Senate Agricultural Affairs Committee

 

2003 Minutes

 

January 16, 2003
January 21, 2003
January 23, 2003
January 28, 2003
January 30, 2003

February 4, 2003
February 6, 2003
February 11, 2003
February 13, 2003
February 18, 2003
February 20, 2003 - Joint Meeting
February 25, 2003
February 27, 2003

March 4, 2003
March 6, 2003
March 11, 2003
March 13, 2003
March 20, 2003
March 25, 2003
March 27, 2003

April 1, 2003
April 2, 2003
April 3, 2003

DATE: January 16, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
CONVENED: Chairman Williams called the meeting to order at 3:10pm.
GUESTS: Guests present were: Steve Johnson, IGPA; Brad Hoaglun, Idaho Alfalfa and Clover Seed Commission; Mike Hamby, IACSC; Jerri Jo Burger, Food Producers; Blaine Jacobson, Wheat Commission; Laura Johnson, ISDA; Patricia Dailey, Wheat Commission; Gary Grindstaff, SCC; J. Morgan Evans, SCC; Sara Braasch, Idaho Cattle Association; Jane McClaran, DFM; Kent Foster, IASCD; Mel Anderson, IPC; Bob Naerebout, IDA; Jerry Nicolescu, SCC; Patrick Kole, IPC; Mark Duffin, Idaho Sugarbeet Growers; Darrel McRoberts, ISDA.
Introductions Chairman Williams welcomed members of the Committee. He welcomed the Department people and commented that visitors are welcome to discuss matters and that the doors are always open. Chairman Williams also introduced Jama Porter the new Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary and Audrey Twiggs, the late Senator Twiggs granddaughter, who will serve as the Committee's Page for the first half of the 2003 session.
Gubernatorial Confirmation

Hearings

J. Morgan Evans appointee to the Idaho Soil Conservation Commission for a term expiring July 1, 2006 was introduced by Jerry Nicolescu of the Idaho Soil Conservation Commission. J. Morgan Evans of Downey, Idaho owns and operates Red Rock ranch in Southeast Idaho. His experience is in the financial field, with a degree in Agricultural Economics & Finance, and in the banking business for 12 years. He served on the Soil Conservation Board for 20 yrs in the Pocatello area. He has worked with the Idaho Cattle Association. He looks forward to working on conservation issues in Idaho.

Discussion among the Committee members and Mr. Evans included the following topics: was he still a Certified Appraiser (too busy with a 600 cow operation); in what capacity he worked at the bank ten years ago (analysis work, managing the bank, Chairman of the Idaho Bankers Association); and who Mr. Evans is replacing (replacing Bob Griff).

Senator Burtenshaw stated Mr. Evans had experience in dealing with CAFOs and NAFOs and asked what his views were. Mr. Evans stated he worked with the Idaho Cattle Association and the EPA in Washington, D.C. He felt that the state needs to manage its abundant resources. He expressed concern to keep agriculture productive in Idaho. Mr. Evans served on some advisory groups for Forest Service and BLM and that using common sense was needed regarding this program.

Senator Stennett remarked that Idaho was not able to help out with conservation programs. Mr. Evans stated that people in state were demanding things from agriculture without the funds being there and that the challenge is for Idaho to work together and use some of its dollars and their dollars to develop the ground.

Jerry Nicolescu introduced Gary Grindstaff who is being reappointed to the Idaho Soil Conservation Commission for a term expiring July 1, 2007. His background is in farming, he served at local level and state level in the ISCC. He served six years as director. He enjoyed serving on the Commission for the past five years and getting soil conservation districts working as good as they can.

Discussion among the Committee members and Mr. Grindstaff pertaining to Mr. Grindstaff's farming experience; his fund raising ability (he commented the Commission made cuts of 10%, currently at 3.5% hold back and commission had him cut four employees); and how much the national resources income tax for the Soil Conservation districts affect use.

Senator Stennett asked about improvement of water quality on the Middle Snake River and Mr. Grindstaff stated there are over 30% sprinklers in Twin Falls canal company area now, that have helped clean up the area extensively.

Senate Noh stated that at the Twin Falls canal company annual meeting the director served notice that meeting the individual standard is no longer optional and that the ditch riders are empowered to turn off the headgate if an individual farmer is not engaged in the best management practice and this has been well received.

Senator Stennett requested a list of the members and their political affiliations before the Committee votes on the Gubernatorial Appointees.
COMMISSION REPORT Blaine Jacobsen, Executive Director of the Idaho Wheat Commission was given the Floor for the purpose of making his financial report. Idaho ranks fifth among annual food production. Last year approximately 1.3 million acres of wheat yielded 90 million bushels in Idaho, this is the second lowest in the past decade. Growers pay $0.015 per bushel for reinvestment in the wheat industry and the Idaho Wheat Commission invests those funds in market development, research, and information and education. Idaho's yield has doubled over 30 years due to development of better varieties of wheat by state researchers. Mr. Jacobson reported that seventy percent of Idaho's wheat is exported to the world market. The world consumption of wheat exceeds production for the fourth consecutive year and there is increasing competition from the Former Soviet Union and the Black Sea. The IWC projects a total budget for 2004 of $1,835,000. Through wise investments in market development, research into more marketable varieties of wheat and educating growers on what to grow to be more competitive the IWC plans to strengthen Idaho's farm industry.

Handouts: Idaho Wheat Facts - Update 2002; "Varieties Increase Profit Margins"; Idaho Wheat Commission FY2002 and FY 2003 Approved Budgets, FY 2004 Projected Budget; Individual Entity Audit Report Idaho Wheat Commission are on file in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

Senator Noh asked how the wheat industry, specifically the research and personnel retirements, is fairing with the cutbacks. Mr. Jacobson commented that several individuals are no longer at the university due to early retirement and they aren't being replaced in the near future. Specific mention was made regarding the need to find someone to replace the vacant position of Entomologist in the Magic Valley.

Senator Goedde asked how important the port of Portland is to the wheat growers and Mr. Jacobson remarked that it is crucial to disposing of the Idaho crop.

Senator Noh asked about the shipping process in Lewiston and Portland and Mr. Jacobson remarked that if Portland raises prices it will affect Idaho growers.

Senator Schroeder asked about the world wheat market and their lack of free market. Mr. Jacobson remarked that Pakistan and India were short-term competitors, however, Kazakhstan and the Ukraine were potentially long-term competitors.

Mel Anderson, Executive Director of the Idaho Potato Commission, was given the Floor for the purpose of making his financial report. For 2002-03 the budgeted revenues were $10,214,673 and the expenses were $9,970,570 with an excess of revenues over expenditures of $244,103 for the year end. Page 13 of the State of Idaho, Idaho Potato Commission Audited Financial Statements was referenced, a copy is available in the Agricultural Affairs office. Mr. Anderson commented on next year's budget of revenues and expenditures of $10,659,000.

Discussion among the Committee members and Mr. Anderson involved questions pertaining to next year's general outlook ( the fryers will have to increase the incentive for increased acreage and overall there looks to be an increase in potato acreage); the issue of Simplot going to Canada and how opening a plant in Manitoba will affect the Magic Valley; and the past problem with certification and sanitation issues to get potatoes exported out of Idaho through the ISDA. (Mr. Anderson reported on Japan, Idaho's largest importer of frozen and dehydrated potatoes, and said no progress has been made on a raw potato exchange); the average salary of Idaho Potato Commission personnel and whether they were all from Idaho.

Senator Burtenshaw asked about a reserve account. Mr. Anderson referenced page 4 of financial statements and commented on the Potato Commission's philosophy on reserve assets.

The Commission's financial report is on file in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

Brad Hoaglun and Mike Hamby of the Idaho Alfalfa & Clover Seed Commission were given the Floor for the purpose of making the Commission's financial report. Mr. Hoaglun commented that the IACSC provides research funds to develop and improve control measures for diseases and pests, works to improve alfalfa seed growing techniques, disseminates information to growers, and promotes Idaho-grown alfalfa seed. Idaho is the number one producer of dormant alfalfa seed in the nation. Handouts were provided and a copy is available in the Agricultural Affairs office. Mr. Hoaglun stated he has received negative feedback from the growers regarding the recommendation of the Governor's Blue Ribbon task force, specifically recommendation number six. Mike Hamby, the IACSC Chairman and a producer from Parma, Idaho referred to the green page in the packet. He commented on the rapid decline in the market due to bankruptcy of the largest seed company in the world, and reported Canada is producing more alfalfa. Canada supplied 25% of dormant alfalfa seed for United States market. Other issues are FQPA, Food Quality Protection Act, requiring the registration of pesticides; the State Budget as it pertains to research & extension and with no entomologist in the state it is a big problem. The bulk of IACSC research goes toward pest control.

A copy of the handouts are on file in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

Discussion among Committee members and Mr. Hoaglun and Mr. Hamby included: providing financials for 2003; what if any stipulations are there for mixing Canadian common seed with Idaho's certified seed (there are currently no rules and that the industry needs to address the issue); quality of the Canadian crop versus the Idaho seed; non-dormant versus dormant alfalfa seed; disposal of the residue from cleaned seeds; clarification on the shipment of unclean Canadian common seeds into Idaho; and what it cost to raise an acre of alfalfa (Mr. Hamby believes a best case scenario to be $800 an acre).

Adjournment Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 4:50 pm.




DATE: January 21, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Senator Noh
CONVENED: Chairman Williams called the meeting to order at 3:10pm.
GUESTS: Truman Kulitz, Idaho & Eastern Oregon Seed Association; Kelly Olson, Idaho Barley Commission; Dick Lawson, ISDA; Paul Stark, ISDA; Rex Rammell; Michael Cooper, ISDA; Laura Johnson, ISDA; John Chatburn, ISDA; Bob Hillman, ISDA; Karen Gustafson, Administrative Rules.
Introduction Chairman Williams welcomed the Committee members and guests. He asked the Committee Secretary to take a silent roll, and excused Senator Noh.
Gubernatorial

Appointments

Senator Stennett asked for unanimous consent to put off a vote of gubernatorial candidates until the next meeting. Senator Stennett requested further information regarding the Idaho Soil Conservation Commission.
Commission Report Chairman Williams welcomed Kelly Olson from the Idaho Barley Commission. Ms. Olson stated that the fiscal year, FY, 2002 ended with a loss of $15, 441. In FY 2003 the approved budget is for $466,026, slightly above last years approved budget. Income is expected to be up 6.3% from FY 02 due to a larger crop. The majority of the budget goes towards research, market development and industry partnerships. Barley production is up 7.4% reporting 53.96 million bushels in 2002. There is a steady trend towards malting production because of the expansion of processing in the state for malting. There are two malting facilities in Idaho: Pocatello, Great Western Malting Company; Idaho Falls , Anheuser Busch, this facility is doubling in capacity. A new facility, Gmodelo, is being constructed in Idaho Falls. Idaho Barley prices are up 10% from last year and above national averages due to local demand. Ms. Olson also reported on the Commission's program Barley Competitiveness Initiative which focuses on developing new markets (petitioning the USFDA to use a heart-health claim on foods containing barley) and providing effective risk management tools (improving barley crop insurance policies) as well as funding barley variety research.

Discussion among the Committee members and Ms. Olson included: the building of an integrated plant for fish feed development (three locations under consideration: Fruitland, Rupert, Pocatello); the difference in pesticide versus insecticide for use on malting barley; what percentage is produced in Northern Idaho versus Southern Idaho (N. Idaho is 12%); the difference in yield in drylands; the use of barley crop during a drought season; the Gmodelo plant and 60,000 to 80,000 acres for malting barley (feed barley acres will be replaced first, then wheat, then potato rotations stretching out).

A copy of the Idaho Barley Commission's financial report is in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

Senator Williams explained to the committee members that they would not be voting on the rules to be reviewed today; he then turned the meeting over to Vice Chairman Noble.
IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE John Chatburn, Deputy Administrator of Division of Animal Industries of the Idaho State Department of Agriculture, testified before the committee regarding the IDAPA 02 Pending Rules 02.04.03, 02.04.20, 02.04.21.
Rules 02.04.03

Rule 02.04.03 of the Department of Agriculture Governing Animal Industry, Docket No. 0202 is a repeal of obsolete sections and sections that have been transferred to new rules (page 30 of the Pending Rules Review).

Rule 02.04.03 Docket No. 0204 this rule puts the National Poultry Improvement Plan into the ISDA Rules, the Department in conjuction with the State has been using the National Poultry Improvement Plan for the past five years. ISDA sent the rule out to poultry industry members and it received no adverse comments. Committee member asked about the sale of live birds, (rule applies to the sale of all live birds); and violations of those selling at farmers markets.

Rule 02.04.03 Docket No. 0205 regarding Trichomoniasis, page 58, a rewrite of the rule, ISDA met with an Advisory Committee comprised of ranchers and veterinarians and through negotiated rule making process held public hearing in Nampa on Oct. 8, 2002 what resulted is the rewrite. More detail and clarity is given. The rule will require veterinarians to submit test report in a timely fashion. Committee members asked about rule as it applies to virgin bulls, and bulls in Salmon river area; and penalty for not testing, and if any animal has been slaughtered.

Rules 02.04.20 IDAPA 02 Pending Rule 02.04.20 Rules of the Department of Agriculture Governing Brucellosis, Docket No. 0201 are a rewrite of the old Brucellosis rules in compliance with the changes of Brucellosis law passed by Legislature last session. The Rules were developed by Advisory Committee through a negotiated rule making process, Cattle Industry, private veterinarians, legislative entities involved. The main change is that the rule now lays out protocol on adult vaccination on animals over a year of age. When a herd is deemed to have Brucellosis, the ISDA quarantines them, tests them, if a reactor cattle is in herd the entire herd must be depopulated in 60 days, in order to maintain Brucellosis free status as federal government requires. ISDA, by statute, is required to remove from state or destroy any wild bison that enter the state of Idaho. In the early 1990's when state became brucellosis free a change in the standards was made. Now treating brucellosis in cattle as an exotic disease to Idaho and the problem with wildlife complicates the situation, but the national standards say if state doesn't eliminate the infected herd then state loses status. Only area ISDA has found Brucellosis in wild elk is in area adjacent to Yellowstone National Park and Wyoming. Brucellosis Rules pertain to all animals.
02.04.21 IDAPA 02 02.04.21 Pending Rules Governing the Importation of Animals Docket No. 0201 page 92 are changes ISDA made after the public comment period. Mr. Chatburn stated, "the ISDA did not do any negotiated rule making on animal import rules because initially all the Dept. was going to do was to pull the old rules out of 02.04.03 and put them in this separate chapter and update the cattle Brucellosis part to reflect the ability to adult vaccinate cattle. Various groups looked at the rules and thought that changes needed to be made, including legislative services and the Dept. made the changes that begin on page 92" (Pending Rule Review Manual). Mr. John Chatburn referenced page 99 Pending Rules Review 02.04.21 section 607 requiring, "that cervidae imported into Idaho be from herds that have been in a CWD (Chronic Wasting Disease) monitoring program for 60 months (5 years), or that they provide enough documentation under this exception, which is 02, that ISDA can conduct an investigation. If documentation is provided that verifies through state animal health officials in that state that: cervidae is from a closed herd, everything tested, no unexplained deaths that aren't tested, then this rule allows Dept. to make an exception." The documentation acceptable for granting exceptions are: "herd records, inventory records from the state animal health officials in the state, records citing the animals individual identification of what was slaughtered, what died and what was tested."

Dr. Bob Hillman, Administrator of Animal Industries Division of Idaho Department of Agriculture stated,"this set of rules went into effect on September 15, 2002 and there was one case that had four years of official surveillance in a program plus records beyond that and one other case that has not been granted."

Testimony regarding

Rule 02.04.21-0201, section 607

Rex Rammell, a veterinarian from Rexburg who specializes in elk and has a game ranch in Madison County was given the Floor to testify about domestic cervidae import rules. Mr. Rammell supplied the Committee members with a handout entitled "Chronic Wasting Disease" as well as a copy of a letter authored by him addressed to John Chatburn, ISDA, dated July 2002. A copy of these handouts are on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office. Mr. Rammell explained that the letter was written because time ran out to negotiate the rules on importation of domestic cervidae. Mr. Rammell participated in the six sessions over which the ISDA negotiated the general cervidae rule. He feels that, "the importation rules as written and that became enforceble July 1, 2002 represent a De Facto Moratorium on importation of elk and prevent our right to fair market interstate commerce." He stated that if he can't import elk than he is out of business. He has not tried to go through the ISDA for an exception to the Import Rule. Mr. Rammell would be pleased if the Pending Rule 02.04.21 Docket No. 02.04.21-0201 sections 607 time frame was reduced from 60 months (5 years) to 36 months (3 years). The Committee requested Mr. Rammell provide the Committee with a written objective of his request of the Senate as well as a list of the states that have gone from 5 years to 3 years.
Adjournment Vice Chairman Noble thanked Mr. Rammell for his testimony. Vice Chairman Noble turned the meeting back over to Chairman Williams. Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 5:00 p.m.




DATE: January 23, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
CONVENED: Chairman Williams called the meeting to order at 3:00pm.
GUESTS: Jim Deakins, Valley Bean & Grain; H.L. Pringle, Mtn. West Trading; Bruce Fredrick, Fredrick Bean; Russ Dapsauski, ISDA; Wes Jones, ISDA; Sam Blake, ISDA; Davis Morse, ISDA; Tiffany Clark, ISDA; Leon Folkman, Valley Grain & Supply; Denis Capson, Snake River Grain; Gordon Steiner, Steiner Elevator; Wade Trost, Trost Feed & Seed; J.D. Cramer, Ririe Grain & Feed; Joseph Schindel, Congressman Simpson's office; Lizzie Fitch, Congressman Simpson's office; Jack Fisher, Idaho Wildlife Federation; Stan Boyd, Idaho Elk Breeders Association; Bob Naerebout, I.D.A; Bill Mendenhall, AgriSource, Inc.; Dave Reinke, Reinke Grain Co.; Darrel McRoberts, ISDA; Jerry Nicolescu, ISCC; Tom Van Witbeck, Idaho Elk Breeders Association; John Chatburn, ISDA; Jim Unsworth, IDFG; Neil Soderquist,
Introductions Chairman Williams welcomed the Committee members and guests, he asked the visitors to introduce themselves which they did.
Gubernatorial Appointments Gubernatorial Appointments

Gubernatorial appointment of J. Morgan Evans to Idaho Soil Conservation Commission for a term to expire July 1, 2006. Senator Stennett made a motion to accept the appointment of Mr. Evans to the Commission and recommend to the Senate that he be confirmed. It was seconded and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Burtenshaw will be the sponsor on the Senate Floor.

Gubernatorial Appointment of Gary Grindstaff to the Idaho Soil Conservation Commission for a term to expire July 1, 2007. Senator Gannon made a motion to accept the re-appointment of Mr. Grindstaff to the Commission and recommend to the Senate that he be confirmed. Second was made by Senator Noh and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Gannon will be the sponsor on the Senate Floor.

IDAPA Rules Review Senator Williams reminded the committee members that they will not be voting on the rules to be reviewed today; he then turned the meeting over to Vice Chairman Noble.
Idaho State Department of Agriculture John Chatburn, Deputy Administrator of Division of Animal Industries of the Idaho State Department of Agriculture, testified before the committee regarding IDAPA 02 Pending Rules 02.04.19, 02.04.22, and 02.04.23.
Rule 02.04.19 Pending Fee Rule 02.04.19 of the Department of Agriculture Governing Domestic Cervidae, Docket No. 02-0419-0201. Department provided handout chronicling other CWD state requirements for testing and lists states with confirmed CWD. A copy is available in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office. Mr. Chatburn referenced page 11 of Pending Fee Rules Review manual, the Department made two amendments to the existing rule after testimony of public hearings and public comments received. ISDA, after negotiated rule making sessions, made some additions and some deletions; authority to license cervidae farms was deleted, no longer require a TB test when moving from one owners premise to another premise of same owner, but intrastate movement certificate is still required and a TB test is required of change of ownership. Section 029, fees for domestic cervidae ranches have not changed, just moved chapters. Mr. Chatburn also addressed sections of the rule regarding record keeping, capture of an escaped animal, CWD tests and investigations of cases. The committee members asked Mr. Chatburn about notification of escaped cervidae (owner is responsible for capturing escaped animal), how the Department identifies cervidae, the procedure for checking for wild cervidae in newly fenced areas and the names of official labs to submit samples.
Testimony Stan Boyd, Idaho Elk Breeders Association was given the Floor for the purpose of stating the IEBA stance on domestic cervidae. Mr. Boyd stated that over the past two years through a negotiating rule making process there has been a differing opinion within the industry about the strictness of the existing rules. Mr. Boyd answered the committee members questions regarding identification of escaped cervidae. Mr. Boyd introduced Tom Van Witbeck, President of Idaho Elk Breeders Association and Director of North American Elk Breeders Association. Vice Chairman Noble welcomed Mr. Van Witbeck. He answered Committee's questions regarding tags. "There are several issues that drive a person to use tags: if used as a formal identification mechanism, then supply of tags has to be controlled...most people use it as a herd inventory management tool as opposed to a legal form of identification." Mr. Van Witbeck stated that it is easier to use the tags for inventory purposes. Most escaped animals can be captured in short amount of time because they know where the feed bucket it. Other identifications are microchip and ear tattoo. Mr. Van Witbeck stated that escaped cervidae once captured are preferred to be killed and if wild animal gets into facility they prefer that it is killed. Mr. Van Witbeck spoke to the domestic program of Rule 020419. He explained the program is a compilation of Rules first adopted in 1993 when moved from F&G to ISDA, combined with that set of rules is the requirements for the current CWD program. They took opportunity to update rules and requested in the process that CWD program be pushed by the State and ISDA to be made a mandatory program, based on the prototype developed by the US Animal Health Association & the North American Elk Breeders Association forming the basis for most state programs. Through the negotiated rule making process a fair compromise was reached and he endorses the rules as written and recommends left in place for 2 years without change. Committee members asked about the surveillance rules. Mr. Van Witbeck stated the current CWD surveillance regarding the program is based on science available when program was developed in 1997-1998, and that through a federal program some time in the near future there will be a certification process that will reduce the intensity of testing program. Committee members asked about the regulatory requirements for two industry segments: horn & meat and trophy hunting; and the penalty clause (ISDA has civil penalty authority, can fine up to $5000 for each offense).
Testimony Jack Fisher, President of Idaho Wildlife Federation, was given the Floor. Mr. Fisher stated he attended the five of the six meetings of the negotiated rule making process regarding domestic cervidae. He felt that most of the issues were addressed by ISDA. He submitted written recommendations and most were resolved through the process. He highlighted some unresolved issues: reported visible ear tags are being used, thinks this is an appropriate amendment to the rule. He addressed concern about cervidae being imported into the state from clean elk cervidae farms direct to slaughter and the sanitary issues and liability of slaughtering these animals in same facility as healthy cervidae; he would prefer each state slaughter their own cervidae.
Rule 02.04.22 John Chatburn, ISDA, was given the Floor to review IDAPA 02.04.22 Rule Governing Animal Health Emergencies. This rule grew out of an Advisory Committee concerning procedure used to handle the Brucellosis case in spring of 2002. The idea was to put the procedure into rules.
Rule 02.04.23 John Chatburn, ISDA, reviewed IDAPA 02.04.23 Rules Governing Commercial Livestock Truck Washing Facilities. This rule is a result of bill passed by legislature last year concerning the containment of waste water, requirements for nutrient management, and permit requirements.
Vice Chair Noble returned the meeting to Chairman Williams. Chairman Williams welcomed the elevator and operator owners. The eight gentlemen were asked to introduce themselves and they did.
Testimony Neil Soderquist, member of Seed Indemnity Advisory Committee, and owner of Jack Thomas Grain & Livestock was given the Floor to present the views of the elevator operators regarding the Indemnity Fund: administration of the fund and regulations they are required to follow. Mr. Soderquist stated the problem started when the legislature passed the Seed Indemnity Law with 94% approval, his group was not notified or aware of the legislation. It doubled bonding and licensing cost and costs of bookkeeping. He listed the following problems: with ISDA setting up 8 month inspections instead of yearly an inspection will fall within harvest time every few years. Secondly when owners are fumigating elevators the inspectors won't inspect bins under fumigation and since they aren't measured can cause elevator to be out of compliance, they maintain that all licensed bins be measured at the time of inspection. Thirdly, there is talk of doing away with NPEs (no price established contracts) and the normal procedure is important to elevators. Next, the State law doesn't allowed for ground storage, the federal regulations allow for it. The trade is angry over the use of the indemnity money for bailing out the alfalfa seed bankruptcy. Lastly he addressed the most important issue of operator having conflict with inspector and he can't send inspector away that is grounds for license suspension, wants better rapport with inspectors. Elevators want to be told in advance so inspectors don't have to be turned away. Mr. Soderquist stated the Seed Indemnity Fund was being put to too few people, everyone should be involved and pay. Senator Schroeder asked for Neil Soderquist to provide a copy of his comments to the Committee.
Testimony Denis Capson, Commodity dealer of Snake River Grain was given the Floor to testify regarding Seed Indemnity Fund Pending Rule, Bonded Warehouse Rules Pending Rule 02.02.12 and Commodity Dealers' Rules Pending Rule 02.02.13. Mr. Capson remarked about NPE contracts and why they're considered by some to be one of the main reasons failures have happened (through hedging on the markets). Mr. Capson provided the Committee with handouts. A copy of the handouts are on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office. He referenced page 4 of handouts Idaho Code statute requirements of bonding. Mr. Capson stated bond requires 6% of total indebtedness to be paid to producer (gross dollar value), if changed bond would go from $25,000 up to max $500,000 bond. Mr. Capson reported that the bond process is tough because must show four to five times worth to get bond, this would be nearly impossible for him. He expressed his concern for inspectors coming around unannounced and that it was possible to be inspected by State and Federal agencies two to three times a year. Mr. Capson stated small elevators make money by increasing their margin (he has set costs per bushel of wheat that he brings in) tries to bring in wheat through the year into the elevator and it lowers cost per bushel; under rumored new legislation this bond would penalize the small businesses for trying to lower the cost per bushel and does nothing to stop failure. Mr. Capson referenced a press release from Director of Department of Agriculture: Federal Department of Agriculture has plan for new rules, put on hold by 13 states, creating duplication of bonding requirement. Committee member asked about the bonding requirement, under this new provision, would be for the total gross owner had during the year when owner has only one months' worth in elevator at one time. Mr. Capson stated he is required by law to pay grower within 30 days and to make him obtain a $500,000 bond when he is only out 30 days would be 100% coverage, as opposed to a large warehouse with a small percent coverage. He sees no reason to increase the bond for the full years amount when he is required to pay within 30 days for the additional wheat that is purchased off the farm.
Testimony Bruce Frederick, Owner Fredericks Feed & Grain was given the Floor to testify. Mr. Frederick said State asking for financial information from owner is invasive and that once person meets financial requirements for license that should be enough. There is a revolving door on warehouse inspectors, two inspectors have entered the private sector that inspected his facility. He expressed his disagreement regarding legislation and wished that the legislation was circulated amongst warehousemen. The additional bonding requirement adds a substantial cost per bag. The Committee asked questions regarding proprietary information gained through inspections and the ethical implications of inspectors entering the industry.
IDAHO DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE Russ Dapsauski, Program Manager of Warehouse Control Program of the ISDA was given the Floor to address the issues discussed in testimony. He stated that ground piles are allowed and they require a permit. Russ sent out a letter as requested by the owners introducing the inspectors, detailing how the program was run and how inspections were run. All exams and all records are protected by the Idaho Public Records Law, mandated to not release that information. The purpose of the letter was informative The proposal coming up is based on what they pay to producer. A producer is an owner, operator, tenant of land in this state. Those elevators working on the borders of this state and bringing in product from Utah, Wyoming, Washington, that commodity is not figured into this proposed bond. Those elevators buying from another elevator and trading amongst themselves, these are not producers, and that amount is not figured into this proposal. Some elevators in Eastern Idaho are storing for the malting barley companies and have storage facilities dedicated to that, these facilities and their storage capacity are not figured into this calculation of bond.
Adjournment Chairman Williams thanked the guests for their testimonies and the meeting adjourned at 5:05pm.




