TAPE/#

Speaker

Comments

TAPE 71, A

003

Chair P. Smith

Calls the meeting to order at 8:37 a.m. and opens a public hearing on HB 3478.

HB 3478 – WORK SESSION

010

Patrick Brennan

Summarizes HB 3478 and talks about what has been done.  Refers to the -1 amendments (EXHIBIT A) and -2 amendments (EXHIBIT B), which were submitted by the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association; the -4 amendments (EXHIBIT C), which were submitted by the Safari Club International; the -5 amendments (EXHIBIT D), which were submitted by a work group on the bill; and the -6 amendments (EXHIBIT E), which were submitted by Defenders of Wildlife. 

050

Roy Elicker

Deputy Director, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW).  Submits prepared testimony (EXHIBIT F).  Discusses the major changes that are made in the -5 amendments. 

117

Katie Fast

Oregon Farm Bureau (OFB).  Testifies in support of HB 3478 as amendment with the -5 amendments.  Comments on the importance of the compensation program.

134

Amaroq Weiss

Defenders of Wildlife.  Testifies in support of the -5 amendments.  Discusses the process HB 3478 has gone through. 

163

Al Elkins

Oregon Hunters Association.  Testifies in support of the -5 amendments. 

169

Rep. Boquist

Asks if the Defenders of Wildlife in full support the wolf management plan as it was adopted by the commission.

181

Weiss

Answers that both the local and national organization are supportive of the wolf plan.

187

Rep. Boquist

Expresses concern that the Defenders of wildlife will decide to not support HB 3478 once it passes. 

193

Weiss

Responds that Defenders of Wildlife has been active in the sate for 25 years and comments on the development process both the management plan and the measure have gone through. 

219

Rep. Boquist

Comments on the compensation program.  Asks what Defenders of Wildlife is willing to do in regard to compensation.

232

Weiss

Gives information on the Bailey Wildlife Foundation Wolf Compensation Trust, the Defenders of Wildlife’s compensation program.  Discusses the benefits of a compensation program.  Comments on how the compensation fund is set up.

297

Rep. Roblan

Asks why each organization represented would rather have the -5 amendments than have nothing.

301

Elkins

Answers by giving a history of the Oregon Hunters Association’s view of HB 3478.  Comments on the importance of having a management tool to deal with the wolves.

328

Fast

Responds that wolves are arriving in Oregon whether they are wanted or not.  Comments on the importance of having tools to deal with the wolves.  States that it is better to be proactive and give legal tools to the landowner. 

350

Elicker

Remarks that it is the department’s commitment to manage fish and wildlife.  Asserts that if there are wolves then there need to be tools to manage them in order to prevent chaos. 

367

Weiss

Concurs with the comments of the other panelists.

371

Rep. Burley

Comments on the concern with the impact of wolves on game mammals. Notes that Defenders of Wildlife was a plaintiff in the lawsuit in which Judge Jones issued his decision to relist wolves as endangered.   Remarks that he is looking for assurance that the Defenders of Wildlife are not going to file another lawsuit.  Asks how the organization will help expedite the downlisting and eventual delisting of the wolf in the state of Oregon. 

404

Weiss

Gives information on the federal law suit and how Defenders of Wildlife was involved.  Remarks that her organization has been intimately involved in the process of the wolf management committee in Oregon.  States that the organization is using the Oregon management plan as a model for other states and they have no intention of suing.

TAPE 72, A

025

Rep. Burley

Comments that Oregon is part of the Western States Distinct Population Segment.  Asks if it is possible to get the wolf downlisted in Oregon and how to go about doing that.

036

Weiss

Responds by explaining the concept of distinct population segments. 

050

Weiss

Discusses the changes in the -6 amendments (EXHIBIT E, Page 5) and discusses what they would do.

100

Kemper McMaster

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).  Submits and reads prepared testimony on HB 3478 (EXHIBIT G). 

136

Lindsay Ball

Director, ODFW.  Makes himself available to answer questions.

