Legislature(1993 - 1994)
02/18/1994 08:15 AM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 46 - Authorizing Moose Farming Number 020 TERESA SAGER-STANCLIFF, AIDE, SENATOR MIKE MILLER, read the sponsor statement for SB 46: "The Finance Committee Substitute for SB 46 provides for the development of moose and other game farming in Alaska and is intended to expand Alaska's economic development opportunities. Surplus moose, if an actual surplus exists at any given time, can be provided by the state to an individual or group to raise in breeding captivity. The bill also legalizes the sale of farm raised moose meat. Under SB 46, the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) are given regulatory authority to ensure the safety and health of animals and handlers, and to provide for adequate start up and monitoring of moose farming activities. "Safeguards have been added to prevent disease, a major concern of ADF&G and to implement the proper regulatory controls to insure a healthy, viable game farming industry in Alaska. Animal husbandry is a priority recommendation of the Agriculture Task Force and was recommended during the Joint House/Senate Economic Task Force Mini-Summit public hearings. The CS for SB 46 is also supported by DEC, DNR, and the Department of Commerce and Economic Development." MS. SAGER-STANCLIFF advised committee members they have two versions of SB 46: One is the version the Senate Finance Committee adopted, which passed the Senate last year; and the other is a work draft, version R. Both versions of the bill provide for the same thing. Number 045 MS. SAGER-STANCLIFF stated: "Basically this legislation expands the game farming statute to add moose and caribou to the list of game animals that can be legally farmed in Alaska. The bill is rather lengthy, mainly because conforming changes were added that ensures that game farming statute applies to all species. People who are interested in game farming will have to register their animals with the three agencies involved, DEC, DNR and ADF&G. They will have to pay their $125 game farming license fee and will have to be certified in their ability to prevent disease transmission. They will have to prove they have adequate facilities and fencing to prevent escapement of the captive animals and prevent entry of wild animals into the private facility. They will have to establish a contractual relationship with a veterinarian for visits to their game farm on a semiannual basis. They will also have to prove they have adequate facilities which are sufficient to prevent injury to animals and to animal handlers." MS. SAGER-STANCLIFF said: "Once a game farmer is able to prove to the satisfaction of DEC and to DNR that they are able to meet the requirements, they are then provided with a certificate and game farming license. At that point, if a surplus exists or if ADF&G has an animal that, for whatever reason, can be transferred into private ownership, then they can consider issuing a permit. At that point, other requirements will be necessary such as branding, ear tags or some sort of identification which makes the animal easily distinguishable if it escapes from a private facility into the wild. There are specific requirements regarding notification to the various agencies if an animal escapes and also notification has to be provided if there is a birth, sale, slaughter or death of animals in a facility. Those provisions are intended to provide for close monitoring by the agencies." Number 101 MS. SAGER-STANCLIFF stated the primary difference between the Finance version and the blank CS is that much of the authority for regulation of game farming, once the animal is transferred to private ownership, has been shifted from ADF&G to DNR and DEC. She advised committee members that a ten minute moose manual is in their folders and said it was provided by constituents in Fairbanks who are interested in SB 46. (VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON noted that REPRESENTATIVES FINKELSTEIN and JAMES had joined the committee at 8:30 a.m. and 8:35 a.m.) REPRESENTATIVE PAT CARNEY wondered if anyone had suggested reindeer be included in the legislation. MS. SAGER-STANCLIFF responded it has been discussed, but currently only Alaska Natives can legally raise reindeer. REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY said he knows there is a federal law which states only Alaska Natives can own reindeer in the state, but the attorney general has agreed to enter into a law suit against the federal government in conjunction with a friend of his who is raising reindeer. He felt including reindeer in the proposed legislation, will send a message to the federal government from the state, saying reindeer is the state's jurisdiction. Number 137 VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON agreed and pointed out that on page four, line four of the work draft, reindeer could be inserted. He asked Ms. Sager-Stancliff if there are any reasons why reindeer are not included in the definition of domesticated game animal. MS. SAGER-STANCLIFF replied she is fairly certain that Senator Miller will agree to that addition. DOUG WITTE, PALMER, testified via teleconference, and stated reindeer are not included in SB 46 because they are currently not considered to be a game species. They are a domestic species. He stated caribou are added because they are a game species. