Kansas 2023-2024 Regular Session

Kansas House Bill HB2047

Introduced
1/17/23  
Refer
1/17/23  
Refer
1/20/23  
Report Pass
2/16/23  
Engrossed
2/23/23  
Refer
3/2/23  
Report Pass
3/25/24  
Enrolled
4/30/24  

Caption

Senate Substitute for HB 2047 by Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources - Requiring approval of livestock brand applications by the animal health commissioner, increasing the maximum amount for brand registration and renewal fees, prohibiting entering or remaining on and knowingly making false statements to gain access to animal facilities and field crop production areas, providing penalties therefor and removing the intent to destroy property in the farm animal and field crop and research facilities protection act.

Impact

By establishing stricter regulations regarding the application and enforcement of livestock branding, HB 2047 aims to protect agricultural operations and their assets. This includes creating penalties for unauthorized access to animal facilities and field crop production areas, thus reinforcing the security of farmers' property against potential vandalism and theft. The amendments to the farm animal and field crop and research facilities protection act further underscore the state's commitment to safeguarding agricultural integrity while ensuring proper management of animal health protocols.

Summary

House Bill 2047, known as the Senate Substitute for HB 2047, is geared towards enhancing agriculture through the regulation of livestock branding and providing protections for animal facilities and agricultural production areas. The bill mandates that applications for livestock brands must receive approval from the animal health commissioner, establishing a formal framework for livestock identification in the state. Additionally, it increases the maximum fees for brand registration and renewal, which are designed to support the operations of the animal health commissioner’s office.

Sentiment

The sentiment regarding HB 2047 appears to be predominantly supportive among agricultural stakeholders and regulatory bodies who see the need for a structured approach to livestock branding and protection of facilities. However, some members of the legislative assembly express concerns over the implications of increased fees and whether such regulations might impose additional burdens on small-scale farmers. The discussions have spurred debate on the balance between regulation and the need for agricultural independence.

Contention

Notable points of contention revolve around the proposed increases in registration and renewal fees associated with livestock brands, which some critics argue may be too high and disproportionately affect smaller operations. Additionally, there are concerns regarding the potential for overreach by the animal health commissioner in the approval process for brand registrations. Opponents caution that stringent regulations may stifle agricultural innovation, particularly among research facilities engaged in crop development and agricultural testing.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB805

Homeowners’ insurance: declared disaster areas.

CA SB569

Insurance: disasters: identification of insurer.

CA SB525

California FAIR Plan: manufactured homes.

CA SB1444

Joint powers authorities: South Bay Regional Housing Trust.

CT SB00218

An Act Concerning Brownfield Remediation.

ND HB1546

Use tax on contractors; and to provide an effective date.

CT SB01038

An Act Concerning Brownfield Remediation.

CA SB11

The California FAIR Plan Association: basic property insurance: exclusions.