Education Committee- House

mean that's a good question I did feel like that question would come up and now I think it's important to understand how that revenue hits that apartment is other thing isn't or some concern that were hidden the revenue of some of those folks that would by license at sixteen that now want so there is a balancing act here that we're trying to hit to to achieve more revenue not less revenue so thank you for that question. Thank you representative Beatty you're recognized. First I want to thank you for this bill and and the work that you in the Commission are are are doing for the state this is kind of I guess my question is part of what you promised when he first spoke to the legislature this bill targets the future of the game in fishing the outdoorsman in the state and you're delivering a what you said and applaud you thank you for that and hope that there's more just like this more changes coming that we can be proud of and I just wanna take a second bite not really a question but but thank you for this bill. Sure. Any other questions. What's will of committee. We have a motion to pass all in favor say aye any opposed. Congratulations your bills passed thank you Mister Committee. And I think we've got a group of visitors here. Who who are these fine young people. What school you from. Not representative wings. Carlton is that your group. Yes Sir Mr chair this is the sixth grade class Mrs Matthews is class from a macular conception in North Little Rock they are coming in to tour the capitol today we're going to a little bit of a view of an actual committee and then a little bit later I'm going to let them go to add an empty committee room and they're going to debate a bill themselves they can learn the process so I'm grateful to get to see us do it then they'll figure out a way to do it even better well congratulates. Well we'll just let you watch just do a model piece of legislation we're just about to pass a bill about aches. Representative Lynch go down there and do your best for. This will be house bill seventeen eighty eight. No. Recognize yourself for the record and then go ahead and present your bill. Roger Lynch state rep District sixty This bill Has to do with a production and distribution does. Five things it exists producers who own fewer than seven hundred eighty hands the limits the repackaging of eggs in retail. Provides for the safe handling of X. delivered directly to the consumer. Established as the S. RT for the destruction. Of any container bags that are not compliant with the statute. And clarifies the authority of the Arkansas department of agriculture to carry out the duties and functions required to be for. Performed by the commission. So. It's Hello short bill that. Not a lot changed it actually loosens it up a little bit and then clarifies the the lands with already to deal with people that deviate from the act. Okay thank you any questions committee. No one signed up to speak for against what's the will of the committee. We have a motion to pass all in favor. Any opposed your bill is passed graduation that's how it works right there. I thank representative wing is going to take you all outside and maybe buy ice cream and stuff that's what I heard. Thank you for coming guys. Okay as they exit is anyone here to present senate bill four oh seven. A representative Beatty would you go to the end of the table please. Recognize yourself. A recognized representative Howard baby District ninety five I'm here to present senate bill four oh seven it is an act regarding bio energy carbon capture technology and to require energy produced from certain sources to be considered carbon neutral to require energy produced from certain sources in conjunction with carbon capture technologies be considered carbon negative and for other purposes basically what this bill does and in short is it add some definition in some language to the code it's a only on page one it defines by all manner biomass maybe bioenergy feedstocks reports products manufacturing including without limitation it It list several things one area that we we can see is downed wood from extreme weather conditions and events or natural disasters as we're experienced is we we experience in the last week has non hazardous landscape and right away to remains in municipal treatment plant materials that are removed for purpose of invasive species and force management activities conducted for timber stand improvement to increase the yield an ecological restoration and maintain a healthy forest balance the other thing that it it adds language that bioenergy with carbon capture and storage means the process of capturing a permanently storing carbon dioxide from that biomass energy generation. The bioenergy produced from biomass is considered renewable and carbon neutral and the one bio energy produced from biomass is paired with bio energy with carbon capture storage the bio energy is carbon negative so also bio energy produced from agricultural harvesting is considered renewable and carbon neutral and then when the bio energy produced from mac harvesting is paired with bioenergy with carbon capture storage that bio energy is carbon negative so that added that language will provide some definitions and and this will be areas that we will improve and add to in the future for the state with that all entertain any questions. There any questions from the committee. Sam Nunn. What. A representative Haak. So I'm a little bit conflicted about landowners property rights I've heard from a number that have some concerns how would that be addressed in this bill I actually think the year property owner rights are probably more with the other bill for fifteen because this would not affect property right and property ownership in any way but you know my next bill Senate for fifteen. Any other questions. No one signed up to speak for against this bill which will. Motion do pass all in favor. Any opposed. Congratulations your bill is passed thank you committee thank you Mr chairman and representative Betty why don't you just sit right there and will move down to Senate bill four fifteen. Yes please. Mr I have Justin Allen join me at the table would you introduce yourself for the record please. Yes Sir Mr chairman members of the committee my name's Justin Allen am here today on behalf of the Arkansas forestry association to help represented by eighty percent this bill answer any questions okay go ahead present your bill Mr chairman members of the committee today and I sit in front of the president Senate bill four fifteen an active established the Arkansas prescribed burning active for other purposes I will tell you that this bill has the support of of all the foresters and forestry industries in the state I'll start off with just a few points that a of a prescribed burns a good burn it reduces the fuel for forest fires improves wildlife habitat allows for planning and regeneration and vegetation control the Arkansas department bank has simply smoke management guidelines that prescribers will follow that includes notice to the agency the identity of the prescribed burn or the location timing duration among other things and also notes the importance of weather conditions when deciding to Bernard are we to conduct the barn the challenge in Arkansas is that prescribed burns are be under utilized there's an issue with attaining insurance to cover prescribed burn in Arkansas law on liability for conducting such a barn is somewhat ambiguous ambiguous I'll get that word out there. Senate bill four fifteen will clear up the ambiguity and makes it clear the standard is negligence if a landowner or his prescribed Bernard negligently conducts a barn and it results in damage to a third party that third party will recover his or her damages it also sets for several requirements for conducting a burn such as utilization of a qualified burner planning the burning prescription with details of the barn and that the prescribed burn or be present on the site the entire time that the burns being conducted is to believe for the industry that this clarity will allow allow for more of