03/14/2008 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s):|| Big Game Commercial Services Board|| Board of Game|| Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission | |
| SB253 | |
| HB367 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 253 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 367 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 14, 2008
1:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Carl Gatto, Co-Chair
Representative Craig Johnson, Co-Chair
Representative Anna Fairclough
Representative Bob Roses
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Bryce Edgmon
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative David Guttenberg
Representative Scott Kawasaki
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S)
Big Game Commercial Services Board
Brenda Rebne - Anchorage
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
Board of Game
Ted Spraker - Soldotna
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
Frank Homan - Juneau
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
SENATE BILL NO. 253
"An Act relating to the appointment of members of the Board of
Game; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED SB 253 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 367
"An Act relating to the sale of raw milk and raw milk products."
- MOVED CSHB 367(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 253
SHORT TITLE: BOARD OF GAME
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) HUGGINS
01/28/08 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/28/08 (S) RES
02/16/08 (S) RES AT 11:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
02/16/08 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
02/18/08 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/18/08 (S) Moved SB 253 Out of Committee
02/18/08 (S) MINUTE(RES)
02/19/08 (S) RES RPT 6DP 1NR
02/19/08 (S) DP: HUGGINS, GREEN, MCGUIRE, STEVENS,
WAGONER, STEDMAN
02/19/08 (S) NR: WIELECHOWSKI
02/27/08 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
02/27/08 (S) VERSION: SB 253
02/29/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/29/08 (H) STA, RES
03/05/08 (H) RES AT 2:00 PM BARNES 124
03/05/08 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/11/08 (H) STA RPT 3DP 3NR
03/11/08 (H) DP: JOHNSON, DOLL, ROSES
03/11/08 (H) NR: JOHANSEN, GRUENBERG, COGHILL
03/11/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/11/08 (H) Moved Out of Committee
03/11/08 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/14/08 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 367
SHORT TITLE: SALE OF RAW MILK PRODUCTS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) NEUMAN
02/13/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/13/08 (H) RES, FIN
02/29/08 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/29/08 (H) <Bill Hearing Postponed to Mon
03/03/08>
03/03/08 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/03/08 (H) Heard & Held
03/03/08 (H) MINUTE(RES)
03/10/08 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/10/08 (H) Heard & Held
03/10/08 (H) MINUTE(RES)
03/14/08 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
BRENDA REBNE, Appointee
to the Big Game Commercial Services Board
Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Big Game
Commercial Services Board.
TED SPRAKER, Appointee
to the Board of Game
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Board of
Game.
JODY SIMPSON, Staff
to Senator Charlie Huggins
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sponsor statement for SB 253
on behalf of Representative Huggins.
KRISTY TIBBLES, Executive Director
Board of Game
Boards Support Section
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 253.
REPRESENTATIVE MARK NEUMAN
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as the sponsor of HB 367.
LOUIE FLORA, Staff
to Representative Paul Seaton
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information regarding a proposed
amendment to HB 367.
Kristin Ryan, Director
Division of Environmental Health
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding HB 367.
JOSEPH MCLAUGHLIN, MD, Acting Chief
Section of Epidemiology
Division of Public Health
Department of Health & Social Services (DHSS)
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding HB 367.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CO-CHAIR CARL GATTO called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:05:47 PM. Representatives
Edgmon, Fairclough, Wilson, Gatto, and Johnson were present at
the call to order. Representative Roses arrived as the meeting
was in progress.
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
^Big Game Commercial Services Board
^Board of Game
^Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
1:05:57 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO announced that the first order of business would
be the continuation of confirmation hearings for the appointment
of Ms. Brenda Rebne to the Big Game Commercial Services Board
and Mr. Ted Spraker to the Board of Game. [Testimony and
questioning of Mr. Frank Homan, appointee to the Alaska
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission was completed on 3/12/08.]
CO-CHAIR GATTO first addressed the appointment of Ms. Brenda
Rebne to the Big Game Commercial Services Board. He inquired
about her position with Ahtna, Incorporated.