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked Mr. Witte if there was any problem with adding reindeer to the bill. MR. WITTE felt it was not necessary because they are not a game species, but defined as domestic livestock. Number 167 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES said he did not see a fiscal note attached to the bill from DEC. MS. SAGER-STANCLIFF replied there is a zero fiscal note. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES noted there is a $10,000 DNR fiscal note and a zero fiscal note from ADF&G. He felt in order to make all the assurances outlined, it is difficult to believe it can be accomplished with only $10,000. MS. SAGER-STANCLIFF responded both DEC and DNR indicated that to start, there will be a small number of individuals interested in getting into moose or caribou farming and they felt the increased costs will not be significant, especially with the state veterinarian. Number 207 WAYNE REGELIN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION, ADF&G, stated during the past seven months DNR, DEC and ADF&G have met several times to discuss game farming and develop a unified administrative position on game farming. He said their goal was to recommend effective legislation which will protect the domestic livestock and game farm industries, protect wildlife resources, and provide a climate for game farming to grow and prosper. He advised committee members that after several meetings, a position paper entitled, "Farming of Big Game Animals In Alaska" was produced. The position represents the views of all three departments and is supported by Governor Hickel. MR. REGELIN continued that the administration supports game farming and believes it has the potential to grow into a viable and sustainable industry. In order for growth to occur, consistent state policies, stability in state laws and effective regulations are needed. He said the key points in the administration's position are, they will initially limit game farming to the four species currently allowed by state law: reindeer, bison, elk, and muskoxen, and would provide a regulatory mechanism to expand the list of species which may be farmed. The farming of nonindigenous species will be prohibited to protect the state's wildlife species. Farming of caribou by non-Natives is prohibited by the Federal Reindeer Act of 1937. He pointed out that law limits ownership of reindeer in Alaska to Natives, but it also defines captive caribou as reindeer. Until the federal law is changed, the administration does not believe caribou should be included as a species which can be farmed because it will create a legal problem. MR. REGELIN stated the administration is not recommending the farming of moose as a commercial enterprise. The biological attributes of moose make them unsuitable for commercial game farming. However, due to the interest by a few citizens to raise moose, the administration recommends creation of a new permit called an experimental animal husbandry permit which would allow individuals to hold moose or caribou in captivity. He added that caribou could be held under the experimental permit because the state will retain ownership of the animals. Number 260 MR. REGELIN said DNR will have the responsibility and authority to regulate most aspects of game farming. DEC will have authority for animal health regulations, and ADF&G will have authority over surplusing animals for game farming, for issuing the experimental animal husbandry permits, and have joint responsibility with DNR for adding species to the list of game farmed animals. He stated the administration believes their position and recommendations will lead to a strong game farming industry in Alaska, while protecting the state's wildlife resources. MR. REGELIN told members he has a two page handout which describes how several other states are regulating their game farming industry. During the past five years, several states have revised their statutes and regulations related to game farming due to increased interest, especially in the western states. One of the concerns is the importation of red deer from New Zealand and the possibility of hybridization. He said the occurrence of tuberculosis in elk in Alberta increased concern about game farm animals spreading disease to domestic livestock and wildlife. Number 275 MR. REGELIN noted that most regulations adopted by several of the states restrict game farming to certain species, and require disease testing, permanent animal identification and records to track animal movements. He explained those are the same types of requirements the administration is recommending in the position paper. He advised that the three agencies are willing to assist the committee in incorporating their regulations into draft legislative form. REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY asked if the Federal Reindeer Act also includes the ownership of caribou, as well as reindeer. MR. REGELIN responded the only reference to caribou in the Act, is where it says any captive caribou is classified as a reindeer. It defines reindeer as reindeer or captive caribou. