A searchable audio archive from the 2013-2016 legislative sessions of the North Carolina General Assembly.

searching for

Reliance on Information Posted The information presented on or through the website is made available solely for general information purposes. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of this information. Any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk. We disclaim all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on such materials by you or any other visitor to the Website, or by anyone who may be informed of any of its contents. Please see our Terms of Use for more information.

House | June 9, 2015 | Committee Room | Agriculture, Part 2

Full MP3 Audio File

Members of the committee I would like to call the house committee on agriculture back in session use the procedure that we are going to do it this time to solidate the interest of the public. We're going to have those who have got expressed desire to make a public comment to do so and then we will proceed. At this particular point what I have in the way of request we have the following people who have requested to speak Dr. Robert Brown North Carolina Wildlife Federation, Dick Hermoton North Carolina Wildlife Federation I would like for the two of you to decide which one of you going to take the two minutes, or each of you to take one minute each Mary Meclin Abezel with the southern environmantal low center for two minutes and then we have a well let's go ahead and do that and then we will queue the other people, so double up Brown. So will you taking the two minutes? I will be taking the two minutes, yes I will speak you are recognized to speak to your personal life. Yes sir my name is Bar Brown I'm a former diner of the College of Natural Resources in NC State, I will be here on behalf of the North Carolina Wildlife Federation. And I have about 30 years experience of working with deer and [xx]. In 2002 there were 100 deer farms in North Carolina, regulation were passed, in 2003 about $250, 000 of state funds were used to buy out a number of those farms. Now the're about 36  to 37 plus two new ones that were just permitted. Of those, about 60% have 10 or fewer deer, they're just pets in the backyard. Only two have over 50 deer, which are being raised for canned hunts in other states or at the Cherokee reservation. The farmers pay an annual fee of $50 a year which adds up to a whopping $18050 per year, to provide for annual inspections and law enforcement. The Wildlife Resources Commission in 2013, spent $72, 000 inspecting these facilities, and another $125, 000 testing wild deer for chronic wasting disease to ensure it's not yet in our wild herd as jurisdiction over deer farms passes from the Wildlife Resources Commission to the Department of [xx] and Consumer Sciences services we have to ask you do they have the funds to continue this inspection and testing, once dairy farming increasingly in our state we expect mischief in form of illegal trade and [xx] smuggling. Does ACF have a law enforcement personal and budget to handle this? The senator said that is this section of the bill was worked up as a compromise the bill that 30 AC ACS in the dairy farmers, non of this [xx] over 300, 000 and nearly 200, 300 dear hunters in the state for wildlife poachers and others are about dairy farming and caned hands[sp] in all African endangers. Note that they include the several county commissions that are now tells resolution against the ones forming from their counties Every state is transferred regulations of daily farms to the agencies now have CWD in the world [XX]. The national wildlife the [Xx], which I'm a member, the [XX], the wildlife society, and a number of other organisation all have position papers against dear farming and ken hunting they went cousine[sp] they discovered CWD in their wild and farmed there in 2002 they now spend 49 million dollars to control the outbreak. Their hunting license sales have decreased 10% since that outbreak with a loss of licence sales, retail sales, economic output sales taxes and jobs they figure it costs them now 70 to 100 million dollars a year in to the future. If that should happen to North Carolina, it's estimated they will cost 35 to 54 million dollars a year in lost revenue for the entire future. And finally this month the University of Texas scientist have confirmed the chronic wasting this prions which are in the urine of an infected deer remain in the soil and are taken up by plants. Although CWD has not been shown to pass over to mad cow disease or disease in humans although it came from, believed it came from scrapie's and sheep in Colorado State University in 1967 our North Carolina animal agriculture industry is worth 9.2 billion dollars a year, is it really worth taking this risk Thank you Dr. Brawer[sp?], we appreciate your comments Thank you. Mary McClain [xx], pardon me if