BRENDA REBNE, Appointee to the Big Game Commercial Services
Board, Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic
Development, stated she is Vice-President of Corporate Affairs
for Ahtna, Incorporated. In response to further questions from
Co-Chair Gatto, Ms. Rebne said the last three days [attending
her first meeting of the Big Game Commercial Services Board]
have been very enlightening and were a good opportunity for her
to gain an understanding of that particular user group. She
said she believes there are nine members on the board: two
landowners, two transporters, two guides, two from the general
public, and one Board of Game representative. She confirmed she
is one of the two landowners and the landowner she is
representing is Ahtna, Incorporated. She said she is unsure who
the other landowner member is, but she believes it is another
Native corporation, although she is not absolutely positive.
CO-CHAIR GATTO, after ascertaining no one else wished to speak,
closed public testimony in regard to Ms. Rebne's appointment to
the Big Game Commercial Services Board.
1:09:24 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO announced that the committee would next consider
the appointment of Mr. Ted Spraker to the Board of Game. He
asked Mr. Spraker to state why he wants to serve on the board.
TED SPRAKER, Appointee to the Board of Game, Alaska Department
of Fish & Game, stated he was raised in and went to school in
Wyoming where he completed a bachelor's degree in wildlife
management and a master's degree in range management. He moved
to Alaska in 1973 after completing his degrees and resides in
Soldotna. He worked as a wildlife biologist for the Alaska
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) for 28 years before retiring
in 2002. He was first appointed to the Board of Game in 2003
and his recent re-appointment by Governor Palin is his third
term. He served as vice-chair of the board for the past two
years and is still in that position. He also serves as the
Board of Game's representative on the Big Game Commercial
Services Board and has done so for 3 years. He said wildlife
management and working with the public has been his lifelong
career and he enjoys the opportunity to work on both of these
boards. He looks forward to continuing his service on both
boards.
1:12:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH requested Mr. Spraker to give an
overview of why he thinks Ahtna, Incorporated is opposing his
re-appointment and an overview of the composite of the board.
CO-CHAIR GATTO asked whether Mr. Spraker had a copy of Ahtna,
Incorporated's letter [dated 3/10/08].
MR. SPRAKER responded he does not. However, he said knows the
gist of the letter from talking to Ms. Rebne and from talking to
the letter's author [Ken Johns, President/CEO of Ahtna,
Incorporated] a month or so ago. Therefore, he thinks he is
prepared to answer most questions.
1:13:31 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO cited the following statements from the letter:
"consistently promoted the non-subsistence utilization",
"inability to understand the merits of customary and traditional
use", and "is not capable of protecting the hunting and fishing
rights of all Alaskan's".
MR. SPRAKER replied he met Mr. Johns in Glennallen where he
worked as a wildlife biologist for four years beginning in 1974.
Upon his re-appointment he was informed of Mr. John's opposition
so he called Mr. Johns and they talked at length. Mr. Spraker
specified:
We have a few differences. And one of the things that
I am ... kind of afraid that he wants me to do - I am
not sure afraid is the right term - I think Ken Johns
looks at my position on the Board of Game, since I
have known him for such a long time, that I would have
been kind of the champion for a lot of the things that
he wanted changed in Unit 13. And we ... discussed
these issues and they all pretty much revolved around
rural preference. And I ... did my best to try to
explain to him that that is something the law does not
... allow us to do. We have a mandate on the Board of
Game to strictly adhere to the state laws and we do
that. And I can't be a champion for you or other
folks in Ahtna to try to change this to rural
preference. I was involved in a subcommittee for at
least a couple years trying to sort out some of the
problems we have of hunting caribou in Unit 13, which
is the Glennallen area, the Ahtna Corporation area,
and to be honest with you we've ... not made much for
... headway. One of the things that Mr. Johns and I
really disagreed on was the Board of Game approved a
calf for people that qualify for Tier II hunting of
caribou in Unit 13. That eliminated Mr. Johns and he
was very critical of the board's position and
extremely critical of my position on voting for that.
The vote was about 6-1. And, again, we discussed
this. My feelings were presented to him on my vote.
I said that because the law requires that we look at
the people that most need the resource, and are most
dependent on the resource, and as a mainstay of their
livelihood, that I could not understand how people
that had incomes that allowed them to have cabins and
airplanes and big motor homes and things like that
could pass the red-face test on qualifying and needing
a subsistence caribou. And I supported that proposal.
