Legislature(2017 - 2018)HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/19/2018 01:30 PM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB79 | |
| HB197 | |
| HB216 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 197 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 216 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 79 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 197
"An Act relating to the duties of the commissioner of
natural resources; relating to agriculture; and
relating to community seed libraries."
2:03:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JENNIFER JOHNSTON, SPONSOR, provided an
explanation of the bill:
Mr. Chairman and members of the Finance committee
thank you for taking the time in your busy schedule to
hear HB 197, a bill relating to Community Seed
Libraries.
This bill came from members of my community, as a way
to legalize the sharing of small amounts of seeds.
Currently, a seed cannot be sold, shared, or exchanged
without going through costly testing and labeling.
Seed sharing and libraries have the potential to
contribute significant value to the health and
heritage in our communities by providing a place to
share regionally-adapted and heirloom seeds as an
alternative to outside genetically modified seeds, and
will help to increase biodiversity and plant
resilience in our state.
Seed libraries have been sprouting up throughout
Alaska and this bill will allow them to operate
legally without burdensome and unnecessary government
regulation.
This bill will help grow an organic sense of community
and increase Alaskan food security.
ELIZABETH REXFORD, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JENNIFER JOHNSTON,
read from prepared remarks:
Thank you, chairmen and members of the house finance
committee, for hearing HB 197.
HB 197 reduces onerous labeling and testing
regulations for small batches of noncommercial seeds.
Currently, all seeds in Alaska fall under commercial
regulations, including the seeds that are traded
amongst friends or saved from the prior year's
harvest. This bill will change this, allowing the
Alaskan gardening and farming communities the
opportunity to continue expanding seed sharing without
breaking the law.
The new labeling guidelines would require 5 sections:
• the seeds' species and variety,
• name and address of seed library
• year the seed was packaged
• the weight of the packaged contents
• and the statement, "Not authorized for commercial
use and not classified, graded, or inspected by
the State of Alaska."
While this may seem like overkill for a small local
seed exchange, five requirements for labeling is less
than the two pages of requirements we currently have.
Because of the way the current statute is written, any
seed that is used at any capacity in the state has to
go through the commercial process of extensive
testing, germinating percentages and labeling. In the
scale of things, the new requirements would be pretty
limited.
This bill also broadens the duties of the DNR
Commissioner to allow the department to administer and
promote the creation of community seed libraries. A
community seed library is not currently defined in
statute, so this bill carves out a space in statute
and says that seed libraries can exist and provides
guidelines. Alaska has been experiencing a severe food
security challenge, where residents now spend close to
$2 billion each year buying food produced from outside
of the state. Community seed libraries encourage
self-sufficiency and preserve agricultural knowledge.
Now that we have planted the seed, please join us in
supporting HB 197. Rob Carter, whom is the state's
plant materials center manager, is on the line to
answer any questions. Thank you for taking the time
to hear the bill.
2:06:39 PM
Representative Kawasaki stated there were letters in
members' packets from individuals who were currently part
of the seed library in Alaska. He asked if the bill sponsor
was saying the individuals were running illegal operations.
Representative Johnston answered "quietly." The bill would
help the individuals do the work on a more orderly and
legal basis.
Representative Kawasaki stated that based on conversations
with individuals with seed libraries, the bill looked
onerous for people with noncommercial seed libraries. He
asked for detail.
Representative Johnston deferred the question to the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
Representative Kawasaki repeated his question. He was
trying to determine whether it was not acceptable for
individuals to operate seed libraries without enabling
legislation.
ROB CARTER, MANAGER, PLANT MATERIALS CENTER, DIVISION OF
AGRICULTURE, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (via
teleconference), answered that current regulations
prohibited all seed sales and transportation being offered
for sale in Alaska. The operations had to meet a very
defined set of testing and labeling requirements. Currently
all of the individuals operating seed libraries, including
anyone sharing or transporting seed, for personal
noncommercial use, were breaking current regulations. He
explained that if DNR went to a seed library to issue a
notice of violation or an order and the seed library failed
to follow through, under AS 03.05.090 a person violating
one of the provisions was guilty of a Class A misdemeanor
and a fine of up to $500 for each violation. He noted
violations could get expensive if a library contained a
couple hundred packets of seed.
Representative Kawasaki asked if the requirements were
statutory or regulatory.
2:10:58 PM
Mr. Carter responded that the requirement was currently in
regulation under the duties of the commissioner. Statute
currently allowed DNR's Division of Agriculture to regulate
the sale, transport, importation, or exportation of seed
within the state.
