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.

BEND, Ore. (AP) — The Tumalo Irrigation District has added an additional fee for patrons in anticipation of mounting legal costs associated with recently filed lawsuits over Oregon spotted frog habitat.

The district instituted a $175 fee this year for each water right account holder to help pay for litigation as well as for public relations during the court case.

“We got estimates from the communication teams and legal teams and came up with an idea of what it would cost us,” said Ken Rieck, the district manager.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Tumalo and other irrigation districts are being sued by the Center for Biological Diversity and WaterWatch of Oregon. The cases focus on Deschutes River flows and management of reservoirs. The two environmental groups first threatened legal action last summer.

The spotted frog has been listed as a threatened species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The bureau and irrigation districts manage Crescent Lake, Crane Prairie and Wickiup reservoirs.

The Tumalo Irrigation District board, which is made up of five members, agreed on the $175 fee unanimously Jan. 12. The district has about 667 accounts, which add up to $116,725 expected to be set aside for lawsuit costs.

The Deschutes Basin Board of Control, a group of eight irrigation districts in Central Oregon, is proportionally dividing up costs for the court case among the districts.

Rieck said responding to the lawsuits is expected to be an “extraordinary expense.” He said the 2016 district budget was tight with little wiggle room to handle added legal costs.

“We’ll keep the accounting for the lawsuit separate, and if we’ve overcollected, we’ll return what we’ve overcollected,” Rieck said.

The Central Oregon Irrigation District, one of the others named in the federal suit, started collecting a $25 fee last year to help cover costs with the Deschutes Basin Habitat Conservation Plan, an assessment of future water needs and habitat conservation.

This year, the fee will go to defraying costs from the spotted frog litigation. The district manages two canals east of Bend that pass through Redmond and Terrebonne. It has about 3,600 patron accounts.

“It will barely even scratch the surface,” Shon Rae, the district’s project manager, said of the fee’s impact on paying for the lawsuits.

SEATTLE (AP) — A President’s Day storm brought record rainfall to the Pacific Northwest and sent rivers overflowing their banks in Western Washington on Tuesday.

The National Weather Service says the storm system, known as a “Pineapple Express” is now pointed toward Oregon.

The weather service had flood warnings in effect for certain rivers in Clallam, King, Kittitas, Mason, Snohomish and Whatcom counties on Tuesday morning.

KOMO-TV reports at least 16 roads were closed on Tuesday morning in Snohomish and King counties because of flooding. The water was several feet deep over several roads, mostly around Duvall and Carnation.

KCPQ-TV reports record one-day rain totals for Monday were set in Bellingham and Quillayute near Forks. The Bellingham Airport reported 1.64 inches of rain, breaking the old record of 1.02 inches set back in 1986.

The north Washington coast reported 3.34 inches of rain near Forks. The old record for Monday was 3.05 inches set 35 years ago.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — A Nevada rancher is returning to court to seek his release from jail in Oregon, where he went to support the armed occupation of a national wildlife preserve.

Cliven Bundy has a detention hearing set for Tuesday, when a federal judge will decide whether to allow him to go home as he awaits trial. Prosecutors said last week that he should stay behind bars because they didn’t expect him to show up for future court dates.

Bundy was arrested in Portland last week on charges stemming from a 2014 armed standoff that forced federal officials to release cattle being rounded up near his Nevada ranch.

The 69-year-old came to Oregon to support the weekslong occupation at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge launched by his now-jailed sons, Ammon and Ryan Bundy.

Linfield College in Oregon has decided to begin a wine studies program.

The private college, located in McMinnville in the heart of the Willamette Valley’s Pinot noir region, will grant students a wine studies minor to go along with their major degree program.

Students will learn about the history, culture, production, business and science of wine, and its social and economic significance in Oregon and beyond, according to a Linfield news release.

The latter is well documented. A California firm, Full Glass Research, estimated the Oregon wine industry’s economic impact at $3.35 billion. The figure counts crop value, sales, jobs and direct and indirect services and businesses.

The Linfield program will aim to produce graduates with a broad understanding of the industry and who, combined with their major field of study, will be able to step into jobs. The college anticipates students will combine a wine studies minor with majors such as management, marketing, accounting, mass communications, biology, chemistry or international business, according to a news release.

Other universities offer deeper programs. University of California-Davis has taught all phases of winemaking for nearly 50 years, while Washington State University and Oregon State University have well-established viticulture and enology programs. OSU also established a Wine Research Institute on campus.