Mr. Johns and I are friends. We have some clear
differences. He is the CEO and I understand and
respect his position. He has a lot of folks that look
to him to change a lot of things to make them better
and the Board of Game has not been as favorable as he
... wanted us to be and I think that's where the
letter came from.
1:18:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH said she thinks it is important to
have a subsistence voice on the board as well as a voice from
hunting and trapping. What is the composite today of both the
boards on which you serve, she asked.
MR. SPRAKER outlined the composite of the [Board of Game] as
being one member each from Wasilla, Anchorage, Sitka, Fairbanks,
Fort Yukon, and Soldotna. He related that the member from Fort
Yukon is Craig Fleener who is an Alaska Native with a master's
degree in wildlife management. The Big Game Commercial Services
Board has two Alaska Natives - Brenda Rebne and Raymond Stoney
of Kiana.
1:20:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH noted she is not so much looking for
heritage as points of opinion. Is there a representative
currently speaking to the subsistence issue loud enough to be
heard and recognized by both boards and is there a hunting
perspective, she asked. She said she thinks Mr. Spraker and Mr.
Fleener speak to the biology and wildlife management issue.
MR. SPRAKER answered he thinks there is. All members are long-
time Alaskans and Mr. Fleener has a strong background in
subsistence. All members strive to support subsistence. He
said he thinks [the Board of Game] has a very good record of
supporting subsistence. There is a law the board deals with as
far as the amount necessary for subsistence. [The board]
adheres to those very carefully when making decisions. Game
Management Unit 13 is where the board seems to always get into
trouble over subsistence. But when the rest of the state is
looked at, he said he feels strongly that this board actually
has a very good record of supporting and providing for
subsistence.
1:22:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH inquired whether the Big Game
Commercial Services Board has a similar balance.
MR. SPRAKER responded the board has a fairly widespread balance.
as explained by Ms. Rebne, there are guides, transporters,
private landowners, at-large members, and two Alaska Natives.
The board really looks forward to the comments and input from
Ms. Rebne and Mr. Stoney. He said he supports Ms. Rebne and
hopes she stays on the committee because she brings a new aspect
to the committee. Everyone on the Big Game Commercial Services
Board has worked toward getting more Alaska Natives involved in
transporting and guiding. Very few Alaska Natives are currently
involved in this industry. [The board] looks to these two
individuals to be its guides as far as trying to break more
Alaska Natives into this industry. He said he thinks this board
is very well balanced and Ms. Rebne has already done an
excellent job and learned quickly.
1:23:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH reiterated she is not asking about an
ethnic balance, but whether there is a balance in voices between
commercial or sport hunting and subsistence.
MR. SPRAKER stated the Big Game Commercial Services Board has
that balance; those issues are talked about.
1:24:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH asked whether Mr. Spraker can state
unequivocally that when something comes before him he will treat
it in a manner that is fair and consistent with the law for Game
Management Unit 13 and across Alaska.
MR. SPRAKER replied, "Without a doubt." He said he prides
himself in trying to be as fair as possible and he reads to
understand the law and the direction required by the law. He
promised to continue to do his best.
1:25:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH inquired whether Ms. Rebne could
listen to all the issues brought before the Big Game Commercial
Services Board and apply state law during her service.
MS. REBNE answered yes, she believes she can do that. The last
three days [of board meetings] have been a very educational
process, she noted. Understanding the regulations that apply to
guides and transporters was very beneficial just in
understanding that user group. She said she welcomes that
opportunity and is quite capable of doing that.
1:26:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH stated she supports the names
submitted by the governor and has no qualms about recommending
the individuals. They have different points of view and
different vantage points from across the state, but healthy
debate is good for laws.
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES echoed Representative Fairclough's
sentiment. He said he does not want boards appointed where all
members have the same opinion resulting in a rubber stamping
process. He appreciates diversity and a diversity of opinion.
He said he, too, will support forwarding the names of all three
appointees.
1:28:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON asked whether Mr. Spraker supports HB 256,
the governor's active game management bill.
