Legislature(2015 - 2016)BARNES 124

03/21/2016 01:00 PM RESOURCES

Note: the audio and video recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as
Download Video part 1. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+= HB 247 TAX;CREDITS;INTEREST;REFUNDS;O & G TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
*+ HB 286 FISH & GAME: OFFENSES;LICENSES;PENALTIES TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
        HB 286-FISH & GAME: OFFENSES;LICENSES;PENALTIES                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:09:57 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR TALERICO  announced that the  next order of  business is                                                               
HOUSE BILL NO.  286, "An Act relating to  sport fishing, hunting,                                                               
or  trapping licenses,  tags, or  permits; relating  to penalties                                                               
for  certain   sport  fishing,  hunting,  and   trapping  license                                                               
violations;  relating to  restrictions on  the issuance  of sport                                                               
fishing, hunting, and trapping  licenses; creating violations and                                                               
amending  fines  and  restitution   for  certain  fish  and  game                                                               
offenses;  relating to  commercial  fishing violations;  allowing                                                               
lost  federal  matching  funds  from  the  Pittman  -  Robertson,                                                               
Dingell - Johnson/Wallop  - Breaux programs to be  included in an                                                               
order of  restitution; adding a definition  of 'electronic form';                                                               
amending Rule  5(a)(4), Alaska Rules of  Minor Offense Procedure;                                                               
and providing for an effective date."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
KEVIN BROOKS,  Deputy Commissioner,  Office of  the Commissioner,                                                               
Alaska Department  of Fish &  Game (ADF&G), introduced HB  286 on                                                               
behalf of  the governor.   He said the  bill relates to  fish and                                                               
game  offenses, licenses,  and penalties,  and  was developed  in                                                               
collaboration with the Department of  Public Safety (DPS) and the                                                               
Department of  Law (DOL).   He advised  the committee  that Major                                                               
Bernard Chastain will present the details of the bill.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:11:52 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR  BERNARD  CHASTAIN,  Deputy Director,  Division  of  Alaska                                                               
Wildlife Troopers, Department of  Public Safety (DPS), provided a                                                               
sectional  analysis  of  HB  286   on  behalf  of  the  governor.                                                               
Referring to  Section 1, he  explained that under AS  16.05.330 a                                                               
person who  is engaged in  activities listed in  paragraphs (1-5)                                                               
must have  in their actual  possession a license, tag,  or permit                                                               
to legally  engage in  that activity.   Section 1  reorders these                                                               
activities  into  two  separate  categories,  with  (1)  and  (2)                                                               
considered general  activities and  (3), (4), and  (5) considered                                                               
commercial  activities.    The purpose  for  this  reordering  is                                                               
contained in Section 3 of the bill.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN  explained that Section  2 amends  AS 16.05.330(d)                                                               
to make it unlawful for a  person to purchase a license in Alaska                                                               
or another state if their license  to hunt, fish or trap has been                                                               
revoked or suspended in Alaska  or another state.  Currently, the                                                               
statute  directs  that if  a  person's  license is  suspended  or                                                               
revoked, the  person is prohibited  from purchasing or  using the                                                               
privileges   of  that   license  only   in  another   state,  and                                                               
surprisingly  it does  not include  the  state of  Alaska.   This                                                               
change will align that statute with the intent of the law.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN  said Section 3  makes it an  official correctable                                                               
citation  when a  person  does not  have  his/her sport  fishing,                                                               
hunting, or trapping license in  possession while engaged in that                                                               
activity.    Wildlife  troopers  realize  that  people  sometimes                                                               
forget their licenses at home,  in their car, or other locations.                                                               
For  many  years  the wildlife  troopers  have  given  unofficial                                                               
correctable citations  to most  people in  this situation.   This                                                               
section will  give the  wildlife troopers the  ability to  cite a                                                               
person  for  not  having  his/her   sport  fishing,  hunting,  or                                                               
trapping license in possession and  giving the person a period of                                                               
30  days to  bring his/her  license to  any Department  of Public                                                               
Safety office  to have it  signed off as a  correctable citation.                                                               
Once signed off the citation is  dismissed.  If this provision is                                                               
passed it will be very  similar to correctable citations used for                                                               
headlight  requirements, proof  of motor  vehicle insurance,  and                                                               
others.    This  section  ensures that  people  engaging  in  the                                                               
activity of sport  fishing, hunting, and trapping  have a license                                                               
and  it allows  for some  leeway for  forgetting that  license at                                                               
