Legislature(1999 - 2000)
03/29/2000 01:40 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 267 - MANAGEMENT OF GAME CO-CHAIR HUDSON announced that the first order of business was CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 267(FIN), "An Act relating to management of game." Number 0176 SENATOR PETE KELLY, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of SB 267, indicated the issue is the pressing matter of predator control in Alaska; more specifically, it is wolf control. He explained that a number of circumstances have occurred in the state, resulting in a situation where the state is no longer able to manage many of its renewable natural resources. He referred to the 1996 ballot initiative; he said the voters could not have foreseen that as a result of that vote, people in rural Alaska would have their dogs taken off of their front porches and eaten by wolves. Nor could they have foreseen mothers in rural Alaska being afraid for their children who were coming and going from school, because the wolves were no longer confining themselves to the area outside of the village. Nor could they have foreseen that people in rural Alaska would be stalked by wolves, which are becoming more bold. The wolves have eaten the resources, which rural Alaskans depend upon, to the point where they are cannibalizing themselves. He stressed that there is great fear among rural Alaskans that one of their children is going to be killed. SENATOR KELLY further stated that the reason he brought forth this legislation is that he thought reasonable people could agree that the 1996 initiative was written in such a way that it prohibited the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) from carrying out its duties to manage for a sustained yield, if not to manage for public safety in this case. He said that he thought by changing the language of that initiative, ADF&G could do its job. He said he thought the department was sincerely unable to do its job because of that initiative, yet the Administration has no intention of doing any lethal wolf control. He indicated he had gone to McGrath and had come back with even greater zeal, because those people in rural Alaska are truly afraid. He pointed out that it has become a nutritional issue. He explained that in McGrath there is a [moose] herd that was at a traditional high of somewhere around 5,000; however, that herd was at around 1,400 when the most recent count was done. After this past winter, the people in McGrath believe that the herd may even be below 1,000. SENATOR KELLY said the most critical "crash" in the population has been under this Administration, because of Governor [Knowles'] internal policy not to do lethal predator control. This bill says, "All right, Governor, ... you've made it very clear, no matter what the circumstances are, you're not [going to] do it." He pointed out that the people need to be able to do this on their own if the Administration simply won't do it. The Board of Game needs to identify areas for predator control and allow the hunters to do it. He explained, "This statute, this bill, does not roll back the initiative, because it so confines an area where this statute will actually be enacted." SENATOR KELLY urged the committee to pass the legislation, vote for it on the floor, and vote for a veto override. He stressed that initiatives have a two-year lifespan for a reason - in case they don't work. He concluded: That initiative does not work, and whereas I am completely willing to refrain from rolling back that initiative completely, we do have to tweak it, because we have to do something before some kid in rural Alaska dies; and the blood will not be on the hands of this committee if that happens. Number 0808 REPRESENTATIVE RAMONA BARNES made a motion to adopt Amendment 1, which read: Page 1, line 6, following "population": Insert "by establishing a wolf control program" REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE JOULE requested confirmation that the amendment will only apply when a problem has been identified. REPRESENTATIVE BARNES replied, "That's correct." SENATOR KELLY noted that in the current bill version, it says "intensive management". The amendment takes it one step further by establishing a wolf control program by the Board of Game. CO-CHAIR HUDSON asked if there was any objection to the adoption of the amendment. There being no objection, Amendment 1 was adopted. REPRESENTATIVE BARNES said: There is a river out of Big Delta, and I don't recall the name. Recently my two sons were up there and came back and told me ... that in the area where they were at, that the wolves were so heavy that they had encircled the moose, and that there were so many of them that there was just this huge pack - a circle - and that there were animals [lying] slaughtered all over the place, that they had even killed a wolverine. ... Have you ever heard of wolves killing a wolverine? SENATOR KELLY responded: No, I haven't, but it is an interesting thing that you say, because in the incident where Mr. and Ms. Fleagle had their two dogs taken off their porch, Mike [Mr. Fleagle] - he's a Board of Game member - trailed them out this slough, where they killed the larger dog, and then followed the pack. He was going to go try and get the pack. ... They'd just killed two dogs and eaten them, and then on the way, they'd killed another wolf and eaten him. They're cannibalizing now, because they don't do management. They just eat until there's nothing left. Now, the area that your talking about is probably the Clearwater. I know there's a good-sized pack there. SENATOR KELLY, in response to a restatement by Representative Barnes, continued: You bring up a point that I think is interesting, because we talk about the management of the issue and how we should