I said that [xx] Good afternoon, I'm Mary McClain Asbill with the Southern Environmental Law Center. Thanks for the opportunity to speak. I just want to note North Carolina will be very out of step with our neighboring state if we transfer the deer farming program to the Department of Agriculture in fund that program to include white-tailed deer, which actually belong to all the people of this state. 17 other states have total bans on cervid imports. White-tailed deer are excluded from farming in Georgia. They are the state Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Agriculture share jurisdiction over the management farm cervid. And while the Department of Agriculture administers the program, no licence is issued until the Department of Natural Resources has inspected the facility. In South Carolina, the Department of Natural Resources controls the possession of captive cervid. There is no extensive deer farming in that state. They've just had a small number of privately held, fallow deer farms and a temporarily permit for a Christmas show reindeer. Import has never been permitted. Next we're in Tennessee. The Department of Agriculture has jurisdiction over captive cervid, but it is not legal to posses white-tailed deer in that state. In 2012, legistlation was introduced in Tennessee to allow white-tailed farming, and it was soundly defeated. in Virginia, all captive [xx] programs are administered by the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. The state no longer permits deer farming only the possession in captivity for exhibits or other purposes. Please consider this fully. It would be a dramatic problem from North Carolina if we transfer this program. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. We now have Brad, and I cannot pronounce that last name. Hoyt or? And Sugray[sp?] and Tommy Hall. Not to exceed two minutes. their are many reasons our forming operations should be under the North Carolina department of agriculture and I would like to meet you forward with this, where needed help the North Carolina department Agriculture to help with our animal health issues. The NCDA and the USDA is responsible for protecting our food supply and definitely has the experience to help our farming operations we hope CWD never gets to North Carolina however if it does we need the experience of department of Agriculture to help us and the state to control this. As [xx] farming their would be more and more opportunities for is to have products to sell. Our Agriculture department is very experienced in helping farmers promote their products for example the got to be North Carolina program has been very successful and we would like to be part of that, we also want to North Carolina agri-business grow and reach the 200 billion goal that they has say it. The NCDA has helped us grow quality animals using the knowledge and experience they have gained from other forms in operations. Number four. The NCDA has approximately 47 vets and other vet technicians to help with animal operations. with the North Carolina wildlife they have just got one on staff. We as deer farmers and ant[sp] farmers need the assistance that NCDA has to give us. I would like to thank Thank you for the time and the consideration on this matter. Thank you for your comments. Miss Gray[sp] Sugwei[sp?] Ooh! sorry. So sorry [xx] Get that horse. I'm trying. My name is Sugray[sp?] I'm the executive director of the North Carolina Horse Council I appreciate just brief to switch from deer to horses, and just wanted to

say there has been some discussion regarding our assessment. I just wanted to stress that it is voluntary, it is a self assessment and that is something that we feel the horse industry itself have endorsed for almost two decades. Thank you. Thank you Mr Chairman and ladies and [xx] of the committee. My name is Tommy Hor, I have been a North Carolina deer farmer for 21 years, currently I serve on the board of directors of the North Deer and Health Farmers Association. I've been a hunter for over 50 years and the last 30 years earning help support my family through my work as a taxidermist. For the last 13 years, there's been a lot of talk about deer farming that isn't true with the purpose of compelling hunters to oppose it. Some of this incorrect information has scared hunters and maybe even compelled some to quite hunting all together. Contrary to this, deer farming brings several positive things to the table. It has a great economic value, and presently it is a $6 billion industry annually and creates tens of thousands of jobs nationwide. And it's one of the fastest growing industries in rural America. Also most importantly, I feel like, is deer farmers and the deer farming industry are responsible for the majority of funding for CWD research. We as hunters should be thankful for this because it will benefit wild deer too thanks again, and I support Senate Bill 513. Thank you for your comments. Members, to the chair's knowledge, we have two amendments. They want to be sent forth if it's okay with the members of the committee, I would like to dispose of these two amendments or proposed amendments and then have comments. Is anybody on the committee move to be heard before we consider the two amendments. Representative Collin I've got a amendment being prepared   Mr. Chairman, I've got a question for the audience, if I could ask Representative Daughtry, to whom would you like to direct your question? I don't know. I know that if this bill passes, we are moving deer hunting from wildlife to agriculture. is there someone from the department of agriculture you might speak to whether or not they want the responsibility of this. Is anybody here we haven't heard from them. Would, who from the department of agriculture, the State Vet or Joy Higgs? We are going to, he is going to. Yes we are ready to accept the assumption of responsibilities of captive deer farming in the state of North Carolina and will to the best of our ability work on a day to day basis with the deer farming industry to prevent the introduction of disease, to control disease should it come to past and to eradicate disease should it be identified in the state. It might be helpful also Representative Doherty in light of your question if we also solicit a response from Gordon Moore Executive Director of the Wildlife Resources Commission to address Representative Daughtry's question relative to the acceptability of the transfer of the cervid deer from Wildlife to the Department of Agriculture? Thank you Mr. Chairman. Gordon Myers, executive director of the Wildlife Resources Commission, and this has been a very challenging policy for many years to work on. And I'd point out that deer farming is not new in North Carolina, nor is the expansion of deer farming, it's already allowed. The important policy here is the baseline that's under consideration, and by working with the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services on this, this bill provides additional safeguards that are currently not in the baseline, so we do support it. Thank you. Members of the committee, I'm aware of three amendments. Representative Ager, Representative Brisson, Representative Collins. I understand Representative Collins' amendment is being prepared.