home.   Section 3 does not  include activities (3), (4),  and (5)                                                               
because these  are commercial activities  and the belief  is that                                                               
commercial activities have a higher  burden to maintain licensure                                                               
than does the general citizen.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:14:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR  CHASTAIN specified  that Section  4 removes  a correctable                                                               
citation from  AS 16.05.330(f)  in the  penalties portion  of the                                                               
statute.  Additionally  Section 4 aligns other areas  of Title 16                                                               
and appropriately makes the crimes listed class A misdemeanors.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR   CHASTAIN  advised   that  Section   5  creates   two  new                                                               
subsections [to  AS 16.05.430].   New subsection  (c) establishes                                                               
that a person may be charged  with the violation offense if there                                                               
is  no culpable  mental state  established and  also maintains  a                                                               
misdemeanor offense  for more serious  cases in this area  of law                                                               
under subsection (a).  He  said subsection (d) provides the court                                                               
with the  ability to impose  additional restitution to  the state                                                               
equal  to the  amount of  lost  federal matching  funds from  the                                                               
wildlife  and   sport  fish  restoration  program,   the  Pitman-                                                               
Robertson,   Dingell-Johnson/Wallop-Breaux  programs,   when  the                                                               
state  is defrauded  by a  defendant  who does  not purchase  the                                                               
appropriate license  or tag or  claims residency when  the person                                                               
is not a resident.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN  related that  Section 6 of  HB 286  increases the                                                               
strict  liability commercial  fishing fines  under AS  16.05.722.                                                               
This [statute] was  enacted in 1988 and has  gone unchanged since                                                               
that time,  and the  fines currently in  place are  inadequate to                                                               
deter commercial fishing crime.   The fine increase will serve as                                                               
both a  deterrent and  a tool for  Alaska's wildlife  troopers to                                                               
effectively enforce  the state's  most important  fisheries worth                                                               
billions of dollars to the state.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
2:16:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON  said he  does not have  an issue  with the                                                               
amount [of the  proposed fines], but would like to  know what the                                                               
thought process  was behind coming  up with the  proposed amounts                                                               
of $6,000, $12,000, and $15,000.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN  replied that the  thought process has to  do with                                                               
inflation rate.   The 1988  fine of $3,000 equals  almost exactly                                                               
$6,000 in today's dollar.   Paragraph (3), which goes from $9,000                                                               
to $15,000, was  a paragraph added in 1995 and  so that $9,000 is                                                               
equal to about $15,000 in 2016 dollars.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN continued  his review of Section  6, explaining it                                                               
also  ensures  that  commercial   fishermen  can  participate  in                                                               
fisheries by deterring illegal fishing that harms the industry.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR  CHASTAIN said  Section  7 creates  a  new subsection  that                                                               
requires  a  court  to transmit  commercial  convictions  to  the                                                               
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC).                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON requested further  explanation of Section 6                                                               
in  regard   to  Major  Chastain's   statement  that   it  allows                                                               
commercial fishermen to participate.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN  responded that it  has to do with  the deterrence                                                               
factor in  commercial fishing.   The deterrence in  violations is                                                               
important so the fishing industry can maintain its viability.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:18:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN  explained that Section  8 removes a  penalty from                                                               
[AS 16.05.782(a)],  which cleans up  the subsection and  makes it                                                               
clearer as to what the penalty actually is.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON inquired what  the penalty becomes if it                                                               
is not a class A misdemeanor.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR  CHASTAIN answered  that the  remaining subsections  [of AS                                                               
16.05.782]  deal with  making  two classes  of  violations.   One                                                               
subsection will remain  a class A misdemeanor  if culpability can                                                               
be  proved.    If  culpability  cannot be  proved  it  becomes  a                                                               
violation offense and that can be found in Sections 9 and 10.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  JOSEPHSON  understood   the  subsequent  sections                                                               
reference back to the earlier sections  to say that these are all                                                               
fines or violations rather than something else.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN  replied that it  sets two separate  categories of                                                               
crime.   If culpability  can be  proved, it  maintains a  Class A                                                               
