call the meeting to order. Our Sergeant At Arms today for House ?? is Bill Bass, Joe Crook, Charles Godman, and B.H. Fowl. And our pages are Jessica Nothan, from Orange, Insco the sponsor, Richard Seebolt from Wake, Avila as sponsor, Cayanna Swinson, Wake, Hall as sponsor, Gregory Stewart from Wake, Cotham sponsor, and Cameron Tallot from Davidson, Dockham sponsor. On the agenda today, Senate Bill 636 has been pulled, so we’re going to start with Senate Bill 376, Senator Bingham. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may go ahead. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, sir. Actually, this bill allows land owners and lessees to request an out-of-season tracker permit year round. And as you probably know, if you have livestock or poultry owners, etcetera, this has been certainly a serious problem for these folks, as well as deer hunters. And both of these groups, the livestock organization and also hunters in the area came to me about this bill, and there was a study done in Texas that showed that coyote diet consisted mostly of fawns, 70%, and there was a study done in South Carolina that indicated one litter of coyotes, they did a night photography study on this and found that there was 27 fawns, one litter, the adult coyote would bring 27 fawns in one season into the den for them to feed on. So deer hunters, it’s been sort of a negative impact, especially in my area of the state, in the Piedmont, to alleviate or get rid of the deer population. And of course in leasing land, no one wants to lease land to hunt if there’s not any deer there to hunt. And this bill was approved by the wildlife commission, and I’ll be happy to try to answer any questions if anybody has any, Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I want to let members raise their questions, and then we got some people that are in the public that wish to speak. Representative Whitmire. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Very briefly going back to the beginning of the session when I ran a bill on a much smaller scale, I will simply say from personal experience on our farm, as a hunter and also as one who has livestock, that landowners need this bill to be able to more effectively be able to control a predator that has no natural enemies in the environment that it’s in. And I strongly support this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Graham. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a question for the bill sponsor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may ask that question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The coyote, what are the wildlife requirements for killing coyotes or not trapping but actually killing those animals. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think, Mr. Chairman, I think Gordon Meyers is here. I think I know that, but I would prefer he answer that if that’s okay with you, Representative Lewis. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, that’s fine. Gordon. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Gordon Meyers, Executive Director of the Wildlife Resources Commission. Relative to coyote hunting, coyotes may be hunted year round and in 95 counties they may also be hunted at night with the aid of a light. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up, Mr. Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Of course, I come from rural Robeson County and there’s a concern with coyotes down there as well, but I guess one of my concerns is animals that are not coyotes getting in these traps.
Becoming maimed and eventually we'll face death as a result of that. What's the position of the, do we have a Hunter's Association or, and another concern is their, their dogs, their animals when they're out hunting, and getting in those traps. Do we have anyone that can speak on that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] We do have some people who wish to speak that represent those groups. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. That's my concern. I just wanted to share that, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Representative Lewis. I think there is someone here that wants to speak. Mister Chairman I don't know how you want to handle this, but as we all know that, nothing, if you set traps you certainly can't be 100% effective and not have negative outcomes and, and of course with the protections we have and, and the interests we have, I feel like that this is going to be well, at least from the land owner's perspective, they're not gonna, certainly don't want to catch any of their neighbor's dogs or anyone else's so, anyway, I'll make that comment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Lucas. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister Chair. I certainly agree that we need to do something to eradicate if we could, at least reduce the coyote population. They're in all one hundred counties if I understand it. But I also know that steel traps don't discriminate. They will catch your pet dog, they will catch your, your hunting dogs, they will catch any animal that happens to go by. And since we do have universal hunting on these coyotes, you can kill them any day of the week I believe, except on Sunday where it's not allowed to hunt on Sunday. You can kill them at night. You can even spotlight them. And if we want to really reduce them, I think that's probably the way to properly go about it rather than kill somebody who's training, kill somebody's dogs who are out there training their dogs in out of season. They're running their dogs to get them in condition, this kind of thing. Those traps really ruin, people get a dog into a steel trap, you ruin that dog. So I just think we ought to shoot them. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Burr? Oh no Brody, I'm sorry, I'll get you next. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister Chairman. Senator, can I just ask you a real quick question on, on just what's in, part that's in this bill it says, you can't remove a coyote that's still alive. Why would anybody ever do that in the first place? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, I had, I had rather, if, if you don't mind, Representative, that the Commissioner answer that. I've heard, but I don't want to, I want, I want to make sure that I get this correct, because I'm not as familiar with this as some of the gentlemen in the room so, anyway. Gordon's permissible, mister Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gordon Myers again, Executive Director of the Wildlife Commission. The reason that provision was incorporated into the bill was as a result of concerns that came forward largely from, from outside fox hunters who have some concerns about the sale and perpetuation of sale of coyotes to, to fox pens, and under, under certain conditions, under certain local laws as well as through rules of the Wildlife Commission during the fur bearing trapping season, coyotes that are captured can be sold to fox pens. This provision was added to, to negate a year round season in which the coyotes would be provided to these pens. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Brody, the, you got your answer? Representative Hurley. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you mister Chair. I don't know who could answer this, but I think I read somewhere that the coyotes were reintroduced back here a few years ago. Are they still being reintroduced or are we still trying to get them out of here? And I don't, I, what I've heard there's so many deer that they're, being killed that I was surprised that you didn't have any deer. But I'd like an answer to that question please, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hurley, I do know that, that they were introduced, and, and of course the concerns that I had were from deer hunters, especially from deer hunters, and because of the population dwindling so much and also from livestock owners et cetera and so, and I think maybe Gordon or
?? or whoever, Mr. Chairman, if that’s permissible. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You may speak. [SPEAKER CHANGES] My name’s Colleen Olfenbuttel; I’m the black bear and fur bear biologist for the Wildlife Resources Commission. In order to address your question, from the 1930s until about the ‘70s, we did have a handful of coyotes that were illegally brought into North Carolina for the purposes of hunting; however, starting in the 1980s, coyotes eventually naturally migrated into our state on their own, so the coyotes we have now in North Carolina are ones that naturally came in on their own. The commission did not reintroduce coyotes into North Carolina. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Dixon. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. We can spend a lot of time talking about this. Let me tell you something: For the livestock industry in eastern North Carolina, the coyote is a very, very significant problem. Of my own personal experience, I’ve lost birds four different times from coyotes. One time it was over 860 turkeys in one house. Representative Lucas, the idea of shooting these coyotes, the coyote’s a very, very smart animal, as you well understand. The time is now that we have to use every means possible in order to reduce or try to eliminate this population of coyote. It’s a very, very imposing financial liability to the livestock producers in eastern North Carolina, and this bill is not perfect, it doesn’t actually go as far as I think it should go, but I have no love lost for the coyote, and I think we need to do everything, and the pet owners and folks need to be responsible for their dogs to the best extent possible, but I’m telling you, the coyote problem is a very serious problem to our livestock producers in eastern North Carolina, and I commend this bill to you in the very strongest of terms possible. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Whitmire again. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Couple more thoughts just from a factual standpoint, and then I’d like to move that we approve. Trapping versus shooting coyotes. The effectiveness on traps is a little over 7 to 1, as far as effectiveness. Coyote’s a hard animal to hunt and kill. They’re… Wile E. Coyote’s sly, and we know that and that’s there. There’s significant speculation amongst the veterinarians in my area about them crossing with feral dogs, and including the red wolf that was introduced, so their aggressiveness has increased. That’s been observed by many in the western part of the state. I’ll also add that the type of trap and the regulations with when you are setting traps, you have to check them every 24 hours, and when they reintroduced the otter into some of the rivers in my area, they actually trapped them in other states and used traps to… Just because an animal gets in a trap, does not mean that it’s doomed, so just to make sure we know that. In Clay County last year, there was a full-grown horse that was taken down by coyotes. Of course it was hemmed in a barn and beat itself to death trying to get away from them, but it’s not just calves, it’s not just fowl, turkeys and chickens, but on the farm that I live on, we too have lost turkeys and chickens and calves, so this is all very a legitimate threat that has very little predators at all, so with that, at the appropriate time I’d like to move that we pass this. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Not yet. We’ll keep you in mind. Representative Horn. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Coyotes aren’t a problem just in the rural or farm areas and just to folks with chickens and other livestock. I live in a rather urbanized area and I’ve seen coyotes twice coming through our area at night. They are incredibly profligate. The question I have though is something ?? that you brought up about deer population, and although that’s not exactly on this subject, I am curious if you or someone from wildlife can tell me, are we really having a decline in deer population in North Carolina? Because I find that hard to believe. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well I can tell you that in my particular area there’s definitely a decline, and I know one gentleman who is an avid deer hunter and he has killed a couple of these coyotes.