We have it? Are there other that have an interest in sending forth amendments. Having seen none, this committee will accept those three amendments and no other ones representative Edgar you're recognized to end forward your amendment. Yes sir I think you all have a copy of it, thank you everyone for allowing me to do thee, I'm here really representing many of the young farmers in North Carolina, many of them ho are, consider themselves organic farmer maybe but their entrepreneurial we have remaining year worrying about who was going to take on farming, so this is with regards to I believe section three just defining sustainable agriculture, I felt like the way it was defined was too generic and I thought of the young farmers like a little more to it as all I'm really adding is some language that specifically and more expensively at the bottom encourages them and the agencies of the state to be involved to North Carolina agricultural finance authority the [xx] and encouraging egg development and form [xx] not for agencies get to work at thee new farm, there'd not much else to it, keep cross out the word technologies I think the worry there is that, that may refer to may be the I don't know what that refers exactly but that that word carried some of our young farmers so that's really the senator Jack and senator Bob  thank you is this from working day or we need thank you Mr chairman representative Arger thank you for your mentor I would have to disagree with I think when you take out the work technology your taking out the future of what we have working on on this state for 50 years of trying to come with better ways to farm announces are 3 positions that you have entered at the bottom I think they are not permanent in this particular piece of language in describing sustainable agriculture in the simple form as possible and Miss chairman with that I would ask the members not to except this amendment representative Linder  Thank you Mr chairman I will also like to ask staff members to oppose lias the real situation is way well covered in the language of the bill we already got, and I think this doesn't ready add anything thank to I think the bottom part of the amendment is definatly was not being parked up what we will do on this bill I hope you will vote aginst this amendment representative Bare Directly asked to represent respond a question. Representative Burger you yield?   I have read the amendment and I'm looking and I'm looking at the what are you actually accomplish. It just seem redundant   [xx] trying to be more explicit and what I'm really trying to accomplish is some more buying from [xx] Further discussion further debate see at 9 those in favor of the amendment sent forth by representative Burger please indicate by saying aye those oppose the amendment fails. Representative [xx] you are recognized to send forth your amendment [xx] [xx] shipping over from the wildlife to agriculture and what this does and what I explained to you [xx] is [xx] whatever you want to [xx] it's under the wildlife the owners or operators of these farms are liable, if any chronic