misdemeanor and  it allows for flexibility  if culpability cannot                                                               
be  proved.   He  said  the subsequent  crimes  that  he will  be                                                               
reviewing also add  a separate section for  creating a violation,                                                               
which is a lesser offense.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  JOSEPHSON  understood  that under  Title  16  and                                                               
Title 5 of the Alaska  Administrative Code (AAC) there are strict                                                               
liability  offenses in  wildlife cases.   He  asked whether  this                                                               
gets rid of strict liability.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN  responded that  all of those  are still  in place                                                               
and still  available to charge.   Title  16 statutes do  not have                                                               
the ability  to charge as  strict liability, so  essentially that                                                               
is created by this bill.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:20:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON observed  that the  language in  Section 7                                                               
states:  "(d) The court  shall transmit notice of all convictions                                                               
under  this  section to  the  Alaska  Commercial Fisheries  Entry                                                               
Commission."  He requested  clarification regarding the executive                                                               
order   transferring   the   administrative  functions   of   the                                                               
Commercial Fisheries  Entry Commission  (CFEC) to  the Department                                                               
of  Fish &  Game (ADF&G),  which will  be issuing  licenses.   He                                                               
suggested  that  either the  definition  be  expanded to  include                                                               
ADF&G or to change it.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR. BROOKS answered  that the administrative order  would have no                                                               
impact  on  this  provision  in  statute,  this  section  is  not                                                               
implicated  by  the  administrative  order.   He  explained  that                                                               
someone  with a  commercial  fishing violation  gets points  like                                                               
what is  done with a  driver's license.   The reporting  of those                                                               
points would  still go  to the  CFEC and  the department  and the                                                               
commission would communicate on whether to issue a permit.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:22:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN  stated that Section 9  relates to Section 8.   It                                                               
removes an unnecessary reference to subsection (a) in Section 8.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR  CHASTAIN  specified  that   Sections  10-15,  in  general,                                                               
provide  consistency   across  the  board  and   create  class  A                                                               
misdemeanors   for  sections   that   the   troopers  can   prove                                                               
culpability, and violations for  sections that were not existence                                                               
prior to this bill.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN  noted that Section  16 increases  the restitution                                                               
amounts  [under  AS  16.05.925]  by  50  percent  that  a  person                                                               
convicted  of unlawfully  taking big  game  may have  to pay  the                                                               
state  if  the  court  chooses  to  implement  this  restitution.                                                               
Alaska's game  belongs to  every person  collectively.   When big                                                               
game animals  are unlawfully taken  it defrauds the state  of the                                                               
value of the animals to its  citizens.  This value varies greatly                                                               
depending upon the species of  animal, the locations of the take,                                                               
the  social  value of  the  animal,  the  economic value  of  the                                                               
animal, and  the food source  value to  the people of  the state.                                                               
These restitution values  may be imposed by a judge  if the judge                                                               
thinks the case warrants applying  restitution.  In most cases it                                                               
does not make the state whole for  the loss of the animal, but it                                                               
pays the  state back for the  illegal take and adds  a deterrence                                                               
value to  the illegal  take.   For example,  several years  ago a                                                               
very large  Dall sheep was  illegally shot on the  Seward Highway                                                               
south of  Anchorage.   This area  is closed  to hunting  for Dall                                                               
sheep.  That  animal was worth an unknown amount  of money to the                                                               
state in  tourism; many thousands  of people took photos  of this                                                               
sheep.   There are many examples  like this every year  where the                                                               
value  of  the  illegally  taken  resource  may  never  be  fully                                                               
recovered to the state.  He  explained that the proposed new fine                                                               
amounts in Section  16 were determined in the same  manner as was                                                               
done for Section  6.  [The statute] in Section  16 was enacted in                                                               
1996 and those dollars were applied to 2016 dollars.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN, regarding  Section 17, pointed out  that there is                                                               
a drafting  error on  page 5,  line 17.   Rather than  stating AS                                                               
16.05.925, this line  should state AS 16.05.901.   [Section 17 is                                                               
related  to Section  16 -  it provides  the additional  option of                                                               