be allowing our department to manage for abundance. But we're going to have more than just a management issue on our hands. We're going to have a sociological problem on our hands, because in my area, where you have 85,000 people, you have the Tanana Flats area and Unit 13, where both Anchorage and Fairbanks hunt out of a lot. A lot of people ... have a boat and maybe they're not tremendously serious, but they want a chance of getting a moose; they'll go to those areas or over to Unit 13 - you have a higher level of success. As the wolf eat those moose and caribou, they're going to be pushed further and further out into rural Alaska, and then we're going to have competing needs between humans, and we don't want that. If we just manage reasonably, like our constitution calls us to do, we can avoid some of these problems, but I see that as being the next problem, and it will be wrapped up into other debates that I don't want to get into now. But you're going to have people from urban Alaska saying, "The areas where we used to hunt the moose have been fed to the wolves, so we're going further and further up river." Number 1202 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN HARRIS wondered if SB 267 will force the Governor's hand - if it is passed by the legislature and if it in fact overrides the Governor's veto - to implement a wolf control management plan. SENATOR KELLY replied: It will take it out of his hands, somewhat, in the areas where the board has declared an area for predator control. The reason it will take it out of his hands is it'll be using one of the acceptable methods and means, which, by the way, you can use for deer; I just learned before this meeting that it is okay in the state of Alaska to land and shoot deer on the same day, but you can't land and shoot wolves. So, ... that method that we can use for deer you can now use for wolves in areas where the Board of Game has said, for predator control. The only thing you have to have is a hunting or trapping license; therefore, the department is removed from it. Senator Bert Sharp started years ago trying to get the department - and it wasn't just this governor, don't get me wrong, it's been other people too - trying to get the department to do reasonable management when it comes to predator control. He tried a number of different bills; most of them failed ... because we ultimately come to a separation-of-powers issue. Senator Sharp's bills, and some of mine that I've put in, in years past, have come to -- the statute has basically said, "Thou shalt implement predator control." Well, essentially what you're telling the commissioner to do is, "Because of this statute, you have to disobey your boss." So if the governor says, "Don't you dare do predator control," but the statute says that the legislature says you do, we can't make him do that. That's where our power ends. I've just thought about it long and hard and came up with the idea that if we put it into the hands of the people who actually live in McGrath or live in the area, if they just had [a] hunting license or a trapper's license, they could go out and implement this program without the department there. Number 1358 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES said, "The Senator said something that I find most interesting." She responded: That I certainly do not agree with, and so, wherefore, I would not wish the record to stand unchallenged, by at least me. When the legislature establishes a policy or places a law on the book, it is the legislature that establishes the policy. We're the ones under the constitution that are deemed managers of the fish and wildlife on a sustained yield principle, and that's not a governor's function. We, in fact, delegate a portion of our responsibilities to the Board of [Fisheries] and to the Board of Game. We don't delegate all of it. We don't delegate the powers to make laws. We don't delegate the power to pass budgets. We delegate specific ... powers, and I believe, unlike you, that it is incumbent upon that board - makes no difference what the governor says - as the board, that we're delegating a specific amount of our powers to manage, in our stead, the fish and wildlife, according to the constitution, on a sustained yield principle. If we can't do that, then they need to come and resign, because it is not up to the governor to establish policy. It is up to the Administration to carry out the policy established by the legislative branch. And for someone to say differently, I have to have them show me in the constitution where it says that somebody else has that power. Number 1467 CO-CHAIR HUDSON indicated he has heard Representative Barnes make that point several times. He said he agrees with her, but it is an argument for another day. Number 1519 JOEL BENNETT, Representative, Defenders of Wildlife, came before the committee to testify. A 32-year state resident and active hunter, he told members he'd served on the Board of Game for 13.5 years under four different administrations, and has been involved with this issue for nearly every year that a form of wolf management came before the board. MR. BENNETT informed members that he thinks [Amendment 1] is a good modification of the bill. He is still troubled, however, by the sponsor's strong statement indicating he wishes to preserve the spirit of the initiative and does not wish to authorize an unsportsmanlike method of hunting, which land-and-shoot is universally acknowledge to be. He said he is sorry that the amendment does not further tie the practice of land-and-shoot to some official relationship with the ADF&G. Without that relationship, there is an open-ended method of hunting by anyone who holds a hunting and trapping license, which cannot be controlled effectively by the state. MR. BENNETT noted