Alex Mann, correspondent
ANNAPOLIS, Md. 鈥� Bills working their way through the General Assembly would outlaw using elephants in certain animal acts; ban using state funds for artificial turf fields or playgrounds; and add 鈥渦nspecified鈥� to the gender selection option on a motor vehicle license or state ID.
Criminal law: Using elephants in traveling animal act
The House Judiciary committee on Thursday was scheduled to address a bill that would outlaw using 鈥� or authorizing the use of 鈥� elephants in traveling animal shows.
Sponsored by Del. Aruna Miller, a Democrat representing Montgomery County, the legislation would penalize offenders with a fine of up to $10,000. It applies to such parties as circuses, carnivals and fairs but not permanent institutions like zoos, according to a state analysis.
Elephants are not protected by state law. Those used in traveling shows are subjected to inhumane conditions, Miller said.
鈥淲e have the responsibility to be the voice for all living creatures,鈥� Miller said. 鈥淎nimals don鈥檛 get to vote.鈥�
The massive mammals can spend a majority of their life in chains, Miller said, and on the road.
Traveling elephants can be kept in relatively small boxcars with no temperature control, Miller said. Some are forced to eat, sleep and defecate in these cramped quarters, she added.
Miller referred to a 2011 Mother Jones article that detailed treatment of elephants by Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus. (The circus stopped using elephants in its performances in 2016 and closed in 2017.)
Current state law prohibits the import of certain wild and exotic animals 鈥� everything from skunks and crocodiles to bears and certain venomous snakes. The statute carries fines of up to $1,000 and $10,000, although there are exemptions for those with the required permits, animal sanctuaries and licensed veterinarians, among others.
State funds for artificial turf
A bill that would ban the use of state funds to build new 鈥� or renovate existing 鈥� athletic fields or playgrounds with synthetic material was scheduled to be presented Thursday to the House Appropriations Committee.
The fields can be made of plastic blades that often contain lead and shredded tires 鈥� known as crumb rubber 鈥� which contain carcinogens, potentially increasing the risk of cancer, according to the Children鈥檚 Environmental Health Network.
鈥淲e know there鈥檚 lead in it, so why are we exposing our kids to this?鈥� said Miller, who is also this bill鈥檚 sponsor. She pointed out that these artificial turf facilities are primarily used by children.
Natural grass blades have antimicrobial properties that kill bacteria, Miller said. Plastic does not.
鈥淲hen athletes get turf burn鈥� resulting in open lesions, Miller said, there鈥檚 a greater risk for infection.
Sen. Douglas Peters (a Democrat representing Prince George鈥檚 County), who in the past has proposed legislation to expand the use of turf fields in his jurisdiction, said the research that reveals potential health risks was done outside of Maryland. He鈥檚 鈥渘ot aware of any field across the state where鈥� health problems occurred.
Artificial turf is often used as an alternative to natural grass because, despite higher installation costs, it is cheaper to maintain and can be more durable.
Turf fields cost about $800,000 to install, while natural grass fields have been estimated to cost $110,000 to install. Grass fields cost approximately $30,000 annually to maintain, compared with $4,000 annually for turf. However, under current law, state grants and capital funds can be used to pay for artificial field installation, according to a state fiscal analysis.
The 10-year cost of an artificial turf field is higher, the bill鈥檚 fiscal and policy note showed.
鈥淭ypically, the turf fields are supposed to last 10 years,鈥� Miller said. But they usually last about seven years, because the surface gets so hard that it becomes unsafe for athletes to use the fields due to an increased risk of concussion, she said.
Turf fields with their black rubber pellets also trap heat, causing the field temperature to rise considerably.
鈥淎s legislators, our priority is to keep the public safe,鈥� Miller said. 鈥淎nd this product does not.鈥�
Peters explained that turf fields can accommodate more sports and other activities, like band practices. He said his county recently added lacrosse as a varsity sport, and with turf fields, the lacrosse teams can play and not 鈥渉ave to worry about football鈥� tearing the field up in the fall.
鈥淭urf fields have been a great success for our county schools,鈥� he said. 鈥淚n my opinion, the benefits outweigh the possible risks.鈥�
License application gender: male, female, unspecified
House Bill 13 would mandate that state applications for licenses, ID cards or moped operator permits give applicants the choice to identify as male, female or 鈥渦nspecified.鈥�
The unspecified gender designation would be displayed as an 鈥淴鈥� on each of the documents, according to a state analysis.
People are safer when their identity documents match their gender identification, said Laura DePalma, a staff attorney at FreeState Justice, in her testimony before the committee. She represents a host of LGBTQ clients in her work.
鈥淭he current law makes it very difficult鈥� for transgender people to obtain appropriate documentation, DePalma added.
鈥淎dding the gender marker 鈥榅,鈥欌�� she said, 鈥渁dds accuracy and inclusion.鈥�
The bill sponsor, Del. Shane Robinson (a Democrat representing Montgomery County), was absent for the hearing on Thursday in the House Environment and Transportation Committee. He was diagnosed with pneumonia Thursday morning, according to his legislative aide Sean Mullen, who testified on behalf of the delegate.
The state鈥檚 fiscal analysis of the bill shows that the law would cost about $220,000 to set up, but Mullen said it could be less.
Washington, D.C., Oregon, Washington state and California recently passed similar legislation, according to a state analysis.
Those who testified in favor of the bill pushed the importance of accurate gender-marker identification. Many detailed the arduous process of obtaining a gender marker change under the current Motor Vehicle Administration policy.
Current Maryland MVA policy states that applicants must either provide an original or certified copy of a 鈥渃ourt order showing requested gender designation,鈥� a federal or state-issued identification showing the requested gender designation, a 鈥渂irth certificate showing requested gender designation,鈥� or an 鈥渁uthorization letter obtained from the MVA’s driver wellness and safety division.鈥�
An authorization letter from the driver wellness and safety division requires the applicant to fill out more paperwork, get a physician鈥檚 approval and have a mental health professional provide an 鈥渁ssessment of your gender identity,鈥� according to the administration’s website. For the two steps involving doctors or mental health professionals, the MVA division鈥檚 staff 鈥渨ill contact your provider to verify the information provided is correct and accurate.鈥�
鈥淪elf-attestation should be enough,鈥� said Dana Beyer, who testified before the committee.
There was no opposing spoken testimony to the bill on Thursday.