charging a person with a violation offense when appropriate.]                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:25:20 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN said  Section 18 adds a  definition of "electronic                                                               
form."  He requested Mr. Brooks to elaborate.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BROOKS  said  this  proposal would  add  the  definition  of                                                               
"electronic form"  so that a  person can display  his/her fishing                                                               
or hunting  license on something  like a smart phone,  similar to                                                               
what can now  be done with insurance.  It  would provide one more                                                               
convenience to  the licensing  public - a  person not  having the                                                               
license in paper form could display it on an electronic device.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE OLSON  inquired whether  that would also  apply to                                                               
the lifetime licenses.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR. BROOKS answered  no, the identification card  for a permanent                                                               
license would still be required.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON  noted that oftentimes on  fishing licenses                                                               
there are  stamps or stickers or  a reporting amount on  the back                                                               
of the  actual physical  license.  He  asked whether  those would                                                               
still need to be [provided in  paper form] or would be allowed in                                                               
electronic form.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. BROOKS  replied that when  a person now buys  his/her license                                                               
electronically a king salmon stamp is  a number, so that would be                                                               
displayed on a  mobile device.  The licensee would  still have to                                                               
get a harvest  record.  Currently for  a permanent identification                                                               
card, if there  is a harvest requirement the  cardholder must get                                                               
a separate  document from ADF&G  and record that harvest,  and it                                                               
is envisioned that that will continue the same way.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:27:18 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TARR  inquired about  the definition  of "culpable                                                               
mental state" and where that definition can be found.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
AARON PETERSON, Assistant Attorney  General Fish and Game, Office                                                               
of  Special  Prosecutions,   Criminal  Division,  responded  that                                                               
generally the culpable  mental states are set out  under Title 12                                                               
and  that  is reckless  conduct  and  knowing its  circumstances.                                                               
Section 17  does not  lay out  a specific  mental state  for this                                                               
offense  and therefore  it  would revert  to  the general  mental                                                               
state requirements  set out  in Title 12.   It is  a term  of art                                                               
used, it does not mean that  a defendant has the capability to do                                                               
it,  it  means  that  in  this instance  the  defendant  had  the                                                               
required mental  state that would make  him/her criminally liable                                                               
for the offense.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TARR  said she was thinking  about instances where                                                               
a  person is  intoxicated but  otherwise capable.   She  surmised                                                               
that  because of  the way  this is  defined the  person would  be                                                               
covered under that definition.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. PETERSON answered  yes, as with driving  under the influence,                                                               
there  would be  a very  good chance  that an  intoxicated person                                                               
violating this law would still be criminally liable.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:30:34 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON  observed that the  last line on  page 1                                                               
of  the governor's  transmittal letter  states, "Currently,  if a                                                               
person  violates certain  fish and  game laws,  they can  only be                                                               
charged  with a  criminal offense."    He recalled  that when  he                                                               
prosecuted these, often  the same act could have  been charged by                                                               
the fish  and game officer as  either a class A  misdemeanor or a                                                               
violation and  generally the sentence would  be suspended anyway,                                                               
but there  would be a change  from perhaps a fine  of over $1,000                                                               
to  a fine  of  $300.   He  asked whether  the  statement in  the                                                               
transmittal letter  is correct that  under current law  these can                                                               
only be charged criminally.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. PETERSON  replied that  any time  there is  the corresponding                                                               
violation  in  the Alaska  Administrative  Code  (AAC) there  are                                                               
several ways that  that can be charged.   It can be  charged as a                                                               
violation  and oftentimes  it  can be  charged  as a  misdemeanor                                                               
depending on  exactly where  it falls under  the AAC  because the                                                               
enacting statute  will have  different penalty  ranges, different                                                               
charging  ranges,  for different  parts  of  the code.    Certain                                                               
things in Title  16 can only be charged as  a misdemeanor because                                                               