DATE: January 28, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:00pm.
GUESTS: 20 University of Idaho Students; Gretchen Hyde, Idaho Rangeland Resources Commission; Curt Thornberg, ISDA; Carson Howell, Governor's Office; Tyson Allen, ICL; Larissa Thurgood, ICL; Dar Olberding, IGPA; Craig Clapier, Food Producers; Rick Waitley, Food Producers; Marvin Bingham, Farm Bureau; Darrel McRoberts, ISDA; Tom Schafer, ISDA; Laura Morris, ISDA; Michael Cooper, ISDA; Margaret Misner, ISDA; John Chatburn, ISDA.
Introductions: Chairman Williams asked Mr. Rick Waitley to introduce his group to the Committee members.
Rick Waitley, Food Producers of Idaho, introduced the University of Idaho students from the campuses of Moscow, Twin Falls and Idaho Falls who are on a public policy tour. Chairman Williams greeted the students and expressed his appreciation for the opportunity to give the students a view of the legislative process.
Rules Review Chairman Williams announced the order in which the Committee would review the rules on the agenda. The meeting was then turned over to Vice Chairman Noble.
Pending Fee Rule 02.02.15 Russ Dapsauski, Program Manager of Warehouse Control Program of ISDA was given the Floor for the purpose of reviewing Pending Fee Rule 02.02.15 Seed Indemnity Fund Law (Pending Fee Rules Review manual, page 4). After 2 year collaborative effort with seed producers, seed companies, legislators and ISDA employees the Seed Indemnity Fund law became effective in July 2002. A negotiated rule making meeting scheduled April 2002 was held to review and make changes to the proposed rules and a follow up meeting with Idaho Eastern Oregon Seed Association was held to develop the Seed Indemnity Fund Assessment Reporting forms. In May 2002 ISDA employees visited every licensed warehouse, commodity dealer and seed dealers in Idaho to educate them and deliver licensing information about the provisions of the Seed Indemnity Fund law. Rules are necessary for the compliance of the deadlines pursuant to Title 22, chapter 51. Committee members discussed the bonding of small growers who produce under $25,000. Mr. Dapsauski stated that by statute ISDA was not allowed to address bonding issue by Rules. There is draft legislation proposed to the seed indemnity fund law that will eliminate the minimum bond requirement of $25,000 and this will go into the bonded warehouse law as well. The upcoming proposed draft will amend the Seed Indemnity law to allow a certificate of deposit. The Committee members asked about getting warehousemen and producers together with ISDA to review the Bonded Warehouse law and Commodity Dealer law for a rewrite in the future.
Pending Rule 02.02.12 Russ Dapsauski, ISDA, reviewed the Pending Rules 02.02.12 Bonded Warehouse Rules. These rules help to have the Bonded Warehouse law run parallel with the Commodity Dealer law and have the administrations of the Commodity and Seed Indemnity funds run parallel, no requests were made for further review of the rules. Rules were published in July 2002, ISDA received no written comments. Committee members discussed: how ISDA checks on licensee ability to pay (pg 12), what exceptions director could make (11d), shielding assets of owners of limited liability corporations (this is one reason warehouse law needs to be looked at and rewritten), the ISDA right to require bonding in amounts at its discretion (section 430, page 12), the required ratio of assets to liabilities, net worth ratio, (no less than 1:1, by Statute), and how Commodity dealers inventory is figured, cost or sale value (figured in notes of financial statements).
Pending Rule 02.02.13 Russ Dapsauski, ISDA, reviewed the Pending Rules 02.02.13 Commodity Dealers' Rules. These rules are to run parallel to the Bonded Warehouse law. Published July 2002, ISDA received no written comments. The Committee members asked Mr. Dapsauski how to reconcile differences with the elevators (ISDA plans to set up meetings around the state with elevators, warehousemen and producers to get their input). Asked if there was a bonding requirement in this rule. Mr. Dapsauski stated that there is no bonding requirement in this rule, it is in Statute. ISDA has two classes of licenses for commodity dealer: Class One license, individual conducting more than $250,000 worth of business in state required to have $25,000 bond and a Class Two license less than $250,000 worth of business is required to have a $15,000 bond. Senator Kennedy asked if a commodity dealer who has $5 million worth of business only has to post a $25,000 bond, the answer is yes. Mr. Dapsauski stated that the proposed legislation, at the recommendation of the small groups, will change the bonding requirement to be just like warehouse - six percent of what they pay producers based on the previous year. A Commodity dealer can do everything that a warehouse does except store. Senator Burtenshaw asked if bonded dealers were involved in the changes of the proposed legislation, Mr. Dapsauski stated he called specific dealers, made calls, and posted it as a public hearing and none showed up at the meeting. Senator Noble asked if there was a maximum cap on amount of bond. Mr. Dapsauski stated the cap is $500,000 bond, he mentioned that the industry is losing warehousemen and by bonding higher it will drive them out of the business, they won't take the risk. Chairman Williams asked Mr. Dapsauski if the State was too stringent on the bonding would it cause the warehouses to become federally licensed. Mr. Dapsauski stated that federal licensing may cause warehouses to side with the State.
Pending Fee Rule 02.06.33 Margaret Misner, Program Manager of Division of Plant Industries of ISDA was given the Floor to review Pending Fee Rule 02.06.33 Organic Food Products rules. Rule became effective in April 2001. There was meeting in Twin Falls to review the changes required to come into compliance by the October 2002 deadline. Certification changes: registration is required but certification is required only for those with sales over $5,000. In order to become accredited the ISDA needed to adopt the National Organic Program rules, the industry was supportive of adopting the rule and becoming accredited. Changes include: hormone changes for livestock (National Organic Program allows for use on breeding stock in emergency situations), and organic seed requirement (use of treated and untreated seeds). Fees change is deletion of transition to organic fees and replaced with fee to register those with sales over $5,000.
Pending Rule 02.02.15 Margaret Misner, ISDA, reviewed Pending Rule 02.02.15 Idaho Organic Food Products Rules. Rule amended in October to allow producers to have other USDA agencies do their inspection and certify them rather than just having ISDA in control of their organic inspections.
Pending Rule 02.02.14 Tom Schafer, Chief of Weights and Measures of ISDA, was given the floor to review Pending Rule 02.02.14 Weights and Measures. The purpose of the change is to adopt by reference the 2003 version of the National Institution of Standards and Technology handbook 44, in order that Idaho be in concert with rest of nation on requirements for weighing and measuring equipment. No public comments were received on the change. Committee members asked about changes to tolerances of liquid, moisture content measures, and requirement of vehicles since 1995 to have a ticket printer.
Pending Rule

02.04.16

John Chatburn, Deputy Administrator of Division of Animal Industries of ISDA was given the Floor to review Pending Rule 02.04.16 -0201 Rules Governing Agricultural Odor Management. Mr. Chatburn stated the ISDA conducted a negotiated rule making this summer to bring rules into compliance with statute changes passed by the 2002 legislature. The Technical Advisory Committee is currently evaluating methods and means to quantify odor emissions. Changes in this rule include definitions (05bat) and changes made to statute. On page 68 inserted the ability for director to order the cease of construction of someone proceeding without a liquid waste system prior approval. Senator Gannon expressed constituent disagreement with this section of the rule. Senator Noble asked about the deadline for the director to issue his decision on approval or non-approval. Mr. Chatburn commented this would be taken into consideration for next year. Senator Burtenshaw referenced section 02, "...inserted standards for which shall be judged..." and asked how ISDA measures the items listed in section 02 and whether there is a measurement tool (Technical Committee is working on developing a tool and a report is due out in the summer of 2003). Committee members asked how long odor can be present until its considered a violation, the acceptable practices of slew (ISDA struggles where to draw the line between fluent or solid manure), and DEQs development of Hydrogen Sulfide standard and Air Quality standard (ISDA will then use those standards to regulate industry).
Pending Rule 02.06.16 Curt Thornberg, ISDA was given the Floor for the purpose of reviewing Pending Rule 02.06.16 Crop Residue Disposal Rules. Rule reflects several changes made by 2002 Legislature, and suggestions for changes made by industry groups, state wide advisory committee and the public. Substantive changes: are in section 100-01 used to be an exemption for any field 5 acres or less from registration or meeting the requirements of this rule, it has been removed. In Section 300 the spring and fall burning time frames were removed. Committee members ask ISDA about burning crop residue in Ada or Canyon county and obtaining additional permits (Section 500). Section 500, 04 and 05 Set Back from Structures and Adequate Fire Suppression Equipment were removed. Section 500 01 added a clarifying statement and Ag industry wanted to add 02 criteria. Section 9 allows ISDA to be more careful when burning near roads. Committee members asked about training sessions, the reason of repeal of Section 500, 04 and 05 (intent was addressed in 10), and if ditch burning is exempt from this rule (yes, however, ISDA likes to advise whether it's a good burn day or not).
Pending Rule

IDAPA 56

56.01.01

Gretchen Hyde, Executive Director of Idaho Rangeland Resources Commission was given the Floor for the purpose of reviewing IDAPA 56 Pending Rule 56.01.01 Idaho Rangeland Resources Commission Rules of Administrative Procedure of the IRRC. Housekeeping changes to rule, terms of commission board were designated.
Pending Rule 02.08.01 Stan Boyd with the Idaho Sheep Commission was given the Floor to review Temporary Rule 02.08.01 Sheep and Goat Rules of the Idaho Sheep Commissioners. A federal program came out with rules so changes are to bring State into conformance. Also the rule eliminates the federal indemnity fund.
Adjournment Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 5:00pm.




DATE: January 30, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Vice Chairman Noble, Senator Burtenshaw
CONVENED: Chairman Williams called the meeting to order at 3:25pm. The delay in convening the meeting was due to a Joint House/Senate Agricultural Committee meeting in the Gold Room sponsored by ICIE on the issue of grass burning.
GUESTS: Dick Lawson, ISDA; Roger Batt, Idaho & E. Oregon Seed Association; Mike Cooper, ISDA; Darrel McRoberts, ISDA.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made and seconded that the Minutes of the January 16, 2003 Senate Agricultural Affairs Committee Meeting be approved as written. The motion carried. The approval of minutes of the January 21, 2003 meeting will be presented on Tuesday February 4, 2003.
IDAPA 02 Administrative Rules Review Chairman Williams gave questioning over to Senator Kennedy for the purpose of giving a synopsis of the rules.
02.06.01 Dick Lawson, Idaho Department of Agriculture was given the Floor to review Pending Fee Rule 02.06.01 Governing the Pure Seed Law. The rule increases all the service fees and the seed dealer license fee. All the fees are set forth on pages 33-37 of Pending Fee Rules Review manual. Mr. Lawson mentioned several organizations participated in the review of the rules and gave their recommendation. The funds will be used to increase the turnaround of service testing and for the addition of two senior seed analysis positions.
2.06.00 Mike Cooper, Deputy Administrator of Division of Plant Industries of ISDA, was given the Floor to review Pending Rule entitled Notice of Legislative Action Affecting the Administrative Rules of the ISDA, Division of Plant Industries. This rule change affects sixteen other rules. The 2002 Legislature passed a law, the Idaho Plant Pest Act 2002, which repealed four other laws which overlapped in their jurisdiction. The removal of the four laws orphaned sixteen other rules. In these 16 rules the ISDA had to redo the legal authorities and references of penalties. Updating these rules included adding definitions, abbreviations, addresses, scope and a findings section in the rules. In a few cases concerning penalties the wording has been changed from may to shall. The Plant and Pest Act 2002 has an encompassing penalty section ranging from issuing a warning letter to a misdemeanor for civil penalties.
02.06.06 Pending Rule 02.06.06 Pending Rule Bacterial Diseases of Beans, Phaseolus Species. The rule change is the result of industry wanting to add a disease to the rules, as well as the addition of definitions and a fee for inspection maps.
02.06.08 02.06.10 02.06.19 02.06.23 Pending Rule 02.06.08 Control of Cherry Fruit in Portions of Canyon County, Pending Rules 02.06.10 Control of Cherry Fruit Fly in Portions of Gem County, 02.06.19 Apple and Cherry Quarantine Rules, 02.06.23 Interior Apple Maggot Quarantine Rules, relating to Apples and Cherries have been repealed and the important part of the rules has been moved into New Rule 02.06.08 Quarantine Rules Pertaining to Apples and Cherries.
02.06.26 02.06.27 02.06.28 02.06.37 Pending Rules 02.06.26 Creating the Fremont Seed Potato Crop Management Areas, 02.06.27 Creating the Teton and Portions of Madison Counties Seed Potato Crop Management Areas, 02.06.28 Creating the Lost River Seed Potato Crop Management Area, 02.06.37 Creating the Caribou County and that Portion of Franklin County included in School District No. 148 Seed Potato Crop Management Area were repealed and the important part of these rules have been moved into Rule 02.06.26 Concerning the Seed Potato Crop Management Areas.
02.06.09 Pending Rule 02.06.09 Quarantine Rules Concerning the Necrotic Strain of the Potato Virus Y. This rule is repealed. The Potato Virus Y is now covered under the ICIA Seed Potato Certification Rules.
Adjournment Chairman Williams announced the Rules would be voted on Tuesday, February 4, 2003. He adjourned the meeting at 3:50pm.




DATE: February 4, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
CONVENED: Chairman Williams called the meeting to order at 3:10pm.
GUESTS: Bob Corbell, Idaho Grape Grower & Wine Producers Association; Mike Cooper, ISDA; Gretchen Hyde, Idaho Rangeland Resources Commission; Delbert Esplin, IFB; Bryan Frost, intern Connolly & Smyser; Malia Steele, intern Republican party; Bob Hillman, ISDA; Greg Nelson, IFBF; Darrel McRoberts, ISDA; Craig Clapier, farmer.
MINUTES APPROVAL: The motion was made and seconded that the Minutes of the January 21, 23, 28, and 30, 2003 be approved as written. The motion carried.
RULES COMMITTEE VOTE Chairman Williams opened up the meeting with discussion of the Rules. Senator Noble began the discussion with thoughts on the Domestic Cervidae rule 02.04.20, concerning Chronic Wasting Disease and importation. Provisions are in the Pending Rules 02.04.20 Governing Importation of Animals, page 99. The Committee addressed their questions to John Chatburn, ISDA, Dr. Hillman, ISDA, and Stan Boyd, Idaho Elk Breeders Association.

Senator Kennedy recalled that during testimony before the Committee it was stated that programs that were designed to study Domestic Cervidae for a period of 5 yrs so that they could be determined disease free were too stringent.

Senator Schroeder asked which states currently had 5 year programs. John Chatburn, ISDA, clarified that Colorado and South Dakota are reaching the five year mark for their programs in 2003.

Senator Gannon remarked about the ISDA's authority to grant exceptions under this rule. Mr. Chatburn stated that Sept. 15, 2002 ISDA has granted import permits for over 200 herd of elk.

Senator Noh stated he thought that ISDA had problems because of an inability to license.

Senator Noble stated the Committee couldn't change the Rule, it could reject it, causing ISDA to go back to the table with the elk breeders.

Chairman Williams noted that for ISDA to redo the rules it must be turned down by both houses. If the Committee rejects the rule, which the House has already approved as written, the rule will go into affect.

Senator Goedde spoke to the fact that the Committee received testimony of one elk breeder upset about the five year wait but the Committee did not hear same problem from the Elk Breeders Association who was involved in the promulgation of the rules and accepted the five year limit.

Senator Schroeder addressed Stan Boyd asking how many elk breeders were in the state (about 60), in the association (45 members), and whether they were involved in the rule making process. Mr. Boyd noted that the Federal Rules are coming, and it is anticipated that the five year limit will be within these rules, if not the rule will have to be amended to reflect the Federal program.

Senator Burtenshaw commented that the Elk Breeders were not present during the import rule, they were in on the Domestic Cervidae rule.

John Chatburn stated that this was correct, ISDA conducted negotiated rule making sessions for the Domestic Cervidae and Brucellosis rules and the discussions that came out of these sessions are what came out on brucellosis and cervidae rules. Mr. Chatburn stated ISDA took drafts of the import rule to sessions and passed them out and at the last three or four sessions time was spent discussing what import rules should be.

In conclusion, Mr. Chatburn stated, "that nearly all states that had Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) have a five year program, some are at 4 years and a state program. ISDA did not believe that since their weren't any states that had five years in a state program that by allowing veterinary medical officers at ISDA to conduct an investigation into an individual facility on case by case basis, and add, to state monitoring time the facility has had, years if that facility has not had any disease exposure documented and tested for CWD. That gives ISDA a way to allow folks to import elk and ISDA could maintain assurance that they have a handle on exposure of CWD."

Senator Burtenshaw asked what the rules stated before. Mr. Chatburn stated that under the old Rules as of Jan. 1, 2002 domestic cervidae had to have been in a monitoring program for 2 years, by Jan. 1, 2003 in a monitoring program for 3 years, and the causes of death for the past five years in this herd had to be documented by the State animal health officials.

Senator Schroeder directed a question to Stan Boyd regarding Korea's cut off sale of all North American cervidae in 2001 and the market for elk antlers. He then commented on the far east market as it related to CWD. He commented that the cervidae ranchers he called in Northern Idaho were in agreement of the Rules. He commented on the economic impact of open markets in far east and he thought if there is an exposure in Idaho it will destroy the potential for markets for a good long time.

Senator Stennett spoke to the import issue stating that since ISDA doesn't have an ability to license, how will it know if there are imported elk. Mr. Chatburn stated that the Rules require cervidae owners take an annual inventory which is then verified by ISDA officials, it is at this point it would be noticed. Senator Stennett asked about enforcement, and/or penalty. Mr. Chatburn stated the civil penalty on importing is up to $5,000. Senator Stennett remarked this amount could be considered an investment on a $17,000 bull.

Senator Kennedy questioned Mr. Chatburn if it was ISDA's position that the 60 month importation rule is a good rule and is necessary to protect this state against the possibility of allowing animals to enter the state with CWD. Mr. Chatburn replied yes. Senator Kennedy stated that several states banned elk farming altogether and listed several states with 5 year program and asked if ISDA consulted with Idaho Department of Fish & Game in the cervidae rules negotiated rule making sessions. Mr. Chatburn said they were involved, they did discuss the import issue and they agree with the five year program.

Senator Schroeder asked whether there are reporting requirements of sale of cervidae in other states, and if ISDA could monitor sales from different states. Mr. Chatburn said each state is different. In Colorado for example, the identification on domestic cervidae farms is done by Brand Department like Idaho's Brand Department does cattle. ISDA is not notified of purchase, however, first knowledge would be when health certificate is issued to move animal and a veterinarian may call to find out ISDA requirements. Dr. Hillman, ISDA, made a statement about the illegal shipment of an animal into the State saying, "if a veterinarian in another state writes a health certificate on an animal that doesn't meet our import requirements, and doesn't get the permit required to bring the animal into Idaho, that vet is in violation of USDA standards and could lose his ability to practice. ISDA can penalize the veterinarian that ignores or fails to comply with ISDA Rules, working with the other State to address the veterinarian. The absolute illegal movement where there is no documentation will be caught up with during inventory. The ISDA has ability through USDA to deal with veterinarians."

Senator Burtenshaw questioned Stan Boyd, Idaho Elk Breeders Association, on how breeders felt about being licensed. Mr. Boyd stated the breeders already feel licensed with the fees paid every year and their operations physically inspected every year.

MOTION: Vice Chairman Noble made a motion to reject section 607 of Pending Rule 02.04.21 0201, pertaining to the quarantine requirement of 5 years (60 months). The motion was seconded by Senator Burtenshaw. Discussion by Vice Chairman Noble noted four letters of testimony signifying ten percent of elk breeders concerned with this Rule. Chairman Williams asked for a Roll Call Vote. The secretary called a verbal roll call vote. The motion failed.

Senator Burtenshaw asked if the House concurred with all the Rules. Darrel McRoberts, ISDA stated that the House concurred.

MOTION: Senator Goedde made a motion that the Department of Agriculture IDAPA 02 Pending Rules, Pending Fee Rules and Temporary Rule 02.08.01 Sheep and Goat Rules of the Idaho Board of Sheep Commissioners considered by the Committee be approved as written and that the Chairman write a letter to the Senate Pro Tem to that affect. The motion was seconded. No discussion on the motion. Chairman Williams asked for a voice vote. The motion carried.
COMMISSION REPORT Gretchen Hyde, Executive Director of the Idaho Rangeland Resources Commission was given the Floor to present the Commission report. Ms. Hyde provided the Committee members with a packet of handouts. The handouts are on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office. Ms. Hyde reported on the fiscal year 2002 assessment revenues separated by state, federal and private lands. The revenue from Federal lands is lower than anticipated, and the budgeting is based on low numbers from last year and was then reduced by another five percent. Ms. Hyde is the only full time employee. She referenced the Projected Income for 2003, which reflected conservative growth. She remarked about a grant received last month through University of Idaho David Little Range Management Foundation for $16,000 that goes through the University of Idaho Rangeland Department. This will reduce IRRC expenses by about $10,000 for this fiscal year. She commented on the IRRC Continuing Education Program, providing two to three week workshops for teachers and a new program creating a workbook for fourth grade students will be available in the fall. IRRC industry and research development includes the "Rangeland Roundup" newsletter, Sun Valley and McCall television programming as well as Idaho Public Television programming.

