Kansas House Bill HB2608

Kansas 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/25/24
• Refer: 1/25/24
• Report Pass: 2/20/24
• Refer: 2/23/24
• Refer: 2/28/24
• Engrossed: 3/4/24
• Refer: 3/5/24
• Failed: 4/30/24

Caption

Authorizing the animal health commissioner to adopt rules and regulations to administer the poultry disease control act and to establish an annual participation fee not to exceed $50 for participation in the national poultry improvement plan, a certification fee not to exceed $50 for persons performing testing and diagnostic services and a testing fee not to exceed $100 per visit to each location participating in the plan.

Impact

By implementing an annual plan participation fee of up to $50 for those participating in the national poultry improvement plan and introducing a certification fee for service providers, the bill establishes a structured approach to funding disease control initiatives. Additionally, it sets forth a testing fee not to exceed $100 per visit for inspection and diagnostic services, indicating a shift towards a more economically accountable model for managing poultry health.

Summary

House Bill 2608 is an act that focuses on enhancing the regulatory framework for poultry health and disease control in the state of Kansas. The bill seeks to authorize the animal health commissioner to adopt rules and regulations that will aid in the administration of the poultry disease control act. This act aims to improve the monitoring and management of poultry diseases, ensuring that the state maintains high standards of animal health and food safety in poultry production.

Contention

One notable point of contention within the bill is the authority granted to the animal health commissioner to revoke certifications and designations in cases of non-payment or repeated disease outbreaks. This could pose challenges for small poultry businesses that may struggle with fee payments or experience difficulties in maintaining disease-free status, potentially leading to disputes over the revocations. Moreover, the consolidation of regulatory authority and costs associated with compliance may be met with resistance from local industry stakeholders concerned about economic impacts.