SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES, AGRICULTURE, SALMON AND WATER

 

 

February 07, 2001   Hearing Room B

8:00 AM Tapes  26 - 27

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:            Sen. Ken Messerle, Chair

Sen. Frank Shields, Vice-Chair

Sen. Jason Atkinson

Sen. Roger Beyer

Sen. Ginny Burdick

Sen. Ryan Deckert

Sen. Bill Fisher

 

MEMBER EXCUSED:

 

STAFF PRESENT:                  Jennifer Solomon, Committee Administrator

Cheryl Young, Committee Assistant

 

 

MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD:            SB 417, Public Hearing

                                    SB 481, Public Hearing

                                    SB 484, Public Hearing                                  

 

These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules.  Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words.  For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.

 

TAPE/#

Speaker

Comments

TAPE 26, A

006

Chair Messerle

Opens meeting at 8:04.  Opens Public Hearing on SB 481

007

Staff

Summarizes SB 481

SB 481,  PUBLIC HEARING

009

Sen. Peter Courtney

District 17. States that he has introduced two bills for pipeline safety, and this is one of them. Requests a technical fix required by a LC opinion directed to him on December 11, 2000.

018

Jack Den

Chief of Pipeline Safety with the Oregon Public Utility Commission. Discusses the bill, statutes, and the department name change.

031

Chair Messerle

Close Public Hearing on SB 481.  Opens Public Hearing on SB 417.

SB 417, PUBLIC HEARING

048

Staff

Summarizes SB 417.

050

Bob Rindy

Legislative Coordinator with the Department of Land Conservation and Development.  States that SB 417 is a proposal by the department to make some repairs to the periodic review process. Asks the committee to make some adjustments to the current time lines assessment under certain circumstances. Continues with testimony. Submits written testimony.  (EXHIBIT A).

134

Chair Messerle

Asks what impact a delayed periodic review would have on an applicant.

136

Rindy

Responds that typically a periodic review doesn’t involve an applicant, but is very often initiated by the local government itself.

146

Chair Messerle

States that he is referring more to their getting caught in a time frame, and their decision being delayed until the periodic review would be completed.

148

Rindy

Agrees they could get caught. Believes the time frame bump up they are asking for is fairly short.

158

Sen. Fisher

Asks if this periodic review is ever brought on by situations that are dependent upon it, or is it a periodic review that comes about as determined by so many quarters, years, or so many days?

167

Rindy

Responds that it is a schedule that LCDC prepares, and is based on the statute.

175

Jim Knight

Manager, Rural and Community Services Division of LCDC. Continues with comments.

176

Sen. Fisher

Asks if the rules are in statute or in OAR?

177

Knight

Responds they are in statues

180

Sen. Fisher

Notes that the people needed to do the periodic reviews know well in advance when these reviews are due.

185

Knight

Yes.

190

Sen. Fisher

Asks “isn’t it reasonable to leave the time lines as they are, and how many times has this problem actually come up?”

197

Rindy

Clarifies his response.

212

Sen. Fisher

Asks how many times this has occurred since this went into effect?

214

Knight

Discusses unanticipated circumstances requiring additional work.

221

Sen. Fisher

Asks if it wouldn’t be better to have the adjustment time spoken to here rather than extending the time-line and basically get it out of the way.  If there was a problem arising, then you can have the specified time, but it would not allow for an automatic periodic review.  

241

Rindy

States that if the local government can’t finish the work in six months, the statute requires that LCDC impose a sanction. LCDC is very reluctant to step in with sanctions.

269

Sen. Fisher

Asks if there is anything preventing them from getting any lead-time, and having it so that the process is under way in six months.

275

Rindy

Explains the reasons why there is no lead-time on this issue.  

293

Sen. Fisher

Asks why not extend it for appeal process?

295

Rindy

States that they are asking for an extension specifically for the appeals process.

297

Sen. Fisher

Comments on the complexity of this process.

311

Rindy

Comments that what they are trying to accomplish is a very minor technical thing that is just only affecting that appeal.

315

Sen. Fisher

Notes that he would be happy if he saw such a reluctance to do sanctions against a private person under LCDC rules and regulations

325

Rindy

States that LCDC is very reluctant to do sanctions on private persons, and that all power is in regards to local government.

332

Chair Messerle

Asks if they would document and clarify what the impact might be on an applicant if this is extended on the periodic reviews.

338

Rindy

Responds that they will try to get more information on that issue.

344

Burton Weast

Speaks on behalf of the Special Districts Association of Oregon. Gives testimony in support of SB 417. Discusses some changes they would like to have made to the bill.