Senator Stennett commented on the NPR (National Public Radio) program and how powerful and valuable it is. He asked how many accounts IRRC has (5,000 newsletters) and Ms. Hyde stated less than one percent ask for refunds.

Senator Burtenshaw asked how IRRC received permission to put workbooks in schools. Ms. Hyde commented that through NPR and television promos the teachers will be made aware of the availability of the workbooks. With new state standards it provides IRRC the opportunity to fulfill a need of the teachers.

Chairman Williams noted the article on Senator Noh's son in the "Rangeland Roundup".

COMMISSION REPORT Bob Corbell, Executive Director of Idaho Grape Growers and Wine Producers Commission, was given the Floor to present the Commission report. The Commission Board consists of two Growers and three Producers. Funding comes from tax paid on wine in the state, 45 cents per gallon, and five percent of this is to run the commission, budget runs at about $100,000 a year in addition the Commission receives $5 per acre for grapes that are in production and $100 per winery, so total budget ends up at around $120,000. The collection for the fees comes from Tax Commission on monthly basis and Commission files audit report. 1200 acres currently in production and between 200 and 300 acres have been planted but aren't producing, with a cost of $13,000 per acre for planting grapes it takes two years before the first grape, three years for first harvest, before wine is produced off the vineyard it is nearly four years. Mr. Corbell provided a copy of a study conducted by University of Idaho entitled "Contribution of the Grape and Wine Industry to Idaho's Economy" Res 162. A copy is on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office. Mr. Corbell commented on the highest known winery in the world in Twin Falls county, Rock Creek Winery. The majority of the wine and grapes are grown in Sunny Slope. New vineyards in Clearwater and soon in Lewiston. Mr. Corbell stated the Commission received a grant of $500,000 administered thru University of Idaho about three years ago with this there is a full lab, Parma Research Center, where under development are 30 varieties of grapes that will acclimate to the Idaho climate. The Commission is worried about not having enough cold, very few hours dip below twenty degrees, and the insect problems that could ensue. Mr. Corbell commented that after the Commission received the grant they hired an outstanding scientist from Texas. She is gaining popularity in the Northwest for the research she has done in the past three years. Mr. Corbell commented on two bug workshops the Commission puts on each year.

Ste. Chappell Winery is the premier winery in Idaho producing 150,000 cases this year and looking at 170,000 next year. Last year the "Wine Spectator" a premier wine magazine rated Idaho wines in the high 80s. Idaho is producing premium wines, Reisling $4.95 on up, and premium wines selling for around $34.00.

Committee members asked about Idaho production (250,000 cases), requested a budget sheet, and asked if grapes were only grown for wine (table grapes are being developed, they are exported to Alaska, they have not yet achieved a large supermarket-type grape).

ADJOURNMENT Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 4:20p.m.




DATE: February 6, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
Members absent/excused: Senator Geodde
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:05 p.m.
GUESTS: Bill Chisholm; Julie Pence, Times-News; Dr. Bob Hillman, ISDA; Grant Loebs, Twin Falls County Prosecutor; Ed Smith; Phuong Smith; Brent Olmstead, MPI; John Chatburn, ISDA; Bob Naerebout, Idaho Dairymen; Lloyd B. Knight, Idaho Cattle Association; Ron Sheffield, University of Idaho; Jon Sanoval, DEQ; Bill Brockman, Twin Falls County Commission; Darrel McRoberts, ISDA; Wayne Tousley, Twin Falls County Sheriff; Stan Boyd, Idaho Sheep Commission.
INTRODUCTION: Chairman Williams excused Senator Geodde who is working on a finance projection committee. He announced that no public testimony will be held at the meeting, purpose of hearing is for information of Committee members to gather information to see whether to look into any legislation. Chairman Williams asked Senator Noh to introduce the Sheriff of Twin Falls County Wayne Tousley, Grant Loeb, Twin Falls County Prosecutor, Bill Brockman, Chair of Twin Falls County Commission and his wife Barbara Brockman. Chairman Williams welcomed the guests. He announced this was the last day to have RS presented to Committee.
RS 12617C2 Senator Stennett presented a verbal synopsis of RS 12617C2 which relates to the ability of local planning authorities to define the size of confined animal feeding operations, CAFO, for the purpose of siting. The RS deletes the reference to large CAFO's, defining CAFO as a thousand animal units. It also gives ISDA the ability to promulgate rules regarding bio hazards.

Discussion among the members of the committee and Senator Stennett involved the following topics:

-When are owners to take their count;

-How many cattle can a person have before a permit is needed;

-What are the general rules to obtaining a permit;

-What was the reason behind defining "large";

-What is the planning and zoning authority to site a CAFO;

-Would this change the rules for owners of under 1,000 head;

-Is this just for local planning and zoning;

-Would this in any way change the original rules for CAFOs.

Motion: A motion was made by Senator Noh and seconded by Senator Stennett that RS12617C2 be sent to print by voice vote; the motion carried. Senator Goedde was absent.
RS 12809 Senator Stennett presented a verbal synopsis of RS 12809 which relates to cruelty of animals, amending Idaho Code section 25-3520A, to provide for penalties. This adds to the Animal Cruelty Code a subsection allowing ISDA to pursue civil penalties. The local prosecutor issues criminal penalties.

Discussion among the committee members and Senator Stennett involved what the catalyst was that prompted this legislation.

A motion was made by Senator Gannon and seconded by Senator Noh that RS12809 be sent to print; the motion carried. Aye votes were recorded by Senator Noh, Senator Schroeder, Senator Gannon, Senator Stennett, Senator Kennedy, and Senator Williams, with dissenting votes from Senator Burtenshaw and Senator Noble. Senator Geodde was absent.

RS 12795 Senator Stennett presented a verbal synopsis of RS 12795 which relates to licensing domestic cervidae operations. Provides for ISDA to promulgate rules giving them the authority to license domestic cervidae operations and authority to require a branding identification.

Discussion among the committee members and Senator Stennett involved whether the word "branding" be interpreted as other tagging.

Motion A motion was made by Vice Chairman Noble and seconded by Senator Kennedy that RS12795 be sent to print.
Substitute Motion A substitute motion was made by Senator Burtenshaw and seconded by Senator Schroeder that RS12795 be returned to sponsor. Discussion among the committee members included:

- Are the elk breeders against licensing;

- Should the rule be in effect for a longer time period before imposing another restriction on the breeders;

- Can owners, officials tell the difference between wild cervidae and domestic cervidae;

- Should there be a way by tagging or other method to assure identification of privately owned cervidae;

- What is the use of having private property if others tell how it is to be used.

Chairman Williams asked for a Roll Call vote, the vote was taken on the substitute motion that RS 12795 be returned to sponsor. The motion carried with aye votes from dissenting votes from Senators Noh, Stennett, and Kennedy. Senator Goedde was absent.

Approval of Minutes A motion was made and seconded that the minutes of House/Senate Joint Agricultural Affairs Meeting January 30, 2003 be approved as written. The motion carried.
Odor Management Ron Sheffield, a waste management engineer at the Twin Falls research & extension center for the Biological and Agricultural Engineering Department of University of Idaho, was given the floor for the purpose of a presentation on odor management. Mr. Sheffield provided handouts to the committee. A copy is on file in the Agricultural Affairs committee secretary's office. Mr. Sheffield spoke of his goals and objectives for the coming year, his position is eighty percent extension and twenty percent research. The research components include looking at how can odor be measured more accurately in the field; obtaining a database of emissions numbers on livestock operations and food processing industries in Idaho; and developing a process, in conjunction with the University of Tennessee, to remove phosphorus from liquid storage ponds on dairies and crystallize the material to be reprocessed as a feed ingredient or as a slow release commercial fertilizer.

Mr. Sheffield stated the extension efforts focus on educating producers about new confined animal feeding operations (CAFO) rules that the EPA released on December 15th and will soon be released in the Federal Register. There are minor changes of the current program that Idaho has in place specifically, record keeping requirements for facilities that have more than 700 milking cattle as well as 1000 heifers or 1000 beef cattle in confinement.

Mr. Sheffield reported on the various professional committees he is a part of. He spoke on the proposal Governor Kempthorne requested regarding odor education. The objectives of the proposal have centered around the Odor Rule Technical Advisory Committee, the committee is working on how a rule of the Department of Agriculture will address the criteria of intensity, duration, frequency, and offensiveness. The committee is working on: Odor measurement study, Agricultural Odor & Gas Emission Survey, Anaerobic Digestion, Idaho Agricultural Odor Technology Conference, and the Odor Management Planning Workshop.

The discussion among Committee members and Mr. Sheffield included the following topics:

- Will $900,000 provide enough financial resources;

- What is the Countryside Engineering Group within the American Society of Ag Engineers;

- How are the crystals made;

- Whether winter-time application of liquid waste on frozen ground is becoming an acceptable practice;

- Constituent raised concern Mr. Sheffield testified for CAFOs in Jerome and Canyon County; what was his professional relationship there.

Animal Cruelty Dr. Bob Hillman, Administrator of Division of Animal Industries for Idaho State Agricultural Department was given the floor to report on the Magic Valley animal cruelty case. He gave a brief synopsis of the following: Section 25-237 Dead Animal Disposal Law, IDAPA 02.04.17 Rules Governing Dead Animal Movement and Disposal, and Idaho Code Title 25, Chapter 35 Cruelty to Animals. The authority given to the ISDA for dead animal disposal was granted by the 2000 Idaho Legislature, the ISDA developed rules and have operated under the rules for less than a year, the Department has not experienced any difficulty in the way the rules are written in being able to enforce the provisions of the rules. They have been effective up until this point.

During a routine trip to a dairy to collect water samples the inspector noted a potential problem with dead animals, the ISDA did act upon the situation, and found that the owner had failed to properly dispose of animal carcases. The ISDA brought a civil action against the owner, the owner paid a civil penalty of $5,000 for improperly disposing of dead animals.

Dr. Hillman spoke about the animal cruelty law, he noted Title 25 section 3501 entitled Administration. This section provides for a dual role: gives ISDA responsibility to administer the provisions of the law, and also gives ISDA responsibility to take its developed cases for prosecution to local prosecutor. Why was it done this way? It took two years to arrive at the version of the law presented here. Discussion related to how ISDA should prosecute the cases came up during the writing of this law. Another question brought up at this time was the fact that many counties manage animal cruelty cases appropriately and effectively, so there was a strong desire to not interfere with local authority. So this section was written carefully to provide ISDA ability to investigate animal cruelty cases but also to provide the ability of prosecutors to prosecute those cases. ISDA works with local law enforcement agencies and prosecutors in developing cases while local jurisdictions retain the authority to deal with their own problems.

Starting in 1997 through January 31, 2003 the ISDA has investigated some 700 plus animal cruelty cases in the state of Idaho, this does not include the numerous cases that have been investigated and handled by local authorities. During last two years ISDA has investigated 274 cases, almost all cases were done jointly with local law enforcement, eleven cases have been prosecuted, an additional nineteen have been presented for prosecution but have not been prosecuted. Those cases not prosecuted does not mean there wasn't animal cruelty involved, but in many cases in working with local prosecutors and local law enforcement their read on the local situation in their county is even though its possible to construe the case to be animal cruelty it is preferred to work with the individual to solve the problem and not have it happen again.

Dr. Hillman stated the Twin Falls County Sheriffs Office has worked with the ISDA very well over many years and many cases and the ISDA appreciates the help. It would be impossible for the ISDA to get the job done without their help. The Twin Falls County Prosecutors office has also prosecuted a number of animal cruelty cases over the years very effectively. He thinks what the ISDA has in current law is adequate for the purposes it was enacted.

The discussion among the committee members and Dr. Hillman included the following:

- The standards of the Animal Cruelty code 25-3502, and the standard of the abandonment provision 25 -351;

- How many of the 11 cases were associated with herd type cruelty;

- Did ISDA have any difficulty in dealing with the law, the implementation of the law;

- What are the standards/approaches ISDA takes to identify responsible parties and what were impediments;

- Specifically with the Dutch Touch Dairy were the animals not being tended to when ISDA came on the scene;

- Does ISDA have a coordination system with local law enforcement of gathering evidence ;

- Under what section of the rule did ISDA determine it had the ability to issue a civil penalty and whether it was appropriate to do so;

- Does ISDA feel that opportunities are missed to prosecute;

- How does ISDA characterize the treatment over a period of time of a downed cow.

Animal Cruelty Grant Loebs, Twin Falls County Prosecuting Attorney, was given the Floor for the purpose of speaking about animal cruelty cases. Mr. Loebs reported, "his office has a long history of prosecuting animal cruelty cases, including two significant cases involving entire herds, rather than individual dog and cat complaints which he has also prosecuted and in all of the cases he has worked with the Twin Falls city police or the Twin Falls County Sheriffs office. In all the cases involving herds he worked with the ISDA, their veterinarians, their investigators to some degree or other."

"With regard to the dairy case in the Twin Falls County, his office views this case as serious, and the allegations made as serious. Mr. Loebs' duty as a prosecutor in the criminal realm is to prove intentional, malicious actions taken towards a living animal. In a more general sense, anytime someone is charged with a crime, the prosecuting attorney takes on the highest burden it is possible to have in the legal system, he must prove, if he takes a case, that the person who committed the crime committed that crime and must prove it beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury. This involves a lot of different types of investigative requirements, different evidence than it does to prove that the cruelty occurred and that it occurred at a particular place. He needs to know who did what, when, where and how and all these things beyond a reasonable doubt."

"Two different tacks are being taken by the government: the Department of Agriculture, which has an oversight, regulatory mission and then the prosecuting attorneys and sheriffs departments, which have a criminal prosecution and punitive mission. To some extent especially the sheriffs office has some of those kind of remedial kinds of responsibilities because they can work with people to try to make the problem better. By the time the problem gets to Mr. Loebs' desk, trying to work with the people in question to resolve the problem has either failed or it has long past happened, as in the dairy case in the Twin Falls County, by the time it got to his desk there was no further problem in the dairy. Mr. Loebs said, "what is being dealt with is the difference between punitive and remedial."

Mr. Loebs asked the Committee, "whether it was the intent by these laws or by the questions asked today of the Department of Agriculture, to make sure this isn't happening anymore, doesn't happen again, or is the intent to criminally punish by jailing the person who may have done a particular act or acts. When discussing the statutes mentioned earlier it is important not to hop from one section to another, from negligence type of statutes and fining and punishing administratively, to talk of criminally prosecuting someone." Mr. Loebs stood for questions from the Committee.

Chairman Williams thanked Mr. Loebs for his comments. He stated it was not the intent of the Committee to try the dairy case in the Twin Falls County in the Committee room today. However, the Committee does have constituents that are very concerned and the Committee's intent was to get answers to questions to see if there is something the Committee members need to be addressing.

Discussion among the Committee members and Mr. Loebs included: Impediments of dealing with intentional and malicious aspects of the law; what are the general problems in finding out who is responsible.

Mr. Loebs stated, "the happening of the event is cruelty or abandonment as code may state, but it doesn't alleviate problem of proving who is responsible. He remarked that the Committee or the Judiciary Committee of the Senate body is not going to want to impose across the board strict liability upon owners of businesses whether they be dairies or stores for every intentional act committed by employees. If this were the case Mr. Loebs could prosecute criminally the manager of a store if while pushing his cart a box boy picked his pocket. Mr. Loebs stated in his opinion it is imperative to have someone to sit in the witness chair and say they knew about the act because they saw it happen and the owner needs to have said something like, "good job, well done, that's how I want it done from now on."

Discussion continued about:

- How does the law hold someone accountable for mismanagement;

- Questions about the timing and coordination of the case between ISDA, the Sheriff and the Prosecuting Attorney;

- Is a civil penalty an appropriate way to go after this kind of cruelty;

- the gap between civil penalties and criminal penalty.

Chairman Williams expressed appreciation for the dairy industry in Idaho and what they contribute to the welfare and well being of individuals in the entire state.

ADJOURNMENT Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 5:20 p.m.




DATE: February 11, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Gannon, Stennett
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Senators Geodde and Kennedy
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:05 p.m.
GUESTS: Stan Boyd, Idaho Sheep Commission; Rich Garber, Director of Advancement University of Idaho; Dr. Mike Weiss, Dean of University of Idaho College of Agricultural and Life Sciences; John Orr, Research and Development scientist Idaho State Pesticide Management Commission; Representative Darrell Bolz, Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute; Darrel McRoberts, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; John Barclay; Jerri Jo Burger, Intern Food Producers of Idaho; Rick Waitley, Chairman of the Leadership Idaho Agriculture (LIA) class, and thirty LIA participants.
Introductions Chairman Williams welcomed the guests to the meeting. He announced that Senators Goedde and Kennedy were attending financial committee meetings. Chairman Williams gave the Floor over to Rick Waitley, Chairman of the Leadership Idaho Agriculture (LIA) class for the purpose of introducing his group. Mr. Waitley commented about the two classes put through the program every year, the potential nominees in the group for future appointments, and he announced a directory would soon be available. Mr. Waitley asked each participant to introduce themselves to the committee by name, organization and sponsor, which they did.
Commission Report Stan Boyd, Idaho Sheep Commission (ISC), was given the Floor for the purpose of reporting on the Commission. Mr. Boyd reviewed the powers and duties of the state board of sheep commissioners. The ISC is under the Idaho State Department of Agriculture, Division of Animal Industries and the State veterinarian acts as the Veterinarian-in-Charge of the ISC.

Idaho Code authorizes the ISC to collect assessments for the Idaho Animal Damage Control program, and for a Promotion, Research and Education program. The current assessment on wool produced by Idaho Wool Growers is eight cents per pound of wool:

- Idaho regulatory animal program for sheep: 3 cents per pound;

- Idaho Animal Damage Control program: 3 cents per pound;

- Sheep Promotion, Research and Education: 2 cents per pound.

The revenues brought in by the ISC are very dependent on the current market of wool. When prices are soft, and producers elect not to sell their wool, the Commission, as well as the programs they collect for, suffer the consequences. Wool prices are up and consumption of lamb is increasing.

On January 1, 2002, Idaho ranked 7th in the nation for total number of breeding stock, which amounted to 224,000 head. Idaho ranked 8th in the nation for the production of wool, which amounted to 2,140,000 pounds.

Mr. Boyd reviewed the Promotion, Research and Education monies provided by the Idaho Sheep Commission and Administered by the Idaho Wool Growers Association for the fiscal year July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2002.

A copy of Mr. Boyd's report is on file in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

Commission Report John Orr, Chairman of the Idaho Pesticide Management Commission (PMC) was given the Floor to present his report. Mr. Orr stated Governor Kempthorne formally appointed the Commission on September 12, 2002, it consists of 11 members from the agricultural industry and five ex officio members representing the University of Idaho, Department of Environmental Quality, Idaho State Department of Agriculture, Labor an Health and Welfare, per statute.

An organizational meeting was held on October 22, 2002, officers were elected: John Orr, Chairman representing the Agricultural Chemical Industry, David Dougherty, Co-chairman, representing the Grain Growers and Tom Lyon, Secretary/Treasurer, representing the Tree Fruit Industry. George Robinson, Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA), was assigned by Director Pat Takasugi to serve as interim administrator to the commission to avoid the expense of hiring a full-time administrator. Funding for the Commission came from a $100,000 grant from the ISDA that was part of the USDA Specialty Crop Grant Program. At the meeting is was determined a by-laws/operating guide would be needed to ensure the direction of the Commission, as well as forms for applicants to complete for the research funding proposals (RFP), committees were appointed to draft the guide and forms.

A second meeting was held December 13, 2002 a draft of ideas for the operating guide was discussed, draft forms were reviewed and Commission priorities were established:

  1. provide pass-through funding and direction for pesticide residue and lab analysis for minor crop uses,
  2. provide pass-through funding for efficacy studies for minor crop uses,
  3. develop and implement IPM and preventative pest management strategies and practices,
  4. prepare and fund data use surveys, and
  5. establish cooperative research efforts with other western states.


A third meeting was held on January 31, 2003, two drafts of a by-laws/operating guide were produced, temporary forms were approved and it was decided to begin soliciting research funding proposals (RFP's) from the various commodity groups and the University of Idaho College of Agriculture.

By mid April the Commission should be dispersing funding for approved projects. At that time the Commission will also need to take on the task of soliciting funding from commodity groups and other interested groups to ensure the future viability of the Commission. Also, a unanimous decision by the commissioners determined a part-time administrator was needed. The next meeting is scheduled for April 11th.

A copy of Mr. Orr's testimony and handouts are available in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

Report on the University of Idaho College of Agricultural and Life Sciences

(U of I, CALS)

Richard Garber, Director of Advancement of University of Idaho, was given the floor to introduce Dr. Mike Weiss, Dean of University of Idaho College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (U of I, CALS) who addressed the Committee with a report on the U of I, CALS. Dr. Weiss reviewed the role and mission of CALS: teaching, research, and extension (helping people improve lives through research-based education and leadership development). The five priority areas of CALS centers around community development; competitive agriculture; health, food safety and quality; healthy and stable families; and natural resources and the environment.

Dr. Weiss reported that CALS lost 59 positions as a result of the fiscal year 2003 (FY 03) budget reductions, as well as an additional 50 people due to resignations and early retirement (an 18% reduction in workforce from FY 02), and CALS has established their Tier 1 priority positions to total 23 full time equivalents (FTE). Dr. Weiss stated CALS has the flexibility to fill 27 positions, then it will be out of money. Dr. Weiss concluded his report with program funding information for the WOI, program (Washington, Oregon & Idaho) and the Caine Center.

Committee members asked how U of I, CALS maintains its roles and how it functions when personnel are lost due to early retirement. Dr. Weiss said the faculty and staff have taken on increased work to fit the bill for the college. Discussion continued on how the agricultural aspect fits with the life science; the impact of the budget on the biotech facility; the cause of the vacant positions, whether they were vacant due to budget cutbacks or if they were a one year freeze; whether the funding for the Tier 2 positions are dependant on the budget recommended by the Governor or will be sustained by the CALS; and where wildlife fits into the CALS program; comments were made about the farming community that relies on the Agricultural Research and Extension offices and the rural economic development services it provides.

A copy of Dr. Weiss' presentation is on file in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

Gubernatorial Appointment Gubernatorial Reappointment of Mel Anderson of Emmett, Idaho to the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute for a term expiring July 1, 2006. Mr. Anderson has experience in the entertainment business, stocks, commodity trading, has been with the Idaho Growers and Shippers, Potato Growers of Idaho, and has been with the Idaho Potato Commission (IPC) since 1987. The IPC invests $200,000 in the Idaho Food Quality Assurance (IFQA) Lab each year. Potato samples are done in the lab and the lab has more than provided its share of benefits for the IPC.
Gubernatorial Appointment Gubernatorial Reappointment of Representative Darrell Bolz, of Caldwell, Idaho to the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute for a term expiring July 1, 2006. Representative Bolz has experience in Future Farmers of America (FFA) as a member, and as an educator. He served in the United States Navy, and worked with and for Idaho Alfalfa seed Growers, the Mint Growers and Sweet Corn seed. Rich Garber and Sara Braasch are Representative Bolz predecessors as Chairman of the IFQA Institute.

Committee members asked Representative Bolz about the teaching role of the Institute, and its relationship with the College of Southern Idaho (CSI).

Adjournment Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 4:32 p.m.




DATE: February 13, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Senator Gannon
CONVENED: Chairman Williams called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m.
GUESTS: David Bennett, scientist representing Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute (IFQAI); Wayne Hurst, farmer representing IFQAI; Christine Hahn, Idaho Department of Health & Welfare; Kris Carter, Idaho Department of Health & Welfare; Dan Wingard, Canyon County Mosquito Abatement District; Brian Benner, Canyon County Mosquito Abatement District; Jack Bennett, Ada County Mosquito Abatement District; Bob Hays, Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA); Gene Winchester, rancher; Bob Hillman, ISDA; Roger Fuhrman, Idaho Department of Fish & Game.
INTRODUCTION: Chairman Williams introduced Monica Pratt, from Skyview High School in Nampa, who will serve as the Agricultural Affairs Committee Page for the second half of the First Regular Session of the 57th Idaho Legislature. Chairman Williams presented Audrey Twiggs, the Committee Page for the first half of the session, with a Senate watch and letter of recommendation signed by the Committee members.
Gubernatorial Appointees Gubernatorial appointment of Mr. David Bennett of Boise, Idaho to the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute (IFQAI) for a term expiring July 1, 2006. Mr. Bennett represents the private sector, the private labs, making sure there is no infringement on the private sector as far as what the IFQAI does. Mr. Bennett has a background in microbiology and chemistry. He is a graduate of the University of Idaho. His interest with the IFQAI concerns government supported entities infringing on private markets.

