Idaho’s legislators called it quits Thursday with a couple of startling results.After killing a wind farm moratorium bill in committee and negotiating a compromise on the extension of the sales tax rebate for alternative energy in the final days, the House passed two bills on April 5 in favor of wind projects.
H347 would extend the rebate for those projects already in the works to December 31st. H348 would give the Idaho Public Utilities Commission jurisdiction over the avoided cost rates paid to PURPA solar and wind qualifying facilities. Only wind and solar projects producing 100 kW or less would continue to receive the standard avoided costs under PURPA but bigger projects would negotiate a purchase price.
When H347 failed by one vote in the Senate yesterday, the companion bill, H348, was returned to the State Affairs Committee at the request of Sen. Curt McKenzie.
An anti-degradation rule was negotiated this summer and fall. As with all rules it had to go by the legislature. In a rare move, the legislature chose to reject portions of the rule and replace them with H153. In doing so, legislators were acquiescing to a request by the industries involved and supported by the Department of Environmental Quality. They assured the legislators that this action will meet with EPA’s approval. Opponents may still proceed with a lawsuit to challenge the new rule and the statutory changes.
Under NOT SO STARTLING BUT IMPORTANT news: an amendment to Idaho’s current Right to Farm statute was challenged in committee hearings by several people whose concerns centered on dairies and confined animal feeding operations (CAFO). The amended law protects agricultural practices from nuisance lawsuits by adding an extensive list of standard agricultural practices. It does not add protection for negligent practices or change the current regulation of dairies or CAFOs. It also does not interfere with local planning and zoning authority. It passed the House and Senate and was signed by the Governor on April 6th.
Other Legislation That Made It:
H40: PROPANE FLAMING - There was a successful negotiated rulemaking to streamline the process for propane flaming of fields which is necessary for crops like mint but should not be regulated under the regular crop residue burning program. This bill changes the current law so that fees shall not apply to this practice.
H137a: ALTERATION OF CHANNELS OF STREAMS – This amends existing law relating to the alteration of channels of streams to provide that in specified situations, no permit shall be required by the state or any agency or political subdivision thereof from a water user or his agent.
H206: POULTRY – This adds to and amends existing law relating to poultry to provide for the Poultry Environmental Act; to provide for permits and registration of existing facilities; permits for expansions of operations; to provide for the design and construction of certain new and modified wastewater storage and containment facilities; to provide that the review and approval of plans by the Idaho Department of Agriculture shall supersede that of the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality.
H270: AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT - RULEMAKING – This requires the director of the Idaho State Department of Agriculture to notify the public and the legislature in the event rules of the director are more stringent than federal law or regulations, or propose to regulate an activity not regulated by the federal government. It requires the director to use the best available science and apply well established risk assessment methods (The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality already has similar requirements).
H328: PUBLIC RECORDS – This amends existing law relating to public records to provide that public agencies may charge fees for the cost of filling requests for public records. This legislation was the result of records requests that were more like fishing expeditions and required a large commitment of staff time and copying thousands of pages.
HJR 2: NO MORE WILDERNESS - Idaho shall not support any wilderness designations without having used the public process, which includes the citizens of the state of Idaho, and urging our elected officials to defend this position whenever necessary with the full support of the citizens of the state.
S1001aa: SPECIALTY OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLES – This amends existing law relating to all-terrain vehicles, utility type vehicles, specialty off-highway vehicles or motorbikes to revise provisions relating to certain operators of all-terrain vehicles, utility type vehicles, specialty off-highway vehicles or motorbikes on certain roads, to provide that certain unlicensed operators on national forest roads must have completed a safety course, to provide that a certificate or proof of completion shall be in the possession of the unlicensed operator and shall be provided for inspection upon request. This came about as a result of Forest Service action to close roads to ATV use because of concern for the safety of children under the age of 16 operating ATVs.
SCR105: WILD LANDS – This urges the Secretary of Interior to abandon the "Wild Lands" wilderness re-inventory and request the United States Congress to honor the longstanding commitment to multiple use management of public lands in Idaho and the western United States....
And some legislation that did not:
H242aa: EMINENT DOMAIN – This would have amended existing law to provide that eminent domain shall not be used for trails, bike paths, walking paths, greenways, or other alternate or limited use transportation corridors, except where bike lanes, bike paths, sidewalks, walking paths, greenways or other alternate or limited use corridors are adjoining or adjacent to highways, roads, streets, permitted bridges, toll roads, byroads, plank and turnpike roads. This passed the House but was held in the Senate Local Government Committee.
H268: EMINENT DOMAIN – This would have amended existing law relating to eminent domain to provide that certain entities exercising the right of eminent domain in behalf of certain public uses shall demonstrate that such use materially serves the interests of the citizens of Idaho. This bill would have applied to a private company trying to use eminent domain to build a merchant power transmission line that did not serve the interests of Idaho citizens. It was also held in the Senate State Affairs Committee after passing the House.
Showing posts with label ATV. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ATV. Show all posts
Friday, April 8, 2011
Friday, February 11, 2011
Joint Committee hears testimony on ATV-riding hunters bills
Senator Tim Corder presented Senate Bills 1015 and 1016 to a joint session of the House and Senate Resources and Conservation Committees Monday. The bills would eliminate what he calls a basic inequity between hunters and the classes of vehicles they ride. The purpose of the joint session was to hear testimony on the bills, and no vote was taken.
