Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/07/1996 09:15 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 335(RES)(title am)
An Act extending the termination date of the Big Game
Commercial Services Board; eliminating the requirement
for a commercial use permit and for payment of
commercial use permit fees; amending the membership of
the Big Game Commercial Services Board; relating to the
qualifications for an assistant guide-outfitter
license; eliminating the requirement for testing of
assistant guide-outfitters; providing for additional
licensing requirements for transporters; eliminating
the requirement for prior approval to enter or remain
on state and federal land; eliminating the requirement
to register base camps; amending the definition of 'big
game commercial services'; and providing for an
effective date.
Co-chairman Halford directed that CSHB 335 (Res)(title am)
be brought on for discussion and referenced a draft SCS CSHB
335 (Fin) (9-LS1156\W, Utermohle, 3/7/96). REPRESENTATIVE
SCOTT OGAN, sponsor of the legislation, came before
committee and explained that under the proposed draft:
1. Authority to license guides is given to the Dept.
of Commerce and Economic Development.
2. Basic statutory definitions for guides remain.
New language says that a person who has been
convicted of a felony in the last ten years
cannot qualify for a guide license.
3. Assistant guides may be hired without a test, upon
recommendation of a guide. That is a significant,
positive change.
4. Provisions for class-A guides will encourage rural
employment. A class-A guide is someone who has
lived or hunted in the area for ten years and
lives in the local area.
5. Game biologists are precluded from becoming a
guide for twelve months after employment by the
Dept. of Fish and Game in areas in which
they worked and studied. An individual
employed by the state to study animals
in an area has an unfair advantage to
subsequently exploit the wildlife.
Existing law prohibiting a fish and
wildlife enforcement officer from
becoming a guide prior to three months
after concluding employment is retained.
6. The level of accountability for transporters, in
terms
of violations, is raised to the same level as
guides.
7. Language within insurance provisions is changed to
require proof of financial responsibility.
8. The time that an individual may operate an
airplane incidental to guide activities is increased
from 250 to 500 hours.
9. Authority is given to the Dept. of Commerce and
Economic Development to discipline guides convicted of
violations.
10. Guide-use areas are retained. However, guides
will not have to report to the department or get a
permit from the department for a guide-use
area. Guides will have to be in three use
areas. They will simply have to notify
protection when they wish to change, and they
may change once every calendar year.
11. Statutory language regarding what a guide may do
and what a transporter may not do is expanded so that
there is no cross-over between the two.
12. Retroactive authority is provided to those who
were licensed since the old board was sunset.
13. Wage and hour provisions exempt assistant guides
from overtime--similar to provisions for
fishermen, agriculture, and various other
occupations.
14. The commercial-use permit is eliminated.
The industry has complained for many years that it is
difficult to get assistant guides because of testing
requirements. A guide is legally responsible for action in
the field as if he were committing each act himself. He is
thus responsible for not only the actions of his assistant
guides but those of his clients. With that level of
responsibility, guides should be able to hire whomever they
wish.
Representative Ogan directed attention to a needed change at
page 8, line 11, and recommended removal of "at all times."
He explained that it is impractical for a registered or
class-A assistant guide to be physically present with the
assistant guide "at all times." Supervision by a registered
guide or class-A assistant is acceptable. Co-chairman
Halford noted that after the recommended deletion language
would remain as it is in current law.
Senator Sharp voiced his understanding that mandated
insurance requirements had expired. He then asked if
current provisions for insurance or proof of financial
responsibility were the only insurance provisions.
Representative Ogan responded affirmatively. Senator Sharp
attested to several guides who conducted two or three hunts
a year who had to go out of business because they could not
afford the mandated insurance.
Senator Randy Phillips MOVED for adoption of SCS CSHB
335(Fin) (Version W, dated 3/7/96) with the technical change
recommended by Representative Ogan at page 8, line 11. No
objection having been raised, SCS CSHB 335 (Fin) was
ADOPTED.
In response to a question from Senator Zharoff, asking why
deleted language was included in the draft, Co-chairman
Halford explained that the intent is that the level of
supervision for assistant guides be higher than supervision
required for class-A assistant guides. Original language
adopting class-A assistant guide provisions was intended to
encourage the hire of long-time residents in game management
units. The attempt was to keep local people in local
hunting areas involved. The Co-chairman reiterated that the
level of supervision for a class-A assistant guide should be
less than supervision required for an assistant guide. That
provides an advantage to hiring and keeping class-A
assistant guides.