Chairman Williams asked about Mr. Bennett's view of the future of the IFQAI. Mr. Bennett commented on the instrumental role IFQAI has in creating a database showing commodities free of pesticides and herbicides, the plans to extend work in pesticide registration, and the general safeguarding of public health. Committee members asked Mr. Bennett about the testing done at IFQAI, food and water testing, hazardous waste testing, and certification of water systems.

Gubernatorial appointment of Mr. Wayne Hurst of Burley, Idaho to the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute (IFQAI) for a term to expire July 1, 2006. Mr. Hurst is a farmer and has 23 years experience in farming. He has been a member of the Idaho Grain Producers State Board and is a graduate of the Leadership Idaho Agriculture program.

Committee members asked about Mr. Hurst's fields that neighbor Senator Darrington's. Comments were made about Mr. Hurst's musical abilities.

Vote on Gubernatorial Appointments Senator Noh made a motion that the Committee confirm the reappointment of Mel Anderson to the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute (IFQAI) for a term to expire July 1, 2006. The motion was seconded by Senator Stennett and the motion carried by a voice vote. Chairman Williams will sponsor the confirmation of Mr. Anderson.

Senator Noble made a motion that the Committee confirm the reappointment of Representative Darrell Bolz to the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute (IFQAI) for a term to expire July 1, 2006. The motion was seconded by Senator Schroeder and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Noble will sponsor the confirmation of Representative Bolz.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The motion was made and seconded that the Minutes of February 6, 2003 be approved as written. The motion carried.
Presentation by Idaho Division of Health and Idaho Department of Agriculture on the West Nile Virus Dr. Kris Carter, Idaho Division of Health was given the Floor to present a report on the West Nile Virus. Dr. Carter gave the presentation in the place of Dr. Leslie Tengelsen who was unable to attend. She gave an introduction to the West Nile virus and its national distribution, updated the committee on the status of West Nile surveillance in Idaho, described how Idaho may respond to an outbreak, and mentioned potential problem areas in respect to the introduction of the West Nile virus in Idaho.

Dr Carter stated,"an infected mosquito transmits the virus by biting a bird, the virus multiplies inside the bird and then when the mosquito bites the infected bird, the mosquito becomes infected and process starts over again. Infected mosquitos can transmit the virus, by biting, to humans and horses. Most people who become infected with the West Nile virus show no symptoms and never know they are infected. About 20 percent of infected people develop a flu like symptom called West Nile fever. Less than one percent of infected persons will develop an inflamation of the brain, or membrane that lines the brain, and some that recover may have lingering mental deficits and some severally affected may die. The majority of severally affected are over the age of 50."

Since first detected in New York in 1999 the West Nile virus has spread rapidly across the country. At the end of 2002 the virus has been reported in humans or animals from nearly every state in the country, and over 4,000 human cases have been reported. In contrast over 14,000 cases of West Nile virus in horses have been reported last year.

Because of the rapid spread of the virus across the United States, Idaho began West Nile virus prevention activities in earnest last year. The focus was put on education and surveillance; education pertaining to physician awareness and public health messages and surveillance is conducted on humans, horses, dead birds, mosquitos, the public health lab provided testing, and some federal funding is received from CDC (Center of Disease Control).

Surveillance of Horses 31 horses were tested from the following counties: Bonner, Kootenai, Nez Perce, Washington, Canyon, Ada, Twin Falls, Jerome, Lincoln, Bonneville, Teton, and Lemhi. One horse tested positive.

Surveillance of Dead Birds 63 birds were tested from the following counties: Bonner, Kootenai, Latah, Nez Perce, Clearwater, Gem, Canyon, Ada, Twin Falls, Blaine, Power, Bingham, Bonneville, Jefferson, and Lemhi. Zero tested positive.

Surveillance of Mosquitoes 179 batches were tested from a collection site in Canyon County. Zero batches were found positive. A map of mosquito abatement districts is available in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

The new activities for 2003 include: expanding laboratory services, increasing mosquito surveillance, developing multi-agency West Nile virus prevention media campaign, and creating "Arbovirus Surveillance and Mosquito Control in Idaho: A Model Plan for Counties".

In response to an outbreak of the West Nile virus the general response will include: verifying test results, investigation of situation, sharing information with fellow agencies, announcing findings to the public, sharing public health messages, and discussing mosquito control options in affected communities. Another response would be the implementation of the proposed phased response in the model county plan.

Issues and potential problems are the limited testing capacity, loss of wildlife from West Nile virus, human health risks and public concern about contracting the virus. Another problem is incomplete mosquito control because of few mosquito abatement districts and no mechanism for mosquito control outside of the districts, as well as conflicts over irrigation and pesticide application.

Senator Schroeder asked if a person is bitten once does their body develop an immunity from future bites? If a person is bitten by a mosquito that is infected and the mosquito has a high enough level of virus in its body to transmit virus to a human that human can develop an antibody response. The antibodies are present but it is unsure of how long they are present.

Bob Hays, Agriculture Pesticide Program Specialist with the Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA) reported on the current situation regarding the West Nile virus. He stated there are adequate pesticides available for the control of mosquitos, both registered within the state and supplied, to the knowledge of the ISDA. The problem is with the number of applicators that are available to perform the work; 25 applicators licensed for public health application within the state. Of the 25, when advisors, consultants, as well as those from out of state, are taken out the number drops to 12: with six able to do ground application and six able to do air application commercially within the state. Currently a process is ongoing to develop a county model for mosquito abatements. He commented that the way the mosquito abatement laws are written the general focus, jurisdictional body, would be at the county level or substitution thereof. The majority of the state is not in a mosquito abatement area and the way the law is set up right now it doesn't allow for timely formation of districts, it's a two year process from start to finish. ISDA has been working with veterinarians throughout the state in recommending vaccinations for horses since last summer.

Mr. Hays stated the real concern in the case of an outbreak is unlicensed and untrained individuals making pesticide applications and so creating an opportunity for the misuse of pesticides. Senator Noble asked Mr. Hays what the ISDA requires for a commercial application license. Mr. Hays commented on the levels of chemicals and pesticides for larva siting and adult siting.

Mr. Hays touched on the following issues: unlicensed pesticide applicators, adulterated pesticide products, and he expressed concern regarding pollinator protection, organic farms, biological control zones, chemical sensitive individuals, Clean Water Act restrictions (wetlands and storm water return), irrigation practices (effect of drought on increased exposure), district formation, timing of control efforts, unique pesticide application technique for the control of adult mosquitoes, jurisdiction and liability.

Mr. Hays also spoke about the management operations in place, the existing mosquito abatement districts, the approximate operational budgets. He also commented on training and logistics, including the urban pesticide program commitments, workshops and presentations scheduled for the spring of 2003, a grant request and pest management resource identification.

The Committee members discussion with Dr. Carter and Mr. Hays as well as Dr. Bob Hillman (ISDA) and Christine Hahn, Division of Health included:

-what the costs are of vaccinating a horse;

-does the ISDA recommend vaccinating horses;

-the odds of a horse dying from the disease;

-what are the mosquito species implicated in the disease;

-the safety of the pesticide program and educating the public;

-problems with split tires and plastic tubing used on dairies;

-tires are among the top habitat for mosquito production;

-can the West Nile virus be picked up by hunters cleaning a bird, direct blood contact and other methods of transmission;

-the potential flood of ads for mosquito repellants and their effectiveness;

-are children and babies more vulnerable to West Nile virus being outside, near water and with exposed skin and the use of repellents on children and babies;

-is this a new disease or an old disease;

-are the bird populations significantly infected.

Discussion continued on the following topics:

-was disease carried from birds migrating from Central and South America;

-the education of public will be the best defense mechanism to West Nile virus;

-what does the Committee need to do, if anything, to set up interface between mosquito abatement districts and organic farmers;

-the possibility of adjusting the abatement law;

-public health versus private property issues;

-Senator Noh remarked on the Idaho Code allowing counties to deal with insect pests, and the existing three percent cap;

-economic pests versus public health threat;

-the economic implications of the health issue;

-whether organic farmers in mosquito abatement districts can be excluded if an outbreak occurs;

-the importance of improving the timing and formation of county wide districts.

Testimony Dr. Dan Wingard, President, Board of Trustees Canyon County Mosquito Abatement district (CCMAD) in Nampa, Idaho, was given the Floor to address the issue of the West Nile virus. Dr. Wingard has experience in anesthesiology, is trained in biology and physiology, toxicology, pharmacology. He is President of the Pacific Northwest Mosquito and Vector Control Association, as well as a retired professor of anesthesiology, University of Nebraska Medical School, and retired fellow of the University of Nebraska Graduate College. Dr. Wingard stated the importance of education on the West Nile virus in Idaho. He commented on the two lines of the virus, its correlation to the disease in Israel in the 1950s, the increased virulence of the disease over time, the potential transmission of the virus by: transfusions, mothers milk, from birds mouths, infant in-utero, and through sexual activity.

Discussion among committee members and Dr. Wingard included:

- what was Dr. Wingard asking the legislators to do about the problem;

-the problem with funding for the mosquito abatement districts;

-the relationship between county commissioners and mosquito abatement districts;

-the emergency plan of Dr. Wingard's mosquito abatement district;

-the financial impediment of a three percent cap in Dr. Wingard's county.

A copy of Dr. Wingard's handout is on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office.

Testimony Gene Winchester, horse owner and breeder, was given the Floor to present his testimony on the issue of the West Nile virus. Mr. Winchester expressed his concern over the need of an education program to reach the horsemen of Idaho about whether they should vaccinate their horses. He explained the problem is with the cost of the vaccination. Currently it is $28.00 to administer the shot, it would cost him around $10,000 to vaccinate all his horses and it is his understanding the vaccine would need to be administered every year. Mr. Winchester requests something be done to make the vaccine available for purchase in bulk. He also questioned whether the vaccine should be mandatory, and what policies if any are in effect regarding the West Nile virus in horses.

Discussion among Committee members and Mr. Winchester included:

-the statute to limit price gouging in cases of emergency;

-the problem with the vaccine being produced by only one drug company;

-the restrictions USDA put on the vaccine that may come off soon;

-the need to vaccinate horses;

-the fact that the vaccine and mosquito control are the way to address the West Nile virus.

The Committee members expressed their desire to hear further presentations and testimony on the West Nile virus, and the mosquito abatement districts. Chairman Williams agreed to schedule further meetings.
ADJOURNMENT Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 5:08 p.m.




DATE: February 18, 2003
TIME: 3:00 p.m.
PLACE: Room 433
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:08 p.m.
GUESTS: John Chatburn, Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA); Sara Braasch, Idaho Cattle Association; Rick Stott, Idaho Cattle Association; Jerry Mobley, R CALF (Ranchers Cattleman Action Legal Fund); Roger Batt, Idaho Mint Commission; Robert McKellip, Idaho Mint Commission; David Dixon, Idaho Mint Commission
MINUTES: A motion to approve the minutes of meetings held on February 4th, February 11th and February 13th was made and seconded. The motion carried by a voice vote.
Committee Vote on Gubernatorial Appointments Gubernatorial appointment of Mr. David Bennett of Boise, Idaho to the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute (IFQAI) for a term expiring July 1, 2006. A motion was made by Senator Schroeder and seconded by Senator Burtenshaw that the Committee confirm the appointment of David Bennett. The motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Noble will sponsor the appointment.

Gubernatorial appointment of Mr. Wayne Hurst of Burley, Idaho to the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute (IFQAI) for a term to expire July 1, 2006. A motion was made by Senator Noh and seconded by Senator Burtenshaw to confirm the appointment of Wayne Hurst. The motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Darrington will sponsor the appointment.

Presentation by Idaho Cattle Association (ICA) Sara Braasch, Executive Vice President of the Idaho Cattle Association (ICA) was given the Floor for a presentation on issues of the beef cattle industry. She commented that most of the issues are federal issues: disaster programs, federal lands, grazing, environmental issues, trade and marketing. On the state level there are a couple of bills in the House on private property rights and the analysis that is done by the government prior to any action taking place.

Sara referenced the handout she provided to the Committee members on new rules from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding animal feeding operations. ICA would appreciate the help the Committee members could provide to let constituents know about the new regulations. She referenced the list of names to contact for more information. The key thing she pointed out is a provision in the rules that goes into effect soon, requiring National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits to be mandatory for any confined animal feeding operation (CAFO). So an existing CAFO has to apply for an NPDES permit. Sara mentioned that the new permit requires owners submit information and that there is a sixty-day deadline. The exact deadline to file for the permit is April 14th. The Committee members asked what the penalty is for missing the deadline. Sara stated the penalty is not clear in the rules. A copy of the handout is on file in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

Sara then introduced Rick Stott who is active in the environmental issues, as well as trade and marketing issues of the cattle industry. Mr. Stott is the treasurer of the Agra Beef company, as well as ICA's Feeder Council Chairman.

Presentation on labeling Rick Stott, ICA's Feeder Council Chairman was given the Floor for the purpose of presenting information on country of origin labeling. Chairman Williams welcomed Mr. Stott to the Committee. Mr. Stott commented on cattle issues at the national level where a major change is anticipated in the structure of the cattle industry within the next five to ten years. Mr. Stott spoke on the rising consumer demand and the accommodation of this demand by the cattle industry. He spoke on Idaho's opportunity to bring its products to the world. Country of origin labeling (COOL) means every product label stipulates where beef is born, raised and processed. COOL was passed last year with the farm bill.

Mr. Stott reported that there are three packing companies in the Northwest, counting Utah, Washington and Idaho, that market about half a million animals each year. Thirty percent of their production relies on Canada, and if trade is restricted the risk is losing the packing plants. Mr. Stott remarked that the northwest is significantly disadvantaged in the free market due to limited number of packers.

Mr. Stott posed the question to the committee whether they believe government has a role in managing markets, managing risks, and managing production in the marketplace. If they believe it does have a role than COOL is the way to go. Consumers are demanding a premium product, and with country of origin labeling, Mr. Stott reported that the consumer is willing to pay for the cost of labeling in order to know where the product comes from.

Discussion among Committee members and Mr. Stott included:

-the effect on the cattle market in relation to exchange rates;

-market demand, cattle production cycle, and production costs;

-issues effecting feed lots;

-the percentage over and above the elasticity price;

-treaties with other countries controlling 100% of the value, while local industry is operating at break-even point;

-does the United States export more value than it receives;

-for Canada more has come down than has gone up;

-opening up borders to get Canadian barley to Idaho feed lots;

-Senator Noh reminded the Committee of a quote by his economics professor," No one is in business for the benefit of mankind."

Discussion continued on:

-Mr. Stott's diagram of a Cattle Oligopoly;

-the packer and retail segment of the diagram;

-the branding of a product;

-the control of a niche market with a premium product.

Presentation on R CALF program Jerry Mobley, R CALF (Ranchers Cattleman Action Legal Fund) United Stock Growers USA was given the Floor to present the program to the Committee members. Mr. Mobley was referenced by Ric Branch. R CALF is a producer organization formed in 1998 that felt that there were certain trade laws that were being violated within the United States. Mr. Mobley stated that trade laws differ from other laws in that industry organizations need to bring actions against other countries because no one else will do it. In 1998 R CALF brought three lawsuits against Canada and Mexico regarding antidumping and antitrust. The Mexico antidumping case was dismissed. The court found in favor of the R CALF filing, as it relates to antidumping and subsidizing of foreign production, in Canada; however, it was found to not be a significant enough amount to warrant a tariff on cattle coming in from Canada. In the process of the cases filed and in the process of seeing how the cow-calf producer was represented, the producers were not satisfied in terms of how the government dealt with trade and marketing issues within the country. Historically the NCBA (National Cattle Branding Association) would be representing the producers; however the NCBA represents all of the industry the packers, producers, and feeders, and there were conflicting priorities.

Since then R CALF has grown to 8,000 members and 35 different state affiliations. R CALF has a strong base, and they are the fastest growing organization among producers. R CALF by-laws state that the organization will deal only with marketing and trade issues at the national level. R CALF is a proponent of country of origin labeling (COOL). The producers view COOL as a way for them to differentiate their product. Mr. Mobley commented on survey that stated that 84% of consumers would like to see where their meat is coming from so that they can make an opinion on safety. He also commented that 68% surveyed would pay a premium for that meat. Mr. Mobley said that the law states that on beef there is not to be a mandatory animal identification system within the United States to implement country of origin labeling. Mr. Mobley stated that COOL is not restricting the flow of beef in or out of this country.

Commission Report Roger Batt, Idaho Mint Commission was given the Floor to present the commission's industry report. He remarked on the mint water and mint candies provided for the Committee members. Mr. Batt commented on the mint production in Idaho, the importance of the Idaho Mint Commission, current mint research projects with the University of Idaho, and the Idaho Mint Growers Association. He provided a fact sheet on mint production, and a brochure on the Mint Commission. A copy is on file in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

Discussion among the committee members and Mr. Batt included:

-what is the yield per acre;

-what is the price per acre;

-where is rootstock raised;

-the collaboration of growers cultivating their crops together;

-what happens to mint waste;

-is there an overseas market.

A copy of the Commission's financials was requested.

ADJOURNMENT Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 4:30 p.m.




DATE: February 20, 2003
TIME: 2:00 p.m.
PLACE: Gold Room
MEMBERS PRESENT: Senate Ag Committee: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy

Senate Commerce & Human Resources: Chairman Andreason, Vice Chairman Goedde, Senators Cameron, Compton, Werk

House Ag Committee: Chairman Jones, Representatives Field (23), Stevenson, Bolz, Langford, Shirley, Jaquet, Andersen

MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Senate Ag Committee: Senator Noh

Senate Commerce & Human Resources: Senators Stegner, Davis, Malepeai

House Ag Committee: Vice Chairman Trail, Representatives Lake, Rydalch, Naccarato

CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 2:15 p.m.
GUESTS: Steve Richards, dairy farmer; Fred Riggers, farmer; Bob Naerebout, Idaho Dairymen's Association; Laura Johnson, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Deana Sessions, Idaho Dairy Commission; Brent Olmstead, Milk Producers of Idaho; Tyler Ricks, student; Darrel McRoberts, Idaho State Department of Agriculture.
Presentation by Department of Agriculture & Department of Commerce - International Trade Officers Pat Takasugi, Director, Idaho State Department of Agriculture, ISDA, was given the Floor. Mr. Takasugi commented on the revenue brought in from agriculture and stated that marketing and trade equal revenue for Idaho. The ISDA works with sixteen advisory committees to decide what path to go on, and moving agricultural products overseas.

Karl Tueller, Acting Director, Idaho Department of Commerce, IDOC, commented on the tough economy and the IDOC plan to use aggressive marketing within the state of Idaho in the coming year. He also commented on the international projects in manufacturing and processing. He stated the representatives present today represent 35 years of experience working directly with Idaho.

Laura Johnson, Idaho State Department of Agriculture, introduced each of the following international trade speakers:

Eddie Yen, Idaho-Asia Trade Office, Taipei, Taiwan

Mr. Yen has been with the Idaho-Asia office since 1990. He commented on the challenging year and the plan to not retreat from the market. He stated the Governor's Trade Mission last June was the largest ever, with 30 companies. He commented on several Idaho companies representing manufacturing, agricultural and industrial products and their success in Taiwan.

Armando Orellana, Idaho-Mexico Trade Office, Guadalajara, Mexico

Mr. Orellana has been with the Idaho-Mexico office since 1994. He provides counseling to Idaho exporters on Mexico and latin-American business opportunities. He commented on the technical assistance the trade office provides for 85 companies from Idaho. He also reported on the accomplishments of his trade office last year, including a trade mission to Central America.

General Woo-Joo Chang, Idaho-Korea Representative Office, Seoul, Korea

General Chang stated he was born in 1927 and has extensive experience in international trade. He commented on the history of working with the Idaho State Department of Agriculture and the Idaho Department of Commerce. He reported a new full-time employee would be taking over his position to continue Idaho promotion in Korea.

Dr. Cao Guoli, Idaho-Shanghai Representative Office, Shanghai, China

Dr. Cao reported that last year was the year of the horse and it was a good year. He reported that Idaho is the next largest importer into China. He commented on a new Shanghai University, a pharmacy school, doing research on an anti cancer treatment. The Shanghai University is being developed in conjunction with Idaho State University. He also reported on the numerous companies from Idaho that export products into China. He stated it is the Chinese year of the Ram and the trade office will try hard to make Idaho successful this year. He reported on China's plans to host Shanghai's Largest Trade Expo in 2010.

A copy of the handouts provided by the Idaho State Department of Agriculture is on file in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

Idaho Dairy Products Commission Annual Report Deanna Sessions, Administrator for the Idaho Dairy Products Commission, gave the annual budget report. The dairy industry is Idaho's number one agricultural commodity and Idaho is ranked 5th in US milk production. There is an increased worldwide demand for US produced milk.

The independent audit for FY02 showed no findings. The commission ended FY02 with a balance of more than $1 million. The projected income and expenses for FY03 are expected to be about the same as FY02, approximately $9.4M.

The producers are assessed a total of 15.5¢/cwt. (check off funds). The national dairy producer program receives 15¢ and the remaining 0.5¢ goes to the Idaho Dairymen's Association. The Idaho Dairy Products Commission petitions for and receives 10¢ back from the national fund for promotion, research and education programs.

The Commission is concerned with California cheese being slotted into supermarkets and is withholding funds to protect Idaho's cheese market. Their new national promotion "three servings a day for stronger bones" is targeting the obesity crisis. Their complete presentation will be available in the "Legislative Library Minutes Books."

Senators and Representatives had the following questions:

  1. Commissions participation in the new proposed promotion program for Idaho products through ISDA

-The Commission will not be participating in the ISDA program

  1. Involvement in the Dairy Odor Issue

-The Commission needs to stay out of the dairy odor issue.

  1. Representative Jones asked the Commission, as a quasi state agency, to clarify their legal authority to lobby.

-Bob Naerebout stated that he believed that the ability to lobby was within the legal framework of the Idaho Dairymen's Association but they need a legal opinion.

Testimony Steve Richards, a dairy farmer from Homedale, is dissatisfied with the use of his check off funds. He feels they need to do more to promote the use of milk in the US. Mr. Richards gave the committee a sample of UHT (Ultra High Temperature Pasteurization) milk that is widely available in other countries. This milk has a much longer expiration date and does not require refrigeration.
Adjournment: Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 3:40 p.m.




DATE: February 25, 2003
TIME: 3:00 p.m.
PLACE: Room 433
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Senator Goedde
GUESTS: Diana Caldwell, Idaho Bean Commission; Paul Mann, J.R. Simplot; Julie Shain, Federal Fleet Management; David Ferguson, Soil Conservation Commission; James Baker, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Russ Hendricks, Farm Bureau; Laura Johnson, Idaho State Department of Agriculture
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:05 p.m.
MINUTES: Senator Gannon made a motion to approve the minutes of the meeting held on February 20th, 2003, it was seconded by Senator Kennedy. The motion carried by a voice vote.
Commission Report Diana Caldwell, Administrator for the Idaho Bean Commission, was given the Floor to present the Commission's annual report to the committee. Ms. Caldwell began her power point presentation with the Commission's mission and an overview of the 2002 bean market. Idaho production increased by 34% in 2002, and yields increased 5%. Pinto beans make up 45% of the types of beans produced in Idaho. The other percentages varied for different varieties. The price of Idaho dry bean per cwt has been increasing since 2000. Ms. Caldwell reported on grants the Commission has received for 2002/2003 totaling $155,000. The budget was broken down into Administration (25%), Research (20%), Bean Seed Promotion (26%), and Food Promotion (29%). She commented on the Commission's achievements, including a new logo, website, and five new trade/grower shows in Mexico and Canada to promote seed. She also addressed the 2003 Commission plans for food including, educating the educators, a nationwide recipe contest, and press and magazine articles. The Commission's 2003 plan for seeds includes, strengthening associations, working to facilitate trade, and appearing in trade and grower shows, with growers and dealers in Mexico and Canada.

