Saturday, Nov. 22

Sundays

SUNDAYS

SALEM — An automatic recount now appears likely for Measure 92, a ballot initiative that would require labeling of food sold in Oregon containing genetically modified organisms.

The latest unofficial count Thursday from the Oregon secretary of state lists 750,989 votes against it, 749,505 for it. The difference of 1,484 is now within the 3,000 that triggers an automatic recount.

Counties have until Tuesday to certify their totals with the secretary of state, who has until Dec. 4 to certify the state results.

Although statewide recounts are rare, they do occur.

In 2000, Randall Edwards beat Gary Bruebaker for the Democratic nomination for state treasurer by 470 votes of more than 300,000 cast. Edwards went on to win two terms as treasurer.

In 1992, Les AuCoin beat Harry Lonsdale for the Democratic nomination for U.S. senator by 330 votes of more than 300,000 cast. AuCoin lost to Republican Sen. Bob Packwood.

Edwards and AuCoin led in their initial counts.

State law requires a recount at public expense if the difference is one-fifth of 1 percent of the total votes cast. Recounts also can be requested even if the margin is greater than the automatic trigger, but the individual or organization requesting it must pay unless the election result is reversed.

Spending by both sides on Measure 92 added up to nearly $29 million, shattering the record of $15 million set back in 2007.

Similar measures have gone down in California in 2012, Washington in 2013, and Colorado on Nov. 4.

SALEM — The Oregon Farm Bureau Board of Directors three years ago told the staff to find a new location for its offices. The board wanted a building that was closer to the Capitol, had more meeting space and a less cluttered financial balance sheet.

The Farm Bureau’s new headquarters at 1320 Capitol St. NE meets all three criteria and has another obvious benefit.

“The building is nicer,” Oregon Farm Bureau Executive Vice President Dave Dillon said.

“The thought was to have not just an office but an event space,” said Katie Fast, vice president of public policy for the Farm Bureau.

The building, and specifically its large meeting room that comes complete with a big-screen television and multiple electronic hook-ups for laptop computers and other devices, already has served as the site for an election-night party for two county Farm Bureaus.

“The idea was to have a really nice space for people to meet,” Fast said.

The building also has three other meeting rooms, enabling the Bureau to accommodate multiple meetings at the same time and for different sized groups.

As for its proximity to the Capitol, the building definitely meets that criteria. The Farm Bureau offices had been in a building across Salem on South Commercial Street for 19 years.

“I can walk to the Oregon Department of Agriculture and Oregon Water Resources Department buildings from here,” Fast said, “and it’s five minutes to the Capitol.”

For the record, the Farm Bureau’s new offices are less than a mile from the Capitol. Its old offices were more than three miles from the Capitol. But that’s only half the story. Add in traffic issues on Commercial Street at peak business hours and the time it takes to go to and from the Capitol for Farm Bureau staff has lessened considerably.

Also, Dillon pointed out, getting public officials and legislators to meet with Farm Bureau staff at the offices is now more palatable.

“If you’ve got somebody from an agency or a legislator and they are coming out to meet with your board or another group of members and a half-an-hour of their day is spent driving to the office and back, that is not the best situation for a group that relies on those kinds of meetings,” Dillon said.

Also, Dillon said, Farm Bureau members from around the state will find it much easier to get to the new offices.

Dillon said the new building also unclutters the Farm Bureau’s financial balance sheet. Instead of renting to several tenants, including many not associated with the natural resource industries, the new building will have less than a handful and all will be associated with natural resource industries.

The Oregon Cattlemen’s Association and the Oregon Dairy Farmers Association moved in with the Farm Bureau in early October. At most, the Farm Bureau expects to rent to two or three more tenants, Dillon said.

Also, the Farm Bureau is divesting its holdings in residential housing that it purchased along with its old building.

“We were spending too much time and had too much of the balance sheet in real-estate management, which is not really core to our mission,” Dillon said.

The new building is called the Natural Resource Center at Capitol and Gaines.