disease or whatever they're reliable, or they've shifted us or change in us on agriculture. They've revealed a liability of these votes and pushes on to tax payers, liability for the state of North Carolina, I just don't think it's fair to shift that burden unheard of calls. We know it's coming, and it's been known to wildlife, and we have had no disease. The doctor from State University got up and testified that they're all set and ready, but they also should be providing the same services that they will provide to agriculture department to the North Carolina wildlife at the present time. I know that they've been working with wildlife, and I know that they've done a good job. We've had no problems with it, but all this does is relieve the burden of the liability and puts it on the state taxpayers. I'm just asking you to support and leave this on the wildlife commission where it's been since 2002 in your reminder and not base this unheard, untold calls that we're just coming to. Senator Brock, Senator Jackson. Thank you Mr. Chairman I would ask the members to opposed the amendment for two other reasons. Number one we do have two deputies in surrounding state unless the deer can read, state the lines about whether this is an interstate or not, we want to be more [xx] may have to transfer it from, understand it from other states that may bring this in already, and I think we had at the Department of Agriculture with our expertise in dealing with so many livestock animals in the State of North Carolina. That added divisional level security will help us if their is outbreak or when their is an outbreak. It's not a matter if it will happen, it's when it will happen and we just want to make sure we're having the Department of Agriculture involved in this process will help us against that infection so I'd ask the members to please oppose the amendment. Representative West. Thank you Mr Chairman, members of the committee, I would ask you to oppose this amendment we've been working on only as I have for nearly four years bringing wildlife and the department of agriculture together along with the dear farmers to work out a compromise we can leave with in North Carolina, and I think we have a good compromise I would ask you to vote against this amendment. Representative Wade on the amendment am sorry Representative [**]. Dear farming from one [**] to though agriculture is the pin hunting of deer, is it hunting or not? senator George, representative Coin nersar of the it's prohibitive in this line so there will be no earing and the commissioner is on several occasions he says, he appreciates joining this team of [**] concerning [**] ans so it prohibited in this language that there would be no deer pin[sp?] hunting. That's it.   Representative Steinburg. Yes, thank you Mr. Chairman. I would ask that you oppose this amendment as well. Looking at the projected numbers for this particular industry and taking into consideration that Pennsylvania the numbers are like $311 million annually, there is no question in my mind given that that the proper spot for this to be would be under the Department of Agriculture. So I would ask that you oppose this amendment, thank you. Representative Yarborough. Well, I'm going to have to say that I believe we should support this amendment because the hunting industry is very important to our State, it's very important in my district. It brings in a lot of money, it brings in a lot of recreation any farm as Sen. Brock is problem everywhere[sp] that this tea disease Somalia disease is gonna come along and permanent agriculture is priority is gonna be the dairy farms, whereas with wildlife resources in charge

for the priority would be the hunting industry which is a tradition is very important in our state for they support the amendment and rise up the raised bill, Representative [xx] Thank you, Mr Chairman. Funny this is I was planning this minute my self in discussion with the wildlife resources now that representative that you for that question that is one I have been waiting for someone to ask. This is the coperation between [xx] and do not want get separated this is going to happen inevitably  and probably this is the best deal we can get  but Representative Brisson has offered all for the amendment and some of the things we had said earlier, and with all the opposition that am hearing from my fellow hunters and Representative Collins has offered an amendment that says the same thing maybe it's not far fetched to amend this act, so I'm going to support this amendment Representative Turner. Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have a question for the bill sponsors please. If just because we are transferring as you propose to Agriculture that would not savor the ability of wildfire to being involved if there were crimes committed. Senator Jackson. Thank you, Mr Chairman. Representative thank you for that question. That's the one I've been waiting for someone to ask. This is a corporation between the wildlife when this is done they going to work together and should they come in, God forbid that we had to sue the committee they going together to contain this as quickly as possible and so is all going to cooperative effort is not in law enforcing of hand on business senator led to believe and in all due respect Dr. Brown some of these formation is not overly accurate. We learnt from we heading in the scenic committee that I did [xx] that out but they are working for operative together, and to me it's a merger of these two on this particular industry wildlife and hunting is very important is very important in this day. I mean it brings in millions and millions of dollars and we wouldn't want doing anything to harm that, but at the same token do we want to stifle a new industry, that we could have, that is been trying to flourish for the last 21st years? All this years this is only trying to get it together to a cooperative stage, and that's what we are doing with wild [xx]. Representative Cleveland thank you Mr chairman. This is probably for staff. My main concern is where representative Brisson pointed out, are we shifting the financial responsibility, for this farming operations in the case of any diseases, from the individual, farming operations to the state Representative Cleveland, to the extend that, that the stay would be responsible. You know Wildlife is a stay agency and Hague is a stay agency. There will not be any additional shift of responsibility to the tax payer any more ability that would normally fall on the farmer, would stay with the deer farmer.  Follow up I have problems with this section I have for some time, and I will point out the state of Pennsylvania's pain to the note was for the chronic wasting disease, and the industry itself doesn't compensate for what the tax payers we've had, a small deer farming operation in this State for along time we haven't had any CWD. Now we understand that CWD, the private, Prion[sp] decosit[sp] can be passed through the urine of the deers into the soil and it's been picked up by plants. I don't think we should encourage deer farming. We're at risk with the wild population. I do not think we should encourage the growth of deer farming in this state, just on the health aspects. Representative Willingham. Thank you Mister Chair. My question is probably an answer, but listening to the conversation. Question is. Is there any reason the head department will not work with the wildlife? Is there anything that they will do differently if they were in charge as far as working with wildlife if they were not in charge? Senator Jackson.