And they've very, very difficult to not only see, but kill or shoot, because they're savvy and they're smart, but the study that was done about them being a predator, the fawns, and 27 fawns, which has been noted and I've had many of the deer hunters ??? indicate that they've noted a decline in the deer population in forested or timber areas especially, because that's the majority of what they feed on, but I'm sure the Wildlife Commission may want to comment on that one, your permission as chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gordon Myers, again, Executive Director of the Wildlife Commission, certainly at a very localized, there are very localized impacts of coyotes on deer, in terms of the overall deer population in the state, it's remained very stable, it had been increasing quite a bit, and it's, we would characterize it as stable today. The coyote mortality is what we consider to be capacitory mortality, it's mortality that would have otherwise occurred, either through hunting or through other factors, but it does certainly take away from hunting opportunity at the same time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We had some people that asked to speak on this bill, so now I would like to take them no more than 3 minutes a person, and when you come up to the mic, tell us who you are, so we all understand that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] My name is Harry Ennis, I'm president of the Eastern North Carolina Fox Hunters Association, and I'd like to say to begin with that I'm no fan of the coyote, but I am a fan of the other animals that these traps can catch during the gestatation period, the nursing period, and the raising of the young that will occur. We have depredation permits that you can obtain in North Carolina, if you have a nuisance problem, and you can use those to catch coyotes anytime during the year, that you show that you have a cause, and that's my main objection to the bill. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] My name is Pete Warren, I'm from the North County, I've come today to oppose this bill, because this is just a bad bill, I do not like this herd that's shared with you, the coyotes followed it personally, they are here to stay, you can do whatever you want to, you can try to eliminate them, but they've been trying to do the same thing in the state of Texas ever since the beginning of time. I wish there was a simple answer to this, but there's not, I've been representing fox hunters and the hunters on outside since 1972, I've been up here again and again and again, my concern again is not a coyote, my concern is what's gonna happen to your red foxes, what's gonna happen to your gray foxes, what's gonna happen to your raccoons, because the same trap that is being used by the majority of people that's trapping animals and will be used are used for all 3 or 4 of these animals, and I've been known to a lot of you, if he spends any time at all in a trap, he is no good of whatever purpose. Second thing I'd like to share with you is that no matter what we do, we tried to pick you guys to represent us, and come forward with ideas that is fair to everybody, and not just fair to what we think is a nuisance, like I said again, I do not have an answer for the coyotes, I do know what the biologist says, they said the last living thing on Earth is going to be a coyote, because he's gonna live on anything. I've heard a lot of recommendations from different ones on how to do it, we got laws in existing now that control them, will they work? I don't think so. But I will disclose with this thing saying to you, that, no matter what you've been lead to believe, by the North Carolina Wildlife Preserve, or the North Carolina Wildlife Protectness, they will not be able to control this bill if it's put in place, and I thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'm Joe McClees, and I represent North Carolina Sporting Dog, we are a 26,000 member group in North Carolina that has all the different hunting dog groups in the entire state. We oppose the bill, I want to talk to you a little bit why. First of all, we are not friend to coyotes, coyotes don't have many friends, no matter where they are. They have got a lot of enemies, what we are concerned about, is the way this bill is written and drafted, at
...present before this became law, if you were a farmer, or you were a merchant, or you were someone who had livestock, you can apply to the Wildlife Resource Commission, Gordon Myers, and get a declaration permit. Catch, kill or do whatever to the animal. We don't have any problem with that. This is not dog hunting versus trapping. We don't have any problem with trapping. What we have a problem is during the period of time that this proposed bill would come in effect is the gestation period of time for the red foxes and the grey foxes, and the raccoons. You're killing the mothers or the seed of the animals that we're going to hunt down the road. Ladies and gentlemen, we ask you to oppose it on this ground. But again, we're not anti people trying to do something with a coyote problem. The coyote problem has been addressed, I know, for the last five or six years in the General Assembly. We haven't come across a perfect answer. But he answer is not this bill and the manner in which it is written. I would appreciate your opposing this bill. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Anyone else from the public wishes to speak? If not, Representative. