Legislature(1997 - 1998)
1998-07-15 House Journal
Full Journal pdf1998-07-15 House Journal Page 4075 HB 406 The following letter, dated June 12, 1998, was received: "Dear Speaker Phillips: Under the authority of art. II, sec. 15 of the Alaska Constitution, I have vetoed the following bill: CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 406(FIN) am(efd fld) "An Act authorizing the Board of Fisheries and the Board of Game to identify fish and game that are taken for subsistence and to identify subsistence and nonsubsistence areas; relating to the establishment of preferences for and to regulation of subsistence fishing and hunting; relating to advisory committees." As you know from your work on the bipartisan task force on subsistence, Alaska's challenge is to prevent a federal takeover of fish and game management in Alaska and protect the vital importance of subsistence to the economy and culture of rural Alaska. Committee Substitute for House Bill 406 (FIN) am (efd fld), (HB 406), fails to accomplish either of these goals. In addition, this bill would create an unworkable, intrusive and expensive bureaucracy to manage a needs- based system largely opposed by the Alaskans who participate in subsistence. An overwhelming majority of Alaskans agree on two key principles for a subsistence solution: 1) state, rather than federal management of 1998-07-15 House Journal Page 4076 HB 406 Alaska's fish and game; and 2) a rural subsistence priority. Securing state management of our fish and game resources was one of the fundamental reasons Alaska became a state, and it remains a critical imperative as we enter our 40th year of statehood. HB 406 does not help our efforts to secure this management; in fact, it harms them. It is simply an invitation to the federal government to come in and take over fish and game management in Alaska. HB 406 does not bring Alaska into compliance with the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), as many members of the Legislature have freely admitted. HB 406 fails to provide the fundamental protection for the subsistence way of life which was embodied in ANILCA and which has been part of Alaskas subsistence laws since 1978. The bill does not provide a priority for subsistence based on rural residence, and it calls for an individual qualification system, contrary to the community or area basis central to ANILCA. In addition, HB 406's proposed regional advisory committee system is inconsistent with ANILCA, and the bill requires unworkable criteria for the establishment of non-subsistence areas. All these provisions, and perhaps others, raise problems with ANILCA compliance that will lead to federal management. In his memorandum on HB 406, Interior Department Solicitor John Leshy advises the Interior Secretary that the bill is not consistent with ANILCA and, "if the approach in CSHB406 is not altered, and a state constitutional amendment is not placed before the voters in the November 1998 general election, you will be required to assume management of subsistence fisheries on the public lands on December 1, 1998, as required by ANILCA and the Federal courts." In addition, HB 406: *Directs the Boards to establish discrete and overlapping subsistence-dependent areas, based on thousands of specific stocks and populations, for which individuals would have to be eligible. *Establishes an individual qualification system that undermines the fundamental nature of subsistence, which is community-based and revolves around the efficiencies incumbent in the sharing of gear and labor as well as subsistence products. 1998-07-15 House Journal Page 4077 HB 406 *Requires a government agency to evaluate an individuals food- gathering habits using ill-defined criteria that, in many cases, will be impossible to verify. A conservative estimate of the cost of the new, large, and intrusive bureaucracy required to handle individual eligibility determinations is $4 million. *Directs the Boards to identify as nonsubsistence areas those communities or areas in which a cash-based economy is a principal characteristic. Using this standard, most rural parts of the state would become nonsubsistence areas. The North Slope Borough would be a nonsubsistence area, as would the Copper Basin, Southeast Alaska, and Bristol Bay. *Requires annual determinations on potentially tens of thousands of individual people's use of fish and game on an area-specific and species-specific basis. HB 406 would place an impossible burden on the Boards, which would have to adjudicate the eligibility of subsistence applicants. *Calls for the Boards to create separate nonsubsistence areas for fish and for game. There could even be nonsubsistence areas for different species of fish and game. The result would be a hopeless tangle of conflicting regulations, making management and enforcement difficult or impossible. *Establishes presumptions, based upon where Alaskans live, that qualify or disqualify them as subsistence users. The presumptions violate the present "equal access" clauses of the Alaska Constitution, but HB 406 is not accompanied by a resolution that would amend those clauses. In short, this bill does not work. It is not constitutional, it does not comply with ANILCA, and most importantly, it will not return or retain state management of fish and game resources on all lands and water in our state. Ensuring state management of fish and game resources is not complicated. The proposal of the bipartisan task force would have provided a solution. It would have provided both the constitutional framework and changes in state law necessary to comply with 1998-07-15 House Journal Page 4078 HB 406 ANILCA, met the objectives of state management of fish and game, and recognized the importance of subsistence for rural Alaskans. Unfortunately, this proposal did not pass during either the regular or special session. My Administration worked hard for a compromise solution during the first special session. As this compromise received broad support, I urge the Legislature to continue considering this approach to allow the people of Alaska to resolve one of the biggest challenges to the basic tenants of statehood we have faced. Sincerely, /s/ Tony Knowles Governor"