Cattle killed by wolves could net Oregon ranchers bigger state payouts. If Democrats defy environmentalists
Oregon ranchers want higher payouts from the state to recoup their losses for cattle and other livestock killed by wolves. But the fate of a bill that would increase those payments will be determined by whether enough Democratic lawmakers, who hold the majority in Salem, are willing to defy environmentalists and support the proposal.For years, Oregon ranchers have complained about wolves preying on their cows, horses and other animals. Because shooting a wolf is against state hunting laws, lawmakers in 2011 agreed to compensate ranchers for the financial loss of any animal that dies following a wolf attack.Ranchers say the money is vital to keeping their operations profitable. In 2023, Oregon counties gave ranchers $70,300 from state coffers for dead or injured cattle that experts determined were likely attacked by wolves. Ranchers are currently compensated for the market value of the cattle lost to wolves.But ranchers say the losses they suffer are deeper than merely the cost of a replacement calf or cow. “Wolf depredation is not only a financial concern, it is an emotional and mental concern and it is causing a great deal of stress to ranchers across entire sections of the state,” Gabrielle Homer, president-elect of Oregon CattleWomen, said in written testimony to lawmakers.Numerous Republican lawmakers agree.Sen. Todd Nash, a Republican from Enterprise and former president of the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association, introduced a bill in January that would require the state to pay ranchers at least the fair market value – and in many cases far more – for animals injured or killed by wolves. Under the bill, Oregon would have to pay seven times the market value of cow calves, sheep and goats, and three times the market value for other cows.These multipliers, ranchers say, are necessary because wolf attacks on herds can negatively impact cattle and ranchers in many unseen ways. “This stress impacts every animal and comes at a cost to the rancher in the way of less pounds to sell, an animal aborting or not rebreeding, and the overall disposition of their cattle,” Oregon cattle ranchers Creighton and Gabriella Nevin wrote to lawmakers.Republicans and a few moderate Democrats have expressed support for the bill. But some Democrats, who have a supermajority in both chambers and will ultimately control which bills pass this session, have shown reluctance to support the proposal. A large reason for their hesitancy: environmentalist opposition to the bill.Wildlife and environmental advocacy groups argue the proposal would worsen the already-tense relationship between ranchers and wolves and could result in ranchers getting money that would be better spent on preventing wolves from attacking cattle in the first place. In 2023, Oregon counties spent more than $400,000 from the state on preventative measures to stop wolves from attacking cattle. Those included building new fences, reducing cattle bone piles or carcasses that can draw wolves and installing alarm systems that can sense and deter wolves. But because that program receives funding from the same pool of money that pays farmers for livestock lost to wolves, environmentalists worry that the bill will decrease funding for preventative efforts. (Another Republican bill would deposit $2 million into this pool, to be used for preventative efforts and to compensate ranchers).“At a time when Oregonians and the Legislature are being asked to tighten our belts due to shifting funds, this bill benefits only a small number of Oregonians who are already eligible for market-rate compensation of lost or missing livestock,” Michael Dotson, executive director of the Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, wrote to lawmakers.Also, wildlife advocates say, increasing the amount of money that ranchers receive for lost cattle will decrease their desire to use non-lethal methods to deter wolves.“Why bother to implement those methods if, when one of your livestock becomes a confirmed or probable wolf kill, you’ll receive payments of up to seven times their value?” Amaroq Weiss, senior wolf advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity, wrote to lawmakers.Environmentalists also push back on several of the ranchers’ assertions. While ranchers say they should receive more money for indirect effects on their cattle following wolf attacks, environmentalists say those effects have not been closely studied and are difficult to quantify, and therefore should not necessarily result in higher payouts to ranchers.Wildlife advocates say they don’t have a problem with ranchers being compensated for killed animals, but they want to negotiate with lawmakers and ranchers to reach a compromise that would prioritize the safety of wolves. Now, lawmakers are conflicted. On Tuesday, the Senate Committee On Natural Resources and Wildfire decided to postpone a vote on the bill after two Democrats expressed hesitancy to support it.“Is the real complaint that we’re not doing enough on the prevention part?” Sen. Kathleen Taylor, D-Portland, asked Tuesday. “If that’s what’s actually really going on, then maybe we could have an opportunity to achieve both.”Similar bills in at least two previous legislative sessions have died after ranchers, environmentalists and lawmakers failed to reach a consensus. But three Senate Democrats have joined several Republicans in co-sponsoring the bill, signalling that at least some Democrats are ready to pass the proposal. With Republicans making up 12 of the Senate’s 30 members, it will take at least four Democrats’ agreement to pass the bill through that chamber.But whether they can convince enough of their colleagues in both chambers to agree remains to be seen.Sen. Jeff Golden, a Democrat from Ashland and chair of the committee, acknowledged Tuesday that Democrats in the full House and Senate might not want to support the bill. But he said passing the proposal as written, meeting some of the ranchers’ long standing requests, would be a strong starting point to eventually reach a compromise.“What we are doing here is putting on the table a specific proposal, instead of saying, ‘“Let’s work group this more,’” he said.— Carlos Fuentes covers state politics and government. Reach him at 503-221-5386 or cfuentes@oregonian.com.Our journalism needs your support. Subscribe today to OregonLive.com.Latest local politics stories
For years, Oregon ranchers have complained about wolves preying on their cows, horses and other animals.