these good birds to take place that are beneficial to the forestry habitat and our economy and with that I'll entertain any questions. Come up with represent Cozart. Thank you Mr president buddy I just have a couple questions of if I own a hundred acres in the middle of a pine plantation area that some of the wildlife some of the forestry people owns that require me to do a prescriber. Restate that I'm absolute okay so why do not owned it in the middle of a file not a hundred acres I've got I'm surrounded on three sides by of timber farmers and it's a they were House or or IP or someone like that in my required to prescribe burn my property or so off the. No Sir right as far as I know there's no requirement that you have to conduct prescribed burns okay just make sure on that and the other questions follow ups are so if if I do a prescribed burn you said we need to have a certain person dare to go over that with you on private land is is there a fee for that is that of the private land people have to pay that fee for that person to be president I think if you read the bill that that's an option this open to the landowner you do not have to pay the fee now the hundred eight and the hundred acre you can you can do that on your own but there are some conditions this will provide you some protection if you follow what's in the plan and all that yeah. Mr Allen speak further to that a few things representative and I've learned some stuff here recently about this especially for Mr fox over there I'd say if you're private landowner nothing's this is going to get to an issue that some of you all heard about concerns within of a gentleman is going to testify here in a little bit we talked at length earlier let me say what this bill does not do it does not require you to follow this does this forestry commission is not going to go out and regulate you and write you a ticket if you don't follow this this is being put in place so that if you do follow it as a landowner whether you're burning fifty acres or fifty thousand acres that if you do follow it the liability standard is negligence and that one able specialties larger landowners to get insurance their obstacle right now is that they can't get insurance to conduct Barnes of the barns are not being done at the rate that we like so to answer your question is a private landowner you can burn however much of your own property as you want without following this and you will not be liable to the regulatory and agent the entity or a prosecutor or anything like that okay thank you Mr. All right representative Blanche I believe you have a question. A representative Vaught. Thank you Mr chair if you'd please turn to page four. Top of page four it says requirements for prescribed burn burning prescription and prescribed burning before conducting a prescribed burning a qualified prescribed burner shall develop a prescribed burning description. So do they have to or don't they have to I think that is a qualified prescribed burn or someone that would qualify under the rules and and avail themselves of the protections provided in this legislation okay but that. That was what I thought that's what codes aren't just ask representative Cozart just ask and I thought you said they didn't have to but that's not what the bill says the building if the water the key word is qualified so if you just want to be a burner that's that's fine you're not required to follow this but if you will be a qualified burger under this legislation and have the protections then then you have to follow the guidance in the in the legislation in represent of the thing I would add to that is if you go to fifteen thirty one oh for the civil liability provision it says a prescribed burning conducted in compliance with this subchapter that's the key language is that if you do do these things then that's going to be the liability standard for if you don't do these things reliability standard may be different. Okay thank you. President Cozart you're recognized. Okay let's go back to that for just a second so if I've got a good friend of mine owns about. Almost two thousand acres or close all Springs he just did a barn on a lot of his land I. think you had talked to the forestry commission there and talk to him about it and what they didn't help him but he just let him know they were going to be doing it so if he was going to do that. He would need to make sure he had a liability policy for case anything got out off his property on to the next property would that be correct he should do that yeah please do that okay so I will speak a little bit more that affect okay Mister chair as a lease see of property that I release the warehouse or and others we have a liability policy with our clubs or anything like that if we get something out and it burns any of their land we are not totally liable for that so that's kind of the same policies when I'm trying to say if we have something happens. They make sure they have a liability policy they should be okay yes Sir okay thank you. Members are there any other questions. Yes represent Cooper. Okay so let me try to understand This Is a private landowners if I want to burn two hundred acres in my property I can do that and this bill does not affect that in any way whatsoever. The limitations in this bill one hundred acres now you could burn I mean you could burn this bill wouldn't wouldn't stop you from burning but the the way this bill is distracted there's a limit of one hundred acres in a in a single Barnes at that that's right but I think the answer your questions yes. You can go barn it's private land over five hundred acres five thousand acres this bill will not stop that but your liability standard is probably going to be different arguably and that's what we're trying to clear up is the ambiguity in the law as to what the liability standard is for prescribed burns in here is defined as negligence in the trade off the for that is that you follow these these checklists. Follows sure go ahead okay on the one hundred acres so it is that one hundred acres of a day a month a year week how how are you defining that I don't necessarily see that in this bill yeah I don't think it's directly addressed in the bill but I would think in Senator stone answer questions similar to that on Senate in that if you burn a hundred acres and you properly extinguish it then you can go by another hundred acres now private practical you do that the same day but you could probably do several and I'm no prescribed burner gonna get online here budget I would guess that in the course of a a couple weeks you could probably do several hundred acre tracts. One more certainly go ahead it. I wish you to define that and in the bill you know hundred hundred acres of a day or hundred acres properly extinguished another hundred acres in the same day I think that leaves a little bit and ambiguity there were. Somebody maybe could be sued ticket or something and one understand but again there will be no ticketing this is not giving the Department any regulatory authority over these parts this is defining what you have to do in order to afford yourself this negligence standard no authority to go if you go right so if you go burned five thousand acres that's fine you can do that this is not going to change that the this is just going to provide some protections if you're burning your hundred and you accidentally burned five thousand acres so this does provide some additional protection and a give some cover for the prescriber nurse in the state it in for my a few other observations a couple things that I've learned in and one is that it of a private landowner is more than welcome to come a qualified prescribed burning and Mr fox explained last week Senate committee that training is done free of charge so if you really want to burn a lot and afford yourself as protection go to the three or four day course free of charge and you will be apart qualified prescribed burning you can write your own prescription also the forestry commission can provide you with a prescription for a barn if you're gonna do less than a hundred acres and one for yourself