Representative Kawasaki remarked on current regulation that
gave DNR and the commissioner the ability to regulate. He
asked if it was possible to amend regulation to allow DNR
to regulate seed libraries or transfers of seed grown and
traded in the state.
Mr. Carter replied it could be effective to change
regulation to allow for personal use, noncommercial seed
distributions or transportations around the state. He
observed that regulations could be changed much easier than
statute. To protect the industry in perpetuity having the
requirement in statute was beneficial because of the
protection it would provide to Alaska's small and larger
personal use seed exchanges or transportations. Currently
it was not in the best interest of the division or the
state for food security and biodiversity reasons for DNR to
issue notices of violation for non-commercial seed use, but
that was because it was the way he operated the division.
Knowing that regulations could be changed by whoever was
sitting in his position (with a lengthy process of public
scoping and through the Department of Law (DOL)), he
believed for long-term food security and sustainability,
establishing statute would protect seed libraries and
noncommercial seed trading.
2:13:54 PM
Representative Grenn pointed to page 3 of the legislation
pertaining to community seed libraries [subsection (c) at
the bottom of the page] "Seed given, exchanged, or offered
for giving or exchange under (b) of this section must be
packaged for sale and labeled." He noted the subsection
listed several things that needed to be on the label. He
asked for verification that someone still needed to label
their seeds if they were giving them away versus selling
them.
Representative Johnston replied, "currently yes." She noted
that the labeling could be merely having a label on the
table or next to the seeds suggesting what the seeds were;
it did not have to be for each individual packaging.
Representative Grenn asked for verification that the
requirement to package and label was not per package.
Representative Johnston replied in the affirmative.
Representative Grenn referenced page 4 of the bill and
asked why there was a one-pound limitation.
Representative Johnston deferred to DNR.
Mr. Carter replied that the issue had been discussed at
length - it had initially been a smaller weight. He
reported that the industry had reached out and communicated
that the weight was too small. He did not believe it was a
benefit or hurdle for anyone sharing seed. He used
cauliflower as an example and specified there were 70,000
seeds per pound. He believed it was plenty for
noncommercial use. He thought that if people started
noncommercial sharing of cereal grains or larger seed, it
may become a burden, but he believed the weight limit in
the bill was per package. He elaborated that a person could
easily write "not authorized for commercial use in the
state of Alaska" on the packages and could follow the other
labeling requirements to overcome the hurdle.
Representative Grenn asked for verification that he would
need five separate, one-pound bags if he wanted five pounds
of one type of seed. He thought a limitation sounded
strange for community sharing.
Mr. Carter answered there was a reasonable way to work
around the issue. The intent behind the bill was to make
sure the use was noncommercial. He elaborated that seed
laws existed to protect individuals who based their
livelihood on the quality of the seed. Federal and state
seed laws regulated the quality of seeds farmers needed or
purchased because their business operations depended on it
- that was where labeling requirements for germination and
purity came into play as a protection for farmers. There
were many workarounds to ensure individuals sharing seeds
could do so easily.
2:18:38 PM
Representative Guttenberg referenced two emails in members'
packets sent to his staff the previous year [email of
opposition from P.S. Holloway sent on April 7, 2017 (copy
on file)]. He detailed that the author of the email, Dr.
Holloway was the retired director of the University of
Alaska experimental farm. He emphasized that no one had
been more active in promoting agriculture in Alaska than
Dr. Holloway. He explained that in addition to her
cynicism, Dr. Holloway did not get the bill. He detailed
that Dr. Holloway was in the middle of the commercial and
free trade of seeds and plants and was still active at the
University's experimental farm. He asked if the bill
addressed the concerns. He referred to DNR's zero fiscal
note. He commented that DNR's budget was strapped and he
questioned where the money would come from to oversee the
changes made by the bill.
Representative Johnston answered that the email had been
sent on April 7 [2017]. The concerns had been addressed by
the House Resources Committee in an amendment process on
April 28 [2017].
Representative Guttenberg referenced the one-pound
limitation and the fact that noncommercial seed libraries
would still be regulated. He mentioned the ability for
people to swap seeds. He thought it appeared the bill did a
substantial amount without a fiscal note. He saw the bill
as a tamping down of people's ability to sell seeds at a
farmer's market or other. He stressed the state did not
have enough agriculture at present to dictate that people
could not experiment and if they did experiment they had to
label and have accurate accounting for what they were
doing. He was concerned the bill would do the opposite of
enhancing.
2:22:16 PM
Representative Johnston replied that Alaska would be the
fifth or sixth state to do the work. She stated that it
appeared to be making things more difficult; however, it
would bring the business of seed exchange into a place of
respect and biodiversity, where it would be possible to buy
seeds from local people at a farmer's market. She stated
that while it seemed cumbersome to some, she believed it
would be better to legitimize the activity by passing
statute.