Oregon ranchers want higher payouts from the state to recoup their losses for cattle and other livestock killed by wolves. But the fate of a bill that would increase those payments will be determined by whether enough Democratic lawmakers, who hold the majority in Salem, are willing to defy environmentalists and support the proposal.
For years, Oregon ranchers have complained about wolves preying on their cows, horses and other animals. Because shooting a wolf is against state hunting laws, lawmakers in 2011 agreed to compensate ranchers for the financial loss of any animal that dies following a wolf attack.
Ranchers say the money is vital to keeping their operations profitable. In 2023, Oregon counties gave ranchers $70,300 from state coffers for dead or injured cattle that experts determined were likely attacked by wolves. Ranchers are currently compensated for the market value of the cattle lost to wolves.
But ranchers say the losses they suffer are deeper than merely the cost of a replacement calf or cow.
“Wolf depredation is not only a financial concern, it is an emotional and mental concern and it is causing a great deal of stress to ranchers across entire sections of the state,” Gabrielle Homer, president-elect of Oregon CattleWomen, said in written testimony to lawmakers.
Numerous Republican lawmakers agree.
Sen. Todd Nash, a Republican from Enterprise and former president of the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association, introduced a bill in January that would require the state to pay ranchers at least the fair market value – and in many cases far more – for animals injured or killed by wolves. Under the bill, Oregon would have to pay seven times the market value of cow calves, sheep and goats, and three times the market value for other cows.
These multipliers, ranchers say, are necessary because wolf attacks on herds can negatively impact cattle and ranchers in many unseen ways.
“This stress impacts every animal and comes at a cost to the rancher in the way of less pounds to sell, an animal aborting or not rebreeding, and the overall disposition of their cattle,” Oregon cattle ranchers Creighton and Gabriella Nevin wrote to lawmakers.
Republicans and a few moderate Democrats have expressed support for the bill. But some Democrats, who have a supermajority in both chambers and will ultimately control which bills pass this session, have shown reluctance to support the proposal.
A large reason for their hesitancy: environmentalist opposition to the bill.
Wildlife and environmental advocacy groups argue the proposal would worsen the already-tense relationship between ranchers and wolves and could result in ranchers getting money that would be better spent on preventing wolves from attacking cattle in the first place.
In 2023, Oregon counties spent more than $400,000 from the state on preventative measures to stop wolves from attacking cattle. Those included building new fences, reducing cattle bone piles or carcasses that can draw wolves and installing alarm systems that can sense and deter wolves.
But because that program receives funding from the same pool of money that pays farmers for livestock lost to wolves, environmentalists worry that the bill will decrease funding for preventative efforts. (Another Republican bill would deposit $2 million into this pool, to be used for preventative efforts and to compensate ranchers).
“At a time when Oregonians and the Legislature are being asked to tighten our belts due to shifting funds, this bill benefits only a small number of Oregonians who are already eligible for market-rate compensation of lost or missing livestock,” Michael Dotson, executive director of the Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, wrote to lawmakers.
Also, wildlife advocates say, increasing the amount of money that ranchers receive for lost cattle will decrease their desire to use non-lethal methods to deter wolves.
“Why bother to implement those methods if, when one of your livestock becomes a confirmed or probable wolf kill, you’ll receive payments of up to seven times their value?” Amaroq Weiss, senior wolf advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity, wrote to lawmakers.
Environmentalists also push back on several of the ranchers’ assertions. While ranchers say they should receive more money for indirect effects on their cattle following wolf attacks, environmentalists say those effects have not been closely studied and are difficult to quantify, and therefore should not necessarily result in higher payouts to ranchers.
Wildlife advocates say they don’t have a problem with ranchers being compensated for killed animals, but they want to negotiate with lawmakers and ranchers to reach a compromise that would prioritize the safety of wolves.
Now, lawmakers are conflicted. On Tuesday, the Senate Committee On Natural Resources and Wildfire decided to postpone a vote on the bill after two Democrats expressed hesitancy to support it.
“Is the real complaint that we’re not doing enough on the prevention part?” Sen. Kathleen Taylor, D-Portland, asked Tuesday. “If that’s what’s actually really going on, then maybe we could have an opportunity to achieve both.”
Similar bills in at least two previous legislative sessions have died after ranchers, environmentalists and lawmakers failed to reach a consensus. But three Senate Democrats have joined several Republicans in co-sponsoring the bill, signalling that at least some Democrats are ready to pass the proposal. With Republicans making up 12 of the Senate’s 30 members, it will take at least four Democrats’ agreement to pass the bill through that chamber.
But whether they can convince enough of their colleagues in both chambers to agree remains to be seen.
Sen. Jeff Golden, a Democrat from Ashland and chair of the committee, acknowledged Tuesday that Democrats in the full House and Senate might not want to support the bill. But he said passing the proposal as written, meeting some of the ranchers’ long standing requests, would be a strong starting point to eventually reach a compromise.
“What we are doing here is putting on the table a specific proposal, instead of saying, ‘“Let’s work group this more,’” he said.
— Carlos Fuentes covers state politics and government. Reach him at 503-221-5386 or cfuentes@oregonian.com.
Our journalism needs your support. Subscribe today to OregonLive.com.