this this protections other plenty of options under this bill including the status quo which is a private land Arkansas burned his or her five thousand acres in they will not get ticketed. Represent hawk you're recognized for a question. Okay representative Vaught thank you Mr chair. And. So a lot of farmers in my area use the rule fire department they come out they do help with the cut you know to make sure that the fire doesn't get out are they considered prescribe burners. No ma'am of crop residue is exempted from this bill. No I don't think so I had a I had very little crops in my area okay I prices a Rangers sorry a lot of my Rangers in my area if they're going to burn something off they use their volunteer fire department to come cut and make sure that they stay within those boundaries and that there's trucks there to put out anything that might would to John Are they considered prescribed burners. If if they haven't taken the course perhaps not however. You'll notice and this was put in an amendment the department is going to promulgate rules on defining a qualified prescribed burner and I would absolutely think that that's something that they would look at because that makes a lot sense is convenient and it will be convenient for landowners so I think the goal is is going to be to make this convenient and reasonable the trainings their offerings the timing who qualifies we're gonna work on that through rule promulgation thank you. Committee members have any other questions. If not we have some people signed up to speak we'll start with the Thomas Baldridge and he speak against the bill. Please recognize yourself for the record yes Sir my name is Thomas Baldridge I'm a private landowner I want to a maybe I can shed some light on some of the concerns from a private landowners perspective so and also give some of my background so my career has been spent in the fire service I have a bachelor's degree in fire science I've investigated fires for live in both in the public and the private sector so in the public investigating the crime of arson and in the private sector working for attorneys insurance companies primarily focused on subrogation issues so I do have a little bit of of of background in this and then currently have a farm and also focus on wildlife and an ecology type type of things I'm advocate of of burning I'm an advocate of prescribed burning it is very very important that we do put more fire on the ground the first part of this bill is is almost impossible to disagree with if you read the first part of this bill and the reasoning to put more fire on the ground in a safe manner of course I think the intent of the bill. And maybe some of those representatives or senators can speak to this but the intent of the bill is to reduce liability in the event that you you are doing these things that you're doing them in a safe manner and you're reducing liability so I had to pick a side today to be for against and the reason I'm against this is not I'm not against the bill in its entirety I'm against a couple parts of the bill I've got I've got three issues with it Obviously Mr Allen spoke earlier and said you know you can just ignore this if you want and you're not going to get a fine and while that may be true and I'm not going to contest that because I don't think forestry has a authority at this point to to come write me a ticket for that what it does do if I if this is voted into law it definitely increases my liability if I choose to ignore I think that would be extremely ignorant and forgive my common vernacular but stupid if I especially my position just chose to ignore this bill so one thing I'm concerned about the first thing is the hundred acre referencing limitation to private landowners that do not complete the training but do obtain a prescribed burn planned I think that numbers arbitrary I think it is not based in science as you may know or may not know their certain weather conditions that impact when you're burning outside and it could be just as risky or more risky if you're burning five acres versus five thousand so I think that just simply eliminating that sentence and putting the responsibility on the person who is certified in writing the burn plan is a wise idea and the reason for that is that person who who has received the training qualifications would be able to put boots on the ground look at at what is going on or at least ask some questions and have a better understanding and knowledge to be able to write that burn planned to say no Thomas you you don't need to burn fifty acres today you need to you need to break this up in smaller units because the fuel there's so much more fuels are or you know you burn this last year or two years ago and you barely have enough fuel to carry a fire so maybe you can burn five hundred acres maybe there are other factors like if you think about the slow. Hope if you get in certain parts of Arkansas slope weather topography all these things can impact how fire behaves so I think that should be put back on the responsibility of the prescribed barn plan writer which would be your prescribed barter at the second issue I have is with training. Right now in this bill the way it the way I see it and and being in Senate committee the other day the way I understand it the train is ambiguous I've had I hope I hope you don't mind me saying Austin okay I've had multiple conversations with director both as well as as others that are sponsored this bill and possibly even some of you and they they have given me assurances that they're going to try to address these concerns in rulemaking The only problem I've got a I've I've got with that is and I told I told director but is this the last time that I and I mean no offense please the last time I trust a politician it didn't go well for me so so I mean that it with with all kindness. But. But I think I think the intent here is a very good intent it's just I'm worried that the training will be accessible it won't be affordable it won't be equitable among different you know different individuals rather from the private industry rather their private landowner rather they're working for gaming Fisher a corporation or or wherever and so I think that that it's important to make sure. That we have multiple opportunities for these classes that the it's reasonable for the average student both physically and mentally. That it's equitable so it's not limited to certain students some of these classes have pre requisites better you know necessarily they they very from from what forestry I think possibly Forscher Commission I'm sorry or Forscher Association possibly as a mine versus what maybe game and fish as in mine and my concern is that when those discussions take place in a meeting of the minds come to promulgate these rules that there will be some middle ground reached and that that may prove to be difficult for a private landowner the other thing I'm I'm concerned about which Mr fox did discuss the other day his his hope and believe that there will be funding available to reduce these these expenses for training and currently game and fish's putting on a couple classes some some of you may or may not have taken that that are free of charge but that was before this bill was was introduced so what comes after this I'm not sure I do I do read the reluctantly trust Director booth and and what he is told me I believe he's a good man and I'm going to hold his feet to the fire on on what he told me but at the same time I do think that that we we instead of rush I know you're busy I realize that I had other people that were coming with me today and they're trying to help tornado victims and are trying to do other things we are all busy and I know you need to put this through and and listen this bill needs to pass I'll be one hundred percent advocate of the bill with a couple of modifications that's that's where I stand on it and and I think those that hundred acre limitation there's just no reason for the training somehow I wish you could give me some type of assurances that it's just it's going to be fair and equitable for all our Kansans rather