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Please tell us who you are? [SPEAKER CHANGES] My name is Stephen Brown. I'm just a regular ol' person, farmer and a trapper, a hunter and sportsman. All I've heard today is everybody just likes to coyote. I can't agree no more. Everybody wants to have something done about the coyotes. And I am not affiliated with the dog people, so I don't want you thinking I'm siding with them. I ain't siding with nobody. I'm siding with regular people. This bill will be detrimental in the long run if it is passed to what I think that Senator Bingham and other sportsmen of like really want to accomplish. I'm also a damage control agent with the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission. I'm certified through them. I go to their school. This is our rules and regulations right here. I pay money to be certified. We trap coyotes 12 months out of the year. We're trained to do so. It's a program in the wildlife commission that is also self sustaining. It takes in $34,300 in revenues and it operates on $36,656 of costs. It's almost a perfect cost revenue ratio. This bill shouldn't be passed. It will duplicate a program which has already been paid or by the citizens of North Carolina. It will duplicate this program. With all the budgetary restrictions that we're going through in North Carolina, why on earth would we duplicate a program that's going to incur costs? And we've already asked the Wildlife Resource Commission to trim up their budget. Why put a bill on the floor and pass it that is going to create a cost when we're cutting their budget? It's already there. The statute is in the book. I'll read it right quick. It is North Carolina statute 113:274, 113, 291.4 gives the authorization, North Carolina Administrative Code 10B 0106, it completely outlines everything in this bill that's on the floor today is already in effect and there's people doing that. The problem is education. We're not education the farmers and the people in the rural and the city areas that this program does exist. It is at no cost to these farmers. They call, they get a permit, they can trap them themselves, the can hire somebody that's a professional to do it. We are professionals. We go to be certified to do so. Just let me end up and I want to, one thing about our dog friends over here, they really want to do something about the coyote problem, then the State of North Carolina needs to get out of the business of selling live animals. Period. No live animals to be sold. Foxes, coons, anything else. You get away with the live animals, you'll see a problem starting to be served. And I'd like to see my friends from the dog lobby over hear agree with that. Thank you.
-- Speech to Text Times time that the people in the cotton bowl alliance, the end of the bulk of the times poll here and memory that left the unwilling to pay , and co-owner of the time of it, they know that in one of thailand's chairman of this and quick question the left leg of the bill Lockyer admitted deprivation a permit for the Indian of a really hard to get rowdy accord that the PF the member of the year of a scary update of action that would time to determine what might be infected one mission depredation permits and vegetable garden to a time of year and cost prevent the burden however breakers were a part in the end of the story in our time card and Poland and up to two and you Gotta have damaged cars that men like that that person they can talk about the Cuba have to go for the two go from them all the older the friend to the property damage one time or are they were among the dead at the national news: that's correct that they would not live with a mean that the proposed time to complete and that you would have a one day will be the departed lifetime of them into the poll found that E of a higher plane that had time to time that they hope and pray and time they got the mud-playoff, and people of coordinating the pond time taken care of them appreciate that should be in the end of the day - time we have to do that than a time to fix the dean of the bill that the leotard time duration of the neck of the late in the only one that the nonleague Ali Curtis bill and all about and if this is a bill that calls to a known quantity and we'll have more than the standard deduction would return to Haiti operation in time you: David Campbell local hero knowledge and mortality and wanted of state bill fitch, and time allows the commission and Wal-Mart coal into one of the control of a coup of play of the opponents good time making the whole working men and women have had a great relationship with all the time and operate the people of the guardian of time in the projected four days left until time and again with names chairman of the commission and the timing of the band and they haven't been known for designing the founding of the founding of time and again and tell why are we hearing Friday only turnover lead into the time of the lead to win two of the two times child Opened up in the cotton bowl alliance, the bottom of that the more people time poll here and memory, and the unwilling to pay happen?? the people already time they know that in one of life's chairman of this that quick question the left leg of the bill Locker the next time they shun the permit for the Indian of a really hard to get them out the accord that the time of a member of the year of a scary update of action that would make your own identity. While the deprivation per day and time are meant to pay another call to prevent the burden however breakers were taking part in the end of the string and are spending three of the county department of time like to work with the one you are, and Poland and up to two men to the two