Thank you Mr. Chairman, and I might ask who admires the statement erring the chairman on this, but it is the prior process that with the department of Agriculture having so much animal history and the veterinarians already working with wildlife on this. This is a better bet for the deer farming, not the wild deer like the deer farming that are raised in captivity. They're born in captivity, they've never been in the wild, we're not bringing wild deer in the pens folk, we'll bring in deers that have been born and raised in pens, and we feel like it is a better mix to fit them with the department of [xx] being they handle every other livestock in this state, and so they have to lock them and they've been working together in the past, and I think this is going to only make it better and as we move into the future. Representative Queen. This deer farming is little new to me so think this is a question. We're not hunting in pens, so we're raising these deers for venison basically or hides Senator Jackson. Thank you Mr. Chairman. We are right for those two things and they are raising them to ship them out of state to where they will be [xx], I mean that part of it, that's part of the deal. Raising depends in a different [xx] cattle and having the option that state pay every year before they get to this figure. [xx] departments. Representative Whitmire. I oppose this amendment, I've been a 100 most of my life, and a lot of you who see me go home on weekends especially during season that's where I'm headed with my two boys and a couple other folks we take. The logic to me is this, I think we're hearing somethings that may or may not relate to what actually this does, we're trying to augment an industry, if you want to call it that, that has been squelched because of the less than ideal operating regulatory setting that we're fixing here we're not importing deer and only when that time would come is when we have the means for life chronic wasting disease test. We're also putting it into an apartment that has significant means to do the testing in a way preventive, and if there's something the means to address it for animals that are kept when they have the means actually watch him and check him and test him we don't have that right now this makes it better so I oppose this amendment Representative Brission on the amendment. You have to hold it down but you speak out so everybody can here you.   Thank you Mr. Chair I will just go to remunerate that and staffs answer the question I'm not sure whether it's correct or not, could the legal folks I'm not a lawyer I'm a farmer but I have talk with a couple well known law use in this general assembly and what it does is it exactly what I said it deed thy are telling me did it shift the liability of the owner operator when you take out a while I input it under agriculture and it come through the paid the way the paid just written I don't know where you are looking at and where you get you information from but of all the information that I have seen on it, it automatically shift the liabilities to the state and do you have a different answer than the answer that you already answered this question with Mr. Chairman I do not the bill to the liability of the former Senator Jackson Thank you Mr. Chairman Representative [xx] this issues rather than [xx] both wildlife and agriculture state agencies this bill will follow the USDA guidelines represented to the federal government only and all sort of field are [xx] and so I would disagree with your analysis of that and you and I know both far so much that we got too low [xx] Just some follow up.  Mr Chair You're sure? And I understand that the point when we'll changing over to agriculture it come from wildlife to farm animals that's where the

