Senate committee approves higher cap on livestock-board fees; amendment eases seasonal-grazing charges

Senate Finance Committee members voted 10-0 to advance Senate Bill 101 after adopting an amendment that clarifies the seasonal-grazing discount and expands the types of movements eligible for a 50% inspection charge.

Sponsor Senator Woods introduced the bill and presented agency staff from the New Mexico Livestock Board to explain the amendment and the broader fee package. The amendment replaces the single-word reference to "allotment" with broader language so that a producer who moves livestock between grazing locations under the producer's control without a transfer of ownership would pay 50% of the regular inspection charge for those seasonal moves.

Livestock Board Director Belinda Garland and Deputy Director Sean Davis explained that the changes respond to long-standing funding constraints: service fees have not been increased since 2002, they said, and the board has among the lowest regional fees. They told the committee the board aims to maintain inspectors across districts, runs recruitment and testing for inspectors, and is improving its fleet to ensure inspectors can reach producers.

Representatives of the cattle industry testified in support. Tom Patterson, a Catron County cattle rancher and president-elect of the New Mexico Cattle Growers Association, told the committee the board is a "model state agency" and urged passage. Other producers from southern and eastern New Mexico also testified in favor of the bill.

Speakers from Northern New Mexico Stockmen's Association and other northern producers asked the committee to consider the bill's impact on small producers who move animals across multiple district lines; they said some northern counties face disproportionate movement costs and asked for alternative approaches such as limiting inspections to a single required inspection when producers move seasonally. Committee staff and the Livestock Board said they had examined district-line and movement data and have amended the bill to address seasonal-grazing moves where ownership does not change.

During final action the committee recorded a 10-0 vote in favor of recommending passage. Committee leaders and witnesses said the board plans gradual fee increases over many years, constrained in some cases by statutory annual caps and by the board'level rulemaking process.

Less critical: public testimony and committee questions included requests for agency incident reports related to previous enforcement actions and continued discussion about whether all required inspector training and law-enforcement academy attendance would be feasible under a producer-funded model.