Legislature(1997 - 1998)
04/08/1997 01:12 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CSSB 7(RLS) am - HUNTING SPORT FISH TRAPPING FEES/LICENSES Number 0278 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN announced the next order of business was CS for Senate Bill No. 7(RLS) am, "An Act reducing certain resident sport fishing, hunting, and trapping license fees, increasing certain nonresident sport fishing license and tag fees, and relating to nonresident sport fishing and hunting licenses and tags; and providing for an effective date." The version before the committee was HCS CSSB 7(FSH). Number 0321 KAREN BRAND, Legislative Assistant to Senator Dave Donley, presented the sponsor statement on his behalf. She said it is not a new concept; Senator Donley had introduced similar legislation two years before, which had numerous hearings in the Senate Resources Committee. MS. BRAND explained that the bill slightly increases nonresident sport fish license fees. It also increases the nonresident annual sport fish license from $50 to $150; for this, it restricts purchase to nonresidents involved in a commercial fishery, possessing a commercial deck hand license or having a limited entry permit. In addition, it slightly decreases resident sport fish license combination fees, resulting in less funds going back to vendors and less paperwork for the department. CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked why it was introduced. Number 0537 MS. BRAND responded that Senator Donley had been tracking this issue for many years. She noted that packets include articles referring to sting operations by the Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection on the Kenai Peninsula and around the state, relating to increased numbers of nonresidents who sport fish and then commercially process that fish for sale. One article refers to a couple who smoked salmon and then sold it at a flea market in the Lower 48 to help pay for their annual trip to Alaska. Although the problem is not widespread, it is increasing. This bill addresses some of that misuse of Alaska's sport fish resources. Number 0613 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON suggested as a result, people wishing to stay all summer would have to buy a license every other week. MS. BRAND replied that those not involved in a commercial fishery, and not deck hands nor holders of limited entry permits, would be required to purchase a license every 14 days; that was the longest license they could purchase. It would create somewhat of a paper trail for enforcement officers. Number 0681 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON inquired about the net change in revenues. MS. BRAND referred to the fiscal notes. She advised that there is uncertainty over how many people will purchase each type of license. The best guess is an additional $4.5 million in sport fish revenues, to be deposited into the fish and game fund. Number 0742 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether the current sport fish license fee is still $10. MS. BRAND affirmed it is $10, unchanged by this bill. Number 0769 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to testimony in committee the previous week by George Utermohle, Legislative Counsel. Representative Green said for a 14-day license, there would be a five-fold difference between resident and nonresident licenses. He expressed concern about whether this would pass muster, not that he opposes it. MS. BRAND replied this has come up before. The "magic number" is a three-to-one ratio for commercial license fees. However, this is for sport fish, which is "want-based." Number 0893 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN recalled that Mr. Utermohle had indicated commercial activity affects a person's livelihood and therefore requires some upper limit. He questioned whether an increase from three-to-one to twenty-to-one might not still be a problem. He again advised he was not passing judgment on it. MS. BRAND agreed there is a difference in ratios studied for constitutionality for commercial activities. She believes in one state, a ten-to-one ratio for nonresident-versus-resident sport fish license fees had been held constitutional. Number 0981 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to the fiscal note and increased funding. He asked whether that took into account additional paperwork for repeated licenses. MS. BRAND did not recall specific comments about that. She advised that an ADF&G representative was present. Number 1015 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES expressed concern over the bill. She cited her own children as an example. Previous residents, if they lived outside Alaska and visited for the whole summer, they would have to buy repeated licenses. She believes that is wrong. She suggested trying to solve one problem may create other, bigger problems. Number 1065 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked what the response had been from the guided sport fish industry. MS. BRAND explained there had been provisions in the previous SB 128 dealing with hunting. There had been a lot of testimony from both hunting and sport fishing guides on that. This year, all those hunting issues had been taken out. The ADF&G had worked with guides to help get the legislation to a point where guides could be satisfied with it. She said several guides on the Kenai River had indicated they were happy to have the new seven-day license in there. Number 1129 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked whether the guided sport input on this version has been supportive. MS. BRAND said there had either been no comment or no stated opposition. Number 1184 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN reported that he had heard from two or three sport fish guides who would prefer the full-season license. He offered to provide their names, if necessary. He noted that it was not a consensus opinion. Number 1219 DALE BONDURANT testified via teleconference from Kenai, saying he does not think this is fair. He suggested if Representative Green's figures were "crunched" further, on a per-day basis it would be a 90-to-one ratio. For combination licenses, a nonresident would pay 25 or 30 times as much as a resident, depending on the license. MR. BONDURANT indicated nonresidents pay 85 percent of the total cost of management of sport fisheries. Furthermore, this presupposes dishonesty by nonresident noncommercial fishermen and honesty by nonresident commercial fishermen. The latter have the same opportunity to run cottage industries. Mr. Bondurant believes this is another attempt to bash visitors. He asked whether anyone had thought about military veterans who visit Alaska. He suggested nonresidents, who furnish more funds than residents, should perhaps even get their licenses for less money. