Bill to re-locate SD Brand Board moves ahead
The South Dakota Senate will likely discuss two bills that will impact South Dakota cattle and brand owners.
HB 1266 and HB 1213 both passed the House of Representatives.
Representative Jana Hunt (R) from Dupree sponsored HB 1266, which would move the South Dakota Brand Board out of the office of the Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources and into the Office of School and Public Lands.
Representative Marty Overweg (R) of New Holland sponsored 1213, which increases the cap on brand inspection fees from $1 to $1.35.
The Brand Board chairman Scott Vance from Faith, said he supports HB 1213, but that it’s not enough of an increase. The former auction market owner said if the brand inspection fee goes up to $1.35, it may not be enough to cover program expenses, especially if cattle numbers dip in the next couple of years, which he expects is likely to happen.
The five-member governor appointed Brand Board is responsible for renewing brand registrations, overseeing the brand investigators (who have law enforcement authority) and overseeing the brand inspection program (no law enforcement authority).
Vance said he would have liked to see a service fee option added to the current law so that the brand inspection program could charge a service fee for smaller numbers of head inspected on the ranch. “Those smaller bunches of cattle, 10, 20 or 30 head are costing us money on the program.” He believes that the inspection fee could be kept to a minimum if a service fee were also included, but he said some of the ag organizations argued against the proposed service fee, saying they didn’t want their seedstock producer members to be charged unfairly when selling a small number of bulls of the place.
According to Raydelle Sperle, the chairman of the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association Brand Committee, his organization supported the concept of service fees to keep the inspection fee down and to support the local brand inspectors.
The South Dakota Stockgrowers Association and most other South Dakota ag organizations supported HB 1213 in committee, but the South Dakota Livestock Auction Markets Association spoke against the bill, said Vance. He understands why the auction markets are concerned, but he said a fee increase is necessary to keep the program solvent.
He doesn’t know which senator will carry the bill on the Senate side.
The South Dakota Brand Board, Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources, the Governor’s office and the South Dakota Cattlemen’s Association all opposed HB 1266 which would move the SD Brand Board out of the state Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources and under the office of School and Public Lands.
The bill was supported by the South Dakota Stockgrowers, Amber Haskew, a Mobridge rancher, Fred Lamphere, Belle Fourche Sheriff, South Dakota Farmers Union, Tom Costello, Newell, and Ray Oday, Blunt.
Vance said he doesn’t support the move because the Brand Board currently has a good working relationship with the Secretary of Ag and Natural Resources and the program is “working” as is.
“We returned over $1.5 million in value of cattle to their rightful owners last year,” he said.
The inspection program has operated with out a chief brand inspector for a couple of years, which has been a point of contention with the industry. Vance the current system, with three regional directors instead of one chief, is actually better because there are more “managers” available to help.
Vance said he “hasn’t heard the pros and cons” of moving the Brand Board to a different office. He said there are a lot of “falsifications” and a lot of “negativity” being talked about regarding the brand inspection program and the Brand Board.
The South Dakota Stockgrowers Association helped draft and lobbied in favor of HB 1213. But the group has been outspoken about their concerns such as the lack of a chief brand inspector.
Sperle said there are a variety of issues that could be dealt with if the Brand Board is moved to a different office.
The Secretary of Ag and Natural Resources is an appointed position, and the School and Public Lands Commissioner is an elected position.
Sperle believes the commissioner would be more responsive to brand and cattle owners.
The Office of School and Public Lands has committed to calling for a forensic audit if the program is moved under its roof.
Sperle would like to see the audit, not because he suspects wrongdoing, but because it would “clear the air” and could find areas where the brand board could work more efficiently. “This is producers’ money,” he said.
Sperle said Brand Board members have been serving without Senate approval. He emphasized that his group doesn’t have any personal problems with any of the specific board members, but that state law calls for Senate approval of board members.
There are bigger issues.
“The program is hurting. There are improvements being made, but I want the program to be as good as it can be…and we need some changes,” he said.
The Stockgrowers have spent time with the Brand Board seeking meaningful change.
“The program is in trouble,” said Sperle. “We’ve got to do something to change it, and you can’t do that completely overnight,” he said.
“My brand is title to my cattle. It’s important, especially as cattle prices increase and there is more temptation for theft,” he said.
Vance shares a concern for the program as well.
“I’m afraid. I can see this program falling in a heap,” he said. “I took an oath as a board member to do everything to maintain this program.”
South Dakota Brand Board members include: Lyle Spring, Jake Longbrake, Haven Stuck and Scott Vance.