Senator Zharoff asked if the forgoing would allow a guide to
supervise from "a penthouse in San Francisco." Co-chairman
Halford acknowledged that the board discussed the issue of
supervision for many years. The rule in the old system was
that a class-A assistant guide could be running a camp as
long as the contracting, registered, or master guide had
contracted the hunt and was actively involved in the hunt at
some point. An assistant guide had to have contact on a
regular basis with the contracting guide or a class-A
assistant guide. Representative Ogan noted that during his
term as a public member on the guide board, the standard was
that the registered guide had to be in the camp at least
once during each hunt. Under the proposed bill, a class-A
assistant guide may supervise an assistant guide in the
field.
Senator Rieger asked if others associated with the camp (the
cook and packers) would have to be licensed. Representative
Ogan responded negatively. Only those who help pursue,
stalk, take or actively engage in hunting must be licensed.
Referencing language at page 17, subsections (A) through
(G), Representative Ogan explained that he lifted language
from existing regulations and placed it in statute.
Established practices needed statutory classification.
KEN TAYLOR, Deputy Director, Division of Wildlife
Conservation, Dept. of Fish and Game, came before committee.
He said that while he had only recently received a copy of
the draft committee substitute, initial review indicates
that it is "a lot cleaner than existing law." Requirements
removed from existing law (the operations plan was cited)
will not significantly impact management. The Dept. of
Public Safety and division of fish and wildlife enforcement
would have to address impact as well.
Senator Zharoff referenced the license fee structure on page
16 and asked if it differentiates between residents and non-
residents. Co-chairman Halford answered negatively. He
acknowledged discussion of a differential. For many years,
a registered guide or master guide had to be an Alaska
resident. That was lost in a constitutional question
because guiding is a commercial activity. He then suggested
that there could be a ratio of fees between resident and
non-resident guides and transporters.
END: SFC-96, #33, Side 2
BEGIN: SFC-96, #34, Side 1
The Co-chairman advised that language could specify that
non-resident fees in each category are four times the fee
for a resident. Senator Zharoff suggested that the
committee review that possibility and make provisions
consistent with other areas where non-resident fees are
different from those paid by residents.
CATHERINE REARDON, Director, Division of Occupational
Licensing, Dept. of Commerce and Economic Development, next
came before committee. She said the department had not yet
had an opportunity to examine the details of the draft bill,
take an official position, or prepare fiscal notes. She
acknowledged that the legislation would have fiscal impact
on the Dept. of Commerce and Economic Development as well as
the Dept. of Public Safety (due to elimination of commercial
use permits that previously generated enforcement funds).
Ms. Reardon next noted areas within the draft giving rise to
questions and cited provisions requiring "fine tuning:"
Page 3, Line 4, language relating to "written or oral"
examinations would be more manageable if it simply said "an
examination." Oral exams are difficult to administer to
larger groups or in rural areas. Co-chairman Halford asked
that the department prepare an amendment reflecting the
change. He acknowledged that cited language was designed
for administration by a peer review board and was more
cumbersome than it needed to be.
Page 8, Line 10, language relating to supervision of
assistant guides is of concern. There is need for
clarification. The department would prepare regulations
defining what supervision means. At the present time,
class-A and assistant guides both have the same supervision
requirements. The guide has to show up once during the
hunt. Ms. Reardon advised of her understanding of foregoing
discussion to be that class-A guides should require less
supervision than assistant guides. Language at Page 7, Line
22, says that class-A guides may take charge of a camp and
conduct guide activities without the registered guide being
present in the area, as long as the registered guide is
supervising. If it is the intention that assistant guides
not be able to do so, it would be helpful if bill language
at page 8 says that an assistant guide cannot take charge of
a camp. Otherwise, supervision could be construed as
supervision from a distance. If the goal is to make class-A
guides more appealing to the employer, it would be helpful
if lack of independent authority for an assistant guide was
clarified.
Page 7 licensing requirements for class-A guides. Ms.
Reardon noted two methods of attaining a class-A license
under current law:
1. Employment one season as an assistant guide plus
ten years of hunting experience in the game management
unit, or
2. Physical residency in the game management unit and
fifteen years of hunting experience in the unit.
If the legislature wishes to place a premium on those who
reside in the game management unit, option number two should
be the only method of attaining that license.
Page 8 language relating to game biologists needs a
definition of "game biologist." Co-chairman Halford asked
that Ms. Reardon provide appropriate language. He explained
that the provision is simply intended to prohibit an
individual employed by the state to gather information from
immediately using that information in a private business
venture.
