PURPLE PAINT INCLUDED IN AGRICULTURE BILL

JEFFERSON CITY - The first time Rep. Larry Thomason explained his purple-paint bill on the floor of the Missouri House, he was subjected to scorn and good-natured ribbing from colleagues, who questioned the value of spending legislative time on such an issue.

But to the Department of Agriculture and Missouri Department of Conservation, making purple paint a designated symbol for "no trespassing" was an important issue. The paint approach has worked well in neighboring states as a deterrent from hunters removing no-trespassing signs and entering the property.

Thomason's bill passed the House last month and was sent to the Senate where it was lost in the shuffle of legislation along with several other agriculture bills.

So last week, Thomason handled a Senate bill of Sen. Jerry Howard, D-Dexter, in the House to give counties the authority to establish agriculture research districts and offered his purple-paint bill as an amendment.

Only this time, aware that drawing too much attention in the late days of a session could make his proposal controversial, the Kennett Democrat avoided the term purple paint.

Thomason mumbled into the microphone on the House floor that his amendment "provides for alternative methods for marking no trespassing," and most representatives paid little attention.

Later the agriculture bill was modified in a conference committee, but both houses eventually passed the measure, with the purple-paint provision intact.

Thomason said purple paint seems silly to most lawmakers, but to people trying to mark no trespassing it is a serious matter.

"Sure it sounds frivolous, but only because they never tried to post property," said Thomason. "It has the full support of the departments of agriculture and conservation.

"When you post property you have to put signs up every 100 feet, and if a guy wants in he tears down a few signs, and when caught, claims there were never any signs. You have to prove he saw the signs, and that is difficult. The concept of purple paint is that it is permanent; no one can tear it off."

Former Gov. John Ashcroft once vetoed the purple-paint legislation, even though it was the only Republican-sponsored bill that passed the House that year, because it seemed frivolous to him.

The purple paint can be applied to trees or fence posts along the property.

But the key part of the bill is a provision that allows individual counties or several counties to join together to establish agricultural commodity research districts.

A district can be formed after a majority of the qualified landowners approve the proposal. An assessment fee of not more than 25 cents an acre can be charged to operate the district. If a district is formed, landowners would meet to elect a board of five supervisors, with every landowner getting one vote for each acre owned.

The district can contract for short-range and long-range research on agricultural commodities, planting and production of agricultural commodities, development and expansion of markets for agricultural commodities, agricultural pest problems, and other research the district may direct.

Thomason, who has worked with Howard to pass the bill for two years, said he believes the bill will help counties that have a large number of farmers like in the Bootheel.

"This bill does not mandate anything, but it does provide an opportunity for producers," said Thomason. "The Bootheel fits in well for this kind of arrangement, where it is often difficult to get research projects funded."

Thomason said the districts could contract with the Missouri Delta Research Center of the University of Missouri in Portageville or some other agency to do research.

The legislation also provides for counties that have the districts to contract with any other county with a district to carry out functions or to join districts.