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked if they are the same animal. MR. REGELIN replied they are the same species, but they are different. The reindeer have been domesticated for thousands of years, have a different body conformation, short legs and are very tame and docile. Caribou have long legs and are wild. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON remarked in the Soviet Far East he saw, what he presumed were thousands of caribou. MR. REGELIN stated in Siberia there is a very large reindeer industry, not caribou. Number 318 DR. CHARLES SCHWARTZ, DIRECTOR, MOOSE RESEARCH CENTER, said Sweden is about one-third the size of Alaska and they have between 300,000 and 450,000 moose in the country. Annually, they kill approximately 150,000 animals. In Alaska, there are about 120,000 moose and approximately 7,000 are harvested annually. There is no moose farming in Sweden. He said the reason Sweden has a large productive moose herd is directly related to the agricultural and forestry practices established in the country. Sweden has an extremely intensive forest management program. Second Scots Pine which is the major forest tree in the country is palatable and eaten by moose. In Alaska, the major conifer is spruce, and it is not palatable to moose. In Sweden there are no predators. Finally, in Sweden half of their harvest is calves. He added that most of the calves born in Alaska are eaten by predators. DR. SCHWARTZ stated the Soviets began experimenting with moose farming in the 1950's and it was collective farms built in three different areas. He said when he attended a meeting there recently, two of the three farms had closed and had not been successful. The Soviets farmed moose for both meat and milk production, velvet antler production, as well as using moose for draft animals and riding. The Soviets had abandoned all their efforts at domestication, and the only facility still operating had been converted to a research facility. DR. SCHWARTZ stressed that there were major differences in the way the Soviets attempted to farm moose than how it probably will occur in Alaska. The animals were bottle raised and tame, and were turned out into the forest at night. They fed on logging stash. Each animal had associated with it, a milk maid and the women would go out each morning and call the animals. The moose came out of the forest and back to the facility where they were milked. The animals were kept in the facility during the day and were fed potatoes and various grains. They were milked about six times a day and in the evening were rereleased back into the wild. Milk production was about 3 1/2 liters per day or about eight pounds. The total production period was about 65-70 days, so a cow moose would produce about 495 pounds of milk. The average dairy cow has a production period of about 305 days, and during that time produces approximately 10,600 pounds of milk. He noted that the Russians do believe moose milk is therapeutic, but he would not rate it as highly palatable. Number 406 DR. SCHWARTZ explained the Moose Research Center in Soldotna was built by ADF&G in the late 1960's. The facility is four one square mile areas, which are fenced and there are also a series of smaller holding pens where more controlled research programs can be conducted. He said there have been moose at the facility since 1978 and those animals are maintained on an artificial diet. The ration given to the animals was developed at the center and contains about 25 percent aspen sawdust. He stressed that moose are not easy to maintain in captivity, and do not live as long in captivity as they do in the wild. Based on a survey he conducted, it was determined that the average life expectancy of a captive moose is about eight years, and about 70 percent of calves born under captive conditions die before they are one year of age. Number 425 DR. SCHWARTZ stated the research center has been more successful in raising calves because they do not hand raise the calves, they allow the cow to raise them. The consequence is the fact that the calves are no longer tame. The moose at the research center are not domestic animals; they are wild animals which have been tamed or accept human handling. Number 436 REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY requested that the statistics regarding Sweden be made available to the committee for their intensive game management proposed legislation. REPRESENTATIVE DAVID FINKELSTEIN asked Dr. Schwartz's thoughts on the threats of disease and other risks involved. DR. SCHWARTZ responded there are threats both ways. He said there will be threats of disease organisms being brought into the state if there are moose coming in from outside. For example, in eastern Canada, there is a wood tick which heavily infests wild populations of moose currently. There can be up to several hundred thousand individual ticks on a moose and in the spring, their hair is completely gone. Many biologists in that area believe an affected animal can cause heavy over winter mortality because it represents a stress to individual animals. DR. SCHWARTZ added that several years ago, ADF&G was concerned about the possibility of this tick getting into