that in years past there have been some serious abuses of game regulations in Alaska that revolve around land- and-shoot hunting; an example is the Jack Frost case in Anchorage. This issue has also gone way beyond landing and shooting wolves; it has gone to landing and shooting fox and geese. It has also gone to herding animals with planes, using radio communications, and shooting animals for bait and then returning to shoot the bears for fur that came to feed on the bait. He noted that cases in the Bethel area and the Arctic have produced an atmosphere such that the board has had to address the legality, acceptability and advisability of land-and-shoot hunting, which played prominently in the 1996 initiative. One could say that the key provision of the initiative was to get at the past abuses, he added. MR. BENNETT further stated, in reference to the amendment and the bill, that unless there is a requirement for a relationship between the airplane hunters and ADF&G, the legislature will be on record as endorsing an unsportsmanlike method of hunting - a method of hunting that no sport group established in this country believes is a fair chase. This is not talking about wolf control, although that is the expressed purpose; this is talking about authorizing regular hunters who have hunting and trapping licenses. He is sympathetic to problems in the Bush, where he has worked and traveled extensively. He knows that there are, and always will be, hardships in the Bush; however, those can be addressed without authorizing a practice that is condemned by so many people. MR. BENNETT reported that he had flown to McGrath two weeks ago to look over the situation. He spent seven hours flying over Game Management Unit 19D and looking at the moose habitat. He won't go into what he believes to be low-density moose habitat, he said. However, he doesn't think that country can support 4,000 to 6,000 moose, as has been indicated, although he thinks it can support more than the actual number of moose present - 1,000 to 2,000. His conclusion is based upon the experts that he was with, Mr. Bennett noted, not upon his own opinion. He further stated that the inflammatory suggestion that wolves are at people's doorsteps is uncalled for. There isn't a documented case of a non-rabid wolf attacking a human being, although many people are killed by domestic dogs in rural Alaska every year. The wolves have a "pretty darn good" record for human safety, he concluded. Number 1937 REPRESENTATIVE MARY KAPSNER asked Mr. Bennett to expound on some alternatives. MR. BENNETT replied that for McGrath and other areas which have a limited number of people, a creative solution would be to transport individuals to an area where there are caribou to take the necessary amount of meat needed. Wolf control, as everybody knows, is a serious business that requires weighing the advantages against the costs. In the event of a true emergency in a village situation, he doesn't think that anybody would oppose a state wolf control effort. Number 2018 CO-CHAIR HUDSON commented that in listening to individuals from McGrath at a recent joint meeting, he was moved by their sincere fear of losing their domestic animals. It seems that when a population is in dire need, there has to be some management flexibility for those involved in predator populations to respond, yet the entire Board of Game feels that their hands are tied. This bill doesn't totally amend the initiative, he concluded; it authorizes ADF&G to identify and participate in land-and-shoot as a solution to problems like those in McGrath. Number 2156 REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER remarked that subsistence is not welfare or a handout. The men in her family felt proud about shooting a moose, bringing it back home, and letting the women take care of it. She is not comfortable with the thought of giving her younger brother a free ride to get a caribou as a handout, as Mr. Bennett has suggested. It is similar to how ADF&G addressed the fish disaster a couple of years ago in Western Alaska; in that, it was a thoughtful and a well-intended gesture, but they handed out Yukon salmon, which is the same as the government handing out bulk cheese. Although it may be an acceptable alternative for Mr. Bennett, it is not an acceptable alternative for her. Number 2230 MR. BENNETT stated that is just one possible solution. In the case of McGrath, a far more successful solution would be to take 30 wolves and transplant them into the Koyukuk Mountains where there aren't any villages. That would mean consigning them to death from other wolves, but it would be a more feasible solution financially than a department-conducted program, which can cost more than a thousand dollars per wolf. Furthermore, believing that these land-and-shoot wolf hunters are going to stay in one area shows a lot of faith, for that isn't what they have done in years past. They fly to where it is easiest to get the wolves. They don't necessarily stay within the borders of the control program, and there is no way for the department to know. Number 2294 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE asked Mr. Bennett whether there is anything "on the books" that prohibits the ability to transplant animals; if not, why hasn't something like that been done before so that there isn't a problem? MR. BENNETT replied there is a wolf control program being conducted now in the Fortymile area, which involves transplanting wolves around the Interior, parts of the subarctic, and even as far as Kenai. The program is oriented around sterilization and caribou, not moose, which is why ADF&G feels that a sterilization program wouldn't be as appropriate. Mr. Bennett further stated that a transplant program has merit and wouldn't involve the controversy associated