Discussion between Committee members and Diana Caldwell included:

-What is cost to raise an acre of beans;

-How does the transfer of funds work with the peso and dollar;

-How does the Commission view the closed border to Mexico issue;

-What does the Commission receive from check offs.

Presentation on Carbon Sequestration David Ferguson, Agricultural Program and Riparian Specialist of the Idaho Soil Conservation Commission, was given the Floor to present to the Committee information on Carbon Sequestration. Mr. Ferguson gave the Committee a review of the Idaho law 22-2501 the set up of a Carbon Sequestration Advisory Committee and their duties, as well as the duties of the Soil Conservation Commission. He introduced four Advisory Committee members present at the meeting: Jerry Nicolescu, Paul Mann, Julie Shain, and James Baker. Chairman Williams welcomed them to the Committee meeting. Mr. Ferguson then gave his definition of carbon sequestration and went into the global warming issue. He reported on the international and national activities that affects or encourages carbon sequestration, such as, the Kyoto protocol and President Bush's initiatives, state and city activities, as well as carbon market activities.

Discussion among Committee members and Mr. Ferguson included:

-Whether there was a law enforcing carbon-----;

-Was there another regulatory agency invoked credits.

Mr. Ferguson reported on a two-day work session of the Advisory Committee where the committee worked through potential practices for application and effectiveness in carbon sequestration and offsetting GHGs (greenhouse gas). The result of the work session was a list of high, moderate and low potential for state-wide carbon sequestration.

The Carbon Sequestration Advisory Committee recommends:

  1. Maintain the carbon sequestration advisory committee to monitor ongoing developments, facilitate economic analysis, facilitate research activities, and provide information to landowners;
  2. Initiate a carbon market pilot project (includes case studies);
  3. Improve landowners' understanding of carbon sequestration and climate change;
  4. Enhance carbon sequestration research relevant to Idaho;
  5. Complete carbon sequestration and greenhouse gas baseline analyses to prepare for future carbon sequestration markets;
  6. Further study the potential economic benefits to Idaho landowners and the state through carbon markets;
  7. Explore requiring carbon participants to be registered within the state;
  8. Explore avenues to increase carbon sequestration in the state;
  9. Explore the potential for improving the production and use of biofuels in the state, and their economic benefit.


Discussion between Committee members and Mr. Ferguson included the following topics:

-Who is going to establish carbon regulations;

-Are there laws on carbon dioxide caps;

-Is there legislation that regulates the industries;

-Are there other regulatory agencies that have credit programs;

-Can private organizations go out and buy carbon credits;

-Is this going on without legislation, through an intermediary process;

-Bush's "climate vision";

-the Kyoto protocol;

-developed and undeveloped countries and their plant productions and emission levels.

ADJOURNMENT Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 4:02 p.m.




DATE: February 27, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 433
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: Richard Lawson, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Darrel McRoberts, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Bob Hillman, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Bob Naerebout, Idaho Dairymen; Greg Nelson, Idaho Farm Bureau Federation; Della Johnson; J. Kent Foster, Idaho Association of Soil Conservation Districts; Bill Chisholm; Brent Olmstead, Milk Producers of Idaho.
CONVENED: Chairman Williams called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m.
Announcements Chairman Williams announced the sad news that Dr. Bob Hillman submitted his resignation to the Department of Agriculture and he will be accepting a job in his home state of Texas. Dr. Hillman has served 23 years for the State of Idaho. Dr. Hillman is respected across the nation for his abilities, experience, and common sense approach to problems in the animal industry and he will be sincerely missed. The Committee members expressed their feelings about Dr. Hillman leaving the Department of Agriculture.
S 1089 Relating to Animal Cruelty: to amend the Animal Cruelty Code to provide the Department of Agriculture the opportunity to assess civil penalties not to exceed $5,000 for each offense.
MOTION: Senator Stennett explained that this legislation is intended to give the Department of Agriculture another tool to ensure compliance with the Animal Cruelty Code. County prosecutors are not always willing to take on the cost of pursuing animal cruelty cases. Senator Stennett spoke about the difference between criminal investigations and what tools the department should have in cases where county prosecutors do not pursue the cases. Senator Stennett reported that since 2002 the ISDA has investigated 274 cases. Of those 274 cases, 12 are being prosecuted, and 18 are investigated and have not reached prosecution. Therefore, 11 percent of the cases are presented for prosecution. And 80-90 percent of the cases are not criminal cases. To pursue a criminal case the prosecutor must be able to prove who, what, where, when and how beyond a reasonable doubt. The owner must be proven to have knowledge and acquiescence to be prosecuted. The civil penalty gives the Department of Agriculture a public policy and civil tool to fine a person.

Discussion among committee members included:

-section 25-3501 and the definition of an "animal" and whether there were any problems with the relation to animals in general;

-the issuance of a civil penalty to owners of various animals;

-the use of fines as a preventative measure;

-the shooting of diseased animals;

-does this legislation make two entities going after the same person;

-how the ISDA works with the prosecutors on investigations;

-what is the reason for further legislation, if the Magic Valley case is being criminally prosecuted;

-how much proof does the ISDA need to have before it files a complaint or issues as civil penalty;

-how will civil penalty be issued, as a warning to prosecution;

-the Dept. of Ag's main motive of correcting problems;

-are there ISDA laws that issue civil and criminal penalties;

-the interpretation of the bill pertaining to the proof ISDA needs to determine whether a fine should be issued;

-does the current law work well or did the ISDA ask for this addition;

-have the cases ISDA worked with prosecutors on been isolated to agricultural animals;

-could the local prosecutors take cases the prosecutor's office is not interested in, like the maltreatment of pets, to the Department of Agriculture so they ISDA could envoke their civil authority in these situations.

Bill Chisholm was given the floor to testify on S 1089. He passed out a letter from the Idaho Rural Council. He stated the bill is a needed piece of legislation. He said that sick and dying animals that are left out for several days without food and water is cruelty. He thinks its important to give ISDA a tool. He urged the committee to do pass S 1089.

Bob Naerebout, Idaho Dairymen's Association, was given the floor to testify on S 1089. The Magic Valley dairy issue has given dairy industry a black eye. He spoke in opposition of the bill stating the reason for the legislation is because of one case and the Dept. of Agriculture hasn't asked for the legislation. He thinks ISDA has enough authority with being able to remove animals. Criminal infractions have a greater stigma attached to it than the issuance of civil infractions. He stated the ISDA did a good job in dealing with the Magic Valley dairy issue.

A Motion was made by Senator Noh and seconded by Senator Kennedy that S 1089 be sent to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. A substitute motion was made by Senator Burtenshaw and seconded by Senator Noble that S 1089 be held in Committee. Chairman Williams called for a roll call vote on the substitute motion. Senators Burtenshaw, Goedde, Noble, and Williams voted aye; Senators Noh, Schroeder, Gannon, Stennett, and Kennedy voted nay. The motion failed 4 to 5. Chairman Williams called for a roll call vote on the original motion with Senators Noh, Schroeder, Gannon, Stennett, and Kennedy voting aye, and Senators Burtenshaw, Goedde, Noble, and Williams voting nay. The motion carried 5 to 4. Senator Stennett will sponsor the bill in the Senate.

H 105 Relating to the State Seed Advisory Board: to add the Idaho Seed Analysts Association as a permanent member of the Advisory Board. He Idaho Seed Analysts Association member would add technical expertise and have the same voting privileges as other board members.

Richard Lawson, Department of Agriculture

Senator Goedde made a motion to send H 105 to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. Senator Noble seconded the motion. The motion carried by a Voice Vote. Senator Goedde will sponsor the bill in the Senate.

H 106 Relating to Exotic Animals: to regulate, up to and including the prohibition of, the importation and possession of deleterious exotic animals. These exotic animals pose an increasing threat to Idaho's agriculture, wildlife, and environment.

John Chatburn, Department of Agriculture

Senator Gannon made a motion to send H 106 to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. Senator Burtenshaw seconded the motion. The motion carried by a Voice Vote. Senator Gannon will sponsor the bill in the Senate.

H 108 Relating to Indemnity Payments for Livestock with Brucellosis: to reconcile conflicting provisions regarding indemnity payments for livestock condemned and destroyed due to brucellosis infection.

Dr. Bob Hillman, Department of Agriculture

Senator Burtenshaw made a motion to send H 108 to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. Senator Goedde seconded the motion. The motion carried by a Voice Vote. Senator Burtenshaw will sponsor the bill in the Senate.

H 109 Relating to Soil Conservation Districts: to re-state the roles and responsibilities for the Soil Conservation Districts and Commission in more understandable, modern language. And consolidate into one section the powers and responsibilities of the Commission.

Jerry Nicolescu, Idaho Soil Conservation Commission, stated the legislation is a housekeeping measure to reflect a number of changes in funding the RCRDP grant and Water Quality Program for agriculture cost-share component in previous legislative sessions.

Senator Noble made a motion to send H 109 to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. Senator Burtenshaw seconded the motion. The motion carried by a Voice Vote. Senator Noble will sponsor the bill in the Senate. Senator Stennett will co-sponsor the bill.

H 157 Relating to Agriculture Labor Act: to repeal the Idaho Agricultural Labor Act. The Act was enacted in 1972 and there has never been a request for action under the act.

Dwight Johnson, Department of Labor, state that since its creation over 25 years ago, the Agricultural Labor Board has never received a petition or a complaint and, consequently, has never had a hearing. The Board met five times throughout the 1970s.

Senator Goedde made a motion to send H 157 to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. Senator Burtenshaw seconded the motion. The motion carried by a Voice Vote. Senator Goedde will sponsor the bill in the Senate.

ADJOURNMENT Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 5:10 p.m.




DATE: March 4, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
MINUTES: A motion was made by Senator Burtenshaw and seconded by Senator Kennedy that the minutes of February 25th be approved as written. The motion carried by a voice vote.
GUESTS: Mike Telford, Idaho Crop Improvement; George Doval, Boise County Commission; Butch Suor; Dan Crowell, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Sandy Donley; John Chatburn, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Mike Cooper, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Darrel McRoberts, Idaho State Department of Agriculture.
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:05 p.m.
COMMISSION REPORT

Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute

Michael Becerra, Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute (IFQAI), was given the floor to present the annual report. He reported on IFQAI's relationships with Idaho universities that are instrumental in the efficiency of the Institute. He said the clientele was increasing and the budget was adequate for the time being. He thanked Sara Braasch for her guidance, as well as Representative Darrell Bolz, IFQAI's new chairman, for doing a great job. Mr. Becerra relayed the importance of the interns that work in the lab through the College of Southern Idaho. There have been 13 graduates and the students as well as increasing their education and earning college credits, go on to enter the science or medical fields.

Mr. Becerra updated the Committee on the Oust situation, the IFQAI analyzed beet seeds and soil collected by farmers in the attempt to show developmental problems in the seedlings that could be attributed to Oust. IFQAI states that it was reasonably successful, the lab anticipated 1,000 to 2,000 samples and they received only 157. Mr. Becerra thought the Institute had false expectations about the numbers. Prior to IFQAI having adequate facilities the chemical analysis was done in Bozeman, Montana. The Institute did break even on the cost of planning for the analysis and the execution of it. The data received from the samples will be used in a lawsuit involving farmers. Mr. Becerra hopes the data is helpful to the farmers in the lawsuit.

The Institute has increased their efficiency, which makes the lab more self-sufficient, which in turn reduces costs. The Institute has reduced costs by one-third. Mr. Becerra reported IFQAI lost 16% of their budget this year, with the state hold backs and loss of clientele, the cut was $55,000 off previous revenue amounts. The Institute, however, expects to break even this year and anticipates another two to three percent cut next year. Mr. Becerra is concerned about the additional percentage cuts but anticipates creating a larger client base.

Discussion among Committee members included:

-Has the lab received requests from private labs;

-Is the lab able to handle bioterrorism;

-How many years has the Institute been doing well;

-What is a typical busy week like in the Institute;

-Does the Institute do test plotting?

H 129 H 129 Relating to a Plant Health Certificate for seed potatoes: to amend Title 22, Chapter 5, Idaho Code to require that all potatoes offered for sale, sold or delivered under contract into or within the state of Idaho for planting in the state be accompanied by a "plant health certificate." Mike Cooper, Idaho Department of Agriculture, was given the Floor to present H 129. Mr. Cooper stated currently the law allows for a certificate of inspection to accompany the seed, but that certificate only shows the quality, grade and condition of the seed potatoes at the time of purchase. The Idaho Crop Improvement Association, ICIA, the seed potato certification agency in Idaho, will use the most commonly used plant health certificate "North American Certified Seed Potato Health Certificate." The plant health certificate will give the generational history and field inspection history behind the seed lots being purchased. The ICIA will begin using the certificate this summer. This legislation also requires that incoming seed potatoes meet the same disease tolerances for a particular generation as required by Idaho standards set forth by ICIA or be down-graded to the next equivalent generation according to Idaho standards. The legislation clarifies where uncertified seed can be planted and performs housekeeping by eliminating outdated language that was restrictive.

Discussion among committee members included:

-What is the penalty for failing to obtain a certificate, and for illegal planting;

-If plant is known to come in from a diseased area, what is the fine;

-What is the cost of inspection to certify the seed;

-Is this plant health certificate done through a visual inspection, or how are diseases known if they are not visible?

Testimony Mike Telford, Chairman of the Potato Advisory Committee of the Idaho Crop Improvement Association (ICIA), and a seed grower from Lincoln county testified on H 129. The ICIA supports the H 129. The plant health certificate is something that has been worked on for a number of years at the national level by the National Potato Council. The plant health certificate levels the playing field as far as the type of information required to report on the certificate. The other issue regarding the import of seeds, is for any seed coming into the state must be at least the same standard and quality of that which is in the state.

Discussion among Mr. Telford and committee members included:

-Who regulates the plant health certificate in other states;

-How much does the process cost?

Motion: A motion was made by Senator Noh that H 129 be sent to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. Senator Stennett seconded the motion. The motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Williams will sponsor the bill.
H 127 H 127 Relating to Private Feeding of big game animals: adds to existing law to authorize the Division of Animal Industries of the ISDA to promulgate rules for the regulation and prohibition of certain private feeding of big game animals, with the cooperation of the Department of Fish & Game (IDFG). John Chatburn, Deputy Administrator of the Division of Animal Industries of the Idaho State Department of Agriculture, was given the Floor to present H 127. The purpose of the legislation is to provide for the regulation of private feeding of big game animals in areas of the state where issues of disease transmission among big game animals, and from big game animals to livestock are a concern.

The issue of the brucellosis infected cattle herd last spring brought the need for this authority to a head. ISDA will cooperate with the IDFG in designating areas where ISDA will regulate the private feeding of big game animals, and also in the promulgation of rules. ISDA believes that for them to bring a rule back to the Idaho legislature and to get the rule through the legislative process, it will need the expertise of the people at IDFG. For instance, if the bill passes, the first rule that will done this summer would be for regulation for private feeding in the area of eastern Idaho, adjacent to Yellowstone and Wyoming. ISDA will use the data collected by IDFG, in conjuction with ISDA, over the last few years on the elk movements and where the brucellosis contacted elk that come from Wyoming and Yellowstone winter in Montana, where they actually go, to help the ISDA designate the areas where the private feeding would be regulated.

The legislation states that only persons who purposely or knowingly provide supplemental feed to big game animals are to be regulated by the rule provisions. ISDA was asked numerous times whether or not persons who are feeding their cows, or horses, and if elk or several elk wander in and eat with the animals, is that person purposely and knowingly providing supplemental feed? ISDA does not believe this would constitute purposely and knowingly providing supplemental feed, however, it does not presume to know what the outcome of a rule would be during the negotiated rule-making process. However, an individual inside an area that was to be regulated that persisted in not allowing ISDA or IDFG to either, trap and move those animals or to reestablish the migration routes, would be potentially in violation of the rules.



In the legislation the rule making authority does not extend to the supplemental feeding activities of IDFG. IDFG conducts their own supplemental feeding activities and ISDA believes they will work closely together particularly in the area of eastern Idaho and brucellosis issue; ISDA is not proposing to regulate their feeding of big game animals.

If this bill passes, ISDA will follow the same process it has used in the past, for the development of rules with the appointment of an advisory committee and a negotiated rule-making process. ISDA is pleased with the results it receives through this process.

Discussion among committee members and Mr. Chatburn regarding H 127 included the following:

Senator Schroeder asked for clarification on what Mr. Chatburn means by reestablish migration, what does this entail? Mr. Chatburn stated, "for instance, to reduce the necessity for winter feeding of elk, primarily, is to break their habituation to certain ranches that have traditionally either allowed them to eat with their cattle or provided additional supplemental feed for them. By trapping the elk and testing them, and moving negative elk on down to the traditional winter range, to try and establish that they don't stop there to eat, that they move on by."

Senator Burtenshaw asked about the wording prohibition of certain private feeding is ISDA talking about no one being able to do it, or just certain areas? Mr. Chatburn stated ISDA believes that in order for them to bring back a rule that addresses disease control to the legislature, with any amount of credibility, they must identify areas where, for example, the brucellosis affected elk have the greater possibility of intermingling with cattle or being found on private property and spreading the disease. Mr. Chatburn stated this would involve drawing a line on the map, encircling that area, which in the rule making process is probably going to be the toughest issue. Senator Burtenshaw asked then for those people in Garden Valley who want to feed the elk, this will not affect them? Mr. Chatburn said the state and citizens of the state feed the elk in various areas across the state, Garden Valley, the Wood River area, Stanley, and Salmon, and some in the south eastern area of the state; so long as there wasn't a disease issue. This bill does have a statewide implication. If, for instance, tuberculosis (TB) was detected in the elk herd in the Garden Valley area, then ISDA would begin writing a rule to regulate the feeding in that area. Unless there was a disease issue in the area then this bill would have no effect on the feeding in that area, or any of the rest of the state. The only area that Idaho currently has is the area in eastern Idaho which is influenced by the brucellosis affected elk out of Yellowstone and Wyoming.

Senator Noh asked about the ISDA rule making process for the areas of the state; would ISDA issue a separate ruling for each feeding ground? Mr. Chatburn envisions a rule, created through the negotiated rule making process, that would have a section that talked about the area of eastern Idaho, giving boundaries to it, where feeding would be regulated, then that rule would probably go on to explain how that is regulated or prohibited. If ISDA came up with another disease in another area of the state ISDA would go back and amend the rule, inserting another section, that talks about the boundaries of that geographic area. Somewhat similar to ISDA seed potato rules where there are specific geographic boundaries for different areas. Senator Noh asked if there was anything in the legislation that would require ISDA to do that, wouldn't that be an option for ISDA? Mr. Chatburn said in discussing the idea with Dr. Hillman, Director of Division of Animal Industries, ISDA, the only way that ISDA can justify a disease control rule is if ISDA lays out the area and explains scientifically and epidemiologically why that area is a disease issue.

Senator Kennedy stated he had trouble equating the private feeding of big game animals with the brucellosis disease and detection in southeast Idaho; must there be private feeding to spread disease among elk? Mr. Chatburn stated that it was not necessarily the case, however, the brucellosis disease in eastern Idaho was an instance where an owner chose to, against advice, feed elk in close proximity to cattle. Several of the diseases of great concern to ISDA like brucellosis and tuberculosis are spread amongst wildlife and from wildlife to livestock in close proximity, in particular in winter feeding episodes, however, there does not need to be feeding on private ground in order for that to happen. Senator Kennedy asked if there could be the spread of disease with feeding in large concentrations of big game whether the feeding is done by private individuals or the Dept. of Fish & Game? Mr. Chatburn stated this could happen, however, the ISDA has developed a very good relationship in working on the issue in eastern Idaho and they work together on the brucellosis issue. They look for ways to limit the amount of supplemental feed that is necessary, including habitat improvement projects on private and public land. Senator Kennedy asked about the original bill Mr. Chatburn drafted. Mr. Chatburn said Legislative Services rewrote the bill with clearer language, and ISDA believes the bill still does the same thing, because they don't think that under this law ISDA can regulate the private feeding of big game animals unless there is a valid disease concern that can be articulated well enough to persuade the legislature when the rules come back for review. Senator Kennedy read Mr. Chatburn's Statement of Purpose (SOP) for H 127, he said this wording is exactly like the wording of Mr. Chatburn's proposed bill, that he presented to Legislative Services. Mr. Chatburn stated this was correct. Senator Kennedy read ...areas of the state... regulated or prohibited... a copy was presented to members of the Committee; several constituents believe the real purpose of the bill is to ban all types of private feeding of big game animals in Boise County regardless of what ISDA intentions are in southeastern Idaho. Mr. Chatburn stated he knew of the concerns. Senator Kennedy asked if the legislature enacted the bill in its present form without any reference to establishing rules in various areas of the state, and ISDA promulgated a rule, is it conceivable that ISDA could at the request of IDFG ban all types of feeding? Mr. Chatburn believes something like this is highly unlikely because of the diverse backgrounds and wide range of people that make up the Advisory Committee. Mr. Chatburn does not think the rule making process would go beyond the scope of providing for disease control. Senator Kennedy asked whether there has been any diseases in elk or deer in the southwestern part of Idaho? Mr. Chatburn stated he wasn't the most qualified person to answer the question. ISDA and state wildlife veterinarians have never found brucellosis, tuberculosis, or Chronic Wasting Disease anywhere except for the brucellosis area in eastern Idaho. Senator Kennedy asked if Mr. Chatburn had any conceivable notion of a situation that he could think of that the ISDA would be inclined to adopt a rule for regulation which would completely outlaw the assistance of private people to help feed elk in Boise County, absent of any disease situation? Mr. Chatburn stated he did not believe this legislation gives ISDA any authority to make any rule to outlaw private feeding anywhere if ISDA can not articulate a valid disease concern. Senator Kennedy asked if ISDA through its Advisory Committee established regulations and rules under which it was proper or appropriate to undertake the winter feeding of big game animals in emergency winter situations, and if private individuals elected to try to assist the IDFG in implementing that program, do you see anything wrong, or unhealthy or disease-prone if private individuals were to follow those specific guidelines and assist the Dept. of feeding big game animals? Mr. Chatburn stated there were two issues, if the bill was law and ISDA had written a rule for eastern Idaho where the brucellosis is an issue, then he thinks that inside that area, emergency feeding and how it is done would be worked out between ISDA and IDFG, which is a different situation than outside the disease control issue, where IDFG winter feeding advisory committees for the various regions have their function under the IDFG. He doesn't see why, outside of the disease areas, people wouldn't be working with IDFG.

Senator Stennett asked for the definition of supplemental feeding? Mr. Chatburn stated that it was not defined in the statute, but would be defined in the rule making process. Mr. Chatburn doesn't presume to know what would come out of the negotiated rule making process but he believes the definition of supplemental feeding to be "providing hay or other supplements to big game animals and providing it directly to the animals within the area designed by ISDA rules where private feeding, for disease purposes, could be regulated." Senator Stennett asked if someone who feeds elk on their alfalfa field during hunting season is considered supplemental feeding those elk, is he knowingly feeding them? Mr. Chatburn stated that he would not be. Supplemental feeding would be something that is provided to the animals. Growing a crop would be a stretch of the definition of supplemental feeding. Senator Stennett stated that with the private ground issue in this legislation is there any way the ISDA would use rules to prohibit people from bating animals onto their property? Mr. Chatburn stated that if the ISDA does not have a disease control issue they can't write a rule, in good conscience, and defend it in front of the legislature. Senator Stennett asked if the individual is feeding elk that Dept. of Fish & Game don't want him to feed, and there is no interaction with any livestock, ISDA will not write a rule that prohibits that individual from feeding? Mr. Chatburn stated that is not what he is telling the Committee. If this bill passes, and ISDA draws a boundary line on eastern Idaho, ISDA would propose to regulate and/or prohibit the private feeding even if there wasn't a cattle herd fed in association with it, because the disease is prevalent in the elk herd in that area, by concentrating those animals in that area there is potential to spread the disease outside the area. Senator Stennett stated that there are statutory provisions in the code that carve out counties for disease purposes, why isn't this in the form of a statute for eastern Idaho rather than statewide? Mr. Chatburn stated there are, for example, under the brucellosis law Title 25, Chapter 6, ISDA can declare a county a brucellosis eradication area, but that only applies to livestock and how cattle are dealt with. Senator Stennett asked why ISDA didn't apply that code section to big game animals, rewrite that section to have ISDA have the ability under those rules? Mr. Chatburn stated that while brucellosis is the current problem in eastern Idaho, ISDA believes disease control is a wider issue. He reported on neighboring states with disease outbreaks.