Alaska. As an experiment, females were taken under extremely controlled conditions and wintered in the Kenai Peninsula to determine if they could survive the weather and lay eggs. He stressed they can. The reason they are not in Alaska now is because they have not been able to get here because of natural geographic barriers and more severe winter weather in interior Canada and Alaska. Number 500 DR. SCHWARTZ stated moose are prone to several diseases which are carried by domestic livestock, but noted that diseases can be controlled. In regard to maintaining animals in captive conditions and expecting them not to mix with the wild, he said based on experience at the research center, even though there are secure fences, they regularly have wild moose get into the facility and described how. He felt there is a high likelihood there will be mixing even with the best security. Number 529 REPRESENTATIVE ELDON MULDER asked Dr. Schwartz to describe the Moose Research Center. DR. SCHWARTZ said currently the center has 26 moose and projects are ongoing to evaluate the effects of selective harvest on moose genetics. The Board of Game passed a law which made spike fork of 50-inch moose legal for harvest and all others are protected. He stated ADF&G has concerns, because individual antler types are being targeted and the potential exists to remove that antler type with heavy hunting pressure. He explained the center also has a number of projects looking at moose reproduction, trying to quantify various aspects of moose reproduction directly related to bull/cow ratios in the wild and herd management. DR. SCHWARTZ said the center has an open ended technique study which tests any new product, and added that all drugs used on moose are first tested at the center. He noted the center's animals are put into the pens in the summer and feed on natural vegetation. In the fall, they are brought in and are fed the ration. He said it is difficult to stop large numbers of moose per square mile. An average density in the wild, on the most excellent range they have, is about 16 animals per square mile. Normal typical boreal forest may carry one to two moose per square mile and that is the stocking rate. Number 605 REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN clarified that other animals which have been successfully farmed are by nature, herd type animals. DR. SCHWARTZ said that is correct. Bison, elk and reindeer are herd forming animals; moose are not. Moose are classified as either solitary or individualistic type animals and they do not aggregate. The average group size for moose is about 2.5 and that includes large breeding groups during the reproductive period. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if moose are somewhat inefficient. DR. SCHWARTZ responded moose are extremely difficult to keep in captivity. The nutritional requirements for moose in captivity have still not been determined. REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY asked Dr. Schwartz if he had said that moose calves are harvested in Sweden. DR. SCHWARTZ replied that was correct. REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY asked how they are harvested. DR. SCHWARTZ answered Swedes shoot them in the spring and added they do not sport hunt, they market hunt. It is legal to buy the right to kill. He noted there are no fences, but added the moose are on private land. The landowner owns the right to shoot the animals; they are not a public resource. The only fences in Sweden for moose occur along the major highways. Number 670 KATHERINE SMITH, CERTIFIED WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST, MEMBER, HOMER FISH AND GAME ADVISORY BOARD, MEMBER, KACHEMAK BAY CONSERVATION SOCIETY, HOMER, testified via teleconference, and said she had been a project director and manager of a private elk farm at high elevations in Hawaii. She oversaw construction of a state of the art quarantine and handling facility for elk and the importation of about 50 animals from the mainland in 1987. There are now several hundred animals which are doing well as long as a very rigorous health program and supplemental nutrients are provided. Even with year round pastures and the benign conditions found in Hawaii, it is extremely expensive to keep the animals healthy and handlers safe. Number 700 MS. SMITH said an elk or a herd animal is easy to handle compared to moose. She stressed moose in captivity are much more of a challenge and a big mistake. In the winter, moose are far ranging browsers and they wander seeking high quality, low availability willow cottonwood, birch buds and tender stems. When moose are locked in, they quickly run out of their limited and dietary requirement of high protein and roughage. Any supplements which will have to be provided are very costly. The feeding of moose will also create conflicts and problems between animals which are not naturally grouped together. MS. SMITH felt no one can afford to fence enough area to adequately provide for a moose. She thought it is very difficult to define what constitutes an adequate handling facility and it will be even more difficult for the state to regulate it, ensuring that animals are adequately cared for and disease transmission is not a major