they. Comprehend things on a seventh grade reading level or rather there in fire science with a college degree there's a lot of variance there and so I just wanna make sure that that that is that is well stated I I also M. I sent a little bit of money not a lot to Arkansas forestry association so I want to commend the Senate and the senators and representatives that sponsored this bill that are trying to help because from ecological standpoint we've got big issues in the state we've pretty much lost or quail population we were our turkeys are in decline the monarch butterfly is by some groups already placed on the endangered list and fight and that's not even getting into the forestry aspects of it so far is a good thing don't believe what Smokey bear tells you fire is a good thing. I'm serious I'm I'm very serious it's true that that campaign reduced fire on the ground and our fire our ecosystem in this state is is is a necessary and it is it is been happening since native Americans were here it is necessary that we have fire on the ground removing that fire has heard us and we're losing habitat and a lot of a lot of species and ecosystems rather you care about a butter flour collared lizard all the way to wild turkeys are being impacted by this so it is important but at the same time I think it's important we don't rush through this and then just have a couple things here that I mean of I don't really understand how the process works but a white out pen could fix this very very easily so thank you for your time if you have any questions I would love to attempt to answer and I appreciate all you do. Thank you members during questions for Mister Aldrich at present McGee. I thank Mr David Walters so I want to follow up on what representative vote talk about a minute ago it seems to me I mean this all sounds good except for for the private landowners so how her farmer. Goes out gets real fire department and and they don't have a certified burn plan and they're going to burn forty acres. And that thing gets out and even though the fire departments that it gets out it seems to me that. Owner if he does not have a certified barn plan and follow it to the T. his liability he's really hang himself out to some increase liability would you agree with that. So let me let me share my opinion without just answering yes or no if you don't mind okay so one of the representative earlier asked about different insurance and so currently on my property I carry a hunting liability policy I carry a timberland liability liability policy the the issue is right now if I want to obtain a policy specifically to burning okay because my timberland liability in my general honey policy does not cover me actually doing prescribed burns so there is a specific insurance policy that is for prescribed burning some some people even big companies like say Lloyds of London won't currently under right especially corporation some private landowners and when they do it's it's very expensive so that has hindered a lot of corporations from from risking that so secondly maybe two more to your question is that landowners liable potentially my issue right now is there is ambiguity in the law and right now he would be liable as well if this is passed and he chooses to ignore it I'm not an attorney Mister Allen might want to answer this question but I do think his liability is increased if he refuses to follow this now again two two there also other statement you know the forestry commission is not gonna show up and write the man a ticket for it so that's why I think training is that it's important to get training that's equitable and open to a variety of people we have a lot of different agencies Forscher commission Arkansas fire academy game and fish there's a lot of agencies put known classes about fire just not all of them are accessible to the private landowner does that answer your. Session yes thank you thank you Mr. Members are there any questions. Yes representative Cooper. Mister Rogers thank you for being here Sir that do you know how many classes are available to the public annually or how many people could potentially be trained right now as it is without increasing the amount of training so I guess it would depend and this is where I'm nervous Mr fox's grin at me it would depend on what the forestry commission and and game and fish actually does after we leave this room if we vote to send the law today and and having to trust that is nerve wracking no money and I'm all for training I'm all for education I I even told Director both the other day that I would have probably done that that section different if it were me but it wasn't and and this is what we have right now so I think that currently Mr fox can speak to this currently forestry commission you know has some classes it was my understanding thank you Ridgley said maybe for half days I was told five I was still five hundred dollars that you know you're told a lot of different things I do know there are pre requisites and I did check with some of the the councils that he referenced I've got him pulled up on my phone a lot of those have pre requisites I'm concerned about that because I want accessibility for landowners and and not not all landowners have a fire background or or even care maybe they just care about Turkey's or butterflies or or improving their for stand well that's that's a great thing and it's a great tool it's call it's cost effective it works very well and and it is easy to do with certain guidelines so I think there will be but I'm having to trust them that they're going to do that and and make that accessible and with director both like right now the game fish free of charge does a large bar one and learn to burn two workshop you can do those one day after after work and then you can turn. Rounded to the other maybe on a weekend or something like that if that is the standard then then great it's free of charge and and he's been you know the game fish is already been doing that if if we go to the standard of where we have to travel to Russellville and spend three and a half to five days maybe even get a motel room or gas back and forth and then the material becomes either requires pre requisites or the material itself is more difficult for the average person to understand who doesn't have a fire background then I think we burden and hindered landowners to be able to do this so for me the training aspect is and building that out is is very important. All right thank you any other questions members. All right thank you for your testimony yes Sir thank you we have individual signed up to speak for the bill and you have to forgive this old man I think it's still S. T. I. L. L. or maybe S. H. I. L. L. or may be S. U. L. L.. We help me. Come on up here. Hey the I would never. Okay we'll come on down there near douche yourself Richard. I appreciate the time I might. My comments will be pretty brief the name is Richard stitch I'm at environmental affairs manager with Weyerhaeuser company work out of hot springs but also cover many of the southeastern states. From Virginia to Oklahoma where we where we have property and you know basically what we what we're started talking about developing a bill to update Arkansas's prescribed burning rules one of the things that we identified was that we we looked across the entire south and where the different prescribed burning laws were what they were how they dealt with private landowners in this a particularly how they dealt with risk and liability and one of the things that we want to do is be able to draft some prescribed burning language that would provide landowners with so many liability risk reduction but with adequate responsibility actions of responsibility built into it as well so we're giving something weird we're we're gonna get something as far as the liability can reduction but also have to give something as far as putting together those responsible actions that a landowner would implement in order to have us a safe Burke and you know some of the things that we're trying to accomplish with this is not only have a more healthy more healthy for is as