But Linfield has hosted the International Pinot Noir Celebration since it began 30 years ago, faculty are engaged in research projects and the campus houses the Oregon Wine History Project and wine archives.

After 41 days, 25 indictments and one man killed, the armed occupation of a federal wildlife refuge near Burns has come to an end.

The underlying issues of rangeland management, however, won’t be going away anytime soon.

John O’Keeffe, president of the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association, said things are far from perfect between ranchers across the West, the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service. Environmental regulations are making it harder to get rangeland improvement projects done quickly. Wildfires are getting bigger and hotter, scorching hundreds of thousands of acres. Noxious weeds continue to spread, choking out native vegetation for grazing.

Yet O’Keeffe was quick to condemn the militants who came mostly from out of state to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, where they protested the sentences of Harney County ranchers Dwight and Steven Hammond and called for federal land to be returned to private citizens.

“What happened in Burns is outsiders coming in and occupying a refuge illegally,” O’Keeffe said. “We have a lot of issues to sort out with the agencies, but we absolutely intend to do it through legal channels.”

O’Keeffe runs cattle on about 75,000 acres of public land near the tiny community of Adel in isolated south-central Oregon — an average size family ranch, he says. His operation includes grazing permits with both the BLM and Fremont-Winema National Forest.

Ranchers understand the need to support multiple uses on public land, such as recreation and wildlife habitat, O’Keeffe said. But he worries further restrictions might become too much to take.

“There’s no guarantees,” O’Keeffe said. “Should these government regulations become too burdensome, ranchers could go away. That would create a whole new set of problems.”

The BLM manages grazing permits and leases on roughly 14 million acres in Oregon and Washington. That breaks down to a total of 951,000 permits for the region.

Of those, about 20 belong to Jacob Ferguson.

Ferguson is a rangeland management specialist for BLM Vale District in southeast Oregon. His area encompasses 850,000 acres south of Jordan Valley and east of the Owyhee River. From May through October, he travels usually once per week to visit his permittees and monitor conditions on the ground.

“We try to see it all,” Ferguson said.

Despite only being on the job for two years, Ferguson said he’s developed good relationships with ranchers around the area. He knows most of his permittees on a first-name basis, and they meet regularly in the field to review grazing plans and check forage conditions.

It’s around this time of year when Ferguson said he meets with ranchers to set grazing schedules and add up fees for the coming season. The BLM uses what are known as animal unit months, or AUMs, to determine its grazing fees. AUMs are measured by the amount of forage animals need for one month, and Ferguson said the limits are very strict.

“You can’t authorize more AUMs without (environmental) analysis,” he said.

The BLM recently adjusted its fees to $2.11 per AUM. The Forest Service, which is under the Department of Agriculture as opposed to the Department of the Interior, charges $1.69 per month per cow-calf pair.

Ranchers must also follow specific conditions laid out in their permits, which might include rotating pastures, maintaining fences and protecting vegetative cover for sensitive species like sage grouse.

“Orderly management of the range is our goal,” Ferguson said.

The problem, according to Mark Mackenzie, is not with local rangeland managers like Ferguson. Rather, it’s mismanagement and political pressure up the chain of command.

Mackenzie, who runs 900 head of cattle south of Jordan Valley, is largely dependent on federal AUMs. But with so many layers of new protections, he said local land management is becoming cumbersome. And when a change is needed on the range, he said the agency will likely be taken to court.

“It’s all driven by special interest groups,” Mackenzie said. “We’ve let the management of these resources become commandeered by the courts.”

Mackenzie figures grazing has fallen by about 40 percent since 1960 in the Vale District. Those losses create an economic ripple in small towns like Jordan Valley — population 180 — that threatens their very existence.

Grazing is also a management tool itself, Mackenzie said. Without grazing, grasses can become overgrown and increase the fuel load for large wildfires — like the Soda Fire that spilled over into Oregon from Idaho last year.

The occupation of the wildlife refuge was unfortunate, Mackenzie said, but the militants’ message of local control resonates strongly.

“We need the control of natural resources management back at the local level,” he said. “Let local people have a say in what goes on in their communities and counties.”

Ferguson did say the BLM is trying to be more proactive with fighting rangeland fires in the West. Oregon, Idaho and Nevada are collaborating on a program creating strategic fuel breaks where firefighters can safely fight fires before they get too big and destructive.

