1998-05-10                     House Journal                      Page 3720
HB 168                                                                        
The following letter, dated May 9, 1998, was received:                        
                                                                               
                                                                               
"Dear Speaker Phillips:                                                        
                                                                               
Under authority of art. II, sec. 15 of the Alaska Constitution, I have         
vetoed the following bill:                                                     
                                                                               
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 168(RLS)(efd fld)                                       
"An Act relating to use of traditional means of access to assist in           
                                                                               

1998-05-10                     House Journal                      Page 3721
HB 168                                                                        
taking game or fish and to traditional means of access for                   
traditional outdoor activities on land and water set aside for fish            
and game purposes."                                                            
                                                                               
                                                                               
I am vetoing this bill because it significantly compromises the Board          
of Fisheries' and Board of Game's obligation to manage Alaska's fish           
and wildlife responsibly.  It is an unreasonable and unacceptable              
constraint on future decision making by these bodies while establishing        
a complicated regulatory process to solve a problem that doesn't exist.        
                                                                               
This bill also limits the access of citizens to fish and game                  
management decisions through the board process and local fish and              
game advisory committees.  For that reason, local fish and game                
advisory committees and many individual committee members from                 
across the state have expressed opposition to this bill.  I also cannot        
support a bill that limits the public's ability to effectively participate in  
decisions that directly affect Alaska citizens in their own communities.       
                                                                               
House Bill 168 requires citizens to go to the Legislature for decisions        
that have long been made by the boards of fish and game.  Legislative          
debate on this bill indicated it was primarily designed to limit the           
Board of Game's ability to adopt Controlled Use Areas.  Regulating the         
means of transportation used in hunting through creation of Controlled         
Use Areas is a legitimate tool of the Board of Game, and one that              
Alaskans accept.  The Board of Game considers the establishment of             
Controlled Use Areas "one of the principal actions available to the            
board for protection of wildlife, habitat, broadest possible hunter            
opportunity, and hunt quality in areas of heavy harvest pressure and           
user conflict."                                                                
                                                                               
A few Controlled Use Areas exist today that limit some types of                
motorized vehicles in hunting and trapping.  These are mostly walk-in          
or fly-in areas that are very popular with a broad spectrum of hunters.        
A quiet hunting experience is quite different from one using a vehicle.        
Most Alaskans believe there is room on the state's 104 million acres           
to manage lands for all types of users including both motorized and            
non-motorized.                                                                 
                                                                               

1998-05-10                     House Journal                      Page 3722
HB 168                                                                        
Even the proponents of this bill concede there is no current problem          
with Controlled Use Areas. Yet the bill places broad restrictions on           
any future creation of these areas by the Board of Fisheries and the           
Department of Fish and Game, as well as the Board of Game.                     
                                                                               
The regulatory process this bill requires is complicated and vague.            
The bill leaves key concepts open to interpretation, inviting debate and       
confusion.  The result is this bill increases the likelihood of litigation     
against the state, to no good purpose.  Furthermore, longstanding and          
broadly accepted access restrictions, like the "same-day airborne" ban         
on hunting most big game, could be eroded under this bill if the Board         
of Game decides to address special concerns by temporarily lifting             
restrictions, as it has been asked to do in the past.  Reestablishing          
these restrictions would take an act of the Legislature, making                
timeliness for game and habitat protection impossible.                         
                                                                               
Alaska's elected officials should be protecting the state's traditional use    
of the board process, not restricting that use because of an imagined          
concern that motorized access for hunting and fishing may be                   
unreasonably restricted at some time in the future.  The boards and the        
department have been very supportive of maintaining opportunities for          
motorized access, and are fully accessible to the public for modifying         
access rules, as the public considers necessary.                               
                                                                               
This bill serves no productive purpose and has several severe                  
deficiencies.  It has the unfortunate result of widening the gap between       
the fish and game regulatory process and the people most likely to be          
affected by those regulations.  For all of these reasons, I have               
concluded that a veto is necessary.                                            
                                                                               
							Sincerely,                                                              
							/s/                                                                     
							Tony Knowles                                                            
							Governor"                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
**The presence of Representative Brice was noted.