important to a company like Weyerhauser through some civil cultural burning but also to be able to do some conservation burning if this for quail or Turkey or if that's for for other species other species we wanted to be able to do that but the big and a big part of that was also just having a health you're forced up to be able to do so our site preparation burning to understorey burning to control you know fuels in the in the understorey knows type thing so The I really appreciate Mr Baltar's as comments I thought their tremendous I I I thought that he he hit on some pretty good issues but one of the things that we run into in Arkansas especially as Arkansas is the only sat state in the south where if there is a a a break over something happens with controlled burn that the assumption through the cold crush feel laws is that you're you're guilty of negligence that that is that's what you square that's where you start off with Arkansas and Arkansas is the only state like that if there are the other states in the southeast don't have that is assumption of guilt and. the other thing that one of the other things that Mr ball destructive out is that the at the the whole idea around a qualified prescribed burner nine of the eleven states in the southeast have a definition of what is a a qualified prescribe burner Arkansas being one of the two that does not in Virginia being the other so what we want to be able to do is just kind of clarify what are those responsibilities because the assumption of guilt if you have something that breaks over if you have prescribed burner and you've checked all the safety boxes you've notified to division of forestry you've you have a burn plan you have the right equipment you have the right personnel on site we want to be able to say that if you have been able to check all of those responses boxes of responsibility that there is not this presumed assumption of of negligence if there if weather conditions change or something unforeseen happens we we don't have that that we don't have that hanging over our head and the other thing that the other issue that Mr bollard brought up what a round of the prescribed burning training again nine of the eleven states have some type of a definition of a qualified prescribed burner they have the the training in place I've talked to Mr fox and we we he's certainly believes that we can we can address that hurdle and and deal with the prescribed burning training what is qualified prescribed burning training and and those issues as well so. with that I'll I'll I'll I'll yield the floor to any other any questions at that you all may have thank you if the committee is there any questions. Seeing none thank you for your testimony thank you Mister Allen you actually signed up to speak for me good he's good okay. All right you ready for the clothes for your bill. I am. First let me address the private landowner in no way shape form or fashion is this piece of legislation and intent to infringe upon the rights of private Arkansans in what they can and can't do with their property I think it's been stated you know five but most the parties they've been at the table prescribed burning is necessary and it's good it's what we need for healthy forest healthy habitat for for our our wildlife and that was the intent the the other intent is to address the the assumption of guilt regarding prescribed burning and the fact that it if something happens after your Bernard or during your burn that you're immediately considered guilty of negligence so the Bill tries to address those issues provide protections to the prescriber nurse in the state provide some protections to the private landowners I'll say it again there's nothing in this bill as far as intent to infringe on the rights of the private landowner the other thing that I would say is I spoke with Mr Baldridge before a committee meeting I think he's got some some valid points and had we had some of that ahead of time I think we can address that with legislation on hundred acres and and the ambiguity there as a as a limit I thank you committee the other day it was stated that most of these burns from private landowners or twenty forty maybe eighty acre Barnes so they're not large acreage burns they're taking place the concerns the they had regarding training all state on the record the training programs and and and that requirements will be addressed in rules and I guarantee and I'll state on the. Record that they that will be addressed some concerns were if you had seven hundred folks signed up for the training that you have to limit some folks would get the training will make certain that the training is successful and open to all that won't that training that will be included in the rules will make certain of that and we'll try to address as many of those concerns in the rulemaking process as possible the other thing I would say eight is most the concerns and and issues that Mr Balter Baldridge had with this bill exist right now today along with the liability that private landowners will have if they burn without this legislation it provides some good protections to our Kansans for prescribed burning and is beneficial and with that I would appreciate a a good vote now for motion do pass okay we have a motion. Okay is there any discussion. Represent Cozart. Committee members I just want to kind of let you know I talked to my little friend that has a lot of land he burns is but he just told me he did take the class so it was very valuable to do that and he also he burns every year or every two years owners property does likes about two thousand acres but he also did this year a prescribed burn with USDA program I believe it's equipment program that they come and help him do that and city recommends anybody that can apply for that program to do that but he said his properties private land and it really has been very essential to him for what he's done but he he says you gotta do all the things they said what's the the forecast maintain a road area of those things right there and do it right but of being that he is good with that and I don't have anybody else in my area that really has to do that them to someone we have else out but I will be voting for this bill. Thank you resented Vaught thank you Mr chair and. I totally agree we do a lot of burning so I I agree with described burning but I hope that will do these courses across the state of Arkansas not one centralized location that everybody has to come to I will consider doing these courses throughout the state so different farmers that may want to become prescribe farmers could actually go to these courses and have to drive a long ways I don't foresee that happening for my rule area and I hope that will look at rule fire departments and how they can be used to help with these burns also I'm with that I'll be voting yes. All right represented more. Thank you Mr chair representative Beatty sorry I'm a little slow to the process here I probably should have put this in the form of a question but I'll use discussion I have a constituent that's a little bit of an anomaly that has around eighteen hundred acres that he's using those conservation trying to encourage the quail population to come back so again little bit of an anomaly because he uses a lot of retired Arkansas game and fish commission The gentleman to come out and do his prescribed burns. I'm sure that they go through this process because they are retired from the Arkansas game and fish commission but you know they're definitely burning more than a hundred acres at a time on this eighteen hundred Occur property but anyway I just wanna make sure you know that this would not slow that process down for them that they would be able to continue that because as I stated earlier it their intent is definitely too for conservation and to continue to encourage the quail population so I again I do appreciate you bringing this. Any other discussion. Okay we have a motion do pass all in favor hi any opposed. Congratulations your bill is passed thank you Mr chairman thank you Committee. Okay we're going to work we're going to move on down to