with the reauthorization of a land-and- shoot program for wolves. Number 2353 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES commented that from everything she has seen and heard, there is a serious wolf problem in the state. There have been two occasions in the district that she represents where wolves have been spotted on Campbell Airstrip Road, in the heart of Anchorage. It seems that they are losing their fear. She remembers the wolf that was transplanted to Kenai; although she had sympathy for that wolf, she doesn't have a lot of sympathy for the wolves that are killing people's dogs. Representative Barnes said she was astounded to hear Mr. Bennett indicate that people could be transported to another area to get food for their tables. She stated: We, as human beings, have to recognize that all creatures have a place, but when those creatures - like the wolves in this state - are getting to be overabundant, we've got a problem. And everybody knows I don't have Muffin anymore, but if I had Muffin and one came a little further down Campbell Airstrip Road and decided to have her for dinner, I wouldn't have to ask anybody about killing that wolf, because I would in a heartbeat. I think we've got a problem. I think we have to address the problem. We've got a serious problem because I have heard the parents now out in McGrath that are walking their kids back and forth to school. My sons didn't make up the fact that [in] this huge area up in the Delta area ... there was animals, blood everywhere, even a wolverine killed. That tells you that we're getting too many wolves. I don't think we can just pick them up and transplant them, because [they will] just keep multiplying. Number 2491 REPRESENTATIVE CARL MORGAN said he doesn't support those who land and kill foxes, for it is against the law. But in relation to wolves, it is not an isolated case. The wolves are coming into town. For example, in a village last summer eight dogs were eaten in a matter of weeks, which also indicates that [the wolves] aren't afraid of man. He wishes that the state could transplant all the wolves to New York, for example, where they want them, but that isn't going to happen. The bill is the most cost-effective means, even though there will be abuse because somebody will always break the law. Number 2593 REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER noted that there are a lot of wolves in the Nushagak region as well, and villages surrounding Dillingham have had a high rate of wolves eating dogs. Number 2608 REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COWDERY asked Mr. Bennett how many incidents of a wolf's attacking a person it would take for him to change his mind on this issue. MR. BENNETT replied that of course there is a potential for animals to injure humans, but that is more true for bears than wolves. There is a law that allows a person to shoot an animal to defend his or her life and property. That is what is used to take care of bears that come into a village or town, but bears aren't killed on a large scale because of that. It is a fact of life in Alaska. He noted that there are accounts of rabid wolves attacking people in India; by and large, however, it is not a problem with a healthy wolf. MR. BENNETT responded to a comment by Representative Morgan, saying there are those in Alaska who believe that land-and-shoot cannot be practiced legally, given how the pilot positions the animal into a place where the plane can land so that the pilot can take an effective shot. It is against the federal Airborne Hunting Act to use a plane in that way. Number 2732 REPRESENTATIVE MORGAN wondered how those in Arizona can shoot from a plane, given that there is a federal law. Number 2810 DICK BISHOP, Vice President, Alaska Outdoor Council (AOC), informed members that the AOC strongly supports the bill and the amendment, which provide a means of dealing with the problem in the proper context. The Board of Game has found that there is a management problem, and the data has been collected. The solution is control. As a former ADF&G biologist, he can attest that the problem will not self-correct within a reasonable amount of time. He wants to make it clear that the AOC supports the legislation as a complement to a management program that addresses a serious imbalance between predator and prey, for it is pretty clear that after the events of this winter, there is only stonewalling by the Administration. TAPE 00-28, SIDE A Number 0001 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner, Alaska Department of Fish & Game, came before the committee to testify. He noted that in addition to the issue of same-day- airborne land-and-shoot methods for wolves, which the bill directly addresses, the bill is also a tool for predator control. Acknowledging the widespread concern regarding the appropriateness and the opportunity for abuse, Mr. Bruce specified, "The department is concerned about this because, to the extent that the non-hunting public views a hunting practice negatively, ... we believe it damages the public support for hunting and could have some negative consequences for hunting opportunities in the future." MR. BRUCE noted that same-day-airborne land-and-shoot is more effective in certain terrain than in others. The Board of Game and the department have discussed this issue in relation to McGrath, where the area of concern is heavily wooded; the department has determined that this method will not be effective tool - in the particular area in which it is suggested as being the most necessary - for reducing the wolf population and thereby, hopefully, increasing the moose population. Therefore, he indicated, ADF&G would be back [before the legislature] in the future looking at another tool to accomplish this. CO-CHAIR HUDSON