that have timecards that anything like that that person they can talk about the Cuba have to go for the two go from the more fuel burned out for the two top of the damage lifetime of work or the bombing of the national news?? (SPEAKER CHANGES) that's correct the day with a little much time I made that the proposed the 50% of the 1015 report and then one day will be the time Hebert-of-the two of the poll found that I'm the Oliveira playwright and time they try all those they can time they got the mud-filled would not give people time the coordinating the pond taken care of them appreciate that should be in the cockpit day and time - we have said that the bill time in nine of the bill that the leotard time , the rate of the neck of the late in the only one day late, lee Curtis bill and all about bill, if this is a bill that calls the time and all quickly if you will have more than the standard deduction-Carroll of the time rejected the idea?? (SPEAKER CHANGES) David Campbell hall, she loved mortality and wanted of state bill Fitch, that basically allows the commissioner and more time to have one of the control of the crew of play of time and that's good, the making of the whole working men and women can make a wide open, and would like to have a great relationship involved in the years and operate the report I'm hardly a problem if the court and the projections for time a equation, bill and that it would mean the time of the invention of the family band and they haven't been known for that and turning the founding of the milk and again and tell why are we hearing Friday only, what I'm late into the work of the lead to time the region would be a ?? ….
I’ve actually been sitting on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Representative Ramsey? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman, a motion at the appropriate time? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Anybody else? Representative Wilkins? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair, but Representative Luebke just went down the path I was going to travel. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK. We’re ready Representative Ramsey. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman, despite the fact that I probably receive more emails about this one matter than any other matter since I’ve been down here in the General Assembly, opposing this, I will make a motion for a favorable report of Senate Bill 638. Is there a referral on that, Mr. Chairman? [SPEAKER CHANGES] 639. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I apologize, 639. And… [SPEAKER CHANGES] There’s no referral. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You’ve heard the motion? Any discussion on the motion? If not, all in favor say aye. All opposed no. OK, the bill passes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you members on that one. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 638. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is a rather lengthy bill. There’s 24 or so sections in this bill. This bill passed unanimously in the Senate. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, this is a PCS and I need to have it… [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m sorry. It is. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Daughtry moves that we have the PCS forced. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The original bill passed 48 to nothing in the Senate. The House has added a few things to it, and I’ll go through those. Part 1 basically is just the title and we had a joke in the Senate that when the reading clerk got done with reading this title, he need the oxygen meter. So I apologize that the title is so long, but this is a rather lengthy bill with many sections. Part 2 basically provides that producers certified by the USDA, GAP and GHP of a verification program, or similar programs designated by the Commissioner of Agriculture, have rebuttable presumptions against charges of negligence. This was added by the House, and what this basically does is if you have met these food safety standards that you should have some type of rebuttable case when you’re taken to court. And it just not be automatic when your guilty, especially when you have met these criteria of these stringent food safety guidelines that are coming. And with FDA coming onto the farms of cantaloupe growers and fruit and vegetable growers in North Carolina this year, we felt like this was a good addition to this bill. OK, part number 3 eases the worries that petting zoos and animal exhibited, the North Carolina State Fair, and many other carnivals and festivals held throughout this state, can get liability insurance for their petting zoos. Currently the way the law is written, with the problems that they’ve had, they cannot get petting zoos. They can’t get the liability insurance. This will give them some coverage on that. To give them some help. Part 4 gives the North Carolina Department of Agriculture boards, commissions and officials, with the authority to assess civil penalties, to assess non-monetary penalties when appropriate to address the underlying violation. Basically what Part 4 does is of someone from the Department of Agriculture comes out and realizes you have a violation, this gives them the authority to help you assist to correct that violation without forcing them to have to give you a penalty. Currently under our general statutes they would have to fine you. This just allows them to help you correct the mistake, and let’s move on. Then if they caught come back I’m sure they would fine you. Part 5 decreases