Legislature(2003 - 2004)
05/16/2003 07:48 AM House FSH
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 309-PROHIBIT RELEASE OF PREDATORY FISH CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 309, "An Act prohibiting the release of nonindigenous predatory fish into public water." CHAIR SEATON said discussion would be begin on HB 309 until a quorum was present. Number 0903 REPRESENTATIVE KELLY WOLF, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of HB 309, testified that the bill would make it illegal to transport predatory game fish and would increase that offense to a felony. He said that Alaska currently considers this as a misdemeanor unless a permit is issued by the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G). He told the committee that in Southcentral Alaska, through the means of "bucket biology," the transportation of northern pike, a nonindigenous, predatory fish has been expanding through the fresh water systems. This expansion jeopardizes different indigenous species of anadromous fish such as trout, coho salmon, and king salmon. He said that the only way to eliminate northern pike is to use a chemical poison, and the poison also kills everything in the water system. He cited the example of Davis Lake in northern California, where it cost the state a lot of money to poison the lake in order to kill off northern pike. Number 1178 REPRESENTATIVE WOLF continued that some individuals wish to have this predatory sport fish expand into the Kenai Peninsula and up into [Matanuska-Susitna] valley. While in some parts of Alaska the fish is an indigenous species, this isn't the case in the Kenai Peninsula, considering the watershed and make-up of the ecosystem. Another issue is that within the last two years, yellow perch, which he doesn't think are indigenous, were transported and stocked in a lake by means of bucket biology. The issue is that individuals should not be changing the state's ecosystem and endangering the economy or ecology of the region, he stated. CHAIR SEATON clarified that the discussion pertained to the proposed CS [Version I, 23-LS1097\I, Utermohle, 5/9/03]. Number 1379 CHAIR SEATON announced that there was now a quorum present in committee, and that there was a motion from Representative Wilson to put the proposed CS for HB 309, Version I, before the committee. [No objection was stated, and Version I was treated as adopted.] CHAIR SEATON asked if the term "game fish" was being used. REPRESENTATIVE WOLF responded that he did not object to that usage, noting that the expanded definition would not be inclusive of tropical fish. Number 1473 REPRESENTATIVE OGG surmised that on page 1, lines 1, 4, 6, and 7, "game" would be inserted. CHAIR SEATON acknowledged the foregoing as [Conceptual Amendment 1]. He asked if there was any objection. There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted. Number 1543 REPRESENTATIVE WOLF acknowledged that from a court of law's perspective, there was concern regarding the ambiguous aspect of "nonindigenous." He suggested that perhaps "nonindigenous" be struck from the title. Number 1678 LANCE NELSON, Assistant Attorney General, Natural Resources Section, Civil Division (Anchorage), Department of Law, testified that an element of the crime is that a person would have to knowingly release live, nonindigenous, predatory fish into a body of fresh water. It could be argued by defense counsel that the state has the burden of proof to show that no fish of that species has ever been present in that body of water; he said this might be a difficult task and burden to overcome. Number 1775 CHAIR SEATON mentioned that perhaps the House Judiciary Standing Committee could address a number of these legal issues. Number 1798 REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS said, "Generally speaking, if you just said 'pike' you'd take care of 99 percent of the problem." Number 1816 KELLY HEPLER, Director, Division of Sport Fish, Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), said that just mentioning "pike" wouldn't be sufficient because other fish such as yellow perch have also been introduced; the bill needs to be broad enough to include other fish as well. CHAIR SEATON voiced his concern regarding the removal of "nonindigenous". He pointed out that Representative Wolf was referring to non-native fish and said, "We're not talking about salmon eggs that are [moved] from one pond to the next." REPRESENTATIVE WOLF replied that "nonindigenous" could be defined within the bill. He said he would like to move the bill to the House Resources Standing Committee and told the committee that during the interim he would commit to work with the Department of Law (DOL) on HB 309. CHAIR SEATON asked the committee if "amend" should be placed on the bill [report] as well as the inclusion of a definition of "nonindigenous". REPRESENTATIVE OGG questioned making this offense a class C felony. He gave the example of a fish farm in Washington State containing Atlantic salmon or other forms of salmon in which fish leave the pens and swim into Alaskan waters. He said that it was foreseeable that fish could swim up the streams, and that under this statute, a state of Washington citizen could be prosecuted. CHAIR SEATON clarified that this would need to be a "knowing" release into a body of fresh public water. REPRESENTATIVE OGG agreed that a person might know that the fish would eventually arrive [at that destination]. CHAIR SEATON said that fish traveling through the salt water and the ocean differed from fish being released knowingly into a body of fresh water. Number 2121 REPRESENTATIVE OGG asked, if fish were released into one body of water with the knowledge that those fish might eventually end up in another body of water, "What's the difference?" REPRESENTATIVE WOLF said the bill was written such that a person may not "knowingly release, or knowingly transport for release", which is similar to carrying that fish to Alaska and releasing it into fresh public water. He stated that if fish escape from a pen, swim through salt water, and eventually spawn in an Alaskan river, that's different altogether. REPRESENTATIVE OGG cautioned that there should be not be any ambiguity, given that a class C felony might be placed on an individual. Number 2206 REPRESENTATIVE WOLF said that one reason a class C felony was chosen was because the poisoning of Davis Lake had cost the [U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service] and the California Department of Fish and Game about $1.7 million. He said that because of the actions of one individual or one small group, the state's resources could end up being spent. Number 2263 REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked what the penalty was for a class C felony. REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS responded that the penalty involved 364 days for a misdemeanor and 365 days for a felony. REPRESENTATIVE OGG commented that he wasn't necessarily suggesting that the felony be lowered to a misdemeanor but rather, if this was going to be a class C felony crime, then the language needed to be very tight. CHAIR SEATON asked if using the language "directly into a body of fresh water" would satisfy Representative Ogg's concern regarding ocean migration. REPRESENTATIVE OGG replied that he would prefer that the language be reviewed by the attorney general's office and the ADF&G to make sure that it's tight. REPRESENTATIVE WOLF said that he had already made the commitment to work with the ADF&G and DOL during the interim. Number 2366 REPRESENTATIVE WILSON told the committee that since the bill isn't currently going anywhere, she would prefer that HB 309 be heard by the House Special Committee on Fisheries this January [2004]. REPRESENTATIVE WOLF said he would like to see the bill move to the House Resources Standing Committee. REPRESENTATIVE WILSON repeated her suggestion that the House Special Committee on Fisheries review the bill at the beginning of next session. REPRESENTATIVE OGG said he agreed with Representative Wilson. He stated that this was clearly a fisheries issue and that he would prefer sending on a bill that had been worked through. REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS stated that he agreed with Representative Ogg. The committee took an at-ease from 8:25 to 8:28 a.m. Number 2460 CHAIR SEATON said that CSHB 309 would be held over and that during the interim the [departments] and the sponsor would continue to work on the bill. A definition of nonindigenous was needed and a tightening of the language in order to avoid unintended consequences. He said that HB 309 would be one of the first orders of business next year. [HB 309 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|