Senate bill four thirty three. That bill Mister with your permission finished runner representative Marcus identify yourself and your authorized to run the bill. Senate bill four thirty three. Mr I'd like to ask if the department secretary to join me here to table certainly introduce yourself for the record and welcome thank you Shane Cory secretary for the Arkansas department of energy and environment. First of all I'd like to say that I think this is probably the best looking committee that I have this this so far this year and. And Mister chair U. S. of a fellow brother in arms of the just wonderful wonderful to be able to see you operate on this thank you Moran and I found that you know and just a few minutes ago I was asked the the run this bill so I'm sorry I have limited knowledge on this so again that's probably a good thing so because so far all the bills that that I really didn't know anything about that I've run been successful so I'm very hopeful with for this one to. Again this this particular bill Senate bill four thirty three is an act to abolish the Arkansas jury graphical survey to create the office of state geologist to transfer the authority and duties of the Arkansas General Geological Survey to the office of the state jail geologist and they will be put underneath the oil and gas commission I have exhausted my knowledge of the bill and would be happy to if it's possible that Mr secretary to go ahead and and do this further addressing of the bill. Your authorized please go ahead thank you I thought it was a great explanation. these these entities are all within the department of energy and environment now the Arkansas Geological Survey is an entity that is funded right now by general revenue consist of the staff and a seven member advisory commission what we're attempting to do is to rename it from the office or excuse me from the Arkansas Geological Survey to the office of the state geologist which is the term used in the current version the Arkansas constitution and then do away with that seven member advisory board and then put the office of state geologist within the oil and gas commission for funding purposes. Hi are there any questions Committee. C. nine what will the committee. We have a motion do pass all in favor. Any opposed congratulations your bill is passed thank you Mr thank you committee for that incredibly enthusiastic voter and this. All right committee we're going to move down to House Bill. What expunge it yeah yeah. we're gonna move down to House Bill eighteen oh eight representative under. Identify yourself in and present your bill. Good morning Mister chair committee representative Steve Unger District nineteen. Ask a Director booth to join me at the end of the table. What a house of would you introduce yourself please yes Sir awesome bill director the Arkansas gamefish Commission. Go ahead all right. A I visited with the Director booth early on in the session just a medium and say hi and we had a conversation I asked the question is there anything I can do to help you he said funny you should ask. I am a hunter it's something I learned from my dad it's something I still enjoy and ethical hunting is one of the hallmarks of our state. But it turns out there's some bad actors out there frankly slaughtering wildlife with semi automatic rifles with thermal scopes and what not shooting from cars at night in the story I got from a director here fight can recount it correctly they after they Stop the guy shooting deer from a car fancy scope thermal scope had a little computer chip in it that record that kills enough remember correctly he'd recorded twenty one. And I thought we just got to put a stop to that and so Bill eighteen oh eight puts a stop to that. Do you have anything to add director yes Sir what about what I would add to that is the and since the representive Unger is referencing One of the penalties that that our current code authorized is that we suspended what we these suspended that Germans hunting license of the problem with it was is he didn't have a hunting license but we suspended anyway and so the goal of this bill is to do what several other states have done in our region and that's to recognize the importance of wildlife dock our way of life our outdoor economy to recognize the resources that private landowners put towards wildlife management and also to increase the deterrents. Of so this is a so so that we've not only seen from other states that heard loud and clear for our constituents on and of I appreciate your support. Thank you a representative Haak your authorized. Thank you Mr chairman hello this doesn't affect like hog hunting does it or not considered a while I just wanna make sure that was okay this only pertains wildlife violations and as you all know feral hogs are not considered wildlife thank you Sir. It represented Cozart you're recognized. Welcome to you are going to do this to me I just get of no I think it's a great bill out of I love what you're doing I think that's a very big problem and and every year even around four I locally live that's a big problem and has been in the past I don't I don't think you're going to do away with it with the bill but you are sure going to give it some good teeth to put those people where they need to be and I appreciate what you're doing. Represent Cooper you're recognized. Thank you for Drug Director being here so a few years ago back home in White County there's an individual at a food truck. And he was selling tamales and he was using deer meat in the tamales and I believe the people buying the tamales understood it was deer meat it wasn't keeping any secrets there so I I read in this bill that selling wildlife would be a felony if. The if it's over five hundred dollars so if it in this instance courses person was shut down by the office Commission ticketed and and all that so but in an instance like that if if he had sold five hundred and one dollars worth of tamales would have been guilty of a felony. Yes Sir that's correct okay thank you. Any other questions committee. Seeing none what's will of the committee. I have to do pass all in favor. All opposed. Your bill is passed. Thank you Committee. Okay we're we're going to move on to House Bill eighteen thirteen representative tears. If you will introduce yourselves for the record please thank you Mr chair she had fears District forty. and when I have a for you today is another game and fish bill the law enforcement division but I we're simply want to do is to land a lot of to a man to amend the law to substitute game warden for wildlife officers we for years since nineteen eighty nine have been not really referred to as well off officers have been referred to as game boards and never quit but in our paper in our language to my knowledge it's all wildlife officer and we just simply want to change that back. Okay and record would you like to address that yes Sir we you know we ran a survey within it Enforcement Division asking our game wardens are wildlife officers and not ninety seven percent of them said we want to be called game arts because that's they join the Arkansas game and fish commission to do not familiar with the intent of why we changed it officially from wildlife officer to us sorry from game warden to wildlife officer but that's what they see themselves says that's what the public sees them and I think for the easiest bill this morning. Okay all right you've heard the bill is there any discussion and questions. Seeing none what so will of the people the Committee. Do pass all in favor. Any opposed congratulations your bill is passed. Okay we're gonna move on now to House Bill eighteen twenty seven representative Milligan. He'll come and recognize yourself or introduce yourself you probably know who we are. The representative Jon Milligan district thirty three Mr if you don't care of like that secretary ward in Mr Childress to come in the table with me please come go down introduce yourself general. In addition. Yes west for from the Arkansas farm wine culture I'm Marvin Children for the poultry federation. Yes committee house bill eighteen twenty seven that you