Page 10, Line 25-26, insurance requirements speak to proof
of financial responsibility of $100.0. Ms. Reardon
questioned what type of proof the individual would have to
submit to the department (a list of assets, something from
an accountant, etc.). Should the department check to
determine if the assets are available every two years?
There are some administrative logistics that need to be
worked out.
Page 12, Line 10, subsection (e) relating to inability of
the department to discipline a transporter for violations
committed by his or her employee. Co-chairman Halford
subsequently voiced intent that both registered guides and
transporters be treated equally in terms of responsibility
for their employees. In response to a question from Senator
Zharoff, the Co-chairman advised that transporters are
responsible for reporting violations of which they are
aware. They are, however, not actively involved in the
field. A transporter would be in violation if he or she
knowingly transports an illegal animal and does not report
the violation. Language pinpointed by Ms. Reardon appears
to be a drafting error. It was intended that the
responsibility levels be comparable and commensurate with
ability to both report violations and "know what was going
on."
Page 14, Line 30, language says that "guides" are
responsible for assistant guides.
Page 19 reference to wage and hour law should be discussed
with staff from the Dept. of Labor. Co-chairman Halford
noted that the industry has had problems with the issue in
the past. The proposed bill includes a limitation of 60
days a year. The existing exemption for fishery processing
workers and other exemptions are "wide open." The language
applies only to licensed personnel, in the employ of
licensed personnel, and "only for a maximum of 60 days . . .
." It thus relates to limited, seasonal employees in a very
specific area. Cooks and other unlicensed personnel would
not be covered by the exemption.
Ms. Reardon referenced earlier discussion of resident and
non-resident fees and advised that it would be helpful if
the differential was placed in statute, or the department
will establish one, across-the-board, consistent fee. Ms.
Reardon referenced a program with language saying that out-
of-state collection agency fees are twice as high as in
state. Co-chairman Halford again asked that the department
prepare amending language and a position paper concerning
whether the department would support the differential
between residents and non-residents.
Senator Sharp suggested that definition of a non-resident
track with one-year residency requirements for purchasing a
hunting license. Co-chairman Halford responded that the
effort could be tried. He acknowledged a possible
constitutional question because a hunting license is a
privilege, not a right. A commercial activity is usually
more suspect when residents are preferred over non-
residents.
Senator Rieger referenced old law relating to guides and
guide-outfitters and asked what changes are proposed in the
instant bill. Co-chairman Halford explained that in the
late 1980s, the law was changed to include the term
"outfitter" with the term "guide" because the term
"outfitter" is used outside of Alaska to denote one who
provides both outfitting and guiding services. The proposed
bill reverts to original definitions and original language.
He suggested, however, that the members might wish to
include a prohibition on use of the term "outfitter" by
someone who is not a registered or master guide, as it
applies to big game hunting.
Senator Rieger cited an example of an individual who does
not actually guide the hunt (stalk the animal) but flies a
hunter to a location and provides a camp and asked if the
provider would be regulated as a guide under the proposed
bill. Co-chairman Halford voiced intent that the provider
be treated the same. If the transporter is operating in air
commerce, the transporter would have to have an air taxi
license. If one provides services in the field in actual
pursuit of game, a guide license is required. Senator
Rieger asked if that includes setting up the camp. Co-
chairman Halford responded negatively, advising that a
section within the proposed legislation deals specifically
with that activity.
Senator Rieger directed attention to Page 17, Line 18, and
referenced the definition of "outfit." He also referenced
language at Page 5, Line 27, which says a registered guide
may contract to guide or outfit hunts. He then noted that
language appears to indicate that outfitting is guiding and
asked if that is a change from the status quo. Co-chairman
Halford advised that it is the intent to maintain the status
quo in those three areas. He said he would further review
the draft to ensure that is the case. Catherine Reardon
remarked that brief review of the draft indicates that the
current situation is unchanged. She clarified that under
current law, one who flies hunters in and drops them off
must have a transporter license. One who flies hunters into
a camp set up and established by the transporter must also
have a guide license. That would continue to be required
under the proposed draft.
Co-chairman Halford acknowledged the participation of JOE
D'AMICO, Commander, Commercial Crimes Bureau, Division of
Fish and Wildlife Protection, Dept. of Public Safety, via
teleconference from Kodiak. The Co-chairman then advised
that the bill would be held for further review.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at approximately
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|