the frequencies of the surveys of persons who withdraws 10,000 gallons of water per day or more. Basically what has happened in this they’ve collected data for the last 5 or 6 years. One thing is they have enough data through droughts, through plenty of rain that the data is not really needed every year. But the other thing that has happened due to sequestering and other things that are going on in DC, the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistical Program has been moved out of North Carolina, and into Kentucky. So we don’t have that close relationship we had just a few years ago. So they’re asking this be done every two years instead of every year. Part 6 provides that no information collected by the Department of Agriculture for its animal health programs, including certificates of veterinary inspections, animal medical records…
...laboratory reports or other information that may identify a person or a private business subject to regulation by the department may be disclosed without the permission of the owner. This is sort of some of the privacy acts that there's been some things going on and they're getting requests all the time for different types of organizations wanting information on veterinarians and other folks and this way, they have to prove that they have a legitimate need. They also have to have the owner's permission to release this information. And I think this is a good part of this bill. Part 7 corrects the name of the structural pest control and pesticide division found in our Article 4E of Chapter 106 of the general statutes. The department has brought this error to our attention. Currently our statute reads structural pest control division. The structural pest control division and pesticides division were merged in 2006 but the change of the name was never updated and this will update that throughout or general statutes. Part 8 would allow retailers to advertise the eggs for sale in the same manner as other products sold by the retailer, excluding sales or promotions. This is another item that was added by the House. Basically, what had been happening due to our general statutes, eggs, the sign for them had to be much larger, so large that it was normally put above the case, the dairy case and this way it will allow them to just have the same signage like all other commodities, which to my knowledge there's no opposition to that. They're trying to make it codified or unanimous or whatever you would like to use there. Part 9 repeals the interstate pest control compact to IPCC found in Article 4 of Chapter 106 and the statutes dealing with cleanliness and purity standards for ice cream plants, creameries and cheese factories found in General Statute 106-246 and 248. The department has asked that we repeal this language, not that we're all about having dirty and unsanitary ice cream plants and so forth, but the IPCC was formed as an interstate compact in 1968 but has not been active in recent years and even earlier this year the IPC closed to dissolve because of an issue with their tax exempt status. The department notified us that the North Carolina Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of General Statute 106, 129, has rendered these older statutes obsolete. The North Carolina Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act prohibit adulterated food from being entered into commerce so basically we're just trying to clean up some more rules. Part 10 will conform set backs and burn times for debris, stumps, brush or other flammable materials resulting from ground clearing activities to current statutes. In 2011, House Bill 119 became Session Law 2011-394 and changed the set back distance and burn times or debris, stumps, brush or other flammable materials resulting from ground clearing activities and we are just updating the statutes and the department has notified us that these changes were not property updated and this will just permanently update it to what they were supposed to be. Part 11 repeals the sulfur content standards in gasoline found in General Statute 119-26.2. The department has asked that we repeal this section because it was adopted prior the EPA standards for sulfur content in gasoline. In other words, the EPA is now regulating it and so this standard is obsolete and this standard set by General Statute 119-26.2 is actually the same as the EPA standard. Part 12 exempts foresty and several cultural operations from the department of transportation's temporary driveway permit process for State roads except for controlled access facilities if the temporary driveway operator has completed an educational course in timbering access and obtained a safety certification. This is another item that was added by the House. The North Carolina Foresty Service notified us of inconsistencies throughout the State for loggers building temporary driveways to transport the timber off the site. Basically, what was happening it appeared that we had 100 different rules and regulations scattered throughout our State because one county didn't regulate at all while the other one might over regulated in some degree. So this is trying to codify it. And also, we worked with DOT on this language and to my knowledge they are comfortable with this and currently the North Carolina Forestry Association runs an educational course that is an annual requirement and has been successful throughout the logging industry. Part 13 exempts migrant housing from requirements for installation of automatic sprinkler system if the building meets certain requirements. And those requirements would be they have to be one floor...
