HOUSE BILL REPORT

SB 6861

BYSenators Bailey, Gaspard, Barr, Hansen and Anderson

Monitoring the impact of certain substances upon the dairy industry.

House Committe on Agriculture & Rural Development

Majority Report:  Do pass as amended.  (11)

      Signed by Representatives Rayburn, Chair; Kremen, Vice Chair; Nealey, Ranking Republican Member; Baugher, Chandler, Doty, Grant, Jesernig, Kirby, Rasmussen and Youngsman.

Minority Report:  Do not pass.  (1)

      Signed by Representative McLean.

House Staff:Kenneth Hirst (786-7105)

BACKGROUND:

Dairies and dairy products are regulated by the Department of Agriculture. The state's dairy commission laws establish the Dairy Products Commission, provide for an assessment on milk, and grant the commission certain powers and duties.  The director of the Department Agriculture appoints a producer-dealer member of the commission and is an ex officio, nonvoting member of the commission.

SUMMARY:

BILL AS AMENDED:  Upon the recommendation of the Dairy Products Commission, the director of the Department Agriculture must examine the potential impact of products or substances which, if used in dairy operations, may affect consumer acceptance and purchases of dairy products.  The director must also monitor the use of such products by milk producers.

The director may adopt rules temporarily restricting the use of such a product or substance by producers if the commission finds that its use has caused or will cause the consumption of dairy products to be reduced significantly and poses a threat to the economic vitality of the state's dairy industry.  Such a rule may remain in effect only until consumer acceptance of the restricted product or substance has been achieved.  It may not apply to agricultural commodities used as feed by dairy producers.

A person who fails to comply with such a rule may be subjected to a civil penalty, as determined by the director, of not more than $5,000 for each violation.  A person who procures, aids, or abets in a violation, through an act of commission or omission, may also be subject to such a penalty.

The director must appoint an advisory committee regarding consumer perceptions and their impact on the dairy industry.  The advisory committee must make recommendations to the Legislature by January 1, 1991.

The provisions of the bill expire on June 30, 1992.

AMENDED BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL:  The amendments provide the expiration date for the bill.

Fiscal Note:      Requested February 19, 1990.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Dan Coyne and Bas Scholten, Washington Dairymen's Federation; Doug Simpson, Washington Dairy Products Commission; Wayne Spence, Washington State Food Dealers Association; and Larry Burns, VitaMilk Dairy and Quality Check Dairies.

House Committee - Testified Against:      David Putman and Randy Ray, Animal Health Institute; Hunter Simpson; and Steve Duzan, Immunex Corporation.

House Committee - Testimony For:    (1) The bill provides a safety valve for delaying the use of bovine somatotropin (BST) until consumers accept its use.  It is designed to protect the dairy industry from an Alar-type disaster.  (2) The Dairy Products Commission has carefully researched consumer perceptions concerning BST use and has found that the pharmaceutical companies have not educated the public regarding its use.  (3) Food dealers do not want to stand in the way of consumer demands.  Surveys show that, for the vast majority of grocery shoppers, the greatest concern is for the presence of additives, hormones, and chemicals in the food they buy.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      (1) BST is a naturally occurring hormone protein that will appear in the milk of cows to which it is given artificially in the same range of concentrations that it is found now in the milk of untreated cows.  Its human safety has already been approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration.  Animal safety and efficacy testing are currently underway.  (2) The use of BST will have no more than a one percent per year impact on the economy of the dairy industry, but BST will permit individual farmers to be more efficient.  (3) The Legislature should respond to the findings of science, not to hysteria, on this issue.  (4) The state's newly formed biotechnology advisory committee was never asked to review this issue.  (5) The tactics employed by opponents of BST threaten the acceptance of any product of biotechnology; such action could deal an irreparable blow to the biotechnology industry in this state.