ELSEWHERE

PORT ORFORD — The first Seasonal Sensations — Words and Music to Celebrate the Holidays will be held from 10 a.m.-5 p.m. Sunday, Dec. 7, at the Port Orford Public Library.

Friday, Nov. 21

Oregon alfalfa growers challenging the legality of a county prohibition on genetically modified organisms have hinged their case on the state’s “right to farm” law.

The plaintiffs — Schulz Family Farms and James and Marilyn Frink — claim the GMO ban passed by Jackson County voters in May is precluded by the statute, which disallows local governments from deeming a common farming practice as a nuisance or trespass.

The complaint asks the Jackson County Circuit Court to stop the GMO ban from being enforced, or in the alternative, for $4.2 million in damages that the farmers would allegedly suffer if they must destory their biotech alfalfa crops by June 2015.

Schulz Family Farms grows 105 acres of “Roundup Ready” alfalfa that has been genetically engineered to withstand glyphosate herbicides, while the Frinks cultivate 200 acres of the biotech crop.

Alfalfa is a perennial crop with a 10-year lifespan, so the plaintiffs will lose out on several years of harvests if they’re forced to tear out the plants, the complaint said. Furthermore, they would have to replant the fields with other crops for about four years to ensure that any biotech alfalfa volunteers aren’t allowed to survive.

The plaintiffs say they sell alfalfa for roughly $200 to $300 per ton and would lose a major portion of their income if they had to switch to less profitable crops for several years — in the case of the Frinks, the disruption would likely drive them out of farming.

The county ordinance tries to circumvent Oregon’s right to farm law by designating the cultivation of biotech crops as a “violation” rather than a “nuisance,” the complaint said.

However, the ordinance is substantively a nuisance rule because it attempts to protect non-GMO farmers from being affected by pollen from biotech crops, the plaintiffs claim.

For this reason, the ordinance is prohibited under the right to farm statute despite its “semantic maneuvering,” the complaint said.

Jackson County, which is named as a defendant in the lawsuit, does not comment on pending litigation, said Joel Benton, counsel for the county.

The Center for Food Safety, a non-profit group that supported the GMO ban, believes it’s well crafted to comply with Oregon law, said George Kimbrell, attorney for the group.

“This lawsuit is without any merit or basis,” he said.

The complaint’s sole reliance on Oregon’s right to farm law to defeat the ordinance is notable. Typically, lawsuits offer multiple legal theories because they generally can’t be refiled to include new arguments.

Similar county ordinances in Hawaii that seek to regulate GMOs are being challenged under several theories, including pre-emption by federal laws.

The alfalfa plaintiffs could not likely raise such objections to the ordinance if they lose the right to farm case.

However, there is a possibility that other growers in the county could file lawsuits that take a different legal approach.

When asked about the reliance on the right to farm statute, an attorney for the alfalfa growers said it wouldn’t be appropriate to discuss the legal strategies of similar cases in other jurisdictions.

For years, foresters and conservationists have been trying to create new markets for western juniper in Oregon. The species has overrun some parts of  the state, and is sucking scarce water from Oregon’s high desert. 

A handful of custom sawmills that are willing to work with the small knotty tree have experimented with juniper fence posts and juniper cabinets and juniper shavings for pet bedding.

Meanwhile, in a tiny town in Sweden not far from the Arctic Circle, master distiller Jon Hillgren wondered what gin would taste like if it were aged in a juniper barrel.

Hillgren is the founder of Hernö Gin Distillery, and claims to be the world’s northernmost gin maker.  

Many craft distillers had tried aging gin in oak barrels and old whiskey casks, but Hillgren thought a juniper barrel would be the perfect compliment to the juniper berries that give gin its distinctive bite.

“In Sweden we make small butter knives out of juniper wood, and just smelling one of these knives you get a great juniper smell. I wondered, if we make a big barrel out of this, what would we get out of it taste-wise?” Hillgren says.

To make a traditional Swedish cask, Hillgren needed thick juniper staves with as few knots as possible, to prevent leaks. His distillery is located just a few miles from Sweden’s largest sawmills, but he couldn’t find juniper wood anywhere in Europe that met his specifications. So he searched Google, and found the In The Sticks sawmill in Fossil, Oregon.