MR. SPRAKER responded he strongly supports HB 256 and is pleased
to support the governor in the effort she has made. She has
made available the money and the staff to provide a tremendous
amount of information to residents across the state regarding
predator management. She has required the Board of Game members
to go to different communities and rotary clubs to provide
unbiased information about predator management. He said he
supports eliminating the public's opportunity to bring forth
initiatives because he does not like ballot box biology. The
state would be much further ahead if the money used to fight
these battles was applied to wildlife management. The state of
Alaska has the most open and public opportunity in the country
for individuals to come to the Board of Game and to work with
the 80 advisory committees. The state has the people, the
places, and the system to accommodate everyone's needs and that
is the way the system should be carried out.
1:30:24 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO requested Ms. Rebne to state what she meant by
her [3/12/08] comment, "I want to move forward."
MS. REBNE said she thinks it is important to recognize that
there are areas where [board members] will not agree, but it is
important to start with those areas where [board members] can
come together. In her first three days of board meetings, she
has identified at least three areas where [board members] have
common ground: concern about overcrowding in rural Alaska,
concern about overharvesting, and that many of the guides have a
similar tie and emotions to the areas they use just as people in
the Native community have for their lands. There is room to
work together and move forward in these areas where common
interests are shared.
1:32:28 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO commented that [the committee] wants to make sure
boards are fair, honest, and balanced to prevent favoring one
group at the expense of another.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON moved that the House Resources Standing
Committee forward the names of appointees Ted Spraker, Brenda
Rebne, and Frank Homan to a joint session for consideration.
There being no objection, all three appointments were advanced.
SB 253-BOARD OF GAME
1:33:56 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO announced that the next order of business would
be SENATE BILL NO. 253, "An Act relating to the appointment of
members of the Board of Game; and providing for an effective
date."
1:34:30 PM
JODY SIMPSON, Staff to Senator Charlie Huggins, Alaska State
Legislature, speaking on behalf of the sponsor, Senator Huggins,
stated that SB 253 would change the expiration date for the
terms of future Board of Game members from March 1 to [July 1].
If adopted, the statute change would: prevent problems that
arise from the short time frame for newly-appointed members to
prepare for the large regulatory board meetings that occur near
the beginning of March every year; reduce confusion among the
public over which board member to contact on issues; clarify the
time by which appointments should be made; and bring the terms
in line with those that are currently in place for the state's
Board of Fisheries. She said the change would also avoid
problems with having two or three of the seven board members
serving in unconfirmed status during the March meeting each
year. New members are aware their March meeting voting record
will be examined during their legislative confirmation hearings
and there can be undue scrutiny on a single vote instead of the
nominees' overall qualifications. She noted that committee
packets should include a letter from Board of Game president Mr.
Cliff Judkins requesting this change, and also a letter from Mr.
Jim Marcotte, Executive Director, Boards Support Section, Alaska
Department of Fish & Game, which outlines the implications of
the changes. This proposed adjustment in term expiration date
recognizes the importance of the Board of Game and the
complexity of the issues that come before it, she said.
1:36:30 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO opened public testimony.
KRISTY TIBBLES, Executive Director, Board of Game, Boards
Support Section, Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G),
related the support of the Board of Game and the Alaska
Department of Fish & Game for SB 253. She affirmed the
information provided by Ms. Simpson. One of the bigger
challenges faced by the Board of Game is that board members are
often appointed shortly before the large regulatory meeting that
occurs the end of February or the beginning of March. Changing
the appointment date would greatly benefit the nominees' ability
to prepare for these meetings. She urged the committee to
support SB 253.
CO-CHAIR GATTO closed public testimony.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON moved to report SB 253 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal
note. There being no objection, SB 253 was reported from the
House Resources Standing Committee.
HB 367-SALE OF RAW MILK PRODUCTS
1:39:00 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 367, "An Act relating to the sale of raw milk
and raw milk products."
CO-CHAIR GATTO noted that there is a work draft that
incorporates Amendments 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 [adopted by the
committee on 3/10/08]. Amendment 1 is not included because it
was withdrawn. Amendment 7, which was before the committee when
it adjourned [on 3/10/08], will be considered once the work
draft is adopted.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON moved that the committee adopt as the work
draft the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 367, labeled
25-LS1429\C, Bannister, 3/11/08.
