Legislature(2009 - 2010)BARNES 124
04/01/2010 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB281 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 318 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 281 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 281-BOARD OF GAME/FISH & GAME COMMISSIONER
8:09:38 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON announced that the only order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 281, "An Act relating to the duties of the
commissioner of fish and game and to the interest of the Board
of Game in public safety as it relates to game."
8:10:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT, speaking as the sponsor of HB 281,
explained that HB 281 came about after two maulings in her
district in 2008. This legislation proposes a management tool
for the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) to utilize to
address nuisance bears. The legislation proposes that the top
priority with wildlife for ADF&G is public safety over the
sustainable yield of the wildlife.
8:13:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER pointed out that although the sponsor
statement refers to garbage, it doesn't include anything
regarding that aspect of the bear issue. He inquired as to how
the garbage issue is connected to game management.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT answered that the legislation doesn't
address the garbage issue because it's a municipality issue.
She noted that she has worked with the Municipality of
Anchorage, which intends to implement some pilot projects,
including bear proof containers, this summer in areas with high
bear activity.
8:14:49 AM
JEDIDIAH SMITH, Legislative Liaison, Alaska Center for the
Environment (ACE), informed the committee that the Alaska Center
for the Environment is Alaska's oldest and largest home-grown
grass roots conservation organization. The organization
represents over 6,000 members. He then provided the following
testimony:
The Alaska Center for the Environment has been working
collaboratively with state and federal agencies, the
municipality, other entities, and businesses to help
inform residents who live and recreate in bear country
how they can reduce their risks of having negative
encounters with bears, both in their neighborhoods and
on the trails through our Safe Neighborhoods and Wild
Bears campaign. Our group has been responsible for
securing funding, producing educational materials,
reaching out to thousands of people, and managing
pilot projects to keep bears out of neighborhoods by
promoting the use of bear resistant containers and
dumpster lids. Taken all together, our efforts have
been successful and we have seen a decrease in the
reports of bears hanging around in neighborhoods. The
Alaska Center for the Environment does not believe
that HB 281 is necessary nor do we believe that it
would result in fewer negative bear encounters. Just
to add some perspective, two people have been killed
by bears in the Municipality of Anchorage in Chugach
State Park in the past 95 years. The money needed to
implement this bill, over $100,000 the first year and
$50,000 therein to maintain, could be spent on
programs that will have far better results, such as
implementing a garbage management policy.
Representative Millett has acknowledged the success of
Juneau's garbage policies, but has concerns that
Anchorage is simply too large to implement such a
program. One hundred thousand dollars would go a long
way to help neighborhoods comply with and enforce
stricter guidelines. And if there is money available
from the state to reduce the incidents of bears in
neighborhoods, it is our recommendation that we start
there. I respectfully request that if you haven't
done so already, please review the recent survey
released by the Alaska Department of Fish & Game,
which shows that most adult residents living in
Anchorage appreciate seeing moose and bears in the
city, even in their neighborhoods. Most want the
number of moose and bears to be maintained or even
increased in the city. Most adult residents accept
the presence of brown and black bears and moose in
city parks like Far North Bicentennial Park. Most
opposed destroying brown bears, black bears, or moose
every year to reduce the population. Most opposed
designating specific areas in Anchorage, such as
downtown, where bears would be killed as soon as
possible. Most supported wildlife authorities
destroying specific bears at their discretion when the
authority believes the bears pose a threat to human
safety in the Anchorage area. I have the web site for
where the survey is available that I can submit to the
committee. While we recognize the potential danger of
sharing our neighborhoods and trails with wildlife, we
believe there are more effective ways of addressing
this issue. Our recommendations include creating an
ordinance requiring bear-resistant tipper carts and
dumpster lids in identified neighborhoods; fund
programs that address the root cause of negative
encounters with wildlife; enforce existing laws that
prohibit the feeding of wildlife through garbage and
other attractants; educate residents about bears and
moose behavior and how to reduce risks of a negative
encounter; engage in long range park and trail
subdivision planning; identify critical wildlife
migration corridors; evaluate salmon stocking programs
in urban areas; and develop a cooperative planning
committee with the Alaska Department of Fish & Game
and the city.
