SENATE BILL REPORT

                                   SHB 1958

          AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE & WATER RESOURCES,

                                MARCH 22, 1991

Brief Description:  Changing requirements and penalties for livestock brands.

SPONSORS:House Committee on Agriculture & Rural Development (originally sponsored by Representatives Rayburn, Nealey, McLean, Chandler, Roland, Franklin and Rasmussen; by request of Department of Agriculture).

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT

SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE & WATER RESOURCES

Majority Report:  Do pass.

      Signed by Senators Barr, Chairman; Anderson, Vice Chairman; Bailey, Conner, Gaspard, Hansen, and Newhouse.

Staff:  Bob Lee (786‑7404)

Hearing Dates:March 22, 1991

BACKGROUND:

Most violations of the state's livestock brand laws are misdemeanors.  A misdemeanor under the state's criminal code is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 90 days, by a fine of not more than $1000, or by both fine and imprisonment.  A gross misdemeanor is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year, a fine of not more than $5000, or both imprisonment and fine.  The maximum penalty for a class I civil infraction is $250.

Some of the points at which brand inspections of cattle and horses must be conducted are specified by law.  Others are specified by the Director of the Department of Agriculture.

SUMMARY:

The penalties for violating the state's laws regarding livestock brands which were misdemeanors are changed.  Knowingly possessing livestock marked with the recorded brand or tattoo of another person is a gross misdemeanor.  All other violations which were misdemeanors are class I civil infractions.

Points at which brand inspections of cattle and horses must be made are no longer specified by statute; they shall all be specified by the Director of the Department of Agriculture.  The director may require brand records be provided to the Department of Agriculture.  The renewal date for a brand registration is set by a schedule established by rule rather than by statute. 

Appropriation:  none

Revenue:  none

Fiscal Note:  none requested

TESTIMONY FOR:

The ability to stagger renewal dates for brand registrations will even out the workload and thus reduce costs of collection.

TESTIMONY AGAINST:  None

TESTIFIED:  PRO:  Mike Schwisow, Department of Agriculture; Marlyta Deck, Washington Cattlemen's Association