issue. She said moose have been proven as a poor choice for intensive game farming, not only in Sweden and Russia, but also closer to home in more similar environments. MS. SMITH noted that the University of Alberta did a study and concluded that moose are not suitable for game farming on any intensive basis. The land area is just too great and the handling and feeding considerations make it uneconomical. She felt meat and antler sales also present a problem. Fish and Wildlife Protection is already overtaxed, understaffed and under-budgeted in their efforts to check the illegal taking of moose. She stressed that SB 46 will promote poaching and black market sales of meat by creating a market incentive. When added to the disease transmission risk to wild stock, SB 46 unnecessarily places one of the state's most significant subsistence animals at risk and threatens the lifestyle of Natives and rural Alaskans. Ms. Smith felt the state has nothing to gain from SB 46 and it will in fact cost Alaskans. TAPE 94-18, SIDE B Number 000 MS. SMITH said promoting moose farming at a time when the state does not have enough money for existing programs and needs does not make sense. She urged the committee not to foster this very harmful and very costly legislation. BUD BLISS, FAIRBANKS, testified via teleconference, and stated he has raised buffalo for over twenty years and wild mountain sheep, goat, and deer for over 15 years. He stressed individual, private owners of game farms bear all the expense on grazing and propagating the animals. In a few years, the owners will be able to sell the meat, which has already been proven to be of much higher quality than beef. He said after the first calf drop, the moose will be dropping twins which is better than beef cattle who only drop one calf per year. The knowledge gained by the private sector in raising the animals will help everybody in the state and will bring a good revenue source into the state. He urged the committee to pass SB 46. Number 042 STANLEY NED, FAIRBANKS, testified via teleconference, and expressed opposition to SB 46. He said there are people who are stunned that SB 46 could happen. (Indiscernible) because of the threat of disease that domestic stock by bringing in (indiscernible) livestock. (Indiscernible)... JEREMY WELTON, FAIRBANKS, testified via teleconference, and expressed support of moose farming. He urged committee members to pass SB 46. Number 058 OPAL WELTON, FAIRBANKS, testified via teleconference, and stated that ADF&G has come up with a different approach to being opposed to moose farming. She said in the department's most recent position paper, ADF&G has lied about domestic moose. Last year in testimony to the Senate Resources Committee, four people testified about ADF&G being far less than honest about the issue. She quoted a Washington newspaper concerning the disease problem in the lower 48: "Legislative testimony has shown that disease problems in deer farms have occurred only in states where they have been regulated by wildlife agencies. There have been no problems where animals disease control and deer farms are handled by the state departments of agriculture." MS. WELTON said to testify further as to the lies and deceits by ADF&G, she stated two years ago Dr. (indiscernible) who is the head of the reindeer department said, "There have been several memos circulated to legislators which refer to disease and testing which have originated from the fish and game department. These memos have not presented all the facts about disease testing, disease status, and disease research. In fact some of the data and facts (indiscernible) for these memos are incorrect." MS. WELTON mentioned a statement that Mr. Regelin made in the Fairbanks newspaper acknowledging that no disease problems have surfaced at the state's Kenai Moose Research facility in 25 years of operation. She said that Mr. Regelin also stated that there is no doubt that people can do this, but the (indiscernible) state interest is such a private investment decision. She noted that Mr. Regelin acknowledged the agency's obligation as primarily philosophical. She read several other quotes from various sources regarding moose and moose farming. Number 137 VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON requested Ms. Welton to send any pertinent information to the committee. DOUG WELTON, FAIRBANKS, testified via teleconference, and said the moose farming issue has been around for many years. He felt it is time to move the bill and get moose farming into the hands of the private sector. He said he had spoken to Governor Hickel when he was in Fairbanks and the Governor assured him that SB 46 will not be vetoed. According to Mr. Welton, the Governor stated he did not believe that it is the role of government to decide whether raising moose would be economical and that he strongly supports game farming of muskoxen, reindeer, bison and elk, but added there are still questions about moose being conducive to farming. MR. WELTON stated over the years, he has had the endurance and the facts to prove almost every excuse wrong. He has done enough research to readily admit and acknowledge all the biological peculiarities that are inherent with moose. He said he has always