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH objected. She withdrew her objection
after ascertaining which version of the work draft was before
the committee.
1:40:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MARK NEUMAN, Alaska State Legislature, stated
that the committee's suggestions were incorporated into the work
draft.
CO-CHAIR GATTO requested a recap of Amendment 7.
LOUIE FLORA, Staff to Representative Paul Seaton, Alaska State
Legislature, stated he provided the committee aide with a fact
sheet on antibiotic resistance to go along with Amendment 7
proposed by Representative Seaton. The intent of Amendment 7 is
to get away from the public health issue of antibiotic-resistant
bacteria which can be prevalent in raw milk products and
transmitted to the consuming public in unpasteurized milk.
Amendment 7 would require that raw milk that is sold must come
from an animal that has never received antibiotics.
1:43:00 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO read Amendment 7, labeled 25-LS1429\A.1,
Bannister, 3/6/08, to the committee [original punctuation
provided]:
Page 2, line 28:
Delete "A"
Insert "Except as provided in (b) of this
section, a"
Page 3, following line 2:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(b) A raw milk product may not be sold
under (a) of this section if the animal that produced
the raw milk for the raw milk product has ever been
treated with antibiotics. In this subsection,
"treated with antibiotics" includes being injected
with antibiotics or being fed antibiotics."
Reletter the following subsections accordingly.
1:44:23 PM
KRISTIN RYAN, Director, Division of Environmental Health,
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), called attention
to a fact sheet prepared by [the division] about antibiotic
resistance that was distributed to the committee.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON inquired how long antibiotics stay in an
animal's system.
MS. RYAN responded she cannot answer that and the state
veterinarian is not available. Current federal regulations for
pasteurized milk outline the required length of time that an
animal cannot be milked, and the length of time is different for
each antibiotic.
1:45:20 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON asked whether antibiotics stay in the meat.
MS. RYAN replied she cannot answer that, but she does not
believe so because it is pretty much the same rules that apply
to the sale of meat.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON said his point is that he believes an injected
antibiotic stays in the meat, but would not stay there forever.
Milk has to be dumped for a certain period of time after the
animal receives an antibiotic. Is it the same for meat, he
asked.
MS. RYAN answered she does not know, the state returned the
regulation of meat production to the federal government. She
reiterated she thinks it is similar to milk - there is a time
limit where the chemical is considered to exist in the body and
after that time limit it is again safe to sell.
1:46:25 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON inquired whether Ms. Ryan supports Amendment 7.
MS. RYAN responded the information she just passed out sort of
explains [the division's] position. She acknowledged that
antibiotic resistance is a problem, but [the division] believes
in the safe use of antibiotics on the farm; not treating an
animal that is known to be sick could be considered a cruelty
issue. [The division] does not support banning antibiotic use
on farms.
1:46:55 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO asked whether cooking denatures a chemical like
an antibiotic to a point where it becomes something different
than the antibiotic itself.
MS. RYAN replied she does not believe so, but she will have to
get back to the committee on that.
CO-CHAIR GATTO said the issue with raw milk is that the bacteria
is not being killed by pasteurization, and milk is mostly fed to
children who may be the most susceptible in the population. He
related that Representative Seaton's point is, Do we want to
give a resistant strain of bacteria to the most vulnerable
section of the population? and, therefore, any cow receiving
antibiotic should not be used for milk production.
1:48:26 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON drew attention to a handout from Cornell
University which shows that even pasteurization does not kill
all bacteria. The handout also states that raw milk - if
produced properly - could have 20 times less bacteria than
pasteurized milk. He said his concern with Amendment 7 is the
word "ever" so that milk from a cow that has ever been treated
with an antibiotic cannot be sold as raw milk. What is the
penalty if someone sells milk that is in violation of the time
period for an antibiotic, and is there any way to check that, he
inquired.
MS. RYAN explained that [the division] currently tests the
pasteurized milk that is sold. Antibiotics are not allowed to
be within the milk that is being processed for pasteurization.
If antibiotics are detected, which happens occasionally, the
entire tank of milk must be dumped at the cost of the dairy
farmer. Because of that great expense, a farmer prefers to
avoid that situation.
