Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/10/1995 03:47 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 3/10/95
SB 77 INTENSIVE MANAGEMENT OF GAME
SENATOR LEMAN announced SB 77 to be up for consideration.
SENATOR SHARP, sponsor of SB 77, said the committee substitute
clears up language in Section 2. Section 3 deletes the
Commissioner's option of establishing a Division of Game and
Section 4 establishes by statute a Division of Game. The intent is
to replace the title of the Division of Wildlife and Conservation
with the original statutory title of Division of Game. Section 5
clarifies language which both the Board of Game and ADF&G are
having difficulty understanding regarding "depletion." Section 6
further clarifies that intensive management does not include
management of people. Section 7 adds three definition paragraphs.
He hoped this legislation would clarify some areas that are not
understandable to some department personnel so that they could move
forward to aggressively manage the resource for the people of
Alaska as is their constitutional mandate.
SENATOR SHARP said from conversations with department people he
thought the fiscal note reflected focusing on existing resources
rather than needing additional resources over the next five years.
SENATOR FRANK moved to adopt the CS labeled 9-LS0460 f to SB 77.
There were no objections and it was so ordered.
TAPE 95-22, SIDE B
Number 001
TOM SCARBOROGH, Fairbanks, said that managing game for human use
has failed which is why this legislation is before us today. He
strongly supported it, because it requires management for sustained
yield which is good for tourism and the hunting public.
BILL HAGAR, Fairbanks, said there is a management imbalance of
resource allocation and the problems associated with it. He said
the question is where does all the harvestable surplus resource go.
He said hundreds of thousands of newborn moose and caribou are
needlessly sacrificed every year under the department's current
management philosophy.
Number 544
RALPH SEEKINS, President, Alaska Wildlife Conservation Association
(AWCA), said the ADF&G people just don't seem to understand
management for human harvest along with wolves, bears, etc. ADF&G
also says they don't have the tools to respond to high levels of
predator population other than monitoring them.
MR. SEEKINS said that they have received adequate funding year
after year and they need to have their personal philosophy changed
to manage the resources for human harvest.
GEORGE MATZ, Anchorage Audubon, opposed SB 77. SENATOR LEMAN noted
that his written testimony had been received. MR. MATZ said that
in a survey, Alaskan voters largely agreed that wildlife was an
important reason they were in Alaska. He thought more concern
should be given to protecting our lands and waters. He said the
wildlife is also important to Alaskan tourists. He said he thought
a constitutional amendment would be needed to move this bill
forward.
STEVE WELLS, Alaska Wildlife Alliance, opposed SB 77. He said it
won't mean more money for the state. Intensive management is very
expensive. SB 77 will not settle hunting allocation questions; it
can't achieve its goals. You can kill the predators in the state
including wolves and bears and not achieve the 33% human harvest
that this bill calls for.
MR. WELLS thought this bill might be to squelch public debate over
the controversial wolf management actions in the Board of Game
process. This is clearly unfair to the public, because it is an
end run around the intensive wildlife management public process.
This bill could also lead to the loss of state wildlife management
authority at a time the state is trying to retrieve management
authority from the federal government. This bill does nothing to
add to the capability of wildlife managers who manage wildlife; it
limits and reduces their options. The Board and ADF&G have always
had the authority to intensively manage wildlife populations.
Number 409
TOM WARNER, Bethel, had specific problems with consumptive use
being the preferred use and the lack of a mechanism for determining
"historic high levels" in Section 5. He said it looks like the
Board is being mandated to manage for certain big game populations
for human use only. This is also an unwarranted intrusion by the
Legislature in what should be a professional activity by the Board
and the Department of Fish and Game.
Number 391
SARAH HANNAN, Alaska Environmental Lobby (AEL), said she has been
a life-long Alaskan hunter. She said AEL does not oppose hunting,
but she urged them to take into account that there is a lengthy
public process built into game management decisions. This is to
make sure that people with seasoned life styles and a diversity of
locations have time enough to look through procedures and processes
that come before them. The Board of Game is not made up of people
who are opposed to managing for human consumption, but it is made
up of hunters who would like to see human harvest continue. She
thought it was a bad precedent to intervene in a law that has not
yet gone into place and that is still being considered by the Board
of Game. Preemption of the Board of Game for making its decisions
will only result in a deeper workload for the Legislature when it
comes to game and fish allocations.
Ed Davis, Alaska Wilderness Recreation and Tourism, said he was
concerned with the definition of a harvestable surplus. He thought
it should exclude all animals that died from all causes other than
normal levels of predation.
He said they opposed aerial methods of taking game especially by
the public.
Number 273
WAYNE REGELIN, Acting Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation,
explained that last year the Legislature passed SB 77 which
mandated the Board of Game implement intensive management if season
lengths and bag limits were reduced in areas where human use of
wildlife was a high value. The department supported this
legislation and worked closely with Senator Sharp throughout the
process. In its December meeting, the Board decided to manage 10
areas, recommended by the public and the department, intensively.
The Board of Game asked the department to prepare more detailed
reports and recommendations for how intensive management should be
implemented in five of these areas. These will be presented at the
Board of Game meeting beginning on March 18.
He said that (last year's) SB 77 was clear and everyone understands
it. There was talk at the Board meetings to add some definitions
to the bill which the department suggested would be useful in
preparing for management activities. He didn't think the Board
could move faster than they have, since this issue wasn't exempted
from the Administrative Procedures Act.
Number 273
Specific aspects of the legislation still concern him, like some of
the definitions and setting the historical high levels of big game
prey populations as a standard for triggering intensive management.
Such high levels in some places cannot be maintained over long
periods of time, because the habitat just can't support them. He
explained they try to stock ranges at about 80% of optimum levels,
because otherwise food would be scarce which would cause a decrease
in birth rates and fewer animals.
Number 197
MR. REGELIN said he thought he understood the purpose of this bill
which is for people who want higher levels of harvest from the most
accessible moose and caribou populations. He said the department
has been frustrated also with getting intensive management programs
started.
He said changing the legislation at this point is not wise, because
SB 77 isn't implemented yet and if more legislation is needed at
some point they could ask for that. He didn't think legislation
was necessarily the best way to achieve their common goals. He did
not think it was beyond the ability of the department or the will
of the Administration to manage the herds more intensively.
SENATOR HOFFMAN said he would like to see some of Mr. Regelin's
suggested definitions.
SENATOR SHARP noted that he has worked with the department over the
last six years with suggestions from constituents with the
legislature in the process and said that the "process" just isn't
getting us there. It gets us to the point to where the Board makes
a decision and then those decisions based on scientific data are
bludgeoned by politics. This is one of the driving forces behind
trying to strengthen the statute and, if anything, trying to keep
the politics out of it. He said the department has always been
willing to work to make things doable which he appreciates.
SENATOR HOFFMAN, referring to a newspaper article, said maybe they
should put stricter fines on officers shooting game out of season.
SENATOR LEMAN said they would hold the bill for further work and
adjourned the meeting at 5:19 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|