Skip to content

Bills · 2021-2022 Regular Session

AB 505

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

Relating to: aquatic plant management plans and permit exemptions.

Natural resources department of — Environmental protection Weeds

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Assembly, not reached
  3. Passes Senate, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. Law, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

This bill makes numerous changes relating to the control of aquatic plants

using chemicals or biological agents.

Current law requires the Department of Natural Resources to establish a

program for the waters of this state that meet several goals, including implementing

efforts to protect and develop native aquatic plants and regulate how aquatic plants

are managed. The bill requires that DNR efforts to protect native aquatic plants rely

on widely accepted methods supported by peer-reviewed science to suppress or

eradicate invasive or nuisance aquatic plants. The bill also requires that DNR plans

to regulate aquatic plants ensure invasive and nuisance aquatic plants are

suppressed or eradicated to the greatest extent possible.

Under current law, subject to exceptions, a person may not control aquatic

plants in waters of the state by the use of chemicals or the introduction of biological

agents without a valid aquatic plant management permit issued by DNR. As a

condition of receiving an aquatic plant management permit, DNR may require the

applicant to submit a plan for how aquatic plants will be introduced, removed, or

controlled. The bill provides that DNR must give equal consideration to plans that

will suppress or eradicate invasive or nuisance aquatic plants by use of chemicals

and provides that the plan requirements may not impose an undue financial burden

on permit applicants or property owners.

The bill also creates exemptions from the permit requirement for the

introduction of chemicals or biological agents to a private pond, which the bill defines

as “a surface water less than 10 acres in size that is surrounded by the private

property of one or more owners, with no public access to the water, and that has either

no surface water discharge or surface water discharge that can be controlled.” Under

the bill, a person who applies a chemical treatment to a private pond to suppress or

eradicate invasive or nuisance aquatic plants is exempt if the person is certified as

a commercial applicator by the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer

Protection in the aquatic and mosquito pest control category and follows U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency standards for chemical type and use. The bill also

exempts a person who applies to a private pond a biological agent to improve water

quality at a concentration that does not cause acute or chronic toxicity for aquatic

organisms or a dye that is not labeled for herbicide use.

Sponsors

Introduced by: Kitchens (R) , Knodl (R) , Kuglitsch (R) , Loudenbeck (R) , Murphy (R) , Mursau (R) , Rozar (R) , Schraa (R) , Skowronski (R) , Steineke (R) , Tittl (R) , Tusler (R)

8 cosponsors

Ballweg (R) , Cowles (R) , Felzkowski (R) , Feyen (R) , Jacque (R) , Marklein (R) , Stafsholt (R) , Stroebel (R)

Votes

Assembly: Report Assembly Amendment 2 adoption recommended by Committee on Environment, Ayes 7, Noes 2

Passed 7–2 Feb 1, 2022 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Assembly: Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Environment, Ayes 7, Noes 2

Passed 7–2 Feb 1, 2022 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Full history

  1. Aug 24, 2021 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Steineke, Kitchens, Knodl, Kuglitsch, Loudenbeck, Murphy, Mursau, Rozar, Schraa, Tittl, Tusler and Skowronski; cosponsored by Senators Feyen, Ballweg, Cowles, Felzkowski, Jacque, Marklein, Stafsholt and Stroebel

  2. Aug 24, 2021 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Environment

  3. Oct 6, 2021 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  4. Jan 3, 2022 · Assembly

    Assembly Amendment 1 offered by Representative Steineke

  5. Jan 14, 2022 · Assembly

    Assembly Amendment 2 offered by Representative Steineke

  6. Jan 18, 2022 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  7. Feb 1, 2022 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 2 adoption recommended by Committee on Environment, Ayes 7, Noes 2

  8. Feb 1, 2022 · Assembly

    Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Environment, Ayes 7, Noes 2

  9. Feb 1, 2022 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  10. Feb 22, 2022 · Assembly

    Made a special order of business at 8:15 AM on 2-23-2022 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 29

  11. Feb 23, 2022 · Assembly

    Laid on the table

  12. Mar 15, 2022 · Assembly

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1