The legislation targets rules that allow Fish and Game officers to cite those they deem to be hunting from an ATV. Proponents of the bill say that ATV users are being unfairly targeted by Fish and Game officers arbitrarily making decisions about whether a person is actively engaged in hunting while riding an ATV. Some of those testifying in favor of the bill say they have had experiences with Fish and Game officers harassing ATV users.
Other proponents note the absurdity of assuming one might successfully hunt from an ATV, noting that as a method of take, an ATV would be highly ineffective because of the noise, and riding off trail is already illegal.
There were also those testifying in favor of the bill who expressed a belief that the Idaho Department of Fish and Game is colluding with the US Forest Service and/or the Bureau of Land Management to restrict access to public lands through road closures.
Opponents of the bill say that hunting from an ATV is tantamount to utilizing an aid like dogs, spotlighting game at night, or hunting from an airplane. Several testified that they have witnessed hunters chasing game from an ATV, improperly accessing winter range areas, or otherwise traveling off trail. They say the rule is necessary to allow Fish and Game officers the latitude to manage for conflict between ATV users and others.
Idaho Fish and Game Commissioner Randy Budge says the rule does not apply to one using an ATV to retrieve game, set up or taking down a camp, or someone holding a disability license.
“We are not opposed to four-wheelers in any way,” he said, noting that Fish and Game officers have to judge whether or not an ATV is being used as an aid to hunting based upon personal judgment: is the person transporting a stowed, unloaded weapon, and not dressed in hunters’ orange? One can reasonably assume, Budge says, he is not hunting.
Budge said the original rule was not enacted to restrict the right to bear arms or to ride ATVs, but was to regulate aids to hunt. This is, he said, part of Fish and Game’s statutory authority, and allows the department to:
- deal with conflicts between hunters with ATVs and those without,
- manage the resource--big game has increased vulnerability to hunters on ATVs, and
- maintain the quality of Idaho’s big game population.
“We’re convinced that those who oppose this rule are a very small, yet a very vocal minority,” Budge said. “Surveys show that hunters feel overwhelmingly that too many unregulated ATVs diminish their quality of hunt.”
Several members of that “vocal minority” were on hand to testify in favor of the bills. They noted several instances of harassment by Fish and Game officers of those using ATVs.
“Fish and Game officers look for people who have weapons on their ATVs and harass them,” David Clairborne said. Clairborne testified on behalf of the Idaho State ATV Association, and said he thinks there is an additional objective to this rule besides managing game.
“We think this rule is an attempt by the Fish and Game to restrict the access to public lands,” he said.
Danny Cohn testified that he believes this is indeed the case, saying that closures of roads that have been accessible by ATV for decades are often done arbitrarily, poorly marked as such, and that Forest Service maps are unclear or out of date, leaving hunters vulnerable to citation.
The legislation targets rules that allow Fish and Game officers to cite those they deem to be hunting from an ATV. Proponents of the bill say that ATV users are being unfairly targeted by Fish and Game officers arbitrarily making decisions about whether a person is actively engaged in hunting while riding an ATV. Some of those testifying in favor of the bill say they have had experiences with Fish and Game officers harassing ATV users.
Other proponents note the absurdity of assuming one might successfully hunt from an ATV, noting that as a method of take, an ATV would be highly ineffective because of the noise, and riding off trail is already illegal.
There were also those testifying in favor of the bill who expressed a belief that the Idaho Department of Fish and Game is colluding with the US Forest Service and/or the Bureau of Land Management to restrict access to public lands through road closures.
Opponents of the bill say that hunting from an ATV is tantamount to utilizing an aid like dogs, spotlighting game at night, or hunting from an airplane. Several testified that they have witnessed hunters chasing game from an ATV, improperly accessing winter range areas, or otherwise traveling off trail. They say the rule is necessary to allow Fish and Game officers the latitude to manage for conflict between ATV users and others.
Idaho Fish and Game Commissioner Randy Budge says the rule does not apply to one using an ATV to retrieve game, set up or taking down a camp, or someone holding a disability license.
“We are not opposed to four-wheelers in any way,” he said, noting that Fish and Game officers have to judge whether or not an ATV is being used as an aid to hunting based upon personal judgment: is the person transporting a stowed, unloaded weapon, and not dressed in hunters’ orange? One can reasonably assume, Budge says, he is not hunting.
Budge said the original rule was not enacted to restrict the right to bear arms or to ride ATVs, but was to regulate aids to hunt. This is, he said, part of Fish and Game’s statutory authority, and allows the department to:
- deal with conflicts between hunters with ATVs and those without,
- manage the resource--big game has increased vulnerability to hunters on ATVs, and
- maintain the quality of Idaho’s big game population.
“We’re convinced that those who oppose this rule are a very small, yet a very vocal minority,” Budge said. “Surveys show that hunters feel overwhelmingly that too many unregulated ATVs diminish their quality of hunt.”
Several members of that “vocal minority” were on hand to testify in favor of the bills. They noted several instances of harassment by Fish and Game officers of those using ATVs.
“Fish and Game officers look for people who have weapons on their ATVs and harass them,” David Clairborne said. Clairborne testified on behalf of the Idaho State ATV Association, and said he thinks there is an additional objective to this rule besides managing game.
“We think this rule is an attempt by the Fish and Game to restrict the access to public lands,” he said.
Danny Cohn testified that he believes this is indeed the case, saying that closures of roads that have been accessible by ATV for decades are often done arbitrarily, poorly marked as such, and that Forest Service maps are unclear or out of date, leaving hunters vulnerable to citation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)