Legislature(2017 - 2018)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/28/2017 03:30 PM Senate COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB8 | |
| SJR4 | |
| HB18 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 18 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SJR 4 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 8 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SJR 4-AK LEGALLY ACQUIRED IVORY USE EXEMPTION
3:56:21 PM
CHAIR BISHOP announced consideration of SJR 4.
SENATOR DONNY OLSON, sponsor of SJR 4, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska, explained this resolution is designed to do two
things: to show support for products made out of ivory by
Alaskans in the State of Alaska as well as to urge the federal
delegation to provide for exemptions for legally obtained ivory
in the United States.
This resolution was brought to his attention by his constituents
from Kaktovik, which is at the eastern border of Canada, down to
Diomede and Hooper Bay. Those constituents, especially during
the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) annual convention, told
him they were very concerned about what was going on with the
ban on elephant ivory, because the byproducts of other ivories
provide necessary incomes to indigenous people that take the
edge off of living out there.
SENATOR OLSON said he would like to be able to wear his ivory
jewelry without it being banned in other states. He displayed a
baleen basket with a fossilized narwhal ivory top and a mastodon
ivory carving made by the former mayor of the Northwest Arctic
Borough, Ross Shaffer.
JACQUELINE BOYER, staff to Senator Donny Olson, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, further explained SJR 4 on behalf
of the sponsor. She said New York is a state that bans ivory and
defines it as pertaining to elephant and mammoth, even though
mammoth is extinct. Their statute prohibits selling, offering to
sell, purchase, trade, barter or distribute any ivory or
rhinoceros horn and then provides for some exceptions (such as
to license or permit an antique for educational or scientific
purposes, an estate, or a musical instrument). Fines associated
with possessing ivory include up to a minimum of $500 up to a
class D felony with a $25,000 fine.
California prohibits purchasing, selling, offering to sell,
possessing with intent to sell, or importing ivory. Their
definitions of ivory include elephant, hippopotamus, mammoth,
mastodon, walrus, warthog, whale, and narwhal. Their exemptions
include permits for instruments or for educational purposes. The
fines are from $1,000 up to $50,000.
Hawaii prohibits selling, offering to sell, purchasing, trading,
possessing with intent to sell, and bartering ivory including
whale, walrus, and mammoth, noting that even though it's extinct
they still want to prevent people from possessing it. Their
exceptions include the right of the indigenous people to possess
and do their traditional practices, much like in Alaska, but
they don't include Alaska Natives in the rights to sell to other
people in Hawaii.
4:01:23 PM
New Jersey has similar language, but just blatantly says all
ivory rather than listing endangered or extinct species. They
don't provide for any exceptions. The most serious offense -
after the third time - is seizure of all ivory.
The State of Washington only bans living elephant ivory, which
seems to be the most reasonable provision.
CHAIR BISHOP asked if mastodon ivory is legal in Washington
State.
MS. BOYER answered yes. The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)
is cited in the resolution. Section 109 relates to transferring
of authority from the secretary to the state. That might need
some clarification to maybe preempt states from arbitrarily
banning ivory that has been legally obtained.
Section 1539 specifically states that these MMPA provisions
don't apply to any Indian, Aleut, or Eskimo who resides in an
Alaska Native village and any non-Native permanent resident in
an Alaska Native village. That could be extended to their by-
products.
4:04:08 PM
SENATOR OLSON said he was open to questions on this resolution
that is very important to the people of western and northern
Alaska where legally obtained ivory has been taken by the local
population and made into beautiful handcrafted items.
SENATOR STEDMAN said he liked the resolution, and asked how
states that make presently owned ivory illegal deal with it. Do
they have to turn it in, and what about the things in
collections and on grandma's coffee table?
MS. BOYER answered it varies state by state. It has to be
reported to Fish and Wildlife Services in one state; for others
it's okay to have as long as it's older than 1972.
SENATOR OLSON added that most people who have private
collections have been grandfathered in, especially if the
collections were obtained before 1972 when the MMPA went into
effect. In most states the general law is you can keep it, but
not sell or barter it for anything else.
SENATOR STEDMAN asked if tourists can buy Alaska artifacts and
legally take them back to New York. What about an abandoned
item?