Kendal Derby, a rangeland ecologist, founded the mill so that juniper cut during range restoration projects wouldn’t go to waste. Few of Oregon’s larger sawmills are willing to work with it.  Hillgren began emailing Derby, and was delighted to find another small artisan business halfway across the world.

“We  haven’t met each other, but we’re doing business very well. It’s all about trust. It’s a perfect cooperation,” Hillgren says.

Derby agrees. “It was fun. When we first started talking about it, I was headed out the door to go elk hunting. Jon promptly wrote back and said ‘we go elk hunting in Sweden too,’” he remembers.

Derby custom cut an order of juniper staves for Hillgren. Some of the lumber didn’t make the grade, so Derby used the leftovers to make butcher blocks and wooden blanks for flute carvers.

In Sweden, Hillgren hired a cooper to build each barrel by hand using traditional techniques, heating the wood to make it easier to bend. Hillgren let his gin age in the barrels for 30 days. He says that gave it a deep, complex flavor and a slight yellow color. He released the first bottles in 2013. This year, the Juniper Cask Gin won a gold medal at the International Wine and Spirits Competition.

“This mix, we thought would be fabulous, and we’re selling out,” Hillgren says. He believes he is the only person in the world making gin in juniper barrels.

Hernö exports gin to eight countries, but it isn’t distributing it in the U.S., though it’s available on Amazon’s website in the United Kingdom. Kendal Derby says he hasn’t had a chance to try the finished gin yet. He’s more of a beer guy, but he loves what Hillgren has made.

“It’s a great idea, and now he’s winning awards. The wood is a real ingredient for his success and that’s pretty exciting to be part of,” he says.

Derby primarily mills landscape timber and furniture grade lumber, and struggles to stay in business. The state has invested heavily in juniper, creating an Oregon Solutions project to help develop new markets for it. Nevertheless, Derby says most juniper sawyers go out of business eventually. He says he’s trying everything, hoping to hit on a way to make In The Sticks profitable.

“Whatever someone calls and says they want, I do it, but I still don’t pay myself. I just work,” he says.

Today

SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) — Idaho was among seven states where the number of unauthorized immigrants increased between 2009 and 2012, according to a report released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center.

The report also found the number of unauthorized immigrants decreased in 14 states, including Oregon, in that time period. The number stayed relatively stable in the remaining states, including Washington.

Nationally, the number of unauthorized immigrants remained stable at 11.2 million between 2009 and 2012, the report found. The number of such immigrants peaked in 2007 at 12.2 million, the report said.

But changes occurred within states. Idaho, for instance, grew from 35,000 unauthorized immigrants in 2009 to 50,000 in 2012, an increase of 15,000 people. Idaho’s growth was “driven by increases in unauthorized immigrants from countries other than Mexico,” the report said.

Other states that saw increases were Florida, Maryland, Nebraska, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Virginia, the report said.

Meanwhile, Oregon saw the number of unauthorized immigrants drop from 140,000 in 2009 to 120,000 in 2012, a decrease of 20,000 people.

In most states, the losses “were due to drops in the number of unauthorized immigrants from Mexico,” the report said.

While Washington did not gain or lose a significant number of unauthorized immigrants, the state ranked 12th in the total number of such people living within its borders. There were 230,000 unauthorized immigrants living in Washington in 2012. California had the greatest number, at 2.4 million, the report found.

Washington also ranked 15th in the number of unauthorized immigrants in the labor force in 2012, at 4.9 percent. Nevada has the largest percentage in the labor force at 10.2 percent.

The report also showed the long-term growth in unauthorized immigrants in each state.

Idaho grew from 10,000 unauthorized immigrants in 1990 to 50,000 in 2012; Oregon grew from 25,000 in 1990 to 120,000 in 2012; and Washington grew from 40,000 in 1990 to 230,000 in 2012.

MEDFORD, Ore. (AP) — Two southern Oregon farms are asking a court to end Jackson County’s voter-approved ban on genetically modified crops or force the county to pay the farms $4.2 million.