catch is, and that where the sheep is, is the same thing as cows, hogs, mules, horses whatever when he in putting on the ugly coat and that's what the difference is Representative [xx] thank you Mr chair I was go Michael comment during the general part of the discussion but I think it's probably pertinent now probably like to ask the bill sponsor a question on this, may be a response from him, I notice in the bill we not going to be importing any deer until we get a vaccine that will test live deer, is that correct? Yes, Sir it is. There has to be a live test developed which has not been done as of yet, and to my knowledge it's not nowhere near in the near future before any importation will take place. Follow up. I think you answered my second question that I was going to ask. Do you have any timetable, any kind of vision when we're going to have this live vaccine available because in my opinion the real risk comes from importing these deer into the State. Representative, I do not. I've asked that question, and we have no scientific data to tell us when this test is going to be developed. I know there is a lot of work being done on this, but as far as a timeline that has not been, and that's why we were careful to fit this language in here that there could be no importation until this test was build. or developed.  Mr. Gordon Matt[sp?], would you the chair is going to take the prerogative relative to the call situation brought up. Would you be kind enough to make comment relative to your opinion on the cost issue that we're talking about here? Mr. Chairman, if you could let me know exactly what the cost issue. Is it relevant to the indemnification the concern relative to the addendum, I mean the amendment. I think the question is relative to, if it's transferred to Agriculture, would there be an additional liability placed on tax payers? Is that correct? Mr. Matt, the Chair is doing exactly what you are trying to do, I'm trying very hard to understand the nature of the question and I was hoping that you might be able to clarify it for me because I'm not quite understanding what is being being addressed here either. I'll do my best Mr. Chairman, as I understand that, in order to participate in the interstate movement of servernts heart certification program is required. North Carolina has a heart certification in place further through legislation in the last session Wild Life Commission is required to comply with, in fact use the USDA Program Standards as our baseline for regulation, and that includes having a heart certificatio program participant within that [xx] program as I understand it may be aligeable for [xx] forms through the US department of agriculture that would be no different if it's under the department of agriculture, or under the Wild Life Resources Commission. I think it's the same. The Chair [xx] correct and will give further explanation if he'd be willing to do so from Dr. Mix[sp?] Mr. Chairman. Myers is correct. Indemnification for the taking of animals in the event of a disease Break, is funded through the US department of Agriculture. Currently going on now, all across the country, is millions of birds have been depopulated from flocks, the US DA is solely responsible for indemnification to those farmers as they suffer through these losses. Representative West you're recognized for the last comment on this amendment. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Again I would ask you do oppose this amendment, we've worked very hard with wildlife and department of Agriculture to try to come up with consensus that would make this a smooth transition and create a new industry in this state, and I'd ask you to oppose this amendment, Those in favor of adopting the amendment, please say yes. yes those opposed No And opinion to Chairs, the No's have it. Representative Collin, do you recognize to send forth your amendment? Mr. Chairman, with your permission, first thing I'd like to do is amend the amendment by striking the third provision on lines 89 because it's the same thing that we've just heard with that objection so ordered.

Representative Collin would say that again so that My memo just changed Senator Jackson I'm working Mr. Chairman,  from now on Okay only this one Representative Carlos, I believe you I want to explain something to you, and if I would call the name of the individual we are trying to do this for I believe that they want to go to state house I got a call in 2012 from a form royal majesty not my district he disagreed I got in a problem he says I will be in a holiday by the law trying to find revues this is a no must angle in the facial I have $50, 000 in wage, he says and you know what that is don't you? I said that most farmers should not avoid corporations they all  say yes. This is real this is in January and February yes they are telling mi that because those workers have left and gone home and I didn't withhold and none of this came about U ntil got social security numbers which was required by the Feds. In part the state had nothing to do with acquiring and getting the social security numbers. They were the state could care less at that point in time according to our rules and regulations. He said they're going to require me to pay full percent of this because either they got the collective, I've got collective from the workers which are all going back to Mexicans, he said that I would be penalized if they won't find a paper for sale he says and crept you know that an alleged  the way you grow that we are not required to without deed to others by over the year all says your right. I said let me see what I can do. I called Secretary home at that time and I explained the situation to him, and he understood. He said they all meet next week and [xx] it's very exact which says it take into cane qwill[sp] cane [xx] so and he took care was boring this farmer here to state in histo indicate this is pass that bill, you were unanimous in the senate in 2013 I believe it was, and it came over to the house and in all fairness I promise into some [xx] that's is you today's of dairy cows we're not having the whole explanation, that it never got hurt. So we're sited back in here trying to explain to the situation that it is and even sector [xx] and they have tweaked it a little more, that they will explain [xx] for this language to address this problem that is a very grey area that will affect as you have already commented and I appreciate your comments [xx] best that are trying to do this right [xx] by going to the expense of going through this cumbersome paperwork not [xx] program called H-2A. I mean we provide them transportation here from here, we provide them housing We provide them with everything they need except what is on their back and what they eat, they are provided with [xx]. We do not even sell our wage rates in regards to [**], any American working on my firm has to make at least if not more then our H2H made which is currently at my memories threat $10 of assembly once in an hour is the new minimum wage on her phone. North Carolina minimum wages at nationals is 7 1/4, so this is not a cheap program so you have to comply with