see on the first page there it it moves Arkansas natural resources commission to the department of agriculture. And now you can read there but does not affect the rules does not affect anything this move them over now I will say this morning on the way down here I have some phone calls if you will go to page. So. Page four of the bill. Land Levin in a line twelve it talks about a ten dollar fee that they're going to do this bill does away with the need to be established by rule by that compartment now I will have missed Childress explained about that ten dollars where that goes because that you know we would play with us they would not come down the table to hurt anyone do any damage to a farmer tried hard to farmers self I'm let him explain about this ten dollars. I'm sorry. Mr Childress is going to explain about the ten dollars for it and this bill that's okay I would love to hear that explanation thank you Mr chairman. First I want to go back and just to give you a little history this is the poultry feeding operations registration act and it was established in two thousand three that fee has been ten dollars since two thousand three and that fee goes to currently to the conservation districts that are delegated as authorized by the current law delegated to the conservation districts to run the program that the total fee is about sixty thousand dollars a year that for you does not even pay for the one person that that works at the natural resources so. There was some confusion this morning I got some calls from members I know the secretary did as well about this that that money was going to in R. C. S. N. was use for water pipes for farmers that's just not the case so we just wanted to clear that up and what what the the current draft says is that the fee would be set by the the the rules of the ag department so you know in the event that fee changes from ten dollars it would require to be done by rules by the department thank you for that clarification. Secretary ward you have anything that. well not not really other than just I just would echo the point person represent Miller gonna Mr shoulders you have the the poultry industry such an incredibly big part of Arkansas agriculture so this this is intended to help streamline the our our program set to exist to support the industry and then also make sure that they're in compliance with the what with other items that may be out there that would cause it to be a report this excellent committee is there any questions well I see the power of the chair asking he said no one U. S. C. had but had Oper gradually. I see none of what's will of the committee. Do do pass all in favor. Any opposed. Congratulations your bill is passed. All right we're going to move on to our final bill for the day House Bill eighteen hundred representative Watson you're recognized entered into your self. Thank you Mr chair state representative Danny Watson District eighty eight of if it's okay I'd like to have a former right next to me Jason McGee to be present with me also certainly introduce yourself for the record Sir. Hi my name's George McGill farming crossing Poinsett County northeast Arkansas okay thank you go ahead represent lots of. Thank you Mr US is two thousand eighteen the Arkansas state plant board has received hundreds of complaints per year regard I can buy the drift of a tall of. All as as a hard worker follow Todd volatility okay because a hundred thousand dollars in economic losses despite tweaks to the cut off date by the plant board of when the last date someone can spray the product over the top of da camera tolerant soybeans and cotton off target damage continues to occur independent and academic researchers demonstrated a correlation between and the temperature and I Campbell volatile volatility showing that that came up dot Kimball volatility increases once the ambient temperature reaches eighty five degrees other states across the country have relied on eighty five degree temperature is they adopted their di Campbell rules and cut off dates the state of Arkansas has a diversity of crops in natural environments that need to be protected and farmers need certainty certainty and confidence that the State the Arkansas state plant board rules are based on science and data the Arkansas state plant board has a responsibility to promote agriculture what insured farmers and the general public are protected from harmful intrusions a cause damage property and economic loss the problem I doubt of that Kimba movement and off target damage to sensitive plants is widespread as July nineteen twenty twenty one Arkansas Democrat Gazette has reported on the problem with the headline six hundred fifty acres the sort things damage but I can't with this summer that's what the state estimates in nationwide the Federal imp of the EPA received nearly thirty five hundred into reports for the twenty twenty one growing season of damage to a wide variety of non target plants it's sentence were also reported for non crop areas in Arkansas such as state parks and wildlife refuges this is important right here the bill calls for the Arkansas state plant board to utilize science to identify a date before averaged. Temperatures exceed eighty five degrees and then established that as a cut off spray date this will help minimize the issues associated with that I can the movement indicted Campbell because of volatilization greatly increases but at a greater rate with temperatures above eighty eighty five degrees this will solve many issues adult camp of application will be finished before the time when extensive off target damage usually occurs due to warmer temperatures farmers can still choose to use docket above if it's right for their form but with less risk of harm in sensitive crops or plants later in summer gardens vegetable crops vineyards flowers and ornamental plants will be better protected from potential damage farmers who choose not used I can but will have more choice about managing the for they will not feel pressured to plant I cannot tolerate crops out of the need to protect their form elected livelihood instead so instead they can make choices based on how they will perform old goes old growth trees and native plant and animal animal habitats will face less threat from off. Target dot camera damage this helps preserve the natural areas Arkansas most of my last closing here the EPA has responded to concerns about that I can the damage by revise and product labeling multiple times in recent years but it hasn't solved the issues occurring in Arkansas Arkansas is unique environment. The EPA did propose the earlier cut off date for Arkansas unfortunately the EPA's proposal was rejected by the Arkansas state plant board on February six of twenty twenty three this decision failed to address the damage complaints in Arkansas in this rejection underscores the need to continue working to address the issues issue utilizes science research weather information I remember. Three springs ago it Legislative Council here in the big mac building the first time I had ever heard the word doc Campbell. M. man was us somewhat infatuated after learning all the things going on. This is been around for awhile and what hurts me on the outside looking in. Is we don't have a safe resolve yet. that's that's what this piece of legislation is seeking at this time I'm going to ask Mr Jason McGee if he has any comments to follow up on his take on this. Thank you I'm my name is judgment the other farming crossing point a county and I'm a first generation farmer and I'm a non GMO soybean and corn grower I've been doing that for around. Twelve years and when I say that I don't take that is I'm not pro technology I'm very much for the advancing technology growers need that but with that comes responsibility and I've been very familiar with the plant board through a number of issues over the years I'll live up in form and to the most highly regulated counties in the state Carlson pointed County it with regard to two forty and to facet both and they had created issues for certain people in the plant board responded accordingly for many many years