The farmers say that’s the value of the Roundup Ready alfalfa crop they’ll have to destroy if the ban stands.

The Medford Mail Tribune reports the lawsuit was filed Tuesday in Jackson County Circuit Court on behalf of Schultz Family Farms LLC and James and Marilyn Frink and their family trust. Lawyers say a coalition of farming, agriculture and biotechnology organizations is assisting the Jackson County farmers.

County voters approved the ban in May. The lawsuit claims that the GMO ban conflicts with state law and will require farmers to destroy crops they have already planted and grown for sale. Roundup Ready alfalfa can withstand the application of glyphosate herbicide.

Bruce Schultz estimates he would lose $2.2 million while the Frinks say they would lose $2 million.

A county spokesman was not immediately reachable late Tuesday for comment.

Earlier this month, Oregon voters narrowly rejected a measure that would have required the labeling of genetically modified foods.

Veteran Oregon cattle rancher Bill Moore has a simple explanation for signing the first individual conservation agreement for Greater sage grouse.

He wants protection from restrictions and regulations that might be slapped on his rangeland if the bird is listed as threatened or endangered next year.

“Our motivation was to not only try and do some conservation for sage grouse, but obviously to continue to be able to use our private lands for grazing,” Moore said.

The agreement with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service covers 7,290 acres of grazing land split about 45 miles apart in Baker and Malheur counties. The accord, technically called a Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances, or CCAA, lays out what the Moore and his wife, Nancy, will do to improve conditions for the Greater sage grouse. The bird is a candidate for the federal endangered species list.

The USFWS will decide whether to list it in September 2015. The decision date has touched off a scramble by ranchers, local governments and wildlife officials to collaborate on voluntary conservation measures.

The Moores will remove juniper trees — which crowd out sage and native grasses and provide perches for predators — and put escape ramps in water troughs, mark fences so birds are less likely to fly into them and keep cattle out of leks, as sage-grouse breeding areas are called.

The agreement is the first in Oregon involving an individual property owner and probably will be the last, wildlife service spokeswoman Anna Harris said.

A half-dozen counties are pursuing a model established this year in Harney County. In that case, the county’s Soil and Water Conservation District served as the intermediary with USFWS. The district holds the CCAA agreement and establishes management plans with individual ranches. The work, which recently won a national stewardship award, allows ranchers to work with a local group they know and trust, rather than a federal agency.

In return, landowners get 30 years protection from additional restrictions or regulations even if the greater sage-grouse is added to the endangered species list.

Bill Moore, who was 2008-09 Oregon Cattlemen’s Association president, said he appreciates the county-wide efforts but pursued his own because he isn’t sure soil and water conservation districts will be able to finish management plans before the decision deadline.

Each agreement requires someone out on the ground, developing management plans for individual ranches. That’s not something that can be done “three, four, five or 10 in a day,” he said.

“Our’s is a done deal,” Moore said. “I wasn’t willing to put it on hold until the counties got their’s done.”

Like other ranchers who have signed agreements, Moore said the management requirements are not a big deal.

Cutting juniper, for example, improves grazing ground because grasses come back.

“Most of the stuff that we’re going to do for sage grouse, it’s probably going to help us,” Moore said. “It’s darn sure not going to hurt us.”

He called the requirements “insignificant management changes” that are “not that invasive on what we’re doing.”

The other benefit to signing an agreement is that CCAAs have withstood court challenges filed by environmentalists, Moore said.

“One of the real attractions is they cannot inflict any more management changes on us for 30 years,” Moore said.

The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife reports two wolves left their birth packs over the summer and are now paired together in the Eagle Cap Wilderness southeast of Cove.

OR-24 dispersed from the Snake River pack and OR-27 from the Minam pack sometime in July. Both animals are fitted with GPS collars, and have been located in higher elevation areas of the Keating and Catherine Creek wildlife management units in northeast Oregon.

ODFW spokeswoman Michelle Dennehy said it remains to be seen whether the animals will mate next year. A map of the pair’s territory is available online at www.dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/wolf_livestock_updates.asp.