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN recognized the arrival of Senator Donley, sponsor. Number 1388 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON referred to the impact of denying an annual license. He asked how Senator Donley envisions long-term visitors handling this. For example, would a visitor to the Kenai River periodically go to Kenai or Soldotna to buy a new license? SENATOR DAVE DONLEY, sponsor, said that was one reason they had not sought to amend the one-day license, which costs $10. He believes that is the best way out for nonresidents who stay in Alaska for a long time. [Co-Chairman Hudson chairing, as Co-Chairman Ogan left the room] Number 1449 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES restated her earlier comments for Senator Donley's benefit. She concluded by saying although she understands the goal, this is overkill, especially for former residents. SENATOR DONLEY replied that he also has relatives who want to visit. However, he believes that is a small percentage in the overall scheme. He further believes nonresident fishing license fees should not be crafted to address their relatives. He expressed concern over commercial harvesting under a sport fish license. He said the good news is that fees go towards developing the same resource that benefits purchasers. Number 1560 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES asked how nonresident military is handled. SENATOR DONLEY said the existing military scheme remains the same. Number 1574 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN advised Senator Donley of earlier discussion on fee ratios and asked whether he believes a twenty-to-one ratio will stand muster. SENATOR DONLEY explained there is U.S. Supreme Court case law on the subject. The standard for commercial operations is between three and four times as great for nonresidents over residents; that falls under the commerce clause of the U.S. constitution, and there are many more restrictions applying to commerce between states. However, that clause does not apply to sport fish, which falls under the privileges and immunities clause and does not rise to the same level of scrutiny for discrimination between residents and nonresidents as do more crucial elements in people's lives. Senator Donley advised that the ten-to-one ratio for the nonresident annual option under this legislation has been held by the U.S. Supreme Court to be constitutional in other cases. Therefore, that is the usual standard he himself follows. [Co-Chairman Ogan returned] Number 1695 SENATOR DONLEY said in past years, there had been the argument, "We'll wait until the commercial case was done because somehow they're linked, they're related." He continued, "And we won the commercial case this year. And that was a three- or four-to-one ratio, and we prevailed in that." He said case law from other states indicates where a three- or four-to-one ratio is allowed commercially, they have allowed a ten-to-one ratio noncommercially. Number 1717 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN suggested while this would increase fees for people staying and canning salmon, for example, it would also penalize people such as Representative Barnes had mentioned. He suggested the possibility of changing the amount of processing allowed for sport-caught fish, rather than changing the license. SENATOR DONLEY replied that in working on this bill over the years, he has frequently heard that the Board of Fisheries will deal with this problem. However, as indicated in a recent newspaper article in committee packets, the board declined this year to address the issue. He said the board had looked extensively at punch cards and bag limits but had been unable to come up with a plan they like. "I was hoping they would do something," he stated. "Frankly, if the fish board would have acted, and come up with some alternative plan, I probably would have been supportive to having just an annual license available for everybody that's a nonresident in here. But since they failed to do anything along those lines, I still believe that limiting it to making people buy a series of 14- day licenses." He believes the series of 14-day licenses provides a tool to examine whether people are habitually buying those, raising a red flag to perhaps inspect what those people are doing. Number 1878 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked how anyone would know people were doing that if licenses were purchased in different locations. SENATOR DONLEY replied that he believes it can be developed as a tool. He said clearly, at the end of the first year, the pattern of purchase would be identifiable. SENATOR DONLEY said the most difficult question has been whether to have an annual nonresident license. He indicated the section on page 2, linking sport licenses to commercial ones, is an effort to coordinate with legislation introduced by Representative Austerman. If that legislation does not pass, Senator Donley would support removing the exceptions from his bill, which would make it much cleaner. Another option would be to say everyone may get a nonresident license for $150; however, that loses the tracking advantage and possible development of an enforcement tool. Number 1933 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN advised that no one from the Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection was present. He asked whether Senator Donley knew that division's position on the bill. SENATOR DONLEY responded that the division had acknowledged over the years that this is a problem, and they had run a sting operation on the Kenai River relating to this. However, they do not believe allowing a maximum of 14 days per license would be useful to them, nor do they endorse that. "I think we were all hoping the fish board would address it with some sort of bag limit or punch card, and they just haven't done it," he added. Number 1986 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE said he was not sure yet whether he supports the bill. The way the legislature is proposing to cut the budget, specifically as relates to fish and game enforcement, he wonders how that will impact continued efforts to enforce these kinds of operations. He asked whether other possibilities for getting at people marketing Alaskan fish had been looked into, such as fines or other incentives. SENATOR DONLEY replied that he