Senator Kennedy stated he believes the ISDA should have the authority to establish rules and regulations regarding disease control that affect livestock and elk and deer herds; it appears that it doesn't make any difference who is feeding the elk, whether it be private individuals or IDFG. If there is a disease situation that the ISDA needs to promulgate rules affected how their going to be fed in a certain area, why shouldn't the same feeding rules apply equally well to IDFG as they would to private individuals? Mr. Chatburn stated that from a disease control perspective he didn't think it makes any difference, however, the ISDA believes that if this law passes, and an area is designated in eastern Idaho, that IDFG will cooperate with ISDA in addressing any supplemental feeding in that area and how they would do it and when they would do it. Senator Kennedy asked if IDFG doesn't have to cooperate, according to the bill, because the bill exempts them from ISDA rules? Mr. Chatburn stated that strictly speaking it was possible. Senator Kennedy asked why ISDA didn't draft the law to not single out private individuals or the IDFG but rather that if ISDA needed to promulgate rules for disease control that it would be universally applied to whoever was going to feed the animals? Mr. Chatburn replied that the decision was made when ISDA proposed the idea for the bill to the Governor's office. A number of these issues were discussed and it was decided by ISDA, in conjunction with the Governor's office, that this bill would not pertain to the supplemental feeding activities of the IDFG.

Senator Burtenshaw asked if the intent of the legislation is to not feed elk and cattle together, so that in an area where they were not commingled ISDA would not have a problem? Mr. Chatburn stated the primary force of the bill is for the commingling of cattle and elk right now, however, if Idaho is to have action against disease control, it is going to have to address the private feeding of big game animals whether in conjunction with livestock or not. Senator Burtenshaw asked if there can be the spread of disease if the elk and livestock are not together? Mr. Chatburn stated that this is why ISDA would use the data collected from the IDFG, with money ISDA received from a brucellosis grant from the federal government for the last three or four years. There has been radial telemetry on the elk, identifying and mapping the livestock operations and grazing in the area, so that ISDA can see where everything is and see what time they are there. If elk are not affected with brucellosis and never migrate in where cows are then it's a different issue than those areas where the elk are on one feed ground one winter, and on another feed ground the next winter, and on a ranch the next winter.

Senator Noh stated he thought H 127 was good legislation. He thought that there were some people who seem feeding elk is big business, drawing people in to watch. This legislation says that the ISDA can only promulgate rules in order to provide for disease control and protection of health and human safety. It is clearly in the interest of IDFG and domestic livestock producers, represented by the ISDA, to keep diseases out both groups of animals. If big game animals become diseased it is a threat to other animals and livestock. The world is fraught with major livestock diseases at an enormous cost because people didn't want an adequate regulatory program. This legislation looks to be responsibly drawn, the safeguards are clear, and the rules come to the legislature. Senator Noh stated that IDFG and ISDA would have a common law, if there is a disease problem, the IDFG will be looking into their own feeding programs, and they don't want to feed the animals because of the great cost.

The Committee then heard public testimony on H 127.

George Dovel, Chairman of Boise County Interim Winter Feeding Advisory Committee and authority to testify on the behalf of Boise County Board of Commissioners. Mr. Dovel stated that Boise County provided substantial input into the IDFG criteria for emergency big game winter feeding, and in the current IDFG Commission emergency big game feeding policy. Mr. Dovel, and the people he represents, supports the legislation whereby the Division of Animal Industries (ISDA) is authorized to designate by rule areas of the state and situations where, for disease control purposes or to protect health and human safety, the feeding of big game animals may be regulated or prohibited. With the exception of deleting the word "private" feeding, this is exactly the language that was provided in the original ISDA draft. But when H 127 was printed the language "designate areas of the state and situations" was deleted in subparagraph (1), thereby changing the meaning from addressing problem areas to promulgating vague rules covering the entire state of Idaho, including areas with no known potential disease problems. There are two reasons why Mr. Dovel, and the people he represents, are reluctant to support H 127 as it exists; this language is overly vague and does not address the specific areas or situations, which need to be addressed; also, Mr. Dovel, and the people he represents, are opposed to the exclusion from the proposed rules of supplemental feeding activities conducted by the IDFG in subparagraph (4) for several reasons. Unless the amendments suggested are incorported in H 127, Mr. Dovel urged the Committee to return the bill to the Division of Animal Industries to be rewritten so as to specifically address problem areas.

A copy of Mr. Dovel's testimony is on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office.

Sandy Donley, resident of Garden Valley, Idaho. Mr. Donley spoke against H 127. Mr. Donley stated he supports the emergency winter feeding of big game animals, and in the past 49 years there has been a handful of winters that snow conditions merited emergency feeding. He stated that in the past IDFG has not been able to recognize emergency situations until it is too late. Mr. Donley realizes that spread of disease is a concern, but he does not believe that proper private feeding is creating the unhealthy concentration of animals. He stated the late feeding practice and the unwillingness to feed upper historic feed stations by IDFG is a far greater cause for game concentration and wildlife domestic livestock interaction. Mr. Donley has participated in private game feeding since 1992. He feeds under the direction of several veterinarians and two nutritionists. He provided copies of letters from these individuals to the Committee members. Mr. Donley requested that H 127 be amended by deleting lines 16, 17 and 18, as well as lines 24, 25 and 26. He would also like to see some language included that would allow for some coordination with appropriate County Commissioners and the ISDA.

A copy of Mr. Donley's testimony and letters are on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office.

Butch Suor, resident of Boise County. Mr. Suor spoke against H 127.

Mr. Suor spoke about the statement of purpose on H 127, he thought that a change should be made to add "to affected areas" to the first line of the statement of purpose. Taking the emphasis from statewide to only those problem areas to regulate the private feeding. He stated he did not support recreation feeding, only emergency feeding. He stated that by paying for tags (deer, elk, antelope), it paid for habitat, restoration, and emergency feeding. He stated that IDFG doesn't like to emergency feed, but the fees from those tags pay for it. He said he doesn't understand why IDFG views the big game in the state as a burden and not a resource. The success rate of hunting, generates out of state money, and out of state money is diminishing. He said that there needs to be better management practices. He has experience with raising cattle in elk country and knows that the elk will come down in winter. He stated there are three outfitters in the Boise County area that count the number of bull elk and that half the elk population is gone.

Senator Schroeder asked Mr. Donley where the money came from to provide the feed? Mr. Donley stated most of the funds come from him personally and there is a citizen account open, Private and Wild Game Feeding; people, such as veterinarians, donate items and or funds. Mr. Donley stated that 100% of funds goes towards the purchase of feed.

A motion was made by Senator Noh to send H 127 to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. The motion was seconded by Senator Burtenshaw. A roll call vote was taken. Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon and Williams voted aye. Senators Stennett and Kennedy voted nay. Senator Noble was absent. The motion carried with six aye and two nay. Senator Noh will sponsor the bill.

RS 12940C1 Senator Noh asked the Agricultural Affairs Committee for their consent to send RS 12940C1 regarding to the limitation on budget requests from property taxes; to exempt pest control and mosquito abatement activities from the cap of three percent, upon a public health issue or economic interests adversely affected by insects or by invasive species, to a privileged committee. There was a unanimous vote by the Committee.
Adjournment: Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 5:05 p.m.




DATE: March 6, 2003
TIME: 3:30 pm
PLACE: Room 433
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Burtenshaw, Goedde
GUESTS: Dr. Richard Parker, College of Southern Idaho, Agriculture Program; David Doeringsfeld, Port of Lewiston.
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:40 p.m.
Gubernatorial Appointment Dr. Richard Parker, College of Southern Idaho (CSI) appeared before the committee regarding his reappointment to the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute for a term expiring July 1, 2006. Dr. Parker is from Twin Falls, Idaho. He has been with the CSI for 18 years, and has worked in the agriculture program, information technology, and marketing management. He is the Division Director at CSI, and manages the Ag department, and works with the agriculture program. He has extensive education in agriculture. He lived and attended school in Iowa, Canada, and Utah. Before he moved to Idaho he lived in California and worked with Dr. M.E. Ensminger on writing agricultural textbooks. He stated he emphatically believes in the agriculture program at CSI and that the Administration has taken chances with planning that they trust people with. Dr. Parker has been involved in education of the interns at the IFQAI. He thinks the most important thing done at the IFQAI is the involvements of students in the lab, students learn by doing and they receive a certificate in laboratory technology within a years time, students earn credits in this program as well. The students have gone on to school or gone on into the sciences industry.

Senator Noh asked if Dr. Parker ran the intern program at IFQAI? Senator Noh mentioned the list of interns Michael Becerra gave the Committee at the last meeting, and the fact that he was impressed with the list of interns and the places where those students are employed.

Senator Kennedy asked Dr. Parker if any staff have done research on alternative methods other than burning crops? Dr. Parker stated the Magic Valley doesn't have environment where the smoke stays in the area long, it do up and out. Dr. Parker stated the thing to think about would probably be a chemical issue, and what would be the most efficient, and perhaps there is something that could be done to the plant, by genetic engineering that could change the way the plant produces seed. Senator Kennedy asked if this was a realistic alternative to be looked at in the future? Dr. Parker stated it is realistic, with the improvements of mapping of plant genetics and how sciences have developed so fast. He said it would entail the identification of the gene.

Senator Kennedy also asked what Dr. Parker thought about the dairy odor issue? Dr. Parker said he was thinking of it in relation to the lab, he didn't see the IFQAI lab involved. He thought perhaps the lab could put some research into what the components of the bad smell are, whether ammonia, or hydrogen sulfide gas, etc, he believes there may be other things that could be making the smell. Dr. Parker also had an idea about an environmental horticulture program, bioremediation with plants. With some planning with the Horticulture program he would like to see if there weren't a plant that could surround the lagoon to absorb some of the components around the lagoon.

Chairman Williams commented on the willingness of the outstanding and qualified individuals within the state that devote their time and service to Idaho's Boards and Labs.

The Committee will vote on Dr. Parker's appointment at the next meeting.

Presentation David Doeringsfeld, Administrator of the Port of Lewiston, was given the floor to present a report on what is going on at the Port of Lewiston, ways the legislature could help, or things that need to be done. Mr. Doeringsfeld thanked the Committee for the invitation to present to the members an overview of port Intermodal operations and to discuss current issues. He started his presentation with the mission of the Port of Lewiston. He stated the Port of Lewiston has three primary objectives: intermodal transportation, economic development, and international trade. Mr. Doeringsfeld spoke about the economy of North Central Idaho in order to give the Committee members understanding of the transportation issues of the Port of Lewiston. He stated the economy is based on Ag and Timber. He stated the following facts:

Wheat- 100% of all wheat shipped on the river is exported.

Pulses- 70-80% of Pulses grown in US.

Pulp & Paper - 60% of export container volume.

Regional Ag Market is a niche market with 80-90% of production exported.

Mr. Doeringsfeld went on to discuss the intermodal transportation of the Port of Lewiston which is dictated by the geography and economy of North Central Idaho. The river, the rail, and roads. The bulk grain shipments average 26,000,000 bushels per year or 800,000 tons, and the barge transportation savings is about 1/3 the cost of rail, and 1/5 the cost of trucking. Container shipments experienced a 160% growth rate throughout the 1990s, however, 60% of the products are from Potlatch Corporation, and due to the longshoreman strikes the Potlatch Corporation was bypassing the Port of Lewiston for a time, and are now getting things back to regular. As a result of this the Port of Lewiston has laid off half their workers, and the volumes are cut on containers by 50%, they are hopeful this will turn around within the next six months. Senator Noh asked about the reason of the enormous variability in the bulk shipments? Mr. Doeringsfeld stated the bulk shipments over the years represented logs and several years the Port made a decision to no longer deal with logs, so those shipments now by bulk are simply raw pulp.

There are also issues on dredging, and salmon recovery. Because of the ONM dredging lawsuit in lower Granite pool, and now the Port is light loading the barges. On the salmon recovery issue, the Corp of Engineers has recommended under an environmental impact statement that there doesn't have to be a removal of dams to recover fish runs, and the last three years of good salmon and steelhead runs have alleviated some of the focus on dams.

Mr. Doeringsfeld stated that rail abandonment is a major issue. There is a new owner for Spaulding to Cottonwood line, the Cottonwood to Grangeville is abandoned. The Port of Lewiston is isolated in the state and its expensive to build roads, the biggest detriment to shipping is the highway system connecting north and south Idaho. Improvements are needed to Hwy 95 and Hwy 12.

Mr. Doeringsfeld said a ton of cargo can be shipped from Lewiston to Tokyo cheaper than it can to Chicago, and a farmer in Montana will spend four times what a farmer in Lewiston will spend to get a bushel of wheat to Portland. He reported that the Port of Lewiston has two industrial parks, approximately 200 acres, a business and technology park, approximately 40 acres, as well as, 67,000 square feet of business incubator space, a warehouse with 150,000 square feet, which all contribute to the economic development. Mr. Doeringsfeld reported that there are about 1900 jobs created from all the Port of Lewiston economic development activities.

Mr. Doeringsfeld said the Port works the Department of Agriculture, the Wheat Commission, and Grain Producers to host trade delegations.

A copy of the handouts provided by David Doeringsfeld is on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office.

Adjournment: Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 4:15 p.m.




DATE: March 11, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 433
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Senator Goedde
MINUTES: The motion was made by Senator Noble and seconded to approve the minutes of February 18th, 2003. The motion carried by a voice vote.
GUESTS: Laura Johnson, Marketing division of Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Peter Mundt, Marketing division of Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Wes Jones, examiner, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Russ Dapsauski, Program Manager, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Dar Olberding, Idaho Grain Producers Association; Dennis Tanikuni, Idaho Farm Bureau Federation; Darrel McRoberts, Idaho Farm Bureau Federation; Brad Hoaglun, Idaho Alfalfa & Clover Seed Growers Association.
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:03 p.m.
Gubernatorial Appointment Vote On Gubernatorial Appointment of Dr. Richard Parker to the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute for a term expiring July 1, 2006. Senator Noh recommended the Committee confirm Dr. Parker to the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute. The motion was seconded and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Noh will sponsor the confirmation.
H 102 H 102 Relating to Bonded Warehouses; amending Idaho Code to restrict the time in which certain contracts are eligible for payment from the Commodity Indemnity Fund. Dar Olberding, Idaho Grain Producers Association, was given the Floor to present H 102. Mr. Olberding gave some history of the Commodity Indemnity account, which was created to help bail out the farmers when an elevator or a warehouse became insolvent. The program has worked well, and it has saved a number of people from going under. In the last few years there were some warehouses that had problems and did fail, and partly due to NPE contracts (No Price Established), Idaho Code refers to them as price-later contracts. In an NPE contract assets are transferred. When a farmer puts his grain into an NPE he gives title to the elevator, and the elevator can borrow money or do whatever he wants with that grain. The idea behind it is to be able to move the grain further down the line in the process. The contracts are a valuable tool, but the problem is when the contracts were left over years, for large amounts of money, and with the insolvency of the elevators, it became a contributing problem. Therefore the industry thought that by limiting the amount of exposure to the Commodity Indemnity fund to six months on the contract, and then the farmer could come back in and renegotiate for another six months, so at least people keep track of what is going on. Mr. Olberding stated that the Association's membership voted on this at their conference last fall and thought it was a good idea. The legislation will protect farmers and will protect the integrity of the Fund, the Fund has been used, but the industry doesn't want to see it be abused. Mr. Olberding stated the warehouse rules will probably be rewritten in a year or two and this is just a stop-gap measure to protect the fund right now.

Discussion among Committee members and Mr. Olberding included:

Senator Noh asked about the reference of every six months, will the owner need to file every six months? Mr. Olberding stated that the legislation allows for the contract to be good for the fund for only six months, if they want to make the contract for a year or nine months they can redo it, they don't limit that. Senator Noh asked if the idea then is that the producer could execute the contract for six months, he would be covered, but then he would have to come in and redo that again for another six months if he wants to be protected? Mr. Olberding stated that if he wants to be protected under the Indemnity account, it would only be for six months at a time. Senator Noh stated that one of the general benefits to this approach of contracting is that it allows for the freeing up of space in the rural elevators which is inadequate, it allows the local elevators to take title to the grain to move it out, and make room for someone else to come in, is this correct? Mr. Olberding stated this was correct, they don't want to limit the practice, just tighten it up, so that people are aware that the contracts are out there and that they don't let them get out too far so they don't remember what is going on.

Senator Burtenshaw asked Mr. Olberding if there was a price on the contracts all the time? Mr. Olberding stated there was not, it is a No Price Contract and there isn't any problem with them until there is a failure. So what price is used? Mr. Olberding stated there is a section in the Idaho Code that ISDA can use three different ways to figure it. Russ Dapsauski, ISDA, stated that in the event of a failure there is a three-prong test to determine the value of the Commodity: the price of the commodity on the date of the failure, the price on the contract itself, or the value of the commodity on the date the contract was written. On the three-prong test it takes the lesser of the three.

Senator Noh asked for clarification on this scenario: a farmer delivers his grain, he expects the price to go up, so he agrees to sell his grain to elevator A presumably at some future date, price to be set at some future date, so the date is fixed on the contract, so two years hence? Mr. Olberding stated the contract could be written for any amount of time, the industry doesn't want to limit the amount of the contract, they want to limit the time of exposure to the Commodity Indemnity Fund for that contract.

Senator Williams stated that he could take the grain into the elevator and have it shipped to Portland and if he goes in every six months two years from now he can still price that grain, and it will still be covered by the Indemnity Fund if he goes in every six months to renew it. Currently its covered and you don't have to go in and renew it.

MOTION: Senator Burtenshaw made the motion to send H 102 to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. A second was made by Senator Gannon. The motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Burtenshaw will sponsor the bill. Senator Noh will co-sponsor the bill.
H 298 H 298 Relating to Idaho Agricultural Products; amending Idaho Code, addition of section, for promotion and certification of Idaho Agricultural Products. Laura Johnson, Bureau Chief of the International Trade and Domestic Market Development for the Idaho State Department of Agriculture was given the Floor to present H 298. Laura expressed her excitement about the innovative programs for ISDA and services that will assist Idaho producers and increase their sales and expand their markets. This legislation gives ISDA the ability to promulgate rules and collect fees from voluntary promotion and certification programs. The legislation will assist agriculture producers and allow them to take advantage of niche markets, specialty products and identity preserved products where documentation and government certification is necessary. These are growing segments of Idaho agriculture economy. ISDA marketing division launched a common mark, to be used on a voluntary basis by food producers and non-food producers of agriculture products, entitled "IDAHO PREFERRED." The mark is a horizontal blue oval with a mountain range and bright yellow starburst appearing behind the mountains. The word IDAHO appears below the mountain in yellow. The word PREFERRED appears in a yellow ribbon underneath the word IDAHO. The state, through the Idaho Department of Commerce, has been working on a Brand Idaho program, and this program has come up with a standard font for the word "Idaho." ISDA will use this same Idaho. This legislation protects other marks used by commodities. This legislation is supported by the Idaho Farm Bureau, the Food Producers of Idaho, the Idaho Potato Commission, the Idaho Mint Growers Association, and the Idaho Organic Producers Association. A number of other commodity commissions are either supporting it or have no objection to it. ISDA next step will be to launch some programs in July, with full launching in the fall.

Discussion among Committee members and Laura Johnson included the following:

-Is the mark registered;

-why is there an emergency clause in the legislation;

-who is going to do the certification program;

-will ISDA meet with each industry to set up the rules for each industry;

-who will enforce the program;

-are there penalty provisions;

-regarding joint promotional programs, and the number of different commodities;

-how will the fees work, will commodity pay a check off to have funds for ISDA to do this;

-will the manpower to run the program be paid through the collected fees;

-concern was expressed about how to back up certification and enforce follow through;

-what is the affect on the foreign markets;

-concern was expressed about the quality of products certified and the various grades of quality;

-will ISDA work with industry through the rule making process about quality standards;

-will individuals be able to use the mark?

TESTIMONY Brad Hoaglun, with Alfalfa and Clover Seed Growers Association, stated the idea of a brand, or marketing program for alfalfa seed growers came up at this time a year ago. The growers association talked with the Commission about doing something because Idaho is the number one producers of winter hearty alfalfa seed in the country, and it has an excellent reputation but in regards to price its very good quality but it costs more, and Idaho is hammered by Canadian seed. They are excited about this program because it lends an identity to more than just alfalfa seed, but to all agricultural products. He stated that each industry should address their own quality or certification, and that the ISDA mark and the promotional program will lend quality to all Idaho products.
MOTION: A motion was made by Senator Noble and seconded by Senator Burtenshaw that H 298 be sent to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. The motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Noble will sponsor the bill.
ADJOURNMENT Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 4:00 p.m.




DATE: March 13, 2003
TIME: 2:30 p.m.
PLACE: Room 433
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
MINUTES: Senator Noh made the motion the minutes of February 27, 2003 be approved as written. The motion was seconded by Senator Burtenshaw. The motion carried by a voice vote.

Senator Burtenshaw made the motion the minutes of March 4, 2003 be approved as written. The motion was seconded by Senator Gannon. The motion carried by a voice vote.

GUESTS: Roger Batt, Idaho and Eastern Oregon Seed Association; Dar Olberding, Idaho Grain Producers Association; Dennis Tanikuni, Idaho Farm Bureau; Russ Dapsauski, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Wes Jones, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Don Tolmic, Western Bean Dealers Association; Darrel McRoberts, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Pat Collins, Idaho Bankers Association.
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 2:35 p.m.
H 309 H 309 Relating to Seed Indemnity Fund; amends the Seed Indemnity Fund law to revise how bonds are calculated. H 309 was presented by Roger Batt, Executive Director of the Idaho and Eastern Oregon Seed Association. Mr. Batt presented letters from the Idaho Farm Bureau, the Idaho Cooperative Council, Inc., Nezperce Prairie Grass Growers Association, and Food Producers of Idaho, all of which state they support H 307, H 308, and H 309. A copy of the letters is on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office. Mr. Batt stated that the three bills are intended to protect Idaho producers and the Commodity and Seed Indemnity Funds. These pieces of legislation establish a bonding requirement that aids the producer in the event of a bankruptcy or failure of a warehouse. The three bills come as a package deal because they all parallel each other. Under section 22-5104 Idaho Code, it eliminated double bonding. Under section 22-5105 Idaho Code, it changes the amount of the bond, lines one through six on page 3 of the bill. Under section 22-5109 Idaho Code, it authorizes the Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA) to make copies of certain books, records, papers and accounts of seed buyers.

Senator Noh asked Mr. Batt about the size of seed warehouses in comparison to grain operations, are these smaller operations? Mr. Batt stated that some seed companies are quite large. Senator Noh asked Mr. Batt whether the $500,000 maximum doesn't overcome the percentage requirement? Mr. Batt stated it does not.

Senator Burtenshaw asked Mr. Batt on clarification of the scale on page 3 of the bill, lines one through six.

Senator Kennedy asked how the grower is protected if there is over $8 million in grain deposited and only a $500,000 bond is required? Mr. Batt stated that the $500,000 bond protects the grower to a certain degree and then $500,000 isn't enough. Senator Williams stated that the Seed Indemnity Fund is above and beyond the bond, so that amount of money is not out for the whole year, and a particular portion would be included in the bankruptcy. Senator Kennedy asked if the growers support these bills as much as the warehouses do? Mr. Batt stated the growers do support the bill and are willing to pay into the fund, and they recognize this is insurance for them.

Senator Noh asked what the total bond required would be if they were doing a $50 million business? Mr. Batt stated it would be a $500,000 bond. Is the concept that bigger companies are less likely to do under? Mr. Batt stated this was the concept.

H 308 H 308 Relating to Bonded Warehouse Law; amends the Bonded Warehouse law to revise how bonds are calculated. Dar Olberding, from the Idaho Grain Producers Association presented H 308. Mr. Olberding stated that since these three bills are related, he would discuss the bonding. A matrix on how the bond amount is determined is on page 3 of H 308. The bonds were never high enough to cover a big loss, they were financially too costly. This is why the Commodity Indemnity Account was created because it was known that insurance could not cover a failure. There has been a give and take, and this is why the bonding requirement doesn't go on up to $50 million. Senator Williams asked if it wasn't the plan to be phased out after three years? Mr. Olberding stated this was true but its been in affect for fourteen years. Mr. Olberding stated that in H 308 other things can be used other than a bond. He also stated the legislation deals with confidential records.

