HOUSE BILL REPORT
HB 1040
This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members in
their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a
statement of legislative intent.
As Reported by House Committee On:
Agriculture & Natural Resources
Title: An act relating to specialized forest products.
Brief Description: Concerning specialized forest products.
Sponsors: Representative B. Sullivan.
Brief History:
Agriculture & Natural Resources: 2/13/07, 2/21/07 [DPS].
Brief Summary of Substitute Bill |
|
|
|
|
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE & NATURAL RESOURCES
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 9 members: Representatives B. Sullivan, Chair; Blake, Vice Chair; Dickerson, Eickmeyer, Grant, Kagi, Lantz, McCoy and VanDeWege.
Minority Report: Do not pass. Signed by 6 members: Representatives Kretz, Ranking Minority Member; Warnick, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Hailey, Newhouse, Orcutt and Strow.
Staff: Jason Callahan (786-7117).
Background:
A specialized forest product (SFP) is, generally, an item found in the forest with a value other
than that found with traditional timber. The term SFP is defined to include native shrubs,
cedar products, cedar salvage, processed cedar products, specialty wood, edible mushrooms,
and certain barks.
A SFP permit, or a true copy of the permit, is required in order to possess or transport the
following:
The SFP permit must be obtained prior to harvesting or collecting the products, even from
one's own land, and is available only from county sheriffs, on forms provided by the
Department of Natural Resources. The permit must be validated by a sheriff.
Violations of the law on SFPs are punishable as a gross misdemeanor, and a convicted
individual may face a fine up to $1,000 and/or up to one year in a county jail. In addition, a
law enforcement officer with probable cause may seize and take possession of any SFPs
found.
Summary of Substitute Bill:
A SFP permit is required to harvest, possess, or transport more than three gallons of
huckleberries. In addition, it is unlawful to use a rake, mechanical device, or other harvesting
method that damages a huckleberry bush. A violation of these requirements is a violation of
the SFP permit law.
Any huckleberries seized by law enforcement for the suspected violation of the SFP
requirements on the ceded land of a recognized Indian tribe must be turned over to that tribe
for ceremonial, educational, or religious uses.
Products possessed by individuals with a federally-recognized tribal right to possess the
product are exempted from the definition of "specialized forest products."
Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill:
The original bill did not contain the provision that exempts products possessed by individuals
with a federally-recognized tribal right from the definition of "specialized forest products."
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Not requested.
Effective Date of Substitute Bill: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.
Staff Summary of Public Testimony:
(In support) Tribal elders rely on an annual harvest of huckleberries for cultural practices;
however, the growing huckleberry picking industry is threatening their ability to harvest a
sufficient amount of huckleberries. Huckleberries used to be a subsistence food, but now the
economic value is high and they have become a commercial industry. Not only do the
commercial pickers take berries in an unsustainable amount, they use mechanical rakes that
permanently damage the wild growing bushes and destroy a food source that is important for
keeping a healthy game population. The industry is interfering with tribal practices.
The three gallon limit will bring the state law to the same level as current requirements on
federal land. The underlying law on SFPs is not being changed. The bill is only adding
huckleberries to the list of SFPs that require a permit so that the state can protect its resources
for future generations.
(With concerns) There are 29 tribes with overlapping usual and accustomed gathering areas.
The impact of these jurisdictions needs to be made clear in the bill.
(Opposed) None.
Persons Testifying: (In support) Representative B. Sullivan, prime sponsor; Dawn Vyvyan,
Yakama Nation; and Miguel Perez-Gibson, Colville Tribes.
(With concerns) Lee Adolph, Colville Tribes.