8:18:43 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON inquired as to the mission of the Alaska Center
for the Environment.
MR. SMITH related that ACE has a number of programs, including a
sustainable communities program, a local foods program, a
program that promotes gardening, a public lands and wildlife
program that promotes the sustainable management of wildlife, a
trailside education and outreach program, and an energy program
that promotes renewable and sustainable energy programs.
CO-CHAIR HERRON recalled that Mr. Smith complimented Juneau's
garbage program, and suggested that the $100,000 could be used
to implement a [program] in Anchorage. He asked if $100,000 is
reasonable to address an area the size of Anchorage. He further
asked if ACE is willing to match that amount.
MR. SMITH responded that ACE has already made a start in terms
of outreach efforts in the way of education as well as secured
grant funding for some of the education programs. He said that
he's not the manager of that program, but would be happy to seek
information on it for the committee. Furthermore, he related
his willingness to work with the municipality, the state, and
the sponsor toward a solution.
8:20:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS related that although he officially lives
in Valdez, he has had a house in Anchorage for the last five
years. [At the Anchorage house] moose are in the front yard
year round, which is of concern. He stressed that public safety
has to be the highest priority. Therefore, if a bear is in the
area kids are playing, the bear will [be killed] before any of
the kids die or the police arrive. Representative Harris
further stressed that placing something before public safety
will be difficult, particularly since the public is upset about
wild animals. He expressed the need for the wild animals to go
elsewhere and to be controlled in some fashion. The Moose
Federation, he noted, is doing a good job getting moose off the
road. "We have an obligation, the department has an obligation
to try and make sure that the public safety is taken care of
first," he stated. He concluded by relating his support for HB
281.
8:24:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA opined that one of the challenges here is
choosing respect. The Municipality of Anchorage survey
referenced by Mr. Smith included Representative Cissna's
district, and therefore she surmised that her constituents
likely weighed heavily on appreciating the wildlife in the area.
She mentioned that her neighborhood is becoming watchful,
particularly in terms of putting out garbage. She expressed
interest in ensuring [everyone is] mindful of safety in
communities and acknowledging the potential for moose to return
to areas where management has been done carefully. In closing,
Representative Cissna said she wanted to be sure that [the
committee is acknowledging the mix of people in Alaska's
communities and their desire to determine how to exist with the
wildlife in Alaska.
8:27:48 AM
MR. SMITH, in response to Representative Harris, clarified that
ACE is not saying it supports wildlife over the safety of
children. The organization, however, is promoting education and
awareness and responsible management of garbage.
8:28:36 AM
JENNIFER YUHAS, Legislative Liaison, Alaska Department of Fish &
Game, related that while ADF&G lauds the sponsor raising the
issue of bear awareness and public safety, the department still
has significant concerns with HB 281. The department, she
further related, believes HB 281 is unnecessary. The only
obstacle the Anchorage Police Department (APD) faces when
determining whether to dispatch an animal that they are unsure
is causing a public safety issue is APD's own policy. Since the
prior hearing on HB 281, the department has worked with APD,
which has been more amenable to utilizing training that ADF&G
already provides in Kodiak and Juneau. Ms. Yuhas pointed out
that nothing in statute or in a memorandum of understanding
(MOU) prohibits APD from dispatching an animal that's causing an
immediate public safety problem. On the contrary, statute
expressly allows an individual to dispatch an animal that is
causing a problem for the individual's own life and property.
8:30:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER related his understanding that no
individual has ever been prosecuted for protecting family, kids,
or garbage as that's already the policy and the law. He then
asked if there has ever been a prosecution for someone shooting
an animal when he/she felt his/her life was in danger.