Representative Guttenberg asked how DNR expected to
implement the bill without a fiscal note. He stated that
normally there was a fiscal note when writing regulation
was required.
2:23:49 PM
Mr. Carter replied that nowhere in the bill was there
language specifying someone "shall" do something, whereas,
there were numerous provisions specifying that the
department "may" do something if it chose. The division was
currently reviewing its seed regulations. If the statute
moved forward during its next regulation process, DNR would
make sure it addressed the community seed libraries and the
personal noncommercial transfer of seed within the
regulations. He noted that DNR's current purview was
commercial only. He cited the department's belief it would
not have to regulate the issue as its reason for the zero
fiscal note. He elaborated there would not be a need for
another staff. There may be some education and the bill
provided the opportunity for DNR to create an additional
webpage; however, the department already had a website. He
did not believe the additional work in the bill would place
an undue burden on the division or department. At present,
if the bill passed, DNR would not have to police the
noncommercial seed sharing activities; it would reduce any
work hours, trips, or inspections the department would
currently have to do if someone brought noncommercial use
to its attention via a complaint.
Representative Guttenberg believed there were too many
contradictions associated with the bill.
Representative Wilson asked if Mr. Carter had participated
in the House Resources Committee meetings the past April.
Mr. Carter answered in the affirmative.
Representative Wilson asked if Mr. Carter had told the
House Resources Committee that the issue was in regulation
and DNR could choose to make changes.
Mr. Carter replied that he believed so. He believed the
concerns could be addressed through a regulation change. He
was uncertain it would provide longevity and protection to
the noncommercial seed sharing activities in Alaska, but it
very well could be done.
Representative Wilson asked why the department had not done
anything in regulation. She surmised that the department
could have elected to implement regulation and the
legislature could have changed it via statute if it did not
like the outcome.
2:27:00 PM
Mr. Carter replied that the duties of the commissioner of
DNR under AS 03.05.010 pertained to the development of a
commercial agriculture industry. The department did not see
the noncommercial seed sharing activities as commercial;
therefore, it did not see the noncommercial activity as
falling under its purview at present.
Representative Wilson stated that Mr. Carter had testified
that DNR wrote regulations and could change them if it
chose to. She thought he was now saying that DNR had no
legal authority to write regulations for noncommercial seed
sales or trade.
Mr. Carter confirmed that DNR did not have the purview of
noncommercial use, but it did have purview to protect and
enhance an agricultural industry in the state. The
regulations that were likely last updated in the 1980s
oversaw and regulated all seed throughout the state, which
included personal use.
Representative Wilson asked how DNR was enhancing if it was
not allowing.
Mr. Carter clarified the department was enhancing
commercial industry. He detailed the department was
providing seed testing and sampling and was regulating the
control, transport, and seeds being offered for sale to the
commercial industry within the state. The department was
not enhancing noncommercial use at present.
Representative Wilson pointed to page 5, lines 18, 19, 23,
and 24 pertaining to the duties of the department with
respect to agriculture. She asked if the language read "the
Department of Natural Resources shall not control and
regulate the entry and transportation of noncommercial
seeds, plants, and other horticulture products," whether it
would take care of the problem that DNR would not be
regulating the noncommercial industry.
Mr. Carter asked for clarification on the line numbers.
Representative Wilson replied that page 5, lines 18 and 19
designated that DNR shall do certain things. Lines 23 and
24 currently read "control and regulate the entry and
transportation of seeds, plants, and other horticulture
products." She believed Mr. Carter was saying that the
language pertained to commercial activity only and that DNR
should not be regulating noncommercial. She asked if the
legislature wanted to ensure DNR was not regulating
noncommercial activity, it should be clarified in statute.
Mr. Carter believed it would be a way to address
noncommercial seed distribution within the state.
2:31:02 PM
Representative Johnston thought Representative Wilson had
an excellent point. The mission of the division was a
commercial one. She spoke to the discussion about the
weight limit discussion (i.e. one to five pounds) and
reasoned it brought up what constituted commercial versus
noncommercial. She believed it was important to keep in
mind the intent of the division to protect commercial while
not standing in the way of the exchanges.