all this rules in order to not be out compliance with it and overtime their is this grey area in black and white where there is not misunderstanding [xx]. And as far as to the other amendment, I think, I can understand some of your concerns with the sustainability, but as some point in time folks, you're going to be forced to choose between what you believe is sustainability and I believe this frame work [**] it is a thorough framework, but it's an encouraging framework that we can build upon as we move forward and everybody talks about sustainability. Of every chain store we deal with and in my fellow growers as well, they are all now requiring you have a sustainability in place and a policy that we have to present to them before we can do business every year. And so what we are trying to do is be ahead of the curve and make sure North Carolina is staged to continue in growing with Agriculture entry that we've been so blessed with. Representative Johns. Thank you Mr. Chair and my comment was really to point of order against if you will and really going through the chair up I wondered if perhaps the amendment sponsor might consider dividing his amendment into two amendments because I think we got to very different issues here, and to me they probably both deserve debate and there maybe people that feel strongly about one lather than the other so that was my question. Representative Collins is next in the question make address centrally may not. I had actually wanted those amendments to be three different amendments frankly to begin with that was my original intention but I gave it to the person so late to do it that we didn't really have time to do this. I was certain it would be [xx] that of the chair so allows. I just like to say in responding to the comments there, I couldn't agree agree more with Senator Jackson about doing away with grey area because that is my concern with section three exactly what he described having having happen in the back constituent is exactly what I'm concerned about with women section three, but I would like for us to get away from the grey area but making it clear that we do  plan to tax, and most employers to withhold taxes from every way journal here in North Carolina whether they are aliens or citizens that's why I would insist giving where the grey area is. But certainly would amenable to splint the amendment Representative Brondy. Thank you senator Jackson, there is a question for you, if the national raid is $10 1000s tomsons in hour and we decide to tax it would you quite count yourself as a disadvantage against our neighboring states if that would happen? Well, [xx] representative Brondy knock your line is no radio avenges disadvantaged to our neighbors States because under most normal years are able to raid he is half the  South Carolina by 50 to 60 to 75 cells per hour. Well Haze and Florida by 75 to 95 cents per hour if they know which part of Florida you lean, the other part is I don't know if we withhold  the wages that with no wages and I am going to use [xx] a worker on my farm works 10 hours he gets paid $100 and 71 cents in regards and so I don't know that if we would not be in violation of federal law if we started withholding these state taxes [xx] I can't answer to that it's my opinion that their again their might never be grey areas that on a fed would have to look at that are based off the contract you pay them $10 71 cents per hour and and I think that's acted on I know it's over 10 dollars per hour for every hour they work, Mr. Sandes do you have a comment Mr. Chairman I can provide may be a little bit of information this does have a referral to finance and the finance team can provide more but this does only applying with holding the employer which still have to comply with any reporting requirements, and as I do understand H2A workers do have to file income tax return so they start to pay taxes this is just about withholding the employer level. T He Chair is enormously sympathetic for those who see various parts of this as

challenging and that's one of the very reasons that things like this become difficult federal and what's being trying to do in Washington the Chair is going to rule we vote on this amendment as it currently exist, any other comment. Representative Johns Mr. Chair I'm raising my hand before you, rise my hand before you making last statement, we're going to bet on it as it currently exist. I was prepared to make a motion if you could accept of a higher order that this amendment be split into two amendments, and that each portion be taken separately. The Chair will accept that motion you recognize you're making motion Representative Johnson.  Thank you Mr. Chair, I move that the comment amendment be split the two separate amendments and each of the two agenda items be treated separately on separate amendment.  Members, you've the motion, comment or discussion on the motion Senator Jackson, any comment or discussion on the motion. Those in favor of the motion to divide the amendment offered by Representative Johns please hi, Hi! Those opposed.  No! Independent to chair the no's have it, the motion be voted on as it exist any other comment on the motion Rep. Riddell the question before the committee is the passage of the amendment sent forth by Representative Collins all those in favor of the amendment our version favor of the amendment send forward by a representative Collins please indicate by saying yes yes, those opposed no the no's have it there is no sustaining to the division the amendment fails. We are back on the bill all those in favor of the bill please say yes, yes yes. Those opposed no yes has it bill passes Thank you Mr chairman and thank you members Does that referral to finance? Absolutely thank you.