No incidents of livestock predation are tied to either animal, though local ranchers are encouraged to adopt nonlethal measures of wolf hazing such as range riders or fladry fencing.

Meanwhile, a second suspected pack in the Catherine Creek and Keating units is no longer believed to be in the area, according to ODFW. Biologists had spotted tracks late last year from five animals near Medical Springs in Union County, but have not found any recent evidence of wolves in the area.

STEVENSON, Wash. — Asia and South America continue to hold the most promise for growth in Pacific Northwest soft white wheat exports, an analyst told producers Nov. 13 at the annual Tri-State Grain Growers Convention.

Casey Chumrau, market analyst with U.S. Wheat Associates in Arlington, Va., said growers will be rewarded for their patience. A growing middle class in China and elsewhere means more purchasing power and increased sales, she said.

Two billion Asian consumers have joined the economic middle class in the past 20 years, Chumrau said, and 1.2 billion more are projected to reach that status by 2020.

In China alone, Chumrau said, 75 percent of the population is projected to earn between $9,000 and $34,000 annually by 2022. In 2000, only 4 percent of the population was in that wage class, she said.

China is a big wheat producer, but consumes what it produces. “The demand for higher quality import products is growing fast,” Chumrau said.

American growers’ overall market share has fallen since the 1980s as other nations ramped up production, but has stabilized, Chumrau said. Soft white wheat accounts for 4 million to 6 million metric tons of the 29 million metric tons the U.S. exports annually, but a higher percentage of production is exported than other wheat classes.

The top 10 markets for soft white are Japan, Korea, the Philippines, Yemen, Indonesia, Thailand, Chile, Taiwan, Nigeria and Mexico.

The strategies for increasing soft white consumption, especially in South America, include blending it with hard wheat varieties, which reduces flour and bakery costs, Chumrau said.

Washington, Idaho and Oregon growers will benefit if the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement is finalized and tariffs are reduced to zero, Chumrau said.

She said solvent retention capacity testing, or SRC, is the “Holy Grail” of wheat marketing. The technique measures flour’s ability to absorb water during mixing and release it during baking, which establishes a flour quality profile and predicts its best use. The testing method could prove U.S. wheat is of better quality than competitors’, Chumrau said.

On another topic, the prospect of selling genetically engineered wheat, Chumrau said U.S. growers must be aware and respectful of customers such as Japan that are opposed to GMO food products.

Because no GE wheat varieties have been approved, “We don’t have a product to promote or discuss,” Chumrau said. “U.S. Wheat has been having many discussions with our export markets. We’ve been saying it’s seven to 10 years away for the past 10 years.”

Marketers may learn from “path to acceptance” of Golden Rice, a GE product.

“We want to ease into it,” she said.

Time is running short for Congress to pass a Klamath basin water bill that supporters say is crucial in keeping the fragile peace between irrigators, Indian tribes and conservationists.

The Klamath Basin Water Recovery and Economic Restoration Act, which would ratify the removal of four hydroelectric dams and authorize funding for environmental restoration, is a crucial component in water use settlements between competing interests in the region.

“Basically, all the pieces are in place. All we need is for the last piece to be put in place by Congress,” said Richard Whitman, natural resources adviser to Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber, who was involved in the deal negotiations.

To make the bill more palatable for lawmakers, the amount of authorized federal spending was reduced from $750 million to roughly $500 million, he said.

Supporters have also sought to demonstrate community support and address other objections of lawmakers, Whitman said. “We’ve checked all the boxes we’re supposed to check at this point.”

The legislation was recently approved by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which allows it to be voted on by the whole Senate.

However, very little time remains before the current “lame duck” Congress adjourns for the year and a new slate of lawmakers moves into the U.S. Capitol in 2015. At that point, legislation currently under consideration would expire.

Supporters say the Klamath bill needs to pass now because a similar bill is unlikely to fair well under the next Congress and the delicate compromise among stakeholders may not hold out for much longer.