they  do not  have  a  corresponding regulation  in  place.   The                                                               
attempt here with HB 286 is  to allow for that flexibility, allow                                                               
for the prosecutor  or DPS in the field to  charge as a violation                                                               
where appropriate.   For  the offenses  included in  this section                                                               
there is not currently that flexibility.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:32:48 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN returned to his  sectional analysis.  He explained                                                               
that  Sections  19-26  do  the   same  things  mentioned  by  Mr.                                                               
Peterson.   They generally standardize penalties  in the statutes                                                               
listed by  providing an  additional option  of charging  a person                                                               
with  a  violation  offense when  appropriate.    These  sections                                                               
maintain the  option of charging  a person with a  misdemeanor if                                                               
the crime  is more serious.   He pointed out a  drafting error in                                                               
Section 23,  page 6,  line 9,  noting that  this line  states "AS                                                               
16.10.090" but should state "AS 16.10.110".                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR  CHASTAIN related  that Section  27  amends the  uncodified                                                               
rules of the court of Alaska to  make it clear that the court has                                                               
the authority to dismiss citations  written for people failing to                                                               
have their license, tag, or permit in their actual possession.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR  CHASTAIN said  Section  28 amends  the  uncodified law  of                                                               
Alaska to  make it clear that  the act applies [to  offenses that                                                               
occur on or] after the effective date of the act.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN stated  that Section 29 provides  for an effective                                                               
date of July 1, 2016.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:34:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  JOSEPHSON shared  that when  he is  with a  group                                                               
fishing  for king  salmon, the  group takes  it really  seriously                                                               
that each  person must have his/her  king tag in possession.   He                                                               
requested Major Chastain's opinion about  why it is okay to relax                                                               
this requirement when it is built into the mindset of citizens.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN understood Representative  Josephson is asking why                                                               
it would be  appropriate for troopers to make  it correctable for                                                               
not  having a  king  salmon stamp.    He said  there  is still  a                                                               
regulation that  requires a person  to have a king  salmon stamp.                                                               
This proposed provision would only  make it a correctable offense                                                               
if the person does not have a fishing license in possession.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON  asked whether  that means it  is excusable                                                               
for a person  to not have his/her license in  possession, but not                                                               
his/her king salmon stamp or the reporting form in possession.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR  CHASTAIN responded  that presently  quite a  few different                                                               
regulations are  in statute.   One requires  having a  license in                                                               
possession,  another requires  having  a king  salmon stamp,  and                                                               
another  requires  that the  king  salmon  stamp  is signed.    A                                                               
variety of regulations  cover all of those.  All  HB 286 would do                                                               
is make  it that if someone  forgot his/her fishing license  in a                                                               
vehicle or at home, the  wildlife troopers could write a citation                                                               
to  that  person and  could  make  it  be a  correctable  offense                                                               
whereby the person could bring the  citation to the office and it                                                               
could be  signed off as a  correctable offense.  If  a person was                                                               
king  salmon fishing,  the wildlife  trooper  could still  decide                                                               
whether it  was appropriate  to write the  person for  not having                                                               
his/her king salmon stamp, which is not a correctable offense.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON understood  a person  would still  have to                                                               
have his/her king  salmon stamp or reporting  card in possession,                                                               
regardless of having his/her license in possession.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN replied correct.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:37:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  TARR drew  attention  to Section  18  on page  5,                                                               
lines  20-22, which  state:   "(38) 'electronic  form' means  the                                                               
display  of images  on  an  electronic device  such  as a  mobile                                                               
telephone, tablet, or computer."  She  noted that a camera is not                                                               
included  in the  list  of  devices and  asked  whether a  camera                                                               
should be included and, if so, the best way to include it.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. BROOKS responded that the  aforementioned was not intended to                                                               
be an  exhaustive list.  He  said the language could  be refined,                                                               
but added  that he  thinks "electronic device  such as"  covers a                                                               