1:50:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked whether there is a certain minimum
time period that would apply to all antibiotics.
MS. RYAN said [the division] checks the milk and makes sure the
standards are met. [The division's] ultimate goal is to ensure
no milk is ever sold with an antibiotic residue in it.
Antibiotics are used frequently on the farm and [the division]
is aware of that. She said she does not believe raw milk would
ever be able to be sold if Amendment 7 passes as written.
1:51:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked whether it would work to amend
Amendment 7 by replacing "ever" with "been treated with
antibiotics in the last 30 days", or would it need to be 60
days.
MS. RYAN advised against getting that specific. She said she
believes the current federal guidelines are very accurate and
are followed closely and do the job sufficiently as-is.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON surmised Ms. Ryan is saying Amendment 7 is
really not needed.
MS. RYAN responded she is not saying that, it is for the
committee to decide. She is just saying that [the division]
already monitors antibiotics pretty heavily because of concern
about residues in the milk and [the division] does not want
people to get that because people could have allergies or other
things. However, if the committee is worried about resistant
bacteria, that is a very different situation than residue.
1:52:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH said her point on the antibiotic issue
is that the committee has taken out all of the testing
requirements.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON inquired whether the division would go to
the farms selling raw milk to test the milk should HB 367 become
law.
MS. RYAN replied yes, [the division's] intent would be to
require testing to ensure there are no antibiotics in raw milk
like [the division] does for pasteurized milk.
JOSEPH MCLAUGHLIN, MD, Acting Chief, Section of Epidemiology,
Division of Public Health, in response to Co-Chair Gatto, stated
he had nothing to add in regard to Amendment 7.
1:54:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON asked whether the division has the ability
to test for antibiotics under current regulations.
MS. RYAN answered yes, [the division] has the authority in
statute as indicated by Section 1 of HB 367. Current statute
requires [the department] to regulate milk in compliance with
the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance, the federal regulations that
allow the state to do all sorts of things for milk. The new
section, Section 2, is being added for raw milk. Section 2 does
not necessarily say how [the division] would regulate raw milk,
it just says the state should allow the sale of raw milk. At
this point the bill is silent on that issue and [the division]
has continually testified that it would intend to build a
program similar to how it regulates pasteurized milk and [the
division's] fiscal note reflects that. However, even though
[the division] would implement as stringent a program as it can,
[the division] still does not believe that would be adequate.
CO-CHAIR GATTO surmised it is within statute that [the division]
has the privilege to move because milk is milk.
MS. RYAN responded no. The statute is clearer on pasteurized
milk, it is silent on raw milk.
1:56:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES stated it is his intent as a legislator
that [the division] would build a set of regulations that would
guarantee the testing procedure similar to what is currently
done for [pasteurized] milk so the public has some relative
assurance that testing is being done.
CO-CHAIR GATTO noted that all committee members present are
nodding their heads in agreement with Representative Roses.
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH said she definitely supports some kind
of quality assurance for consumers.
1:57:38 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO inquired whether [the division] would be able to
perform these tests without an additional position.
MS. RYAN replied the fiscal note is requesting three additional
positions; [the division] would not be able to do the testing
within its current budget.
CO-CHAIR GATTO stated HB 367 would go to the House Finance
Committee because of the fiscal note.
1:58:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES requested Dr. McLaughlin's opinion on
whether there is a relatively standard length of time that could
be applied for antibiotics and therefore specified in the
amendment or does he agree with not getting that specific.
DR. MCLAUGHLIN answered each antibiotic has a different half-
life - some are a matter of hours and some are several days. He
said Ms. Ryan's testimony was very accurate and he supports what
she said.
2:00:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES presumed that regardless of Dr.
McLaughlin's position on raw milk, in regard to Amendment 7 the
doctor would be comfortable that current regulations will
prevent the selling of raw milk that contains antibiotics.
DR. MCLAUGHLIN said he believes that DEC's current, elaborate
testing process is sufficient to determine whether there is
antibiotic in the milk. However, he added, cows can be
colonized with antibiotic-resistant bacteria in ways other than
from inadequate antibiotic therapy for a bacterial infection.