believes this bill more accurately adjusts nonresident sport fishing fees to where they should be. That is the bottom line. Denying annual sport fish licenses has the extra benefit of possibly creating an enforcement or assessment tool. Although money generated by the bill cannot be used directly for enforcement, it can be used for enhancement of the fishery for sport fish projects. He stated that this money goes into a fund to be used for that. This would generate additional fees to be used for those kinds of projects. Number 2093 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), came forward to testify. The ADF&G had been discussing this bill with Senator Donley since first introduced a year or two ago. After working to narrow their differences, one major difference remains: The ADF&G wants an annual nonresident license available for purchase by any nonresident. The three categories of concern are family members coming for an extended stay; seasonal workers; and new residents moving to the state in the spring or summer, who otherwise would have to remain an entire year before being able to purchase an annual license. Therefore, the ADF&G is asking the committee to amend the bill to provide a general, annual nonresident sport fishing license for $100 to $125. Mr. Bruce advised that the price is not as big an issue as availability. MR. BRUCE agrees the proposed fee schedule is not unfair. The ADF&G further supports raising fees for long-term licenses rather than short-term ones. Number 2235 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON stated his understanding that there is a 30-day requirement for new residents. SENATOR DONLEY responded that statutes contain variable residency requirements, depending on the benefit gained by residency. For a sport fish license, there is a one-year requirement. Number 2282 DICK BISHOP, Executive Director, Alaska Outdoor Council, came forward to testify about concerns the council has with the bill. They support a general annual nonresident sport fishing license, for reasons stated by others and because U.S. citizens would feel disadvantaged by having to qualify as commercial fishermen, for example, in order to obtain an annual license in Alaska. In addition, Alaska competes with other areas of the country for visitors and sport fishermen, as well as with Canada. He believes there is a real risk in raising Alaska's fees, unless it is state policy to discourage visitors. He concluded by recommending inclusion of an annual sport fishing license generally available for nonresidents, with a fee of $100, rather than $150. Number 2368 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked what Canada's fees are. MR. BISHOP said he does not know. He does know that "they advertise like crazy" in fishing magazines. SENATOR DONLEY indicated he had some information about it. Depending on the exchange rate, Canadian fees would be a little lower than Alaska's if the legislation were to pass as it is. Number 2406 MR. BRUCE advised that the ADF&G Division of Sport Fish had looked at the fee schedule in many western states. Under Senator Donley's proposed schedule, Alaska would fall on the high side but generally within the range. The ADF&G believes that given the quality of experience in Alaska, as well as its resources, being on the high end of the range is appropriate. Number 2435 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS referred to issues relating to the Kenai River and said he would like to hear how this could be used as a tool. SENATOR DONLEY responded that at the end of each year, there would be an assessment of how many of these particular licenses were sold and how many were repeat sales. TAPE 97-39, SIDE B Number 0006 SENATOR DONLEY suggested multiple purchases would indicate how many nonresidents use the resource for the entire season or for long periods of time. He believes that would be helpful. Now, it is so cheap to buy an annual license that people staying two weeks might buy one in case they might return. Although he had heard of examples of problems, he had no hard data to determine their extent. In the future, through computers, the information could be a possible enforcement or management tool. Number 0068 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON referred to page 2 of the bill and suggested that removing all the qualifiers on lines 16 through 28 would restore the general annual sport fishing license at the rate of $150. He noted that as the bill stands, an annual license is the next increment beyond a 14-day license. He suggested possibly adding a 30-day license as well. SENATOR DONLEY said he believes in the 14-day license theory. However, if the committee restores the general annual license option, deleting lines 16 through 28 on page 2 is appropriate. He said he hates to lose the management aspect. He therefore requested that the committee also assist him in drafting intent language to call on the Board of Fisheries to revisit this issue. He suggested putting that at the front of the bill. He again expressed disappointment that the Board of Fisheries had not acted on it this year. Number 0164 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN concurred. He announced he would hold the bill over. CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked Senator Donley to work on intent language to bring before the committee at the next hearing. SENATOR DONLEY agreed to do so. Number 0188 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS commented that this is a hot issue, especially on the Kenai River. He said the problem is there are too many out-of-state fishermen there. He suggested if they are concerned about sport fishermen in Alaska, they should say so. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN said it is an issue statewide, though perhaps harder to track in Southeast Alaska. CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON said he believes Representative Williams is right. He has heard tales of case after case of canned salmon coming in from Pelican, for example. He does not believe it is an isolated problem. He suggested the key is getting information. He said we do not want nonresidents coming up here, staying and literally going into a commercial business. He believes this is on the right track. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN recalled an instance where the Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection became aware of a restaurant in Germany selling salmon that could only have been caught with a rod and reel, under a sport license. [SB 7 was held over]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|