broader list than what is written.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TARR  suggested the  opinion of  Legislative Legal                                                               
and Research Services be sought  so as to preclude any unintended                                                               
consequences.   For example,  whether to  change the  language to                                                               
state "including  but not limited  to" in order to  indicate that                                                               
it is a not an exhaustive list.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR.  PETERSON clarified  he is  with the  Department of  Law, not                                                               
Legislative Legal and  Research Services.  He  noted the language                                                               
"such as" is  a cannon of construction that is  on point here and                                                               
it essentially says  that a thing would be known  by those around                                                               
it.   Here,  it seems  pretty  clear that  a camera  would be  an                                                               
electronic form and "such as" is  just giving some guidance as to                                                               
what some of  those might be.  As a  prosecutor, if somebody were                                                               
to say  that he/she  had it  on a camera  but it  was not  on the                                                               
list,  he can  certainly say  that it  is pretty  clear how  that                                                               
would be resolved.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TARR  observed that  the fiscal  notes for  HB 286                                                               
are zero.   She inquired as  to the overall value  of these fines                                                               
based on information from the last several years.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR. BROOKS  answered he will  get back  to the committee  with an                                                               
answer.   He  said  he does  not  think ADF&G  has  an amount  by                                                               
violation but he can provide an  order of magnitude as far as how                                                               
much has been collected.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:40:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CHENAULT understood  that,  except  for a  senior                                                               
exempt license, a  king salmon tag is stuck to  a person's actual                                                               
fishing license.  He asked what  the difference is between a king                                                               
salmon stamp and  a tag for, say,  a brown bear if  a person does                                                               
not have that in possession at the time of kill.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BROOKS  replied  that  when  purchased  electronically  from                                                               
ADF&G's  store,  a stamp  is  a  number  on  the license,  not  a                                                               
sticker; but when purchased from a  sports store it is a sticker.                                                               
The fixable  part of this  is that a  person would have  had this                                                               
previously, a  person cannot just go  out and buy it  and fix the                                                               
ticket; a person has to  have had ownership before he/she engaged                                                               
in hunting or fishing.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CHENAULT  said he  will  not  say that  he  knows                                                               
people who go out fishing and  catch fish illegally, but he would                                                               
say that it does  happen in the state.  He  recounted that he has                                                               
seen the excuse  where a person has left his/her  license at home                                                               
during  dipnetting on  the Kasilof  River.   While this  proposed                                                               
provision is to cover the  person who did honestly forget his/her                                                               
license  in the  car, he  questioned  whether there  could be  an                                                               
unintended consequence  of a person going  dipnetting, not taking                                                               
along his/her permit,  getting caught, and saying  the permit was                                                               
left at home.   This person gets to keep the  fish and brings the                                                               
permit in  after filling  it out  and now  cannot catch  any more                                                               
fish.   But, if the  person doesn't  get caught, that  person can                                                               
continue to  fish until  caught versus  the current  situation of                                                               
where people know they are supposed  to have the permit with them                                                               
and if they don't they get fined.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR. BROOKS  responded that the  fixable license does  not relieve                                                               
someone of his/her  harvest reporting, so the  person would still                                                               
be in violation  on that if out without a  permit and recording a                                                               
harvest.   A  person could  still fix  it if  not having  his/her                                                               
license  along,  but  he/she  could  not  fix  the  fact  of  not                                                               
reporting the harvest.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CHENAULT   surmised  there   still  would   be  a                                                               
possibility  of  the  fine  associated with  not  filling  out  a                                                               
harvest ticket or  not actually having a king stamp  along at the                                                               
time of catching the fish should a game warden be encountered.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR  CHASTAIN  answered  that   currently  there  are  adequate                                                               
regulations and  statutes available to wildlife  troopers to deal                                                               
with  all  of  the  scenarios just  presented  by  Representative                                                               
Chenault.     Those   are  separate   regulations  and   separate                                                               
responsibilities.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CHENAULT said  he  wants to  ensure that  another                                                               
