Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/20/1995 03:38 PM Senate RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SRES - 2/20/95
SB 81 CLASSIFYING WOLF AS PREDATOR
CHAIRMAN LEMAN called the Senate Resources Committee meeting to
order at 3:38 p.m. and announced SB 81 to be up for consideration.
SENATOR SHARP, prime sponsor, said there are several reasons to
reinstate a bounty on wolves. He pointed out that there were no
longer general open seasons on caribou and moose and in the 1960's
there used to be 160 day seasons. He thought the reason was that
the state inherited large, healthy game populations from the
federal government at the time of statehood. Then it was state
policy to vigorously manage predators by aerial hunting and a
severe poisoning program. The last four governors have ignored
recommendations from the ADF&G calling for intensive predator
control actions in many areas of the state where the ungulate
population declined to critical levels. These recommendations were
based on many scientific studies and game surveys.
Last year, Senator Sharp noted, this Legislature passed intensive
game management mandate legislation. At its December 1, 1994
meeting the Board of Game asked ADF&G to review the Unit 13 moose
situation, a big concern with the public. ADF&G said that moose
populations were down 25% - 30% and continuing down. Moose calf
and 15 month yearlings population was at an all time low level
which would cause an additional deterioration of moose numbers.
There was a higher than average wolf population with strong
indications of a much lower level of wolf harvest by trappers or
hunters, and continued high levels of grizzly bear population in
Unit 13. ADF&G still chooses not to recommend intensive
management, so Senator Sharp stated, there would be continued
reduction of seasons and management of the people and not the
resource.
SENATOR SHARP said statistics from ADF&G indicated 87.5% of all
moose are harvested by predators - bears and wolves. 10% die from
natural causes and 2.5% are harvested by people. It doesn't make
sense to manage the 2.5%. SENATOR SHARP said his constituents want
the state budget cut when the state workers aren't doing their job.
He would like ADF&G to refocus on managing resources, not people.
He said this could be accomplished within the ADF&G budget.
SENATOR SHARP said careful review of this bill would reveal that it
is also Alaska hire legislation.
Number 216
SENATOR HALFORD asked if he had predation statistics for whether
bears or wolves are the major harvester of the prey. SENATOR SHARP
said that bears in Unit 13 are more responsible for harvesting
moose calves, in Unit 20 he didn't recall, in Unit 20 A wolves are
the primary problem.
SENATOR HALFORD asked which would do the most good, to reclassify
the wolf or to create a bounty.
SENATOR SHARP answered that reclassifying the wolf as a predator
and liberalizing most methods and means, except poison, was best.
Number 283
SENATOR HALFORD moved to adopt the CS to SB 81. There were no
objections and it was so ordered.
SENATOR LINCOLN said she supported some kind of wolf control, but
she had a number of concerns with SB 81 which, she thought, might
be a reaction to recent press. She had a problem with the wolf
being taken by any method other than poison. Another issue was
specifying adult wolves or pups. For instance someone could go
into a den and eliminate the whole den and get $400 for each pup
and also have the hide of the adult. She was concerned that it
would cost the state $675,000 according to her calculations.
Number 334
SENATOR SHARP responded that it would be more economically feasible
for people to go out and harvest wolves if there was a bounty,
although he wasn't set with the $400 figure. There are variables
like the fluctuation in the price of fur and the cost of hunting.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked why we couldn't dust off the ADF&G studies we
had spent so much on to see how we can have humane predator
control. SENATOR SHARP said the studies were implemented by the
Board several times, but were not seen through to fruition.
Unfortunately, politics enters into the situation and the resource
is not being managed effectively. More studies will not produce
different results on what can happen. There is adequate money in
the Department now to be rechanneled and get the job done.
SENATOR LINCOLN again asked if pups in a den could be killed.
SENATOR SHARP responded that that was done in the bush years ago
and he had no idea how practical it is, but it is legal under this
bill.
Number 400
SENATOR LINCOLN asked again if the wolves can be taken any way,
except by poison. SENATOR SHARP replied that is right. She
emphasized that she supported some type of wolf control, but not
necessarily the methods in this bill.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked if they could use a snare without having it
specific to wolves. SENATOR SHARP said experienced trappers have
testified to the Department of Public Safety that snares are the
most effective, humane way to take wolves. However, you have to
expect by-catch, because of the changing snow conditions.
WAYNE REGELIN, Acting Director, Division of Wildlife, said they
believe this bill would provide few, if any positive, benefits to
our wildlife resources, but it could provide several significant
negative results. In general, bounties do not target specific
areas where wolf populations need to be reduced. It is likely the
increased harvest would happen in areas where wolves are already at
appropriate levels or even lower than they would like, because
there's better access for hunters and trappers in these areas.
Statewide bounties have been eliminated as a game management tool
in all states, MR. REGELIN said, because they are unpopular with
the public and they are very costly.