MS. YUHAS answered that she wasn't aware of such a prosecution,
but deferred to Kevin Saxby who is the attorney for ADF&G.
8:31:47 AM
GARY FOLGER, Colonel/Director, Division of Wildlife Troopers,
Department of Public Safety, in response to Representative
Keller, said that very few prosecutions occur due to defense of
life and property. He attributed the aforementioned to the fact
that one person's fear may be completely different than
another's fear, which makes prosecution very difficult.
8:32:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said that it was a leading question
because the legislature shouldn't change its game management
laws if the matter is already addressed in existing law.
8:32:38 AM
MS. YUHAS, in response to Co-Chair Herron, agreed to provide Mr.
Saxby's response to Representative Keller's question. She then
clarified that ADF&G's game management in urban areas isn't for
abundance or large populations of ungulates or fur bearers. The
game management populations are set through the advisory
committee process and the Board of Game, with significant public
testimony. Public safety is taken into consideration during
that process. In rural areas, there would likely be significant
testimony relating the desire of a high population of moose in
order to feed their families whereas in urban areas there is
significant testimony regarding public safety issues. Ms. Yuhas
explained that while the department is bound to manage for a
sustainable yield, that's not abundance. She compared it to
having a bank account in that while interest has to be
generated, in an urban area it can be the lowest allowable
interest possible on the account of any type of animal.
However, in a rural area where the department manages for
abundance, the department would want a high interest yield in
order to draw from it every year.
8:34:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT directed attention to ADF&G's fiscal note
specifying a fiscal impact on the Division of Wildlife
Conservation, which she disputed. She opined that HB 281 didn't
change the process of picking up carcasses in the Municipality
of Anchorage. Therefore, she asked if the fiscal note could be
zeroed out since it seems disingenuous.
MS. YUHAS related that ADF&G's Administrative Services staff
read the legislation to mandate that ADF&G pick up these
carcasses. The aforementioned mandate wouldn't allow ADF&G to
work with the road crews, Hunters for the Hungry, and other
groups who pick up carcasses. She recalled that in Fairbanks,
the [local government] retrieved moose from residents' yards,
although there is no mandate for such, as it's a private
property issue. The department has simply done the same, and
thus the mandate in HB 281 would change the situation and the
department would expect to receive more calls. Furthermore, the
department doesn't have the fleet resources to address the
aforementioned, which is why the purchase of a truck was
included in the fiscal note.
8:35:45 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON inquired as to where that mandate is located in
the legislation.
MS. YUHAS said that the mandate is located in Section 1(20). If
the mandate stands, the department doesn't have the resources to
respond to the volume of calls expected.
8:36:55 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON, referring to an amendment labeled 26-
LS1194\R.1, Kane, 3/26/10, asked if changing the term "game" to
"predators" would change the [department's view and fiscal
note]. He mentioned his understanding that there are a lot of
moose carcasses rather than predator carcasses.
MS. YUHAS clarified that the department's fiscal note was
drafted to address the legislation before the committee.
However, should the aforementioned amendment be adopted, the
fiscal note would likely change.
The committee took a brief at-ease.
8:38:10 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON announced that by request of the sponsor, HB 281
will be assigned to a subcommittee of one, the sponsor.
8:38:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA discussed the different views of the
presence of animals in urban and rural areas. Although she
indicated the need to address wildlife that is endangering
humans, she expressed the need to remember that in Alaska it's
difficult to control animals that are being fed knowingly. She
expressed the need for HB 281 to include education for the
public.
MS. YUHAS said that she doesn't see much in the language that
doesn't cause complication. With regard to the rural public
safety issue, Ms. Yuhas related that public safety is taken into
account. In fact, recently the department dealt with some very
high profile issues in Chignik Lake. Just prior to the incident
at Chignik Lake, ADF&G had proposed a management plan for aerial
predator control. Although the aforementioned plan was brought
forth for ungulate population recovery, the department
understands that public safety issues occur throughout the
state. With regard to what the department can do to help, Ms.