been an advocate of small, family farm type operations with animals only in their natural habitat and (indiscernible). He stressed no one can tell him that the animals are not perfectly adapted and conducive to the things he has fought for. MR. WELTON remarked that a person can call what is done with an animal anything, including farming, and said the state calls what they do with their moose, research. He noted he is grateful for what has been done at the moose station and felt there should be moose stations all across the state to bring in the injured and wayward moose which are caught in the thousands of accidents happening. Over the past six years, he stated he has heard moose being farmed, ranched, researched, rode, raced, (indiscernible), poached, stolen, hybridized, diseased, bought, sold, auctioned, tranquilized, eaten by bears and wolves and even in fast food restaurants. He emphasized the fact is, it has all been done in people's minds and in committee meetings. MR. WELTON stated that throughout the long process, he has not been allowed to save one more moose. The orphan he had was sent to Germany and no one can tell him that the man there has not prospered. He stressed he is still interested in salvaging this valuable resource and putting moose to a variety of uses. He said he is getting tired of people saying all he wants is a pet and asked is the horse a person hunts from a pet, is the cow a person milks a pet, etc. MR. WELTON stated the opponents have not been forced to use the only one excuse they have left, and that is God. Disease has taken him six years to deal with and he is pleased to see that it has disappeared from the position paper. He felt to have to boil it down to behavior is very ironic. He believed it has more to do with the behavior of the people in a certain office, than it does with the moose. MR. WELTON said there is a lot of work needed to be done. On the Kenai Peninsula alone, Alaskans are running over 3,000 moose a year. Until some major habitat work is done away from the cities, roads and railroads, there will continue to be increased problems. SB 46 has targeted areas which could use an economic option that do not have one today, in addition to all of the other businesses which will be affected positively. He felt there are enough moose out there to start many families back on the road to recovery and a rural lifestyle which will help both them and the moose. He urged committee members to pass SB 46. HAROLD GILLAM, FAIRBANKS, testified via teleconference, and thanked Representative Carney for mentioning the advantages of forest management. He said if Sweden is one-third the size of Alaska and it has approximately three times as many moose, they are raising moose at a ratio ten times that of Alaska. He remarked he has seen moose herds, with groups of 9-14 moose together in the winter. He believed the biggest threat to subsistence hunting is the lack of intensive management. He felt if moose farming is not going to be allowed, then the Moose Research Center should be closed. He expressed support of SB 46. Number 250 CHRIS RAINWATER, HOMER, testified via teleconference, and expressed support of SB 46. He said moose have been coming on his ground for the past thirty years and has never lost one. The moose eat his hay, grass and willows. He believed there is a future for moose farming. GLORIA GILL, ALASKA ENVIRONMENTAL LOBBY, said the Lobby opposes SB 46. Moose farming may put wild animals at increased risk of disease. The escape of captive animals is inevitable and if a disease, such as tuberculosis ever gets established in the wild, it will be a permanent source of infection for native species. She read a sentence from a newspaper article, "By mid-1992, Alberta officials had euthanized 2,600 captive elk to stop the spread of bovine tuberculosis and will wait years to see if they successfully kept the disease out of the provinces wildlife and cattle." She said the Lobby has many articles similar to the one she read, which point to statistics where animals have had to be destroyed because of the threat of disease. MS. GILL stated that moose farming may be detrimental to predator populations. Domesticated animals are easy prey for bears and wolves. Farmers will be forced to protect their investment. The means used in Kodiak and other areas of Alaska has been to shoot them. She gave examples of such. She said the legalized sale of moose meat creates a financial incentive to take the animals illegally and poaching may increase. Number 330 VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON advised that was the end of the testimony and asked Ms. Sager-Stancliff to come back to the table. He said ADF&G would like to get together with the sponsor and find amendments which will satisfy the department. He asked if Senator Miller will be willing to take SB 46, sit down with ADF&G and come back to the committee with a revised work draft. MS. SAGER-STANCLIFF responded that Senator Miller will be very agreeable to doing that. She asked if DNR and DEC could also be included since they worked with ADF&G on the game farming policy. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON replied that is agreeable.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|