the Arkansas state plant board was looked at as the model for the nation they they did it right they follow the signs they did everything with regard to protecting all our Kansans not just a particular farmer but our gardener Forster whoever they may be they took all those things into account but something changed with with doc Campbell and of a lot of the growers they'll argue they have to have it blah blah blah but if there to fax or they don't there's lots of options there I don't want to see that I can but there surely taken away a hundred percent but the data since the seventies has supported by what's happening in the field they cannot contained dot Camden Arkansas high heat environments of volatile eyes is off the the problem is not at the spring creek it happens in the field and it happens for several days or there's a mass loading that's occurring you can go to Crowley's Ridge in June and July and you can't find a sycamore tree anywhere the dun shall die Campbell a rose bush a garden many people don't realize exactly what's happening with the growers today have options new technologies have come about they have been list they have liberty the. Those are herbicides that do a good job of staying where they're put best any herbicide you can have a mishap but the volatility that occurs with doc Campbell it to unprecedented we've never dealt with anything quite like that and the spurring is going on passed the cut off date so there's been a lack of enforcement to if you will and non di Kampus soybeans or. Very susceptible particularly in reproductive phases so the economic losses or severe and there's no where to turn if you read their story companies mainly responsible for the manufacture of the doc Campbell formulations are used today the labels are written in grading if you call them when you have a problem they'll say it's the farmer who did it they didn't follow the label to the to the the farmer says we can't prove it came for me and then there's been a lack of enforcement from the plant board's standpoint and so we do need some help greatly you know I support diversity I support technology but also support responsibility and this bill is a step in the right direction towards our responsibility thank you. I thank you man the Committee are there any questions. Okay saying none of there's an individual signed up to speak against I believe it's Andrew grow buyer. I hope I got your name close or not did the last fall. Again if I yourself for the record. Good morning and your grub Mar with agricultural council of Arkansas and we're an industry trade organization that represents row crop farmers and landowners and ag businesses to provide goods and services to the industry you're recognized to speak or thank you I'll be very brief I know we're at the tail end of this meeting today but did want to say that organization as opposed to this bill we feel that it sets a bad precedence in our view related to any crop protection product whether that's a herbicide or nice insecticide or fungicide we feel that those decisions in regulating those matter should be left to the plant board and the EPA rather than decided at this table or in and the House or Senate the plant board was created by the legislature to handle these things and we think it should be continue to be handled at that level we also feel that it is of an over reach by the legislative overreach that that would interfere with the process it's already available to the public when it comes to challenging any rule that's out there there's a petition process anybody can file a petition any individual or organization can file a petition to trigger the plant board to consider rulemaking and so that's our primary concern with this and we think it's better left Plant Board and encourage anybody that has an issue with the rule that's in place to to file a petition and and take that route rather than Legislative bro. That's our our stance thank you all right thank you representative Vaught did you have a question I do thank you Mr chair Mr Andrew would you agree though that we constantly are always telling. Different entities what they can and can't do I mean I understand you're wanted to stay with the plant board but we direct boards and agencies from the end of that table at all times would you agree with that. I've seen examples of that in this in this case we have concern not related to any particular what's it to us it's it's it's a precedence that would be established that would be applicable to any product that our industry depends on and we have concerns about this becoming a regular process we we preferred the child delegate that responsibility to the the plant board there's nineteen people in the plant board with a broad range of expertise they understand the chemistry is the understanding the uses and. That's what initially this body The General Assembly created them to to handle these things and so it's our preference that continue to be handled that way. But again we do this quite often I'm just trying to get you to answer that part of the question I've seen it before thank you. President hockey recognized thank you for coming were you aware of the Democrat Gazette article talking about all the instances of the camera and how it's affected other farmers that don't use this product. Is this for me yeah I'm not yeah I'm asking yes I'm I'm very where we have members. It robot production all commodities across the state so this is something I'm very familiar with and have have had among the members follows go ahead so with that being said do you know if we we have a massive amount of people that are that are being affected by this we're not saying with this legislation that were banning it we're just putting a a stricter time frame on when it can be used I don't I guess what I'm my question would be is. What's what's wrong with just saying you know what I mean there's when we were just talking about burning you know I mean making it to where what what's wrong with making it to where there's just a certain period of time when you can use it so it doesn't affect so many so many people. What would what would be wrong with that and. There's nothing wrong with that there's that's already been done and it's been done in a variety of different ways over the history of this particular product. Today the day the date is June thirtieth. All right any other questions. Dan a represent Vaught. Thank you the cut off date is June thirtieth right now what is. By. I know it's eighty five degrees right. We say after eighty five degrees that can pick up and move to somewhere else so why would we picked June thirtieth in the State of Arkansas when we know probably by the end of April beginning of may end of may we're going to be probably pass that eighty five degrees what what made June thirtieth the date. I'm not a plant board members that the only thing I would say that is that the federal regulation has aged thirty of St for soybeans July thirtieth day for cotton and the state decided June thirtieth for all use. So basically so. In reality that's probably not around a science data information that picked June thirtieth for the state of Arkansas. Would you agree with that. I will say that the State Plant Board made their decision based on a lot of different data and information science the EPA did the same Arkansas is more restrictive than the EPA currently okay I mean I'm not saying one way or the other that just doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me when I know in June it can be really hot here in the state of Arkansas thank you. Any other questions. Thank you. We have one more individual signed up to speak for it Terry for. Share this time uh. Okay thank you Mr for. Are there any other questions for the committee. Are you ready to close. Mister chair I am ready to close and I appreciate a favorable vote to. The end this nightmare and this get working on it. Okay we have a motion do pass. All in favor. Any opposed. Congratulations your bill is passed and members thank you so much for your patience this is been a long one but we got a lot done per share everybody being here.