I know how much you all have been waiting for this moment id like to call this meeting of house finance together and to order id like to thank our sergent of arms mr. hines, mr. seals, mr. brandon, and mr. clampet thank you for your endurance id also like to thank our pages for today todd mazell, nolan rutazul, caitlin sissen, and arron walker thank you for what your about to observe today, and we appreicate it at this time we will take up the pcs for house bill 998 representative hager moves to have the pcs for house bill 998 move forward to discussion all in favor say i all apposed say no thank you representative hager that was very kind of you representative lewis we will continue the discussion from the meeting last time mr chairman and ladies and gentleman thank you again for the chance to be here it's on bill, and im sorry because that was smooth and you missed what i was saying thank you so much for the chance to stand before you today i tried that line what i thought was a very good tax line that i would go in depth for whatever part of the tax line you would like to discuss out of respect foor the comittes time i know a lot of you may have some inquiries or amedments you'd like to send forth i'll take the chairs directions as to what he wants me to do we can't start in on the amendments if i may ask a question personal income taxes johnny the plumber operates out of his house and has been taking when he files taxes he takes a deduction for the expensies of operating the plumbing expenses under this bill will he still be able to take these deductions under this bill? yes sir. all of them? if it's johnny the real estate agent will he be able to do the same thing for his license and expenses? yes sir. and mr chairman if it's okay maybe you'd let dr ordman to clear this up dr boardman if you don't mind an explanation regarding that question with respect for expenses, if the sole proprioter is scheduling on the scheduling on those ecxpenses would be included above the calulation your federal adjusted income those expenses would represent one of those of the income thank you information purpses and members of the committe we will have a discussion and have a voting on this and let the members have joy because they are missing these discussins howard amendment, amendment one does everyone have a copy f the howard amendment i'd also like to welcome representative grear martin welcome to the world of finance unofficially we are glad to have you. we hope you feel that way after today representative howard thank you. this is a very simple amentment it looks lengthy with a lot of lines it does two major things three major things it removes the cap on mortgage interest. cuts off
Part 18 directs the Department of, directs ?? and the Department of Transportation to jointly petition the United States Corp of Engineers to allow for greater flexibility and opportunity to perform wetlands mitigation outside of the watershed where development occurs. This vote was voted on by the Senate and passed. It allows ?? and DOT to report back to the, to petition the Corp of Engineers to the Environmental Review Commission no later than January 21, 2014. Part 19 accelerates the sunset date of the patrol unit displacement plan to the effective date of this site. This was added by the House. The patrol unit displacement plan requires off state agencies, universities and community colleges that have state-owned vehicle fleets to develop and implement plans to produce the amount of petroleum consumed, the amount of petroleum products consumed to 20%. This statue has been amended twice since its inception in 2005, in general statue 2009451 and 2011145. It is our understanding that the state has achieved a 19.92% reduction in petroleum use compared to the original baseline in 2005 and at this point it takes more resources to create the report and perform the functions than it is worth. So in other words, it costs more to get that other eight-tenth of a percent than it would be worth to get. And Mr. Chairman with that I'll stop and entertain any questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator we're not supposed to take a vote in the last 10 minutes of the meeting and we all got a session at 2 o'clock. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So, what I think would be appropriate is, now that he's presented it, is that we'll have a call meeting to take the rest of it up later in the week. And were you can have your questions answered and that kind of stuff. And I think that would be an appropriate thing to do. And give everybody time to actually look at it carefully and do that. And we want to move the bill pretty quick but what you do is watch your emails and we will call a meeting to take up nothing but this, and to vote on it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sounds fine. Thank you all very much. Appreciate it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. That's what we get for taking up coyotes, right?