SENATOR OLSON answered if ivory is not raw and crafted into
something, in general you can take it back to the state you came
from, but in some states it has to be reported to U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS).
SENATOR GARDNER asked if his intention was to have the
exemptions apply to every state preemptively or only to federal
law with regards to the further resolve on page 2, line 14.
4:07:24 PM
SENATOR OLSON said he would like the Alaska congressional
delegation to exempt all of it across the states.
4:08:13 PM
SUSIE SILOOK, representing herself, Tulalip, Washington,
supported SJR 4. She is originally from Gamble, Alaska, and is a
member of an artist advocacy group for Alaska Natives against
the bans on ivory. This issue began for her when she heard
Hawaii was banning walrus ivory, also. They told Hawaii that
Alaska Natives are exempted under MMPA, but they were banned
anyway. There is a lot of confusion about the bans. Some items
are not banned, but people think they are. So, there is a de
facto ban going on anyway. She has been told by both businesses
and artists that the market is way down, so it is already
hurting the market.
Her research has revealed that these bans are an overreach by
wildlife groups involved with the elephant ivory ban, which she
has nothing against, but you don't have to ban all ivory
worldwide, which their advertising says.
MS. SILOOK said another issue is that it is hard to distinguish
between the ivories, but she has a written document from the
USFWS saying that one can absolutely distinguish between walrus
and elephant ivory.
4:12:53 PM
ALICE BIOFF, Kawerak Inc., Nome, Alaska, supported SJR 4. She is
a member of the Alaska State Council of the Arts. She is a
tribal member of the Native Village Koyukuk and grew up in Nome.
She has been employed as a business planning specialist for
Kawerak, the regional non-profit consortium of tribes for the
Bering Straits region. She is privileged to work with artists
entrepreneurs within the communities and the Council provides
tools and resources to assist artists in continuing their work
so they can sustain themselves, their families, and their
communities.
Walrus ivory harvested during subsistence hunting is one of the
main materials artists entrepreneurs use to carve into unique
traditional art work that has been recognized for its amazing
craftsmanship throughout the world. These artists are economic
development drivers in their communities and she sees firsthand
the economic impact selling ivory has in the communities, but
most importantly how the arts and crafts made with ivory keep
traditions alive and strong: beautiful work being passed down
from one generation to the next. Their art is woven into who
they are as indigenous people, and having access to those
materials is vital.
MS. BIOFF said it would be a shame to see their ability to sell
ivory collapse because of a lack of understanding of their
culture that is unique and has a history of customs and
traditions of working with nature and an ability to successfully
self-manage a resource such as walrus. Please educate those who
do not understand this, she urged. She thanked all the sponsors
for bringing this resolution forward.
4:15:28 PM
JOHN WAGHIYI, representing himself, Savoonga, Alaska, said he is
a life-long subsistence provider for his family and community,
and supported SJR 4. He said the State of Alaska needs to help
educate and advocate for the indigenous community to make sure
that their guaranteed right of survival is protected. He said
St. Lawrence Island people are the only people in the world that
harvest walrus - first - as a subsistence resource. It helps
them maintain spiritual, physical, and psychological needs that
keep them knowing who they are. They harvest more walrus than
any other people in the world. The walrus ivory has been used
for thousands of years and is used exclusively to help
supplement their subsistence way of life.
4:18:12 PM
DERA METALF, Program Director, Eskimo Walrus Commission, Nome,
Alaska, supported SJR 4. She said the Walrus Commission has been
around since 1978. She also serves on the Marine Mammal
Commission as their special advisor on Native affairs. Alaska
Natives are already facing difficulties with harvesting walrus
and pressures because of climate change, and she wonders if
these communities can even afford to continue hunting. But
hunting is fundamental to the coastal communities from the meat
to the blubber, skin to organs, and food to processing skin and
tusks that are used in boats, guns, and jewelry, and
handicrafts. These are critically important to them.
She added that with the ice cover diminishing and changing as it
has for the past few years, their hunters have to travel further
distances to hunt. Walrus defines not only their local economies
and way of life, but their food group resources and their
cultural traditions including arts and crafts.
CHAIR BISHOP closed public testimony and held SJR 4 in
committee.