Senator Noh asked Mr. Olberding what has caused the change? Mr. Olberding stated that warehousemen are concerned about the information becoming available. Is it your impression that this law makes records available under the freedom of information act? Darrel McRoberts, ISDA, stated that the seed indemnity fund already states this. He stated the last sentence is key, on page 4 of bill 69-250, lines 30 thru 32.

Darrel McRoberts, ISDA, stated that this legislation does not cover up any information or any additional records than already allowed in law.

H 307 H 307 Relating to Commodity Dealer Law; amends the Commodity Dealer law to revise how bonds are calculated. Dar Olberding presented

H 307 to the Committee. Mr. Olberding stated that this is the bill that caused concern in the House. It relates to the concern for those Commodity dealers without the assets of warehousemen. If the bonding requirement were put at six percent then it would put them out of reach. This legislation parallels everything in the Bonded Warehouse law. It takes another look into the bonding requirement and the financial ability of the Commodity dealers. ISDA can inspect the records and it will keep the dealers in operation and keep them from getting too far out there as far as their ability to pay.

Senator Noh asked if small commodity dealers had a bond requirement before this legislation? Mr. Olberding stated they did have a bond requirement.

Senator Kennedy asked what they were required to bond? Mr. Olberding stated it was $15,000 to a maximum of $25,000. Senator Kennedy asked if the growers are okay with lowering those bonds for Commodity dealers? Mr. Olberding stated this was negotiated, and that he represents the growers and they agree.

Senator Williams stated that there are other funds that help cover the seed indemnity fund.

Senator Kennedy asked about the history of failures and the coverage of these situations? Mr. Olberding spoke about a seed failure and the fact that there was no seed indemnity fund, the growers were stuck, and this is why the fund was formed. The Commodity Indemnity fund which deals with grain was formed fourteen years ago as a result of a bankrupt elevator in northern Idaho. There are ten warehouses in the last 12 years that the fund has backed up. The growers get 90% of their money and can litigate the other 10%.

Russ Dapsauski, ISDA, stated the funds are capped at between ten and twelve million dollars. If a $30 million failure were to occur, the debt to the grower would continue on the Commodity indemnity fund until that 90% was paid. On the seed indemnity side, if there were to be a failure, the law says that that debt stays for three years. He also stated that in the bonding issue, that in visiting with the bonding companies through this process, and in light of Enron, bonding companies are beginning to disappear. One of the reasons why bond is required is because of the extra eyes that look into the business in the licensing process, if they can't get bonded, they can't afford to do business in the state. Bonding companies start backing off because of exposure at $500,000 for surety bonds, and when the bond is up to $1 million bond they don't even want to talk to you. It is easier for larger companies to get bonds, their rates are better.

Testimony Bruce Beckland, manager of Farmers Warehouse in Mountain Home, Idaho wrote a letter to the Committee read by Senator Kennedy. Mr. Beckland stated he supported H 309, H 308, and H 307.
Testimony Pat Collins, representing the Idaho Bankers Association, voiced the Associations support for H 309, H 308, H 307. The Association looked at the language about the alternatives for bonds and believes them to be good alternatives.
MOTION: A motion was made by Senator Noble and seconded by Senator Noh that H 309 be sent to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. The motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Noble will sponsor the bill.
MOTION: A motion was made by Senator Noble and seconded by Senator Burtenshaw that H 308 be sent to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. The motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Burtenshaw will sponsor the bill.
MOTION: A motion was made by Senator Noble and seconded by Senator Goedde that H 307 be sent to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. The motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Williams will sponsor the bill.
ADJOURNMENT Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 3:15 p.m.




DATE: March 20, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 433
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Senator Kennedy
MINUTES: A motion was made by Senator Gannon and seconded by Senator Noble that the minutes of March 11th be approved as written. The motion carried by a voice vote.
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:12 p.m.
GUESTS: Laura Johnson, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Leah Clark, Idaho Beef Council; Candi Fitch, Idaho Apple & Cherry Commission; Sara Braasch, Idaho Cattle Association.
COMMISSION REPORT Leah Clark, Idaho Beef Council, was given the floor to present the annual report to the committee. Ms. Clark gave a brief history of the Beef Council, its Board of Directors, and its checkoff program. She stated the Council focuses on beef promotion, research, and new product information. The Beef Council has a state and national partnership regarding advertising, promotion, and other programs. Ms. Clark reported on new projects within the Beef Council regarding two new television ads, a new print campaign, as well as a retail push on new products. She stated that overall demand for beef is increasing, and that consumers are willing to pay more for certain products. The goal of the Beef Council is to increase beef consumption by six percent by 2005. The Beef Council is also very involved in an education program to reach the children, involving teachers, dieticians, and other health care professionals. Ms. Clark commented on the Beef Council's research stating that Idaho is one of the leading states as far as doing instate nutrition research involving CLA (conjugated linolaic acid), a natural occurring fatty acid in dairy and beef products, its been found to inhibit tumor growth. As well as research on e. coli. She presented a copy of the financials including budgets and projects, as well as details on where the check off funds go to. A copy is on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office.

Discussion among committee members and Ms. Clark included:

-litigation on the national check-off;

-the cost of the litigation, and how it is funded;

-concern for the adolescent vegetarian trend;

-incentive for foreign countries to take share of the beef industry;

-how much more does Idaho import than export?

COMMISSION REPORT Candi Fitch, Idaho Apple Commission and the Idaho Cherry Commission was given the floor to present the annual report to the committee. Ms. Fitch gave her report on the Apple Commission first. Ms. Fitch reported on the status of the budget. She stated that a late frost caused a crop reduction with the crop ended 75% of normal, the quality of this crop was excellent however. The apple industry is made up of older trees, and there are fewer plantings going in to replace the trees going out. The Apple Commission, if there was a full crop, would have 1.5 million bushels, and the commission receives $0.05 on each box. It takes five to seven years for a tree to reach full production. The national apple crop is estimated at 2.3 million bushels, the smallest crop in the USA in the past 16 years. The Apple Commission received some specialty crop funds, and they developed a website idahoapples.com. Ms. Fitch reported on the figures in the budget. A similar season to this year is anticipated for next year. She reported that Washington and Idaho currently export apples into Mexico in conjunction with the Northwest Food Exporters. She reported on local promotions with the Women's Fitness Celebration, and the Western Idaho Fair. Research is being done with University of Idaho that is very important to the apple industry, involving funds of $20,000, however, this fiscal year they reduced the allotment to $15,000.

Discussion among committee members and Ms. Fitch included:

- Are apple crops being replaced by grapes?

- What is the gross on an acre of apples?

- Is the Chinese apple juice still a devastating factor to the apple industry?

- Are foreign countries developing better apples?

- Do we need new breeds in Idaho?

- Are people buying more local grown apples or foreign export apples?

- Are the Fugi and Gala apples taking over the Red Delicious demand?

- Is there a market for dried apples?

Ms. Fitch reported on the Cherry Commission stating that the cherry crop in Idaho is growing larger. There was a major freeze in May which affected the entire cherry crop, there was a higher price for those cherries in the 2001-2002 season. Ms. Fitch reported that this years assessments were collected on 1400 tons, the average for the last 8 years has been 1200 tons. The Commission collected $28,372 in crop assessments for the season. A budget is set for $18,000 for next year. She reported that the Commission works in conjunction with the Northwest Cherry Growers for promotions. The assessment sent to them is variable, the membership is important for Idaho because they promote the industry jointly, rather than individually.

Discussion among committee members and Ms. Fitch included:

- Which variety of cherry is sold the most?

Senator Noh gave the committee an update on the search for a Dean of Agriculture for the University of Idaho. Senator Noh reported that he was on the Advisory Group for the College of Agriculture. In interviewing the finalists for the Dean's position, which is a very important, and high profile position for the agricultural industry. The main selection committee is made up of seventeen faculty members and the two outside members are Sara Braasch and Dick Rush, this group will make the recommendation to the acting President of the University in the absence of President Hoover. Overall, the qualifications of the candidates is extremely impressive. Senator Noh commented that the finalists include: D.C. Coston, Oklahoma State University; A. Gene Nelson, Texas A & M; Sharron Quisenberry, Montana State University; Michael Weiss, University of Idaho.

Discussion among committee members included the strong suits of each finalist, the opportunity for the University of Idaho to be competitive, the salary range of the finalists, and the money that each finalist could bring into the state with their research, grants and projects.

ADJOURNMENT Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 4:16 p.m.




DATE: March 25, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 433
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Senator Geodde
MINUTES: The motion was made by Senator Kennedy and seconded by Senator Gannon that the minutes of the meeting held on March 6th be approved as written. The motion carried by a voice vote.

The motion the made by Senator Stennett and seconded by Senator Noble that the minutes of the meeting of March 13th be approved as written. The motion carried by a voice vote.

GUESTS: Tyler Ricks, student; Victoria Paulson, Idaho Medical Association; Robert Wilkosz, Department of Environmental Quality.
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:05 p.m.
H 228 Relating to Agricultural Field Burning; Amending Section 22-4803, Idaho Code, to provide that rules promulgated by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) relating to opacity standards shall not apply to crop residue burning. Representative Wayne Meyer presented H 228 to the Committee. He stated that this legislation clarifies the issue of opacity or visual emissions. Visible emissions or opacity were never intended to apply to agricultural burning, they were only intended to apply to point source pollution meaning smokestacks. In 1985 there was legislation passed that took the control of field burning out of the hands of DEQ. In 1998 that language was changed and the authority to regulate field burning was given to the Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA). When this happened it created some degree of uncertainty when it comes to the issue of opacity. This legislation is an attempt on his part to clarify the issue. In US Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, these are draft rules for Tribal lands in the state of Idaho, and in section "Rules for limiting visible emissions", it states what is exempt from these rules and it states that these rules do not apply to open burning for agricultural activities. It very precisely states that visible emissions, or opacity, do not apply to agricultural burning, and this is the EPA. Representative Meyer questioned why the state of Idaho should be any different than what the EPA is.

Senator Schroeder asked for the definition of opacity. Representative Meyer stated it is the ability to look through the smoke.

Senator Noh asked if the Committee was going to hear from an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) expert or someone from Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). He also asked if this legislation would affect the current court case involving 79 farmers in Northern Idaho and their presumed violation of standards? Representative Meyer stated that this legislation would have no effect on the court case.

Senator Gannon asked if DEQ had rules that deal with opacity standards? Representative Meyer stated there were in IDAPA 58.01.01, Visible Emissions.

Senator Williams stated he spoke with a gentleman from DEQ on opacity, Robert Wilkosz, who e-mailed him a couple of formal definitions of opacity, and his testimony before the House Agriculture Affairs committee. A copy is on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office. Senator Williams requested that a copy be made for each committee member as well as the IDAPA 58.01.01 Rules.

Senator Schroeder asked about the regulation for dust storms, in the normal tilling of fields. Representative was not sure if there were any regulations.

Senator Kennedy asked if the opacity standards undertaken by tests of the EPA, would this be done to assess the smoke and its risk to health?

Representative Meyer stated that the standards are an attempt to keep emissions or level of visibility to a minimum. Health is not part of the opacity standards. Health is covered under the Clean Air Act. Opacity is a tool DEQ uses to regulate emissions from smokestacks to be sure they are burning cleanly and efficiently.

Senator Kennedy asked why the same standards wouldn't apply to fields if there was concern for the smoke level coming out of a smokestack? Representative Meyer stated that the standards are a measurement of the smoke, rather than a concern about health.

Senator Noh stated that if there is an opacity problem it appears they then look into it from a health problem standpoint.

Senator Noble commented that he thought the discussion was about the ability to distinguish between opacity or health risk. He stated that opacity isn't a measure of health.

The Committee welcomed Robert Wilkosz, DEQ, to the meeting.

Mr. Wilkosz stated that opacity was never tied to health effects. This standard has never been used for field burning or prescribed burning. Some reasons of this are procedural.

Senator Williams stated that this bill, H 228, was originally part of four bills. The other three bills were held in the House Agricultural Affairs committee. This bill is presented as it was written and appears now. The other three bills are being worked into one new bill.

MOTION: A motion was made by Senator Burtenshaw and seconded by Senator Noble that H 228 be sent to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. The discussion on the motion included:

-the impression that some groups seem to get exemptions, and the difficulty of explaining these issues to constituents;

-the history of burning and the regulations imposed on it;

-the prematurity of passing one bill without seeing what the others when this bill was originally part of a group of bills;

-whether the legislation is needed;

-the list of exemptions on page 156 of IDAPA Rules 58.01.01 Rules for the Control of Air Pollution in Idaho.

Representative Meyers stated that in rules, it came to light during this session that agriculture was not in the rules under "categories of allowable burning", and that the rules have been changed to allow for agricultural burning as an allowable form of burning.

Mr. Wilkosz spoke about particulate matter versus opacity. The national ambient air quality standards protect the health of community and areas. The measurement tool for health is the ambient monitors. He stated that if constituents ask why opacity can't be used for agricultural burning or for prescribed burns that when burning the material it has significant amounts of natural moisture in it. The smoke seen is very white, and the whiteness comes from the moisture. And using Method 9 when doing an opacity assessment states that you must estimate opacity absent of water.

Senator Kennedy asked how this bill will modify the ISDA rules? Mr. Wilkosz stated that this language modifies the statute that applies directly to the ISDA rules, but says that DEQ opacity rules do not apply. Senator Kennedy asked if current DEQ rules for air quality standards allow the opacity tests in connection with field burning? Mr. Wilkosz stated that they do not have any direct air quality language in them, other than both agencies are encouraged to cooperate. ISDA activities and their rules, cannot violate DEQ rules. Senator Kennedy asked about the cautionary language in Mr. Wilkosz's draft opinion presented to the committee. Mr. Wilkosz stated that the language is his own, it was written for the agency, not for the legislature, the purpose was to get his upper management and the Attorney General to consider this issue. There is no linkage of opacity based initiative to Idaho Air Quality State Implementation (SIP). They came to the conclusion this does not degrade Idaho's ability to protect air quality.

Senator Noble called for the question. Chairman Williams yielded to further questioning. Senator Stennett asked about the language at the bottom of page 2 of Mr. Wilkosz's draft opinion, stating,"however, it is remotely possible that EPA or some third party could take a different view." Mr. Wilkosz has heard from people that have offered their expertise, that opacity should be used for field burning, this is not direct

knowledge on his part. Senator Stennett stated,"so EPA doesn't use opacity for standard for agricultural burning?"

Mr. Wilkosz stated that last year EPA proposed rules for Tribal Air Quality program for the Pacific Northwest, specifically in those rules there is an exemption for field burning of the opacity rule.

Chairman Williams asked for a roll call vote. Senators Noble, Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Gannon, and Williams voted aye. Senators Stennett and Kennedy voted nay. The motion carried with six ayes and two nays. H 228 will be sponsored by Senator Williams.





DATE: March 27, 2003
TIME: 3:00 pm
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Vice Chairman Noble
MINUTES: The motion was made by Senator Noh and seconded by Senator Burtenshaw to approve the minutes of March 20th. The motion carried by a voice vote.

The motion was made by Senator Schroeder and seconded by Senator Gannon that the minutes of March 25th be approved as written. The motion carried by a voice vote.

GUESTS: Bill Chisholm; Stacy Butler, Idaho Rural Council; Veronica Lierman, Jerome County Commissioner; John Elorrieta, Jerome County Commissioner, Idaho Association of Counties; Maggie Mahoney, Idaho Association of Counties; Representative Bert Stevenson; Darrel McRoberts, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Reed Batt, Idaho Hop Commission; Mike Gooding, Idaho Hop Growers Association; Lauren McLean, Idaho Conservation League; Laurie Warren; Bob Naerebout, Idaho Dairymen's Association; Neil Colwell.
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:00 p.m.
Commission Report Idaho Hop Commission Report

Mike Gooding, Idaho Hop Growers Association, was given the floor to comment on the hop industry. He stated the industry is in a downturn and they survive by contracting. A beer tax may be insignificant in the scheme of things, overall it becomes significant when a number burden the brewers, a reduction in consumption thus reduction in production thus reduction down to the grower level. Assuming there are no reductions at the grower level the brewers are so competitive that they will try and recapture that additional tax somewhere and generally the hop growers are price takers. The inelasticity of demand coupled with over production and inventory problems has led the growers to this situation. So the hop growers want to oppose any beer tax.

Mr. Gooding then spoke on behalf of the Idaho Hop Commission regarding a letter they received on the proposal of the Governor's Blue Ribbon Task Force. The Commission responded with a letter in return to state their opposition to a consolidation of commissions. They feel their commission would lose their autonomy, and they oppose administration consolidation.

Discussion between Mr. Gooding and Committee members included:

-What does Mr. Gooding recommend if he opposes a beer tax and he opposes consolidation;

-At what level is the beer tax assessed;

-How many acres of hops are grown in Idaho;

-Are most hop crops contracted before they're grown;

-What is the cost to put in a new crop of hops;

-What is the longevity of the hop plant;

-How do hops compare to grapes?

H 283a Relating to Local Land Use Planning; to revise provisions relating to large confined animal feeding operations (CAFO). The purpose of the legislation is to recognize the importance of local concerns regarding the siting of CAFOs by mandating that county boards of commissioners enact ordinances and resolutions regulating the siting of such operations and requiring that no fewer than one public meeting be held wherein citizens whose primary residence is within one mile, or such greater distance as determined by the county board of commissioners, of the proposed site may provide input to be considered in the county's siting decisions.

Representative John A. "Bert" Stevenson was given the Floor to present H 283 as amended, to the Committee. Representative Stevenson gave the history of the legislation. He stated this bill is in conjunction with H 284 relating to defining "local public interest". The purpose of the legislation is for people to have the ability to voice their concerns. And for their opinions to be heard on CAFO siting issues without having to file an official protest in the Land Use Planning Act. The most significant change to the Statute is in section 67-6529, section 2, line 18 where the word "may" was been changed to "shall." There was no desire to take away the authority of county commissioners, but it would require that the board enact an ordinance before they site a CAFO.

Representative Stevenson then described the definition of CAFO and the language . . . shall not be less restrictive than the definition contained in section 67-6529c, Idaho Code. . . (line 20). Used federal guidelines in defining large. Amendment was hard part, Jerome County is the only county that sites.

Discussion between the Committee members and Representative Stevenson included the definition of "large CAFO" and the intent of the language "shall not be less restrictive" (67-6529, section 2, lines 20-22) and the issue of the one mile designation in line 29-32 and the zoning code regarding public notices.

Testimony Lauren McLean, Idaho Conservation League was given the Floor to testify on H 283a. The Idaho Conservation League believes the bill is a step in the right direction, however, it is concerned about the issue of distance, most subdivisions are further than one mile from the CAFOs and the problems extend further than a mile.
Testimony Laurie Warren, Filer, Idaho was given the floor to testify on H 283a. She would like the area to be expanded beyond a one mile radius. She would like all those concerned with the siting be allowed to voice their opinion, and she voiced her concern about the county commissioners ability to evaluate a good site for a CAFO.

A copy of Ms. Warren's testimony is on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office.

Testimony Bob Naerebout, Executive Director, Idaho Dairymen's Association, was given the Floor to testify on H 283a. Mr. Naerebout stated the dairy industry supports this legislation. As previously pointed out this bill is a companion to H 284 and the industry feels both bills are important. The industry believes individuals have a right to be heard so they support H 283 as amended. However, the industry would struggle if the radius was extended, but they believed that everyone needs to have confidence in the local elected officials and allow them to do their job also.
Testimony Bill Chisholm, Buhl, Idaho was given the Floor to testify on H 283a. The primary role of government is to protect the unalienable rights of all citizens. Jerome County and Twin Falls County both have an administrative approval process below 3,000 animal units. There should be an addition (line 24) to require that permits be issued. Twin Falls county is before the Supreme Court saying that CAFOs don't come under the Land Use Planning Act because permits are not required (Chisholm vs. Twin Falls County). In the House Ag Committee there was an amendment that took out the entire line dealing with the one mile radius, the motion. Mr. Chisholm proposed an amendment that would state, "public notice of such hearings should be mailed to all property owners within one mile and published in local or regional newspapers" to ensure that potentially affected citizens in neighboring jurisdictions have opportunity to comment.
Testimony Stacy Butler, Idaho Rural Council was given the Floor to testify on H 283a. Ms. Butler stated her family owns and operates a cattle ranch in Bliss, Idaho. She has also served on the Gooding Planning & Zoning commission for five years. She stated the foremost reason the committee has been filled with angry citizens from the rural communities across southern Idaho over the past five years is either due to poor siting of dairy CAFOs or a lack of opportunity for public participation in the siting process. She offered the following comments:

-Insert the word "permit", H 283 as amended doesn't explicitly refer to CAFO siting decisions as CAFO siting permits;

-The limitation of only those whose primary residence is within one mile may testify is arbitrary and will lead to lawsuits;

-Why not require counties to provide the same opportunity for public comment as the courts require for "standing" to bring a court challenge?

-Where should the mile radius should be drawn from? She suggested from the property line or from the end of any fixed irrigation system used to dispose of lagoon waste.

-Given the fact that the average dairy CAFO in Idaho is around 450 cows the threshold H 283a sets for any public hearing at all is about 160% of the current average.

A copy of Ms. Butler's testimony is on file in the Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office.

Testimony Veronica Lierman, Chair of the Jerome County Board of Commissioners was given the Floor to testify on H 283a. Ms. Lierman expressed the Commissioners opposition to H 283a. She stated a 1988 approval of a CAFO was appealed to District Court and the State Supreme Court where it was ruled in their (Planning & Zoning Commission and County Commissioners) favor; it is the responsibility of counties to set their planning and zoning requirements and processes. Ms. Lierman described the administrative approval process and stated this legislation would require them to abandon this process. She stated when an application is received, notice of the application and an invitation to inspect the application is printed in the newspaper and currently notices are sent to everyone within a 1,000-ft. radius. Once the administrator is satisfied that all requirements of our ordinance are being addressed, we request an inspection by the state siting team. If the report is favorable and county requirements are met, the administrator issues a permit, which does not become effective until the time allowed for appeal has passed. Once again notice of the approval or denial is published and neighbors are notified. If the permit is appealed, a hearing is held before the P&Z commission and the hearing focuses on the grounds for the appeal. During the past 2.5 years there have been 7 CAFO appeal hearings (3 for dairies and 4 for calf operations).

A copy of Veronica Lierman's testimony is available on file in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

Testimony Jon Elorrieta, on behalf of Jerome County and representing the Idaho Association of Counties (IAC) was given the Floor to testify on H 283a. Mr. Elorrieta stated the IAC opposes the legislation for its circumvention of the local ordinance authority, it dictates to all 44 counties that they shall adopt a CAFO ordinance, and what they shall include in that ordinance. Mr. Elorrieta presented a letter from the Executive Director of IAC to the Committee members, a copy is on file in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office. Mr. Elorrieta then spoke on behalf of Jerome County and the process of adopting a CAFO ordinance is not quickly done. He stated they have been reviewing the current ordinance for two years, to present changes to the current ordinance. In mandating a CAFO ordinance to counties that will never need a CAFO ordinance goes to far in the eyes of the IAC. IAC does want public input in the decisions. He stated that local officials are very sensitive to public comment. No one has approached him about the need to alter the permit process. At the county level, objective standards are what the county needs to apply in whether or not to deny or grant a CAFO. The issues the administrator is looking at are setbacks in the ordinances, and numbers. Water quality, quantity, and odor the county has neither the authority nor the expertise to enforce.
Testimony Neil Colwell, Hammett, Idaho in Elmore County was given the Floor to testify on H 283a. Mr. Colwell stated that he has been involved in a CAFO siting in Elmore County. He commended the sponsors for the legislation and expressed his opinion that it is a step forward. He stated he knew it was an imposition on the counties who would never have to address the CAFO issue. Mr. Colwell stated he would like to see some amendments to the legislation, but the House killed those and he recommended the committee do pass the legislation. If it is not passed here, and sent to be amended, and goes back to the House he felt the legislation would die.
MOTION A motion was made by Senator Noh and seconded by Senator Stennett to sent H 283 as amended to the Senate with a do pass recommendation.
SUBSTITUTE

MOTION

A substitute motion was made by Senator Goedde to sent H 283 as amended to the 14th order. The motion died for lack of a second.

Chairman Williams called for a roll call vote. Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Gannon, Stennett and Williams voted aye. Senators Goedde and Kennedy voted nay. The motion carried. Senator Noh will sponsor the bill, Senator Stennett will cosponsor the bill.

ADJOURNED Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 5:05 p.m.