139

Rep. Burley

Asks what USFWS is doing in light of Judge Jones’ decision, especially in respect to the distinct population segments.

148

McMaster

Responds that he cannot tell the committee what is being done in response to the next steps in the lawsuit.  Remarks that the law does not allow for delisting by state boundary.  Gives information on how animals are listed and delisted. 

166

Rep. Burley

Inquires if wolves in Minnesota are considered a distinct population segment. 

169

McMaster

Responds that the exception for Minnesota was part of the original listing process and discusses why the exception was made.

175

Rep. Burley

Summarizes some of the options that have been discussed.  Asks about the positive and negative aspects of each option and what kind of timeline is involved with each option.

187

McMaster

Gives information on Section 10a-01a.  Comments on section 10a-01b and discusses the difference between the two permits.

217

McMaster

Discusses section 10j and the experimental population process, states that it takes five years. Comments on the section 6 process, summarizes what it is. 

232

Rep. Burley

Asks if USFWS is authorized under section 6 to help pay for the management activities in the state.

237

McMaster

States that USFWS can help pay for management and comments on the process to get the money. 

245

Rep. Burley

Comments on new rules that have been approved in Montana and Idaho.  Asks if these types of rules are possible in the state of Oregon and, if so, what would Oregon have to do to get these types of rules.

256

McMaster

Responds that he was not aware that lethal take by private individuals was approved in those states and that the one approach legal counsel advises USFWS it cannot take is granting lethal take to individuals.

275

Rep. Burley

Remarks that under 10a-01a the state can use lethal take but the individual cannot.  Asks how to get the wolf down listed in the state of Oregon. 

289

McMaster

Comments that his opinion is that creating a conservation plan will help with downlisting and eventual delisting of the wolf.

298

Rep. Burley

Inquires if Oregon would then be at the mercy of the other states that are part of the western population segment.

299

McMaster

Concurs.

300

Rep. Boquist

Asks Mr. McMaster to comment on the current wolf management plan.

315

McMaster

Responds that it is an outstanding plan. 

326

Rep. Boquist

Asks what Mr. McMaster’s thinks the wolf classification should be.

337

McMaster

Responds that he is not aware of the technical word used.  Comments that state wildlife entities are the proper organizations for managing resident wildlife within the states.

358

Rep. Boquist

Asks if there is any federal program that is providing compensation.

365

McMaster

Answers that he is not aware of a state paying compensation.

387

Chair P. Smith

Inquires about the first incident of livestock depredation that Mr. McMaster faced in Montana.

390

McMaster

Responds by giving information about the incident.

402

Rep. Burley

Asks what would happen if this legislation is not passed.

416

McMaster

Answers that USFWS believes that the designated Rocky Mountain Area is sufficient to move toward downlisting and eventually delisting. 

TAPE 71, B

040

Chair P. Smith

Inquires if the state manages the animals if it costs the state money rather than the federal government.

041

McMaster

Concurs.

042

Chair P. Smith

Asks if the wolves coming into Oregon are federally controlled.

043

McMaster

Answers that it is a federally-listed species.

046

Chair P. Smith

Comments that the state appears to be unable to manage cougars.  Asks Director Ball how ODFW is going to manage wolves.

047

Ball

Responds by commenting on how cougars are managed.

070

Glen Stonebrink

Oregon Cattlemen’s Association (OCA).  Submits prepared testimony regarding HB 3478 (EXHIBIT H).  Comments that the Cattlemen’s Association was not included in the workgroup that drafted the -5 amendments.

141

Stonebrink

Discusses concerns with the -5 amendments.  States that the amendments do nothing for livestock producers, rather they make things worse.

191

Stonebrink

Comments on a situation that he has seen in which a wolf could be taken.

249

Stonebrink

Discusses OCA’s opinion of the plan and delisting the wolves (EXHIBIT H, Page 3).

290

Stonebrink

Reads parts of the letter from Legislative Counsel regarding the plan (EXHIBIT H, Page 5).

