confirmed.

GRANTS PASS, Ore. — An organic seed company and an organization opposed to genetic engineering will be allowed to defend a prohibition against biotech crops in Oregon’s Josephine County.

Circuit Court Judge Michael Newman ruled Nov. 4 that Siskiyou Seeds and Oregonians for Safe Farms and Families can intervene in a lawsuit that seeks to overturn the county’s ban on genetically modified organisms.

The seed company should not have to wait to defend the ordinance until its crops are at risk of cross-pollination from GMO varieties, Newman said at a hearing in Grants Pass, Ore.

The judge also allowed OSFF, a group that campaigned for the ordinance, to serve as Siskiyou Seeds’ co-defendant.

The company and OSFF argued that Josephine County’s government won’t defend the ban against genetically engineered crops, so they should be allowed to resist an attempt to overturn it.

The intervenors claimed that it would be prejudicial to exclude them from the lawsuit because the county doesn’t appear willing to challenge a state law that pre-empts most local governments from regulating GMOs.

“This litigation won’t be fully and fairly litigated by the existing parties,” said Stephanie Dolan, an attorney for the intervenors.

The group cited court documents filed by Josephine County, which raised no “affirmative defenses” of the ban on genetically modified organisms and did not question the legal standing of farmers who filed a case to invalidate the ordinance.

Robert and Shelley Ann White, who grew transgenic sugar beets, filed a complaint earlier this year seeking a declaration that the ordinance was pre-empted by a state statute passed in 2013.

In its answer to the complaint, Josephine County said it “takes no position” on whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a declaration that the GMO ban is unenforceable.

Instead, the county joined the plaintiffs in a request that a judge decide whether the prohibition is valid, noting that the ordinance was passed by voters and not the county.

“We have to follow the law. What we want to know is what law: the county law or the state law,” said Wally Hicks, attorney for Josephine County.

John DiLorenzo, attorney for the farmers who filed the case, said Siskiyou Seeds and OSFF weren’t entitled to act as defendants.

“It has to be more than an interested person who wants the laws enforced,” DiLorenzo said.

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a similar bid by an anti-gay marriage group that wanted to defend a California initiative defining marriage as between a man and a woman, he said.

In that case, lawyers representing California decided the statute was legally indefensible, DiLorenzo said.

“I don’t know why the county is not actively defending the (GMO) ordinance. It may be because it has come to the same conclusion as California’s attorney general did,” he said.

Don Tipping, owner of Siskiyou Seeds, hasn’t shown “one scintilla of evidence” that his company was harmed by biotech crops, DiLorenzo said.

The GMO ban would not have prevented Tipping from buying corn seed that contained GMO traits, as occurred in the past, he said.

Tipping’s decision to tear out a field of Swiss chard due to the proximity of a biotech sugar beet crop did not amount to harm either, he said.

“He dug it up himself without any evidence of harm,” DiLorenzo said. “His interest is not real or probable. Rather, it is hypothetical or speculative.”

Dolan countered that Tipping suffered a real injury, based on the economic damage he would have sustained from growing and harvesting a contaminated seed crop that was unsalable.

“Given our narrow valleys and the light pollen that can travel for miles, they’re effectively prohibiting non-GE farmers from growing other crops such as Swiss chard,” she said.

Litigation over the county ordinance should not be rushed, but instead the issue of whether state pre-emption is valid should be fully vetted, she said.

“At this stage, the challenge to the state seed law can begin,” Dolan said. “The current parties are not going to fully litigate the constitutionality of state law.”

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — An Oregon nonprofit has filed a lawsuit seeking to reinstate a state law that would have allowed people to get driver’s cards if they can’t prove legal presence in the United States.

The law was approved by lawmakers in 2013, but overturned by voters the following year in a referendum.

In its lawsuit filed Wednesday, the Oregon Law Center says it’s illegal for Oregon to enforce Measure 88, because it was motivated by a desire to regulate immigration laws and that’s the federal government’s job.

The group also says the measure is illegal because it targets a group of people based on their Mexican and Central American national origin.

About 120,000 immigrants in Oregon — 3 percent of the state’s population — lack legal status. Most are from Mexico.

The Oregon attorney general’s office declined to comment on pending litigation.