DATE: April 1, 2003
TIME: 3:00 p.m.
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Vice Chairman Noble
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:05 p.m.
GUESTS: Doug Scoville, Idaho Rapeseed & Canola Commission was given the Floor to present the Commission report. Mr. Scoville reported the Idaho Canola/Rapeseed Commission was created in 1996 for the purpose of implementing a program of research, promotion, and consumer and industry information designed to strengthen the position in the marketplace of the Idaho canola and rapeseed industry, to expand existing markets, and to develop new markets for canola and rapeseed and their products as outlined in the Canola and Rapeseed Research and Development Act, Idaho Code, Section 22-4701. By definition, crops affected by the Commission include canola, rapeseed, and mustard.

The Commission's top research priority is developing more and better cultivars that can be grown profitably in dryland cropping systems in northern Idaho and on irrigated operations in southern Idaho.

In 2000, the Commission had built a reserve of funds to begin awarding research grants to University of Idaho researchers. The Commission considers funding requests each spring and most approved research grants are multiple year studies. Mr. Scoville provided a list of completed projects and current projects sponsored by the Commission. Also, provided to the committee members were the financial statements of the Commission.

Discussion between Committee members and Mr. Scoville included:

- When did the Commission begin expending funds? ;

- Questions about the Commissions actual operating expense;

- What is the trend of canola crops?

Mr. Scoville commented on research that has shown that the growing of canola, rapeseed or mustard and the tilling under of these materials before potatoes are planted provides many beneficial things to the soil. The material left in the soil provides a quality to the potatoes that eliminates the need to fumigate. He also commented on the extracted oil from canola, rapeseed and mustard being tilled into the ground around strawberries and cherry trees which greatly reduced the weeds, it killed the weeds and resulted in very healthy products.

There was discussion between Senator Noh and Mr. Scoville regarding how canola oil is used in bio-diesel fuel.

Senator Williams asked about the total acreage in Idaho. Mr. Scoville replied it was around 40,000 acres primarily grown in northern Idaho. The crops produce yellow blooming flowers that appear May through July.

A copy of the Commission report is on file in the Agricultural Affairs secretary's office.

ADJOURNED Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 3:40 p.m.




DATE: April 2, 2003
TIME: 7:00 a.m.
PLACE: Room 426
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT: Senator Stennett
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 7:05 a.m.
Senator Kennedy initiated a discussion of whether the meeting was consistent with the open meeting law. Mr. Michael Bogert, Governor Kempthorne's office, outlined the law, and generally described the litigation and court supervised mediation which must be conducted under the protective order directed by the court. He indicated a conservative interpretation of the open meeting statute authorizes executive sessions for legislative committees under these circumstances.

Senator Noh indicated the court ordered mediation of the Nez Perce Tribal claims in the Snake River Basin Adjudication has required, for several years, that the legislative interim committee on natural resources meet in a closed session to review issues and progress in the mediation. Otherwise, the public as represented by their elected representatives would be excluded from participation.

Chairman Williams asked for a roll call vote to enter into an Executive Session pursuant to Idaho Code, 67-2345 (f) to hear from Michael Bogert, legal council to the Governor, about grass burning litigation which involves the State of Idaho.

Senator Noble - aye Senator Burtenshaw - aye
Senator Noh - aye Senator Gannon - aye
Senator Goedde -aye Senator Kennedy - nay
Senator Schroeder - aye Senator Williams -aye


Senator Stennett was absent. Senator Kennedy chose to not attend the meeting based on his interpretation of Idaho Code, 67-2346, regarding the Open Meetings Act. The Committee went into Executive Session at 7:17 a.m.

RECONVENED: The Committee moved to adjourn the Executive Session at 7:55 a.m. No decisions were made and no votes were taken in Executive Session.
Briefing on

H391

The Committee then heard from Representative Doug Jones, sponsor of H 391. Representative Jones briefed the Committee on the history of the legislation through drafting, House Committee hearings, the negotiations with the affected industry and public, and meetings with the Governor's office. Representative Jones stated the legislation as it appears in H 391 is supported by the Food Producers, the Grain Producers, and the Farm Bureau. The anti-burning group is opposed to the section of the legislation concerning a safe harbor provision.

There was discussion between the Committee members and Representative Jones regarding the penalties for growers for not complying with the legislation, as well as discussion on EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) comments regarding the legislation.

ADJOURNED: There being no other business, the Chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:13 a.m.




DATE: April 3, 2003
TIME: 3:00 p.m.
PLACE: Room 437
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Williams, Vice Chairman Noble, Senators Noh, Burtenshaw, Schroeder, Goedde, Gannon, Stennett, Kennedy
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
GUESTS: Darrel McRoberts, Idaho State Department of Agriculture; Pat Barclay, Idaho Council on Industry and Environment; Dr. Greg Nelson, Idaho Farm Bureau Federation; Linda Clovis, North Idaho Farmers; Paul Stearns, farmer; Lawrence M. Lampert, fieldsman; Patti Gora, SAFE; Tony Park, American Lung Association; Jeff Tee, farmer; Nick Lawson, farmer; Kristy Reed Johnson, Air Quality Advisory Committee; Richard Morrison, farmer; Steve Johnson, Idaho Grain Producers Association; Roger Batt, Idaho Eastern Oregon Seed Association; Bill Flory, farmer; Michael Bogert, Governor Kempthorne's office; Phil Lampert, farmer; Keith Daman, farmer; Robert Wilkosz, Department of Environmental Quality.
CONVENED: Chairman Williams convened the meeting at 3:08 p.m.
MINUTES: A motion was made by Senator Kennedy to approve the minutes of March 27, 2003. The motion was seconded by Senator Geodde. The motion carried by a voice vote.

A motion was made by Senator Burtenshaw to approve the minutes of April 1, 2003. The motion was seconded by Senator Goedde. The motion carried by a voice vote.

A motion was made by Senator Noh to approve the minutes of April 2, 2003. The motion was seconded by Senator Kennedy. The motion carried by a voice vote.

H 391 Relating to Smoke Management and Crop Residue Disposal; amending the Smoke Management and Crop Residue Disposal Act of 1999 by expanding the program from just Kootenai and Benewah counties to all of the ten north Idaho counties.
Presentation of Legislation Representative Doug Jones presented H 391 to the Committee. Representative Jones stated H 391 comes before the Committee after a long series of legislation this session. He reported there was a hearing in the Gold Room regarding H 228 relating to DEQ opacity standards, H 226 relating to certain trespass provisions that do not apply to smoke or odors, H 227 relating to eliminating lawsuits or injunction on farmers who burn within regulations. These three bills were married together. However, H 226 and H 227 were held in the House Agricultural Affairs Committee. H 228 was passed by both houses and is on its way to the Governor. This piece of legislation, H 391, is a product of several drafts and compromises. H 391 was conceptually presented to the Food Producers of Idaho, and was supported. The legislation was discussed with the agricultural community representatives, state agencies, and other affected people at a meeting held at the Department of Agriculture. H 391 makes significant changes to the Smoke Management and Crop Residue Disposal Act of 1999 which recognizes burning as an accepted agricultural practice. Representative Jones went through the legislation section by section identifying the changes made through additions and deletions of language. He highlighted the following specific areas:

-Intent of the legislature to promote agricultural activities while at the same time protecting public health.

-Recognition that northern Idaho has unique conditions in regard to climate, soils, and crop rotations.

-Legislation encourages ISDA to cooperate with DEQ.

-Shift ISDA control of eight counties to ten counties, taking two counties (Kootenai & Benewah) previously monitored by DEQ.

-The requirement to register ($1.00 per acre) and seek approval to burn from ISDA.

-The penalties are loss of burning for one year for the first violation, and up to $10,000 fine for the second violation within a three-year period.

-ISDA is required to investigate violations.

-The safe harbor provision for farmers who abide by the rules (page 4, section 6, line 32).

-The allowable uses of funds generated by registration.

-The emergency clause.

-The fiscal impact: generation of approximately $70,000.

Discussion between Committee members and Representative Jones included the following:

Senator Noh asked whether the language in the violation section on page 3, lines 23-27, refers to "any person" and then refers to "party," are person and party interchangeable? Does this apply to owners of the land, and/or people leasing the land, on line 26 it states "owned or controlled" this implies the party is always the operator, but language states the prohibition for the violation applies to all fields in the state?

Representative Jones replied by stating that person or party are those operating the land. It might be corporations, limited liability corporations, or any other configuration of business entities. He stated this is a very broad prohibition and this is what put significant teeth into it. He is aware of entities who operate in more than one county.

Senator Noh stated presumably a person leasing land in northern Idaho could engage in a violation and if that person also owned land anywhere else in the state he would not be able to burn on that land as well? Representative Jones stated it is his interpretation that is correct.

Senator Noh asked for clarification on the "time of first violation?"

Representative Jones stated it was the time the burn occurred.

Senator Noble asked in reference to Line 26, all fields "owned" by the violating party, if the owner violates and burns, he can't burn for a year, he would probably go bankrupt, and even if he still owns the land he can't rent out the property. Representative Jones stated there are provisions built in for appeal in the legislation, he stated this would be something that could be appealed and discussed with the Department. The prohibition against burning is by far the biggest penalty in the legislation. The alternative is for the EPA to take over the program all over the state, and EPA primarily issues monetary penalties.

Senator Noble stated this legislation has jaws to it, the farmers are signing on for bankruptcy, or a change in their entire plan, and they can't rent out their grounds. Representative Jones stated he would let the farmers speak for themselves.

Senator Burtenshaw asked about the language in reference to the prohibition of burning on any land within the state if the owner violates the requirements, shouldn't it be limited to only the land in those ten Counties? Representative Jones stated this was a judgement call. He isn't aware of anyone who operates in two completely opposite ends of the state. Senator Burtenshaw stated if the legislation is for the ten northern counties it ought to apply to only those counties.

Senator Goedde asked about EPA, Region 10 comments made at a meeting. Representative Jones stated it was his impression that Mr. John Iani, the Regional Director of Region 10, EPA, looked favorably on the legislation and wouldn't see any need for federal interference.

DISCUSSION: Senator Stennett asked about Section 22-4803, line 26 where "agricultural" has been struck and replaced by "economically," what is the intent of this change? Representative Jones stated it makes sense in connection with the entire context. The original construction of the sentence didn't make sense. Senator Stennett asked about lines 38,39, and 40, what are the standards for state particulate matter? Representative Jones said he knows there are standards, but he can't speak to them. Representative Jones deferred the question to Robert Wilkosz, DEQ.

Mr. Robert Wilkosz, DEQ, stated that Idaho has Ambient Air Quality Standards that mimic the federal standards. For particulate matter the diameter is two and half microns or smaller, PM 2.5. Air quality for PM 2.5 is 65 micrograms per cubic meter averaged over 24 hours. Senator Stennett asked if the burns lasted 24 hours? Mr. Wilkosz stated that agricultural burning usually lasts an hour, or couple of hours. Senator Stennett asked how then the farmers qualify, how could that standard be applied to grass burning? Mr. Wilkosz stated that in response to this problem, DEQ has clarified their emergency authority, the Director can issue a burn ban in Idaho when ambient monitors indicate 80 micrograms per cubic meter for a period of one hour, plus meteorological conditions are such that the conditions persist or worsen. Senator Stennett asked if the DEQ is delegating ISDA to administer that program? Mr. Wilkosz stated the DEQ will continue to monitor the program, it is their responsibility, that authority is in Idaho Code. Senator Stennett asked about the penalties? Mr. Wilkosz stated the maximum fine is $10,000 per occurrence. Senator Stennett asked what happens when the grass burn exceeds 80 micrograms per hour? Mr. Wilkosz stated that there are procedures in place, and ISDA rules will shut down burning at 80 percent of the 80-microgram action. He stated a burn ban isn't a response to a specific individual. It's for the total area. Senator Stennett asked how many monitors were in northern Idaho, and whether they were read on-line or on-site? Mr. Wilkosz didn't know how many monitors there were but there is an electronic access system monitored every day during the burn season. DEQ is in the process of making the information available to the public. Senator Stennett commented that most of the monitors are not out in the fields, they are concentrated mostly around the city.

Senator Kennedy asked why DEQ is being replaced by ISDA? Representative Jones stated because ISDA is in charge of the smoke management program, and has managed it in the eight out of ten counties. DEQ will continue to monitor the air, and they were sharing the information from their two counties with the ISDA. Senator Kennedy raised questions on the regulatory language in section 2a, page 2, lines 25 and 33, who makes the determination on the weather, and he expressed his concern about the shift from DEQ to ISDA, when DEQ is the agency designed to monitor air.

Representative Meyer stated that DEQ would continue to monitor the air. In Kootenai and Benewah counties they operated under ISDA rules last year, used modeling, and weather monitoring. Kootenai and Benewah counties signed a voluntary agreement which went above and beyond ISDA rules, they didn't burn on Fridays, they had voluntary penalties.

Curt Thornberg, program manager of ISDA, in ISDA rules IDAPA 02.616, if particulate matter reaches 64 for one hour then ISDA shuts down all burns within one hour. Most farmers make themselves available by cell phone.

Senator Noble asked who is manning the monitors? Mr. Thornberg stated that both ISDA local coordinators monitor DEQ air monitors. Senator Noble stated that DEQ will be monitoring ISDA information.

TESTIMONY Testimony of Fourteen Individuals for a four-minute time allotment appeared as follows.

Paul Stearns, a grass farmer on the Couer dAlene Indian reservation in southern Kootenai county. Mr. Stearns supports the legislation and stated the bill is similar to plan they currently operate under. This plan has served them well, and is an overall effective system. He stated it would also protect them from frivolous lawsuits.

Patti Gora, SAFE (Safe Air For Everyone) represents 1500 members dedicated to protecting the health of northern Idaho residents. SAFE acknowledged the beneficial aspects of the legislation. She stated that most of the deaths occurred within perfectly legal burning regulations. The main concern she had is with the immunity provisions, which raises a constitutionality issue. Ms. Gora stated it doesn't make good fiscal sense for the state of Idaho to start insuring the practice of burning acreage. Ms. Gora stated a judge has found solid evidence that injury is irreparable. She reported that EPA has stated that it is no longer able to safely burn in the Rathdrum prairie area.

Senator Goedde asked how the passage of this bill would make Idaho more liable? Ms. Gora stated that when the next wave of people are injured, those people hurt can no longer bring suit against the individuals responsible for the damage, they can only bring suit against the state of Idaho. She stated that Judge Mitchell's decision found that there was irreparable harm and that harm is likely to continue if burning is continued on the Rathdrum prairie.

Dr. Greg Nelson, Idaho Farm Bureau Federation, stated the IFBF was involved in this legislation, and they were a part of the discussion. They recognize the difficulty of the issues. He stated this bill is a compromise and he recommended the Committee send it to the Floor with a do pass.

Tony Park, President American Lung Association of Idaho, he addressed the legislation's serious constitutional problems and public health implications. The American Lung Association believes in the people's inherent right to breathe clean air. He stated this legislation is classic special interest legislation. It benefits a small class of people at the expense of the public health. He doesn't like the removal of regulation from DEQ, and the immunity provided to this special class with an inadequate rationale.

Senator Stennett asked Mr. Park about the state's liability. Mr. Park stated there was a remote chance the state would be liable. The offensive part is immunizing those who do the damage.

Senator Kennedy asked about the liability if this legislation is enacted. If the state allows owners to use property in a manner that creates a nuisance, haven't there been decisions that held the states financially responsible? Mr. Park stated he was unsure.

Linda Clovis, representing the farmers of northern Idaho, supports H 391. She believes it clarifies the law, and that it will allow the farmers to burn under strict guidelines, for a few hours, each year. She welcomes the strict penalties for those who don't comply. She brought a letter from the Couer dAlene Chamber of Commerce that recognizes the value of the grass farms on the Rathdrum prairie. She reported on a graph received from DEQ that the EPA has asked for on PM10 and PM2.5 levels from the area over 1999, 2000, and 2001. It shows on every year that the 4th of July has higher levels, and exceeds the regulations than any other time of the year.

Senator Goedde asked about John Iani, of the EPA and his comments made at the meeting. Ms. Clovis heard Mr. Iani say he felt comfortable with the penalties in the ruling. He talked about a 303 ruling giving emergency rule for them to come in and take over state agencies. If they came in with 303 then they may have to ban fireworks.

Senator Goedde asked if there was any mention of slash burning at the meeting. Ms. Clovis did not recall.

Lawrence Lampert, a farmer and turf grass seed employee, spoke to the fact that the farmers provide food for him, and anything that helps them is good. Mr. Lampert reported that Judge Mitchell's decision created a 250 lb. loss of seed. The penalties in the legislation are harsh but the farmers aren't going to jeopardize their farmers by intentionally breaking the rules of crop residue disposal. He left a handout about what happened in Washington when they crippled the grass seed industry by shutting down the burning. They left 99% of the pollutants of Spokane County unscathed.

Jeff Tee, a fourth generation farmer who farms in Benewah and Kootenai counties, supports the legislation. He listed all the benefits of agricultural burning: eliminating soil erosion, promoting water quality, protecting the aquifer, generating tax revenue, oxygen release, wildlife habitats, hundreds of local jobs, lack of alternative crops that can be grown on the poor soil where bluegrass is currently grown. The Smoke Management Program allows the use of all the tools that H 391 promotes, using DEQ, ISDA, computer modeling and atmospheric data, and responsible farmers abiding by the law. He stated that farmers are getting better at this every year. This bill along with proper smoke management will achieve the goal of coexistence, compromise and the protection of not only the industry, but the citizens of the region.

Nick Lawson, a Benewah County grass grower, and he also raises wheat and lentils in rotation. He is on the Board of Directors of PERC, an organization that was formed on the reservation to create rules, and help lobby, and help pave the way for legal defense. There are 100 growers in the organization are for the legislation. He stated he was at the meeting with John Iani, and Mr. Lawson stressed an emissions-based industry. He referenced a handout from the American Lung Association of the state of Washington, which stated that 57% of outdoor air pollution is caused by motor vehicles, agricultural burning makes up 6%. He said a small portion of the puzzle is grass burning. He is concerned about the public health, and he feels the smoke management program.

Senator Noh asked whether he owns the land or leases it? Mr. Lawson stated that half of his acres, in bluegrass, are in Indian landlord leases, the other half is owned by his family.

Kristy Reed Johnson of Post Falls is a member of the citizen's air quality advisory board at DEQ in Kootenai county. She spoke about, "singling out North Idaho blue grass growers for special civil litigation based on alleged health impacts of burning grass fields, which do have a distinct agricultural benefit, while ignoring other sources of open burning, including wheat stubble burning, or the overall impact of these actions on the big picture of our specific air shed." A copy of Ms. Reed Johnson's testimony, including graphs is on file in the Senate Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office.

Richard Morrison, a Southwest Benewah County and Latah County farmer. He is on the Smoke Management Advisory Board with the Couer d' Alene tribe, and spoke about how the board has micro managed it at a much higher level than even the state has. Since 1987 they have worked with the state, but have had their own program since 1985. They take great pride and great detail in their operations in the Coeur d' Alene reservation because they have three distinct air sheds. They have welcomed the new technology, the clear sky technology, to apply to the EPA in the state. He stated the watersheds are linked to fm. radio and they know when something comes up and can correct it immediately. He stated they are concerned with public health. Mr. Morrison believes in working with the state and EPA as a team effort to implement a program of good management.

Bill Flory, a fourth generation producer, and a member of the Nez Perce Grass Growers Association. He stated this legislation creates a lead agency, the ISDA, and this seems to be the concern of the Nez Perce reservation. There is a higher level of responsibility and possible punitive actions in which a burn ban is the greatest of those punitive actions. He stated they welcome industry, technical and political oversight and they will comply with it. He urged the Committee to pass the legislation.

Phil Lampert, a farmer from Plummer, Idaho in Benewah County favors H 391, because it spells out the rules that allow them to burn while minimizing the impact to others. The bill provides growers a safe harbor from nuisance and trespass lawsuits if they follow the rules. He states they are the window on the future of burning in the rest of the state of Idaho. He spoke about SAFE's programs and advertisements in northern Idaho that are detrimental to his small farm. The first day of burning has become a media event. All state field burning regulations have been complied with and no state or air quality laws have been violated. The legislation will provide for a regional scientific approach to the weather conditions necessary for safe, healthy, field burning conditions.

Keith Daman, a grass farmer from Benewah County spoke about H 391. He stated that throughout the agricultural community they search for answers. Claims have been made that this bill will hinder or eliminate the due process by which balance is achieved. Is balance best achieved by lawsuits bases on trespass and nuisance, or is balance best achieved through the application of the law by the agencies responsible for creating and administering appropriate rules and regulations? Mr. Daman stated his interpretation of Idaho Statute 22-4801, and Idaho Statutes Title 39-102A. A copy of Mr. Daman's testimony is on file in the Senate Agricultural Affairs Committee secretary's office.

Michael Bogert, legal counsel to Governor Kempthorne's office spoke about the legislation before the Committee where the regulated community has asked for the legislation, with better regulation, penalties, enforce ability of a statute and bring more integrity of a preexisting program under state law. He stated the Governor is appreciative of the leadership of Chairman Jones on this issue to work with every stakeholder in north Idaho and throughout the state that could be impacted by this legislation. This legislation was drafted with the Ag community, with the input from folks in Sandpoint, in north Idaho with a differing perspective on the issue. Mr. Bogert expressed the Governors' office's respect for the perspective of the North Idaho delegation of Senator Keogh, Representatives Campbell and Eskridge. He stated this legislation is a path forward to a balanced approach that protects the integrity of the smoke management program that the Governor signed into law in 1999 with the understanding this would be a significant regulatory framework that would accommodate the need to have agricultural practices maintained in the state of Idaho. The Governor remains committed to a balanced solution. And to the extent that we believe that the policy of our smoke management program must be made in this body and avoided in the judicial branches of government, be it state or federal, at all costs. He states this legislation is a significant advancement on the integrity and credibility and the enforceability of our smoke management program.

RECESS: Chairman Williams called for a brief recess at 5:20 p.m. to round up all the Committee members for a vote.
RECONVENED: Chairman Williams reconvened the meeting at 5:25 p.m.
MOTION: Senator Noble made a motion to send H 391 to the Senate with a do pass recommendation. It was seconded by Senator Gannon.
Discussion There was discussion on the motion.

Senator Goedde stated he was put in a box by this particular bill, people in his district do suffer from occasional smoke. He hopes that a cooperative effort between ISDA, DEQ and the farmers and the additional funding will abate some of the problems that have occurred in the past. The other concern he has is if the EPA assumes authority what would happen to the timber industry. He supports the bill.

Senator Noh stated that in his limited evaluation there is no data kept on health effects and the air pollution data.

Senator Kennedy stated he doesn't want to see any farmers put out of business, he wants everyone to look at the other side of the issue. The other side is the health of people who have nothing to do with that part of the economy. Because of the testimony of doctors at the Gold Room hearings there isn't any question in his mind that there is an adverse public health issue in the burning of the blue grass in northern Idaho. He thinks the legislation will pass on the Floor of the Senate. He hopes the legislature will do something to make sure that we try to monitor the effects this burning will have in the next few years and that they start spending some money in scientific areas to get some substituted technologies involved so farmers can get the assistance they need for their crops without burning. We have to keep in mind the health of the people of the state.

Senator Noh stated it is not good public policy to exempt people from the nuisance statutes. The only way he can justify it is that there are very tough penalties, and there is good administration for the program.

Senator Stennett wanted it recorded that the state will be sued. And it will ultimately find itself in reverse condemnation on trespass and nuisance, and the state will pay for it.

Senator Burtenshaw stated the smoke burning window is 40-45 days, and there are other things that create more problems than it does. He thinks that these other things need to be looked into. He said this practice has been here for a long time and every year there is progress made. And he feels there is potential for a solution, and EPA still has the authority to cut the state off, if it gets out of hand. He thinks this is good legislation.

Senator Noble stated that the pioneers came across the prairies and found the Indians burned and it made the grass grow better, and the buffalo came. The lawsuits are brought by small groups that work to take-away things we have to do and later take away things we like to do. He wonders when they will start taking away fireworks. Addressing the farmers in the room he stated the legislation has not only teeth but jaws, if you break the law you won't be burning grass the following year.

Chairman Williams asked for a roll call vote.

Senator Noh - aye Senator Burtenshaw - aye
Senator Schroeder - aye Senator Goedde - aye
Senator Gannon - aye Senator Noble - aye
Senator Stennett - nay Senator Kennedy - nay
Chairman Williams - aye


The motion carried with seven ayes and two nays. H 391 will be sponsored by Senator Burtenshaw, and cosponsored by Senator Williams.

ADJOURNED: Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 5:35 p.m.