avenue is not being opened.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:44:57 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  JOSEPHSON understood  that generally  there is  a                                                               
top prosecutor working on these  matters.  He asked who questions                                                               
should be directed to if a committee member has questions.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BROOKS  replied  that   Seth  Beausang,  Assistant  Attorney                                                               
General,  Natural Resources  Section, Civil  Division, Department                                                               
of  Law,  Anchorage,  advises  ADF&G on  fish  and  game  related                                                               
matters,  whereas Mr.  Peterson  is with  the Criminal  Division,                                                               
Department of Law.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
2:45:53 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  TARR inquired  whether  the  proposed 50  percent                                                               
increase in fines would put Alaska  on par with the fines imposed                                                               
by other states.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MAJOR CHASTAIN  responded that two  distinctions are to  be made.                                                               
The 50  percent increase is  the restitution amount and  that can                                                               
be applied by  the judge if the court believes  that the crime is                                                               
serious  enough to  apply the  restitution to  that animal.   For                                                               
instance,  right  now if  someone  takes  a moose  illegally,  in                                                               
addition  to any  penalties that  the  court may  impose for  the                                                               
misdemeanor offense or  the violation, the court  may also impose                                                               
additional  restitution  of  $1,000  for  that  moose,  and  that                                                               
represents the value  of that animal to the State  of Alaska.  He                                                               
said he is  unaware of other states and  restitution amounts, but                                                               
he is aware that Alaska's fines levied  by the court tend to be a                                                               
bit  higher than  other places  in the  U.S.   It depends  on the                                                               
crime,  but  adequately so  because  the  animals in  Alaska  are                                                               
valued at a much higher level than other places in the Lower 48.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TARR remarked that what  makes this of interest to                                                               
her is  that it was  mentioned that  these numbers have  not been                                                               
adjusted for  a number of years,  but the suggestion was  that it                                                               
was inflation  adjusting these restitution  limits.   Given these                                                               
issues are looked at fairly  infrequently by the legislature, she                                                               
said she would like  to make the effort to bring  the state up to                                                               
speed  with what  would be  comparable in  other locations.   She                                                               
requested  that Major  Chastain  provide the  committee with  any                                                               
other information he might have in this regard.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  TALERICO commented  that in  regard to  Section 16,  he                                                               
would say from  personal experience that if a deer  is worth $600                                                               
then a moose is worth $4,000 from a food source perspective.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HERRON pointed  out that  the co-chair  does have                                                               
the ability to make these changes.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
2:49:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BROOKS  thanked the committee  for hearing HB 286  because it                                                               
is important to enforcement and to his department.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SEATON  asked  how  the two  drafting  errors  in                                                               
Sections 17 and 23 would be handled.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR  TALERICO  responded  that  something  will  be  brought                                                               
forward to  correct those  drafting errors, as  well as  taking a                                                               
look at  what the appropriate  language should be in  Section 18.                                                               
He said  he will also  be looking over  the value given  to these                                                               
particular animals.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
[HB 286 was held over.]                                                                                                         

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB286 ver A.pdf HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 286
HB286 Sponsor Statement - Governor's Transmittal Letter.pdf HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 286
HB286- Fiscal Note F&G-CO-2-2-16.pdf HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 286
HB286 ADFG Hearing Request Letter 2-4-16.pdf HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 286
HB286 - Sectional Analysis.pdf HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 286
HSE RES HB 247 - DOR Response to House Resources - 3 20 16.pdf HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 247
HSE RES CS for HB 247, ver P Sectional Analysis 3.21.16 Final.pdf HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/22/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 247
2.3.16 - HSE RES - HB247 Sponsor Statement - Governor's Transmittal Letter.pdf HRES 3/19/2016 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 247
2.3.16 - HSE RES - HB 247 Sectional Analysis.pdf HRES 3/19/2016 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 247
2.3.16 - HSE RES - HB 247 - DOR Summary of Key Features of Oil Credit Bill.pdf HRES 3/19/2016 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 247
HB247 Fiscal Note - FUNDCAP-OIL & GAS TAX CREDIT FUND-2-1-16.pdf HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 247
HSE RES CS for HB 247, ver P - Summary of Changes.pdf HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/22/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 247
HSE RES CS for HB 247 - 29-GH2609 - ver P.pdf HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HRES 3/22/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 247
HSE RES HB 247 - 3.21.16 Presentation - DOR reaction to CSHB247(RES).pdf HRES 3/21/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 247