Specifically, SB 81 would eliminate all regulations governing
wolves. Allowing all other methods and means, except poison, would
complicate enforcement methods for other species, because every
violator they catch would be hunting wolves. It would allow
ownership of wolves for breeders and exhibitors. He also thought
it would result in the listing of wolves under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA). This is because the ESA specifically says that
animals may be listed due to inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms. Listing of the wolves would also have a major impact
on logging. The federal government would very likely close federal
lands to the taking of wolves resulting in a lot less wolf harvest
and ultimately more restrictions on moose and caribou harvest.
MR. REGELIN estimated that approximately $600,000 would be spent
before an extra wolf would be killed, because you pay the bounty on
all the wolves, not just the ones that are in excess of the
average.
MR. REGELIN stated the Department thinks wolves should be managed
in a manner similar to other wildlife. The current classification
of wolves as a big game animal and a fur bearer is appropriate.
They deserve the same respect in management as other species. SB
81 would be bad wildlife policy and there would be tremendous
public opposition.
Number 496
MR. REGELIN said he has done a thorough analysis of all the seasons
and bag limits since 1965 at 10 year intervals. In the vast
majority of the state seasons are longer or the same length and
have a higher bag limit. There are some exceptions that are on the
road system.
SENATOR HALFORD asked him if the high ungulate population was due
to the poisoning of wolves that was going on before statehood. MR.
REGELIN said that was the major reason for it.
MR. REGELIN commented that in Unit 13 there is a lot of effort from
Anchorage and Fairbanks. There is a problem there and they are
trying to solve it. They will recommend maintaining the moose
season with antler restrictions. The Board took significant action
in January where they took off the $25 grizzly tag fee to increase
the take of bears to manage that area primarily for moose and
caribou. However, they do want to maintain a viable population of
bears there.
SENATOR HALFORD said he thought the bill was not drafted giving
ADF&G enough leeway to make an effective predator control program.
He would like to see the bill work. He commented on the video that
went around the country and asked if the man who shot the wolf pup
still had a job. MR. REGELIN said he still has a job and that he
is one of the most professional biologists they have. He doesn't
know of any other mistakes he has made and supports him as much as
he can.
SENATOR HALFORD, referring to CSSB 81 (Res), line 7, said if you
insert "legal for predators or other unclassified game" instead of
"other than poison", you would still have your regulatory
authority, but you could set up big game type protections.
TAPE 95-10, SIDE B
SENATOR HALFORD continued saying that he would delete (c) so wolves
could be treated as any other predator. Paying a bounty in all
areas of the state has problems also, but if the law said a bounty
would be paid for each wolf taken in a predator reduction area as
designated by the Board of Game, you would have the control to
avoid any problems with eliminating wolves in areas where they are
close to being threatened.
MR. REGELIN said he had analyzed the problem of targeting a bounty
to specific areas and he thought in reality every wolf killed in
Alaska would be reported to be killed in whatever areas had
bounties. He thought the best thing was to work with the local
trappers and trapper incentive programs, by trying to get them to
trap more intensively. SENATOR HALFORD said you just have the
bounties paid in the areas where the harvest takes place. There
wouldn't be a bounty office in Southeast Alaska. MR. REGELIN said
throughout the entire road system, people would move the wolves
around for $400.
Number 546
SENATOR SHARP added he strongly favored ADF&G contracting with
groups that have expertise in local areas where there are problems.
SENATOR HOFFMAN asked why on line 6 is the wolf listed as "not a
fur bearing animal." SENATOR SHARP responded that if it was listed
as fur bearing, it would be subject to regulated seasons, etc. It
would be the same situation as declaring it a game animal.
MR. REGELIN informed the Committee that the wolf season is set to
be when the fur is prime, about the first of November through the
end of March, and there is no limit.
SENATOR LINCOLN said she hoped to work on this bill in a
subcommittee. She said she might not disagree with Senator Sharp's
comments on not implementing the studies ADF&G has paid millions of
dollars for. Addressing Mr. Regelin, she said she hoped he would
have had some suggestions on how to make this bill better and asked
him to be prepared to tell them what is workable since they do have
all those studies. MR. REGELIN said he would be happy to work with
her and with a subcommittee on something called trapper incentives.
He reiterated that using the word "bounty" would be detrimental to
the state nation wide.
In a dialogue with SENATOR HALFORD, MR. REGELIN said that Texas
still has a bounty on shrub wolves and coyotes by county. Most
counties don't do it anymore; nothing is state-wide. He said most
counties don't budget for it and because they end up getting
coyotes from all over the state. A Predator Control Program run by
the Department of Agriculture can use planes which is the only way
aerial hunting can legally be used. The Federal Airborne Hunting
Act doesn't apply to state authorized programs. He said the recent
rabies outbreak in Texas was attempting to be solved with bait
treated with a rabies inhibitor. He didn't know how that was
working.
SENATOR LEMAN announced that SB 81 would go into a subcommittee
consisting of Senator Halford as Chairman, Senator Lincoln and
Senator Frank.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|