Antibiotic-resistant bacteria can be spread from farm to farm
and from cow to cow through socializing with other cows and
through the feed. This is becoming a worldwide issue regardless
of whether an individual cow has actually received an antibiotic
in the past.
2:02:16 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO surmised that every person has antibodies running
through his or her system.
DR. MCLAUGHLIN said correct.
CO-CHAIR GATTO asked whether antibodies introduced to an
individual's body are different enough so that they should be
treated differently than those antibodies naturally produced by
the individual. He noted that a person takes antibodies to
quickly raise titer levels rather than waiting for his or her
body to produce its own immunity.
DR. MCLAUGHLIN responded he thinks three different things are
being talked about. Antibiotics are drugs or chemicals that are
produced to kill bacteria. Antibodies are developed by a
person's or animal's own body as the result of antigens being
introduced into the body and those antibodies kill the offending
pathogens. Some human pathogens or bacteria are more resistant
to the body's immune system and some are less resistant.
Antibiotics are developed to help fight those bacteria that the
body is less resistant to. When those pathogens develop a
resistance to antibiotics, that is when there is serious
trouble. This is being seen in all sorts of different human
pathogens, from Salmonella to tuberculosis to influenza. More
and more antibiotic-resistant pathogens will continue to emerge
as the use of antibiotics continues in the healthcare setting.
2:05:18 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO inquired what the significance would be to pass
HB 367 with Amendment 7 as opposed to without Amendment 7.
DR. MCLAUGHLIN replied it would be better to have Ms. Ryan or
the state veterinarian answer this question. He said his
concern is much larger than just Amendment 7. His understanding
is that DEC currently has a monitoring system in place that is
able to determine whether there are antibiotics in milk that is
being sold. The question is whether DEC can go to all of these
small mom-and-pop farms that are selling raw milk to determine
whether antibiotics are in that milk. He said it is apparent to
him that DEC will not be able to do that. The department may be
able to that with some of the farms or maybe with all of the
farms some of the time, but DEC does not have the capacity to do
it with all of the farms all of the time.
2:07:12 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO asked whether Dr. McLaughlin is saying that small
farms have a failure rate in regard to the voluntary compliance
of not selling milk from cows treated with antibiotics.
DR. MCLAUGHLIN said he thinks that if Amendment 7 were to stand,
the risk of raw milk being sold with antibiotics in it would
certainly decrease.
2:07:48 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON inquired whether milk could be tested to detect
an antibiotic that had been administered to the cow six months
or a year ago.
DR. MCLAUGHLIN stated not to his knowledge.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON asked about 30 days ago.
DR. MCLAUGHLIN answered he could research this to come up with a
definitive number.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON deduced there is no way to tell whether a cow
has ever had an antibiotic.
DR. MCLAUGHLIN agreed.
2:08:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES objected to Amendment 7. [Representative
Wilson had previously objected to Amendment 7 on 3/10/08.]
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON said if Representative Roses had not objected
he would have.
2:09:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN stated there is no way to tell whether a
cow or animal has ever been treated. He related that in the
opinion of Dr. Gerlach, the state veterinarian, it would be
considered cruelty to not treat a sick animal with antibiotic.
Keeping an animal healthy is natural animal husbandry. Selling
milk from an unhealthy animal would be a problem.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON called the question.
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN added one more statement: Should a mother
be able to breastfeed if she has ever had an antibiotic?
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON again called the question.
A roll call vote was taken. No one voted in favor of Amendment
7. Representatives Edgmon, Fairclough, Wilson, Roses, Johnson,
and Gatto voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 7 failed by a
vote of 0-6.
2:11:35 PM
CO-CHAIR GATTO announced that HB 367, as amended, was now before
the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH moved to report CSHB 367, Version 25-
LS1429\C, Bannister, 3/11/08 out of committee with individual
recommendations, the accompanying fiscal notes [and the
forthcoming fiscal note]. There being no objection, CSHB
367(RES) was reported from the House Resources Standing
Committee.
2:12:18 PM
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON said he thinks there may be an additional
forthcoming fiscal note. He requested that the motion be
restated to include the forthcoming fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH agreed.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:12 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|