Co-Chair Seaton pointed out that one of DNR's duties listed
on page 5, line 25, was to control and eradicate pests
injurious to plants. He believed allowing individuals to
import anything they wanted would be in opposition to
efforts to control invasive plants. He thought getting too
broad would create problems. He noted that Section 4 (page
3) was new to the legislation and included language about
giving or exchanging seeds. He pointed language on lines 23
and 24 "...from a plant grown (1) outside the state, and
imported into the state in compliance with AS
03.05.010(a)(5)." He remarked that the bill would change
language on page 2 from "into" the state, to "in" the
state. He wondered why the provision on page 3 would be
necessary, which would allow for importation from outside
the state, if page 2 specified the bill applied only to
seed from within the state.
Representative Johnston answered that House Resources
Committee had discussed there were occasional chances for
seed libraries to exchange seeds with commercial entities.
She did not want to prevent seeds from being available to
seed libraries.
2:34:17 PM
Mr. Carter agreed. For example, if he placed a seed order
for his garden and ordered one ounce of broccoli seed (any
remaining seed would have met the requirements within AS
03.05.010(a)(5)) he could leave the seed in its commercial
package or repackage it and label it accordingly and could
noncommercially share it with individuals in his community
or in other regions around the state. There were numerous
individuals throughout Alaska who had relatives outside the
state who bought and shared commercial seeds that met DNR's
current regulations to contain no noxious weeds and have
high purity and good germination. There were also numerous
crop varieties that were not great producers within the
state (e.g. some could not be overwintered); therefore, as
long as the materials met the state's labeling requirements
in their original container, the seed could be disseminated
in Alaska.
Co-Chair Seaton referenced page 2, line 12 that read
"regulate and control the entry in the state" instead of
the previous "regulate and control entry into the state."
He asked if the language change did not change the
regulation of importing seed or distributing within the
state.
Mr. Carter agreed. He viewed it as a language change that
would still allow DNR to regulate seed being brought into
the state to ensure it met the needs of commercial users
and to prevent invasive species from being brought in. The
language would still allow seeds that could not be viably
produced in Alaska to be noncommercially traded or
distributed around the state.
2:37:35 PM
Representative Pruitt stated that his concerns about
ensuring the state maintained its control over any type of
invasive or noxious seeds. He pointed to language intending
to protect from the issue on page 4 under applicability of
other laws. He noted the language specified that nothing
authorized a person to possess or exchange [invasive or
toxic] seeds. He asked how to maintain the control. He had
no problem with individuals sharing heirloom or other seeds
with no issues; however, he reasoned that individuals may
think that something looked pretty or had a value, but
ultimately it could have a negative impact on the [non-
native] environment it was brought to. He used Hawaii as an
example and noted that much of the plants on the islands
were invasive. He asked how to maintain controls through
the new exchange even if there was good intention involved.
Mr. Carter remarked on the importance of the question about
not allowing invasives to include non-native species into
the state. He referred to earlier testimony that people
were going under the radar. He believed the intent of the
language to provide some guidelines to follow for
noncommercial use, gave the state the ability to try to cut
off any invasive species from being brought into the state.
He remarked on the difficulty of the task because vehicles,
planes, boats, lawn mowers from out-of-state, and other
could have seeds attached when brought in. He referenced
Alaska's large size and remoteness. The department would
continue to utilize its current invasive and restrictive
noxious weed list, which it planned on enhancing to include
other species of concern it was hearing about from other
state and federal agencies. The goal was to stop the seeds
preferably before they reached the state's border or if
they made it into the state and were brought to the
department's attention.
Representative Pruitt asked if there was language to
include that would enable DNR to shut down a seed library
or act to prevent someone from bringing in invasive species
or other. He did not see specific language in the bill and
asked if the department was able to take action.
2:42:07 PM
Mr. Carter answered that DNR would take all of the
assistance it could get controlling non-native invasive
species in Alaska. He referenced page 4, lines 16
pertaining to the applicability of other laws, which did
not allow a person to violate the PVP Act [Plant Variety
Protection Act], distribute or exchange seeds classified as
controlled substances, and anything considered noxious,
invasive, or toxic under AS 03 or a regulation adopted
under those chapters. He believed the bill left all tools
the department currently had in place to go in, issue
notice of violations and stop sales to have the seeds
destroyed in a manner at the discretion of the director of
the Division of Agriculture. He did not believe the bill
hindered the department's ability to continue to control
the entry into the state of invasive or non-native plant
species of concern.
Co-Chair Foster OPENED and CLOSED public testimony.
Representative Wilson was disturbed the bill had been
around since the past May. She stated the Division of
Agriculture was supposed to be helping agriculture. She
referenced a letter from a person in Homer related to
growing pumpkins. She hoped there would be more discussion
about how the bill was enhancing agriculture. She believed
there was currently a huge loss occurring.
Co-Chair Foster asked members to provide any amendments by
the coming Wednesday.
HB 197 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.