Yuhas reminded the committee that ADF&G has bear aware programs.
The department would [support] representatives in communities
with bear problems to promote bear awareness in ways that the
department doesn't believe requires statutory changes.
Ambassadors for such programs, she opined, would benefit the
department and the public significantly.
8:42:20 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON expressed his hope that nothing happens this
summer that would cause the committee to see fit to hold a
hearing.
8:44:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA recalled the training she received to deal
with teenagers with violent histories. The training begins by
informing everyone that prevention is best. The aforementioned
is true with animals as well. Therefore, she encouraged the use
of prevention methods.
8:45:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT anticipated that in her district there
will continue to be bear problems and encounters with humans.
She clarified that she's referring to the casual encounter with
a bear in an individual's backyard where meat is being grilled
and children are playing. She, too, expressed hope that this
summer no incidents occur that cause the committee to hear the
legislation again and be in a position of reacting, much like
with the incident in Chignik Lake. She charged that in the
Chignik Lake situation, the state reacted too late and nothing
meaningful that provided public safety was put in place. With
regard to the ACE survey, Representative Millett characterized
it as a jaded, one-sided survey that she considered to be the
worst survey that she's ever seen. She further charged that the
survey was meant to obtain the results it did and the science
was poor. Moreover, the survey wasn't conducted by an Alaska
company and there was no due diligence with regard to the types
of questions that should've been asked. She related that while
she enjoys viewing wildlife, she prefers it to be in a
controlled environment in which she or her children aren't at
risk. A three-year-old can't be taught how to be careful
[around] bears. Representative Millet told the committee that
she introduced HB 281 in an effort to find solutions.
8:48:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER recommended that the sponsor consider the
definition of "predator" when working on HB 281. He related his
understanding that the term "predator" includes birds of prey
and goes beyond the sponsor's intent. He expressed concern that
[HB 281] would establish a game management plan that's different
for one area over another. The department and citizens, he
reiterated, already have the authority to deal with bears.
8:50:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT remarked that the legislation may need
language to address nuisance bears. She informed the committee
that although statute doesn't have a definition of "predator,"
ADF&G's definition includes bears, raptors, wolverines, lynx,
[wolves], and pike fish. Of those, she said she would focus on
bears and wolves. She related she no longer walks in her
neighborhood without pepper spray.
8:51:54 AM
CO-CHAIR MUNOZ moved Amendment 1 labeled 26-LS1194\R.1, Kane,
3/26/10, which read:
Page 1, line 2:
Delete "game"
Insert "predators"
Page 1, line 5:
Delete "remove a game carcass when notified that
game"
Insert "provide for the removal of a predator
carcass when notified that a predator"
Page 1, line 13:
Delete "game resources"
Insert "predators"
Page 2, line 3:
Delete "game"
Insert "a predator"
Page 2, line 4:
Delete "game"
Insert "predator"
CO-CHAIR HERRON objected for purposes of discussion.
8:52:04 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON closed public testimony and reminded the
committee that HB 281 will be assigned to subcommittee.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA offered a conceptual amendment to
Amendment 1 such that Section 1 would allow the various groups
to pick up carcasses without getting in the way of sharing
edible meat.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT interjected that Amendment 1 addresses
what Representative Cissna is suggesting in the proposed
conceptual amendment to Amendment 1. She directed attention to
the language being inserted on page 1, line 5, which would read:
"provide for the removal of a predator carcass when notified
that a predator". The aforementioned language was developed in
conjunction with ADF&G to accommodate ADF&G's current practices
related to removing carcasses.
8:54:53 AM
CO-CHAIR HERRON withdrew his objection. There being no further
objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
8:55:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA expressed the need to ensure that humans
respect and take care of each other rather than kill and hurt.
[HB 281 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 281 - Amendment R.1.pdf |
HCRA 4/1/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 281 |