The “rubber band” uniting irrigators, tribes and conservationists is getting stretched very tight and may snap, said Greg Addington, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association.

Support for the legislation among key irrigator groups in the area often gets overlooked due to the controversy over dam removal, he said.

Dam removal is intended to improve the function and water quality of the Klamath River for fish but has caused a great deal of controversy, with opponents claiming it will actually have negative environmental effects.

“For us, it’s not about dams,” Addington said. “It’s about water in the ditch.”

The Klamath Tribes are recognized by the Oregon Water Resources Department as “time immemorial” senior water rights holders in the basin, which means they can “call” water and cut off junior water rights holders.

Such calls can be devastating for irrigators during the droughts that the basin has experienced in recent years.

The settlement deal contains mechanisms that reduce the impact to irrigators, said Don Gentry, tribal chairman of the Klamath Tribes.

“It provides a softer landing for folks with junior water rights,” he said.

However, not everybody has lined up in support of the legislation.

Klamath County Commissioner Tom Mallams, a longtime opponent of the deal, said public opinion in the area is against dam removal.

“The local people still do not want it,” he said.

Removal of the J.C. Boyle dam would cost the county roughly $500,000 in property taxes and would flush hazardous sediments that have built up behind it down the river, Mallams said.

The four dams in question provide valuable flood control and their removal would cause the Klamath river to dry up in summer, he said.

Many irrigators in the upper Klamath basin, including Mallams, remain opposed to the deal as well, he said. “I feel like this is nothing more than a surrender.”

Irrigators who have signed onto the deal are supporting the legislation under duress, Mallams said.

In the case of PacifiCorp, the dams’ owner, the federal government has made clear that any required upgrades would be prohibitively expensive, so removal is the only option, he said. “They have a loaded gun to their head.”

Mallams said the leaders of Klamath County in Oregon and Sisikiyou County in California — where three of the dams are located — plan to send letters to their Congressional delegates in opposition to the bill.

Bill sponsor Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., has vowed to push for the bill’s passage in the Senate and will try to attach it to “must pass” tax or spending legislation, said Keith Chu, his spokesperson.

“Getting anything to happen is a heavy lift with only a few weeks to go,” he said.

On the House side, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., is seen as instrumental to the bill’s chances of passage but hasn’t yet decided whether or not to support it.

The representative’s team is doing “due diligence” on the effects of the bill and people’s opinion of it, said Andrew Malcolm, his spokesperson.

“It’s something we’re looking at,” he said. “We need to understand all the implications of this before moving forward.”

Saturday, Nov. 15

SALEM — A report issued by an Oregon task force on genetic engineering received some mild rebukes from critics of biotechnology at a sparsely attended meeting on Nov. 13.

Only a handful of people attended the public comment hearing, held in Salem during wintry weather that prevented some task force organizers from attending.

The task force was appointed by Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber to explain the controversies over biotechnology to the Oregon legislature, which may rely on the report in drafting bills.

Cindy Condon, an Oregon resident, said she was concerned because essentially nothing new was included in the report and she’s concerned about what role it will play among lawmakers and state regulators.

“Who’s speaking for us as citizens?” she said.

There hasn’t been enough long-term testing on the health effects of genetically modified organisms, Condon said.

“The research is limited because it’s controlled by industry,” she said.

Pat Williams, a resident, said she generally enjoyed the report but would like certain items removed, like the possibility of genetic engineering plants to withstand drought.

Seed companies can achieve such results without biotechnology, she said.

Also, the report shouldn’t state that genetically engineered sugarbeets can be harmed through cross-pollination with organic or conventional chard, Williams said. “There is no vice versa. The damage is not related to GMO.”

Jan Castle, another resident, said she hadn’t read the report but objected to its underlying premise that biotech crops can coexist with organic and conventional ones.

“I think it’s impossible. The two are mutually exclusive,” she said. “Nature and the wind will not respect the boundaries we put on them.”

Farmers should reject GMOs and embrace the “foodie restaurant” ethic that is often associated with Oregon agriculture, Castle said. “We have become the Provence of the U.S.”

Bug Chicks bringing arthropod zoo