asked how far in the future. MR. BRUCE estimated two or three years. SENATOR KELLY responded that Mr. Bruce is assuming that the department will not utilize any means to do predator control there. Senator Kelly said: I've been told by many biologists that if the department would go in there and use the means that they have available to them, which is either aerial wolf control or land-and-shoot, and they could bring the wolf population down significantly, then the people of McGrath could use the land-and-shoot to maintain the [wolf] population at an acceptable level and bring that moose herd back up. So, what you said assumes the department will do nothing and, frankly, that's why we're here, because the department has done nothing. Number 0610 MR. BRUCE noted that the amendment narrows the scope of the bill, which addresses more than merely the McGrath area. He believes that the Board of Game has identified four areas in regulation in which there are predator control programs in place. He recalled that Nelchina had been added to the list. MR. BRUCE expressed concern in regard to the Fortymile [caribou] herd. Currently, there is an experimental control program for nonlethal control, involving sterilization of the alpha pair in a number of packs and transplanting the young wolves out of that area. The hope is that the alpha pairs would maintain their territory, which seems to be the case, thereby stabilizing the wolf population and reducing predation so that the caribou population would increase. This bill would authorize land-and- shoot methods in the area, and it is possible that those alpha pairs that have been sterilized will be taken. If that is the case, then non-sterilized pairs will replace them, and the wolf population will begin to reproduce again; that entire program will be undermined. Perhaps that is something that [the committee] may want to address regarding that one area, Mr. Bruce concluded. In response to Co-Chair Hudson, Mr. Bruce said he believes that both the male and female are sterilized. Number 0748 DAVID HAEG testified via teleconference from Kenai. He informed the committee that he is a big-game guide who has operated 100 miles southeast of McGrath for the past 14 years; he employees ten other Alaskan residents during the hunting season. Mr. Haeg voiced strong support of SB 267, which he believes would help curb a large and increasing wolf predation problem in Interior Alaska. In Unit 19, the McGrath area, Mr. Haeg feels this problem has reached epidemic proportions. If no immediate action is taken, he said, fish and game biologists state that it may be decades before there is a healthy and huntable moose population in the area. Such a situation would put guides out of business and would be catastrophic for rural residents who depend on moose to survive. MR. HAEG pointed out that wolf populations have remained healthy through various control methods utilized in the past; those include poisoning, shooting from helicopters, killing of pups while in the den, and shooting from airborne airplanes. Landing and shooting is one of the least effective methods and will never threaten the species, although it may be enough to reverse the exploding population. He commented that this problem arose only after numerous years in which there was no effective wolf control. MR. HAEG said, "I think it obvious that when we had land-and- shoot of wolves, we had a healthy balance. Now that we don't, look at the problem we have created." He continued by saying that he did not advocate killing all wolves, but he did advocate keeping the wolf [population] in check in order to continue to have healthy game populations. If the wolf species were being decimated to extinction when land-and-shoot was in place, why are there now so many wolves? Mr. Haeg added that land-and-shoot is not sporting but is a method of control. He pointed out that in several units land-and-shoot hunting of caribou occurs, as is the case, he believes, with deer in most of Alaska. Number 0964 ROD ARNO testified via teleconference from the Mat-Su Valley. He informed the committee that he has been working as a wilderness guide - or for one - for the past 35 years. He further noted that he has been publicly working for the last ten years in order to get "anti-hunters" to understand what is going on. Mr. Arno stated his support for passage of SB 267, noting that it was fine as amended. He indicated that its passage is a job for the legislature in order to place control back with the legislature in order that "we can have our constitutional mandate under Article VIII, Section 4, implemented." Mr. Arno expressed amazement regarding how people do not have a problem with fish management for abundance. He said as long as Alaska has a governor who his headed on a "new era" of game management, broad public support will not be achieved. MR. ARNO turned to the issue of where predator control could be implemented. He believes that this legislation will help guarantee that the state does [get] to choose implement predator control on state lands. He noted that the federal subsistence board had banned land-and-shoot methods in April 1994. At that time, seven of the ten regional councils supported the ban; that represents about 60 percent of the state, and therefore he doubts whether land-and-shoot would ever be possible in the future. However, he hopes that Native lands can be managed for abundance, which he believes many are trying to achieve. Number 1198 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a motion to move CSSB 267(FIN), as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note; she asked unanimous consent. There being no objection, it was so ordered and HCS CSSB 267(RES) was moved from the House Resources Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|