HOUSE BILL REPORT

HB 2545

BYRepresentatives Rasmussen, Rayburn, Nealey, Kremen, Grant, Youngsman, Smith, Ballard, Prince, Doty, Prentice, McLean, Cooper, Vekich, P. King, Haugen and Kirby

Monitoring the impact of certain biotechnologies upon the dairy industry.

House Committe on Agriculture & Rural Development

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  (10)

      Signed by Representatives Rayburn, 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)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT

JANUARY 30, 1990

BACKGROUND:

The state's dairy commission laws provide for an assessment on milk, establish the Dairy Products Commission, grant the commission certain powers, and authorize the commission to administer and enforce the dairy commission statutes.  Among the powers of the commission are those to conduct research to improve milk production, quality, transportation, processing and distribution; promote the sale of dairy products; and conduct advertising and educational campaigns.  Violations of the dairy commission statutes are gross misdemeanors.

SUMMARY:

SUBSTITUTE BILL:  The Dairy Products Commission must examine the potential impact of products, including those of biotechnology, which, if used in dairy operations, may affect consumer acceptance and purchases of dairy products.  The commission must also monitor the use of such products by milk producers.

The commission may adopt rules temporarily restricting the use of such a product 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 products has been achieved.  It may not apply to agricultural commodities, or products used in the production of the commodities, which are used as feed by dairy producers.  The commission must report to the agriculture committees of the House and Senate each time such a rule is adopted or rescinded.

The commission must appoint an advisory committee regarding consumer perceptions of the effects of such products on the wholesomeness of milk and milk products.  The advisory committee must make recommendations to the commission by June 30, 1991.

Any person who violates or aids in the violation of any rules adopted by the commission is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

The provisions granting new powers to the commission to adopt rules and establishing the advisory committee expire on June 30, 1993.

SUBSTITUTE BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL:  Provided by the substitute bill are the provisions: limiting the duration that a rule may remain in effect; requiring the commission to report to legislative committees regarding the adoption or rescission of these rules; exempting from such rules agricultural commodities used as feed; and requiring the establishment of a subcommittee.

Fiscal Note:      Requested January 30, 1990.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Dan Coyne, Washington State Dairy Federation; Doug Simpson and Al Sherman, Dairy Products Commission; Mike Lancaster and Doug Marshall, Darigold Farms; and Ray Woodside.

House Committee - Testified Against:      Randy Ray, Animal Health Institute; Tony Yost and Angel Aguilar, Eli Lilly Company; and Darby Moeller, Monsanto.

House Committee - Testimony For:    (1) Dairy producers are concerned that the use of a newly developed product, bovine somatotropin (BST, sometimes referred to as bovine growth hormone), will cause consumers to decrease or discontinue their purchases of dairy products.  A poll conducted for the Dairy Products Commission confirms that fear.  (2) Opponents of BST use have already prepared advertisements discouraging consumer purchases of milk produced using it. (3) If consumers do react negatively to BST products, the industry needs to be able to react much more quickly than the federal government did in the Alar scare.  It would be difficult to reestablish the milk market after a scare.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      (1) Data show that there are no negative effects in using BST in milk production.  It is a substance already present in the cow's body, and use of BST does not increase the range of levels found in milk.  (2) Milk sales do not decrease in research areas currently using BST.  Consumers do not react negatively when they are given the facts.  (3) The power granted by the bill is too broad.  It can be used to ban the use of any product of technology.