444

Sen. Fisher

Notes if this appeals process is changed to a one time shot to the end of things, then there would be the potential to have an appeal settled more quickly.

450

Weast

Responds.

479

Chair Messerle

Asks what are the sanctions against the State Department if they don’t get their process done?

484

Weast

Responds on the time lines that the LCDC and commission have to act.  Does not see SB 417 harming that objective.

493

Chair Messerle

Asks for clarification regarding the time lines not met.

495

Weast

Responds.

504

Chair Messerle

Asks, that if the periodic review is not adopted yet and there is not a time line as we have seen in other regulatory agencies, then if the agency does not meet the time line then that person has the authority to go ahead with the project.

511

Weast

Responds “not in this process”.

Tape 27, A

038

Sen. Fisher

Do you have an amendment drawn up to make that appeal process a one-time thing?

040

Weast

No, but the bill was drafted last session, and he will try to get the local governments and department to meet and look at it and try to get some consensus on it before bringing it back to the committee.

046

Sen. Fisher

Asks if the relating clause allows it?

047

Weast

Responds that it states it relates to deadlines of periodic review. Believes it would be a deadline for appeals.

050

Chair Messerle

Requests that Mr. Weast do that.

052

Art Schlack

Association of Oregon Counties. Speaks in support of SB 417.

097

Linda Ludwig

League of Oregon Cities. Speaks in support for SB 417. Asks the committee to consider amendments to the bill.

123

Chair Messerle

Asks how long the sanctions have been in place.

124

Ludwig

Responds that she was told several years.

132

Chair Messerle

Requests of all those who testified, to work with Jennifer Solomon, and they will try to get all these amendments packaged together before the committee comes back.  Closes Hearing on SB 417.  Opens Public Hearing on SB 484.

SB 484, Public Hearing

141

Staff

Summarizes bill.

148

Roy Elicker

Legislative Coordinator for the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife. States that the department has concerns with SB 484. Continues with testimony. Submits written testimony.  (EXHIBIT B).

176

Chair Messerle

Asks if the purpose of SB 484 is to get the cougars to move out of the populated areas, how effective do you think that would be? If they know where the easy food is going to be, are they going to migrate back into the area again, especially if they are prone to doing damage?

185

George Buckner

Director, Wildlife Division, Oregon Dept of Fish and Wildlife. Do not have any information that leads to the belief that cougars respond negatively to harassment.

190

Sen. Deckert

What is the definition or standard for immediate imminent threat to public safety?

194

Buckner

Responds that there is no definition like that in this bill. 

209

Sen. Deckert

Asks, “in this work group, are all parties at table in the House that are concerned with this issue?”

211

Buckner

Responds that he believes so.

222

Sen. Burdick

Regarding the other bill in the House, are they talking about the same thing this bill is talking about which is non lethal use of dogs, or are they talking about a broader approach?

228

Elicker

States that in the other bill, it allows someone to kill a cougar if they feel there is an imminent threat to their own personal safety, others or their pets.

232

Sen. Burdick

Does the other bill have reference to dogs in it?

233

Elicker

Responds that yes it does.

238

Sen. Ferrioli

Represents District 28. Requests to be heard for SB 484 that he sponsored at the request of Paul Swartz and some Baker County Houndsmen. Testifies in support of SB 484.

322

Sen. Fisher

Asks what specific situation would authorize this person to get on the spot to allow him to follow this animal the 15 miles it would take, without having to go through all the red tape to go through the property.

331

Sen. Ferrioli

States that the Houndsmen are very adaptable. Expands on his answer.

361

Sen. R. Beyer

Notes that biggest concern that Mr. Buckner spoke of earlier about is that on line 13 there’s three little letters – NON. Because the cougar would come right back to the area again, why not take out those three letters and make it lethal harassment?

360

Sen. Ferrioli

Responds that there are others bills in the building to allow lethal take of cougars. Expands on this issue.

384

Sen. R. Beyer

Comments that he does not share that same thought, because he has a bill coming that overturns it.

385

Sen. Burdick

What kinds of hounds are being talked about?

388

Sen. Ferrioli

Dogs that are bred and trained to track, bred to hunt in packs, and bred to tree the animal.

400

Sen. Burdick

Asks if they are trained to tree the animal, what happens if they go 50 yards from the area and just tree the animal?

403

Sen. Ferrioli

States that the handlers control the hounds.

411

Sen. Burdick

How do they follow them, are they on horseback?

