Senate OKs bill on field burning

BOISE – Impassioned opposition from almost every North Idaho senator wasn’t enough to sway the full Senate from approving a bill Tuesday that critics say will make it harder to find alternatives to field burning.

“For three or four hours a day, it’s very difficult. I can feel it in my lungs,” said Sen. Shawn Keough, R-Sandpoint, describing what it’s like for her when Rathdrum Prairie farmers burn their fields. “For three or four hours a day, I’m fearful for my life.”

HB 33 says the only “economically viable alternative” to field burning is something that achieves the same agricultural objectives and doesn’t cost farmers a penny more, either in the short term or long term. Under current state law, the state agriculture director has to make a determination annually that there’s no economically viable alternative, in order to allow the practice.

The bill, which has already gone through the House, passed on a 19-15 vote after nearly an hour of debate. The only Panhandle legislator to vote in favor of it was Sen. Joyce Broadsword, R-Sagle.

Keough, who has asthma, detailed her struggles on burn days, saying she regularly contemplates whether she should go to the hospital to receive breathing treatments.

“The burning brings a delivery of smoke to my living room, to my house,” Keough said. “I’m personally affected.”

The debate came just four days after another district judge ruled in the state’s favor regarding the director’s determination.

The Idaho Conservation League, American Lung Association of Idaho/Nevada and the Sandpoint-based Safe Air For Everyone have filed lawsuits against the state the past two years, arguing that state Agriculture Director Pat Takasugi’s determinations were “capricious and arbitrary.”

On Friday, 4th District Judge Duff McKee said he had no legal basis to overturn the director’s 2004 decision. And just two weeks ago, 6th District Judge W.H. Woodland ruled that Takasugi’s 2003 determination was reasonable.

Brad Purdy, an attorney for the three organizations, said appeals on both rulings are possible.

Advocates of the bill, which now goes to Gov. Dirk Kempthorne, argued it would help put an end to lawsuits against the state on the issue.

“We will get sued again if this doesn’t pass,” said Sen. Tim Corder, R-Mountain Home, the Senate sponsor of the measure.

After hearing Keough issue her heartfelt plea, Corder said, “I wanted to grab the first farmer I saw and beat the heck out of the guy. But then I realized it’s me – I’m that farmer. I don’t see why it has to be us against them on this issue.”

North Idaho senators, however, said the bill’s definition of “economically viable alternative” to burning is too narrow and will negatively affect people north of the prairie.

“If you live south of the burning, the smoke goes the other way,” said Sen. Dick Compton, R-Coeur d’Alene. “You say, ‘Well, isn’t that too bad.’ But it’s a disaster for people up north.”

Added Keough: “With this legislation we’re saying the people in Bonner County, Sandpoint, Priest River … don’t count.”

Wind patterns push smoke up to the Sandpoint area when prairie farmers burn their bluegrass fields. Despite the effects on people’s health, the burning is profitable to grass farmers because it brings on another crop without reseeding.

Proponents contended enough safeguards already are in place to protect people’s health and make sure alternatives are being pursued.

Sen. Don Burtenshaw, R-Terreton, said he wished there were a “silver bullet” to solve the field burning problem but farmers have no choice but to burn to stay afloat.

Broadsword remained silent during the debate, but in an earlier committee hearing she supported the bill, saying a few weeks a year of field burning don’t cause as much pollution as the development of farm fields into houses and streets.

GOP Sens. John Goedde and Mike Jorgenson, both of whom represent Kootenai County, said the bill will affect Coeur d’Alene residents who feel the effects of burning on Coeur d’Alene tribal land.

“Farmers have an inherited right to make a living, but they have an obligation not to harm people,” said Jorgenson, of Hayden Lake.