“The whole goal is to reduce the size of these fires,” he said.

Andy Bentz, a former Malheur County sheriff and owner of Bentz Solutions in Ontario, agrees the BLM doesn’t have enough flexibility to do proper management. He pointed to lawsuits from environmental groups as what’s hobbling the agency.

“Yelling at the BLM is like yelling at a fireman when your house is on fire,” Bentz said. “They can’t make on-the-ground annual changes, because it opens them up to challenges and litigation.”

Bentz, whose family has ranched in southeast Oregon since 1916, said there is enough local expertise to manage the lands for multiple use. But when the agency tries to adapt to Mother Nature, adjusting seasons or stocking rates, Bentz said it faces another lawsuit. He blamed the Equal Access to Justice Act, which compensates attorney fees if groups can prove their litigation is justified.

“They have to find a way to get flexibility back into management,” Bentz said. “The land continues to deteriorate because the land managers don’t have the flexibility to manage it properly.”

George Wuerthner, Oregon state director for the Western Watersheds Project, said most environmental groups don’t actually have a lot of money to spend on lawsuits, and therefore only the most egregious violations are challenged in court. Just as many others are left ignored, he said.

Wuerthner, who previously worked with the BLM as a botanist in Idaho, said many public lands are negatively impacted by domestic livestock. Water is limited in the desert country of southeast Oregon, yet cattle gravitate toward springs and streams, harming the ecosystem for other animals and fish.

Summer grazing can also put stress on native grasses and allow invasive species like cheat grass to take over, Wuerthner said.

“That’s one of the things squeezing ranchers, in fact,” he said.

Wuerthner said the BLM actually depends on some of these lawsuits to ensure they are following the laws passed by Congress, and not overly influenced by local pressure.

“They’re keeping the agencies honest,” he said.

The Umatilla and Wallowa-Whitman national forests have just shy of 2 million acres of rangeland deemed suitable for grazing. Those forests are also in the midst of 15-year updates to their respective land management plans.

Maura Laverty, range program manager for the two forests, said they have 135 active grazing allotments. She said they have good relationships with their permittees that have helped them come a long way in managing the land responsibly.

“We don’t graze like we use to,” she said. “We’re a lot more conscientious now.”

Currently, the Forest Service is working on environmental reviews for each allotment, which it hopes to finish by 2025. The reviews must take into account endangered fish on each site, as well as wolves which are becoming increasingly established in the northeast corner of the state.

Karl Jensen, a Pilot Rock rancher, runs about 80 of his 300 head of cattle on the Umatilla forest near Ukiah. He said the biggest challenge he’s faced is fencing off his cows away from nearby Five Mile Creek and Sugarbowl Creek, which are home to endangered bull trout and salmon.

Jensen said the Forest Service has been great to work with in both Heppner and Ukiah.

“There’s always regulations that come down from higher up,” he said. “We’re able to work those out and come up with a good management plan.”

O’Keeffe, president of the cattlemen’s association, said good rangeland management must include adequate grazing and a stable supply of forage. Funding and workload remain huge challenges for the BLM, The whole issue has him on edge.

“So far, we’re here and ranching. But the potential is there for it to no longer be workable,” he said. “If that happens, these communities will be trouble, These fires will be uncontrollable. It’s kind of a cumulative effect.”

Ferguson said there are areas they’d like to improve, but it’s not going to happen overnight.

“It’s a slow process,” he said. “We do the best we can.”

Work in the Northwest’s rangelands and forests has been reshaped in recent decades by the environmental laws that ranchers and loggers must navigate.

The changes are often propelled by conflicts decided in federal court, an arena where attorney Scott Horngren has made his mark as a defender of natural resource industries.

Important legal opinions can arise from lawsuits over relatively minor projects that affect endangered species and public lands — major subjects of litigation in the West.

For this reason, Horngren sees certain battles as worthwhile even if they don’t involve enormous timber tracts or grazing allotments, since losing one fight can have a domino effect.

“That precedent is going to hurt you in the next case,” he said.

The general thrust of major U.S. environmental statutes is set by Congress, and their enforcement is carried out by federal agencies, but key questions about how these laws should function are often answered by judges.

“It’s up to the courts to decide what (statutes) mean in the absence of clear direction,” Horngren said. “Those interpretations are a huge part of natural resource law.”

