Bentz: Wolf bill dead

Democrats in control of legislative committees refused to schedule a hearing on House Bill 3383 last Friday, apparently killing any chance of passing the legislation to expand ranchers’ ability to track and kill wolves attacking cattle and sheep.

“Right now, what we probably have is a bill that won’t go anywhere this session,” said Rep. Cliff Bentz, R-Ontario, who was the chief sponsor of HB 3383 on behalf of the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association.

“Clem told us the reason he didn’t schedule a hearing is because Sen. Jackie Dingfelder, D-Salem, chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee, said she wouldn’t schedule the bill for a hearing on the Senate side unless the Defenders of Wildlife are in agreement,” Bentz said.

“Even if Clem scheduled a hearing and it passed the House, Dingfelder would kill the bill and it would not get a hearing in the Senate,” Bentz said

The sticking point is that ranchers want the bill to give them greater authority to track and kill wolves that attack livestock, while Defenders of Wildlife are willing to allow ranchers to kill wolves under Oregon’s endangered species law, but only when they are caught in the act of killing a lamb, calf or other livestock.

Dan Forsea, a Richland-area rancher and president of the Baker County Livestock Association, said the current prohibition under the state and federal endangered species acts against killing wolves that attack livestock is unfair to ranchers.

“It’s a sad deal they couldn’t get something done,” said Forsea. “It’s a bummer. It’s like being tied to a post and having somebody come in and kill  your animals in front of you.”

“This is your livelihood. These are the animals that feed your family,” Forsea said.

“It wasn’t right to bring the wolves in here in the first place, but since they are here, and are here to stay, we need the tools to protect our animals,” Forsea said.

Even though Defenders of Wildlife have a program to reimburse ranchers for livestock killed by wolves while they are protected under the federal Endangered Species Act, Forsea said the economic impacts on rural economies is far greater than the price of a lamb or a calf.

When a lamb or calf is killed by wolves, it has as ripple effect through the rural economy because for every animal lost to depredation, the rancher buys less feed and other supplies and services, such as medicine and veterinary care, the cowboy or shepherd winds up with fewer animals to watch over, the brand inspector winds up with fewer animals to check, the trucker winds up with fewer animals to haul, processors wind up with less animals to process and so forth, all the way to the consumer, who winds up paying more for meat due to cumulative effects of losses that begin when a wolf kills a calf or a lamb, Forsea said.      

Bentz said there is a glimmer of hope that a modified version of the bill could be reintroduced during a possible February special session of the Legislature, provided the cattlemen’s association and Defenders of Wildlife can come to an agreement on language.

Bentz said the deadlock over legislation ranchers need to protect their livestock from wolf depredation is an example of a bigger issue of a lack of understanding by environmental groups and some urban lawmakers about the costs such environmental regulations impose on farmers, ranchers and rural communities, whose economies rise and fall to a significant degree with the rise and fall of agriculture, timber, mining and other natural resource industries.

“The bigger issue is a lack of understanding of the costs these environmental regulations impose on people trying to earn a living raising potatoes, wheat, cattle and other crops,” Bentz said. “There’s a lack of understanding of just how narrow the margins are in agriculture.

“I don’t think they understand that the profit margin in ag is very, very small,” Bentz said. “When people come to the committees with new environmental regulations, I want them to tell me what the costs will be — what will it cost the rancher?”

Bentz said he believes one of the keys to bringing down Oregon’s second-highest in the nation unemployment rate of 12.1 percent is to “get rid of barriers” that have stymied the state’s natural resource industries that support rural Oregon.

 Peggy Browne, president of the Baker County Farm Bureau, said it’s frustrating that urban Democrats who control the Oregon Legislature don’t seem to get the connection between Oregon’s 12.1 percent unemployment rate — second highest in the nation — and the seemingly endless onslaught of environmental regulations, passed under their watch.

Browne said the failure of the Democratic majority to at least schedule a hearing on HB 3383 and listen to farmers and ranchers who are most directly affected by wolf depredation seems un-American and feeds the fear that they don’t care about rural Oregon or its No. 1 industry — agriculture.

“I am frustrated, quite honestly,” Browne said. “I’m afraid this is another instance where they don’t really understand the weight of the issue,” Browne said.

“I was hoping we would have a hearing so landowners could come in and explain how they are affected and why they feel they need some sort of tools to help deal with these wolf attacks,” Browne said.

“I understand they have a full plate, with the state economy in trouble, but if something isn’t done about the wolf attacks, this could possibly throw Baker County’s economy in a tailspin,” Browne said.

In just two weeks, she said wolf depredation of livestock in Baker County has claimed 24 sheep and one calf.

“What the urban legislators don’t seem to understand is that the basic foundation of any good economy is its ability to rely on its own natural resources,” Browne said. “That ability is getting more and more restricted. We are relying on other industries like tourism, and tourism is fairly fickle.”