412

Sen. Ferrioli

Responds, sometimes in vehicles, sometimes on horseback, sometimes afoot.

427

Sen. Fisher

Comments that he would like to go on record regarding the sports pack license. Describes a situation in his district.

478

Chair Messerle

States for the record that this is a serious problem in his district. Describes an incident in his district.

Tape 26, B

036

Sen. Fisher

Discusses an instance where someone was attacked in Canada last month.

044

Sen. Ferrioli

Offers closing comments. 

061

Rod Harder

Executive Director of the Oregon Sportsmen Defense Fund. States that he has changed from a supportive to a neutral position. Continues with testimony.

096

Rod Klawitter

Representing Oregon United Sporting Dog Association. States that they are in support of this bill. Continues testimony. Submits written testimony. (EXHIBIT C).

139

Sen. Shields

Asks if aversion therapy is for the public or for the cougar or bear.

142

Klawitter

Responds to question.

145

Sen. Shields

Asks if it really works.

146

Klawitter

Responds that he believes it does.

165

Chair Messerle

Asks, “in cases where you do have to take an animal or cougar, how much does it reduce the ability to find and destroy the animal if you don’t use dogs?”

170

Harder

Answers that we are killing more cougars in Oregon with the use of dogs now than before the ban.

181

Chair Messerle

When you have extreme danger to people or property, the chances of going out and finding that cougar and being able to take it is almost nil. So in those cases where it’s very specific, you just about have to use dogs.

187

Harder

Agrees

188

Sen. Deckert

Asks for clarification of killing more cougars now than before the initiative passed.

196

Harder

Clarifies the statement.

203

Sen. Deckert

States that he heard stories that we are not able to do this, that is why populations are increasing. States that it was more of a surprising factor that we’re taking more with dogs today perhaps than we did 6 to 7 years ago.

210

Harder

States that also would be correct if we still had hunters out there. Given the cougar models, there would be more tags issued to those people who ran sporting dogs, and we would see a really significant increase in the harvest.

214

Klawitter

Gives a follow up response to Sen. Deckert’s question.

250

Chair Messerle

States that he had a neighbor that had a bear this fall, who thought it would hibernate and leave him alone, but it has been with him all winter. Is that normal for bears not to hibernate?

254

Klawitter

Responds that it is fairly common. It depends on what the food source is.

262

Chair Messerle

Asks if he has developed an amendment, or would like staff to request an amendment to this bill?

267

Klawitter

States that he had not seen the bill until yesterday.

284

Glen Stonebrink

Oregon Cattlemen’s Association. Speaks generally in favor of this bill. 

340

Jim Welsh

Lobbying for Oregon Family Farm Association who do not support this bill. Believes that this bill does not go far enough.

389

Michelle Blake

Citizen. Asks committee to oppose SB 484.   Submits written testimony. (EXHIBIT D).

450

Kelly Peterson

Oregon Program Coordinator for the Humane Society of the United States.  Opposes SB 484.  Submits written testimony.  (EXHIBIT E).

488

Chair Messerle

States that it is his belief that the animals destroyed now are much closer to the populated areas than they were in the past prior to Ballot Measure 18. That speaks to the danger that we are placing a lot of our communities in. Does your organization have any solutions to this?

502

Peterson

Responds.

Tape 27, B

039

Sen. Fisher

Comment for record. People of the state did not pass it, the people of Multnomah County passed Measure 18. Took Multnomah County out of the equation. People did not pass it by as many votes as it was passed by.

042

Sen. Deckert

Comments on the geographic or demographic conclusions. Asks if Ms. Peterson’s organization is in support of House Bill 2260?

048

Peterson

Responds that they are fine with it.

049

Chair Messerle

Notes that he understands that it is being amended.

050

Peterson

Agrees. Notes that as long as they are comfortable with the way it is being drafted currently, and there is some reference that it could change, then we would look at it at that point.

053

Sen. Fisher

Is it his understanding that if the hounds are out of it, then it’s acceptable?

054

Peterson

Responds yes.


 

056

Chair Messerle

Closes Public Hearing on SB 484. Adjourned 9:32.

 

 

Submitted By,                        Reviewed By,

 

 

 

Cheryl Young,                        Jennifer Solomon,

Committee Assistant                        Administrator

 

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

 

A – SB 417, written testimony,  Bob Rindy, 1p
B – SB 484, written testimony,  Roy Elicker, 1p

C – SB 484, written testimony,  Rod Klawitter, 1p

D – SB 484, written testimony,  Michelle Blake, 1p

E – SB 484, written testimony,  Kelly Peterson, 1p