In nearly three decades of legal practice, Horngren has represented private companies — often when they’re caught in the middle of disputes between environmentalists and the government — and influenced federal policy as an attorney for the American Forest Resource Council, a nonprofit industry group.

Now, he’s turned his attention to educating the next crop of natural resource attorneys while continuing to litigate cases that impact agriculture, timber and mining at the Western Resources Legal Center, which is affiliated with Lewis & Clark Law School in Portland.

Unlike most nonprofit environmental law centers, WRLC is dedicated to helping natural resource industries rather than thwarting them.

The program represents parties in select lawsuits that have the potential to set legal precedent and provide an educational experience for law students.

Horngren is a natural fit for this role as a teacher-litigator, as he’s well-versed in a variety of industries affected by environmental laws, said Caroline Lobdell, executive director of WRLC.

“We can’t let all that talent just walk out the door,” she said. “He’s the true definition of a natural resources lawyer.”

New lawyers have long turned to Horngren for advice as a “wise sage” of natural resource law, said Tim Bernasek, chair of the agriculture, food and natural resources team at the Dunn Carney law firm.

After retiring from a successful private practice, Horngren is still contributing to the field instead of devoting himself to golf or other pastimes, he said.

“It’s a testament to his character and devotion to this industry,” Bernasek said. “There are not a lot of people who are willing to do that.”

During his career, Horngren has noticed subtle shifts in the effect of environmental litigation on natural resource industries.

While the public’s attention is often drawn to pivotal cases, the profusion of environmental litigation has also had a more gradual effect: Federal agencies have become more gun-shy about making decisions.

For example, due to pressure from environmentalists, the government is often persuaded to scale back watershed-scale thinning projects until they’re a fraction of their original scope, Horngren said.

“The agencies continue to be scared of litigation and the environmental groups,” he said.

The legal landscape facing natural resource users isn’t all doom and gloom. Horngren said the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where many Western environmental cases end up, has grown more even-handed in recent years.

In the early days of Horngren’s career, the 9th Circuit was “stacked” with judges who weren’t sympathetic to federal management policies, he said. More recent 9th Circuit appointees, though, are less biased in favor of environmental plaintiffs.

A key 2008 opinion by a broad “en banc” panel of 9th Circuit judges, known as Lands Council v. McNair, has also helped level the playing field.

Horngren represented logging companies and local governments in that case, which pitted environmentalists against a 3,800-acre selective logging project in Idaho’s Panhandle National Forest.

In its ruling resolving the dispute, the 9th Circuit overturned two of its own previous decisions because they misconstrued federal forest management law.

The 9th Circuit held that it’s “not a proper role for a federal appellate court” to “act as a panel of scientists” that scrutinizes federal decisions and orders agencies to “explain every possible scientific uncertainty.”

“Since McNair, the pendulum has swung back more toward the middle,” Horngren said.

Though much of his work life has been spent in the courtroom, it was a love of the outdoors that started Horngren on his career path.

Long bicycle trips through the woods convinced him to pursue a career in forestry, he said. “I figured I’d be a forester and sit it a lookout tower all day and life would be good.”

After graduating from Oregon State University, however, the timber economy was depressed while the controversies over forest management were heating up.

In this climate, Horngren became a lobbyist for timber industry groups. However, he soon realized lawsuits were influencing forest managers more than reasoned arguments and he began studying for his law degree.

“I saw that the future of public lands management is all this litigation,” he said.

Scott Horngren

Occupation: Natural resource attorney

Age: 61

Hometown: Portland, Ore.

Family: Wife, Yona McNally, and a grown son

Education: Bachelor of science in Forestry from Oregon State University in 1977, juris doctor from Lewis & Clark Law School in 1988.

CAVE JUNCTION, Ore. (AP) — A southwest Oregon lumber mill is shutting down for the second time in three years due to a log shortage.

Rough & Ready Lumber co-owner Jennifer Phillippi tells the Grants Pass Daily Courier that she told the sawmill crew on Saturday.

She says 20 sawmill workers are out of work and another 40 working in other areas could be gradually phased out over the coming weeks.

The lumber mill has about 70 full-time workers. It’s one of the largest employers in Cave Junction.

Phillippi says it’s not clear when the mill can reopen at full strength.

The mill shut down for a year in 2013-2014 but reopened with $5 million in upgrades.

Phillippi and other mill owners say federal agencies are to blame for lagging timber supplies.