Other Activities > Trapping
HB 1775 Prohibiting the production of fur products
Ric0:
I believe it would also outlaw fishing jigs. A lot of them use rabbits fur.
Skyvalhunter:
I would think that presenting what's going on with this bill to the different tribes would have a huge impact to it being shut down.
Humptulips:
Several people asked me to report on how the hearing went. Well, it is sometimes hard to gauge how the testimony was received but I am optimistic. We had I thought some good testimony from a diverse group. Trappers, fur dealers, fur farmers, fly tiers, Fur Commision, Colville tribe and a biologist. Karen, I thought was particularly good as someone who likes to wear fur. Of Course, the other side had their shot, but I was not real impressed with their performance.
It is easy to critique our testimony but consider they only gave a person 90 seconds. You can't make all the good arguments that come to mind. You pick something and try to get across your argument the best you can in the time allotted.
What's next?
The Committee will, at some point vote on whether to move it to the House floor for a vote or not. The Chair can hold it in Committee without a vote and it holds over till next year. If they move it to the floor and it gets a yes vote it goes to the Senate and starts all over again.
You can still send in comments.
Humptulips:
I went up this morning to see The House Ag and NR Committee's Executive Session on 1775. They passed a substitute Bill on a straight party line vote Dems, aye/ Rep, nay. I'm not sure what all is in the substitute Bill as they have not published it yet that I can see. It sounds like they did make changes to accommodate fur farmers and fly tiers. I can't say the same for furriers, but it doesn't sound good from what I heard. Not sure until I can read the Bill. On to the full House with a do pass recommendation.
I also gave testimony on HB 1685 and HB 1930. Those are the restructuring of the F&W Commission Bills in the House. I don't think I made any impact but from hearing what I did and reading faces I think neither Bill is going far. Overwhelming sentiment against 1685 and for 1930 if you go by pro/con voting by the public. Seemed like the hearing comments were heavily by anti-hunters and they hate 1930 but not fully behind 1685.
Frank The Tank:
--- Quote from: Humptulips on February 19, 2025, 01:07:50 PM ---I went up this morning to see The House Ag and NR Committee's Executive Session on 1775. They passed a substitute Bill on a straight party line vote Dems, aye/ Rep, nay. I'm not sure what all is in the substitute Bill as they have not published it yet that I can see. It sounds like they did make changes to accommodate fur farmers and fly tiers. I can't say the same for furriers, but it doesn't sound good from what I heard. Not sure until I can read the Bill. On to the full House with a do pass recommendation.
I also gave testimony on HB 1685 and HB 1930. Those are the restructuring of the F&W Commission Bills in the House. I don't think I made any impact but from hearing what I did and reading faces I think neither Bill is going far. Overwhelming sentiment against 1685 and for 1930 if you go by pro/con voting by the public. Seemed like the hearing comments were heavily by anti-hunters and they hate 1930 but not fully behind 1685.
--- End quote ---
Bruce, here's the substitute bill text. This is NOT good at all. If this passes I (and many others) are done, business wise.
"Replaces the prohibition on fur farming with a requirement that a fur farm be a member of an organization recognizing a professional certification program that includes animal welfare and environmental standards and requires fur farms to be fully in compliance with inspection and certification requirements. • Requires the production and manufacture of fur or fur-related products made from farmed fur to be sourced from a farm that is a member of an organization recognizing a professional certification program that includes animal welfare and environmental standards and fully in compliance with inspection and certification requirements. • Exempts products used in fishing gear from the prohibition on producing and manufacturing fur products. • Deletes the intent section"
OK my questions...
Requirement on fur farms may not be a high hurdle to pass as just about all if not ALL fur farms belong to a professional organization. Fur Harvesters may have this requirement. What this WILL stop is any ranch fur-say I buy one at Glenn's Ferry sold by another private person. This hangs in my shop. I buy something manufactured by another business in New York etc. We all know that furs change hands many times, and anyway, fur doesn't come with a tag showing origination. Even CITES tags can be removed once the hide is tanned. What nightmare administrative burden does this require that can never be met?
"exempts products used in fishing gear from the prohibition on producing and manufacturing fur products". First, this shows the power of some outdoor groups. Great, just NOT US. However this implies that any other activity/manufacture with fur, wild or ranch, is prohibited.
"Deletes the intent section" What's this?
All of this, BTW will seriously impact the economics-and by default severely restricts-Native American use, pruchase, movement of furs outside of their inner tribal use, in effect a law against them.
I look forward to yours and other's response as I draft my letter to my Reps.
Frank
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version