311

Chair P. Smith

Recesses the meeting at 9:55 a.m.

323

Chair P. Smith

Reconvenes the meeting at 10:00 a.m. and opens a public hearing on SB 844-A.

SB 844-A – PUBLIC HEARING

326

Patrick Brennan

Committee Administrator.  Summarizes SB 844-A.

335

Senator Ryan Deckert

Senate District 14.  Submits prepared testimony in support of SB 844-A (EXHIBIT I).  Gives information on what has gone into the bill. 

422

Rep. Hass

Asks about the amendments to SB 844-A.

TAPE 71, B

012

Patrick Brennan

Answers that the committee has the –A3 amendments (EXHIBIT X).

016

Sen. Deckert

Summarizes what the –A3 amendments do. 

041

Rep. Burley

Asks if the registry of dogs is deleted from the bill with the –A3 amendments.

042

Sen. Deckert

Responds that Rep. Burley is correct and comments on the reason.

054

Rep. Boquist

Comments that the city and county ordinances will preempt SB 844-A, so it is not taking away local control.    

060

Sen. Deckert

Responds that any city and county dog ordnances will supersede that SB 844-A.

070

Lorraine Still

National Animal Interest Alliance .  Submits and reads prepared testimony in support of SB 844-A (EXHIBIT J).

150

Glen Stonebrink

Oregon Cattlemen’s Association.  Submits prepared testimony (EXHIBIT K).  Expresses the concern with SB 844-A. 

174

Gordon Fultz

Association of Oregon Counties (AOC).  Discusses the impact of      SB 844-A on rural counties.  Comments on the costs counties could incur as a result of the measure. 

198

Chair P. Smith

Expresses concern that what is being done in the rural counties is different than urban counties.

201

Mike Oswald

Multnomah County Animal Services.  Testifies in support of SB 844-A, and comments on the value it has statewide.  Testifies in support of the idea of improving pubic safety related to animals.  States that Multnomah county has ordnances that addresses dangerous dogs. 

260

Rep. Boquist

Asks if the issue of county exemption was raise on the senate side. 

269

Fultz

Answers that it was.

285

Rep. Boquist

Comments that an ordnance is a simple answer.  States that SB 844-A needs to be addressed, and time is running out.

293

Rep. Hass

Comments on his experience as a news reporter.  States that dangerous dogs are a public safety issue and it is unreasonable for counties to want to not take action necessary to protect citizens.

311

Fultz

Responds that they are not trying to suggest that the legislature not pass a law dealing with dangerous dogs.  Comments on the enforcement problems of SB 844-A.

324

Rep. Burley

Gives the example of his dog.  Asks how animals will be declared potentially dangerous, and how owning a potentially dangerous dog would be punishable.  

344

Oswald

Answers that there are two concepts, dangerous dogs and potentially dangerous dogs.  Discusses the difference between the two types. 

378

Rep. Burley

Remarks that there is no question regarding the dangerous dog, however there is a gray area in regard to potentially dangerous dogs.

397

Oswald

States that issue is something the parties to the bill are working through.

TAPE 73, A

014

John Powell

State Farm Insurance Companies; Oregon Sheriffs Association.  Expresses concern that SB 844-A could have unintended consequences on homeowners insurance.

047

Chair P. Smith

Inquires what was done in the state of Washington for underwriting.

048

Powell

Responds that a bill in Washington similar to SB 844-A did not pass.

063

Marcia Keith

Oregon Veterinary Medical Association.  Submits prepared testimony in support of SB 844-A (EXHIBIT L).

082

Becky Maddock

Union County.  States that she sees a need for a state wide law dealing with animal control, because there are many counties in Oregon that have no animal control ordinances or personnel.    

102

Sen. Deckert

Addresses the concerns that were discusses in the meeting. 

128

Chair P. Smith

Closes the public hearing on SB 844-A and adjourns the meeting at 10:39 a.m.