Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/31/2003 03:39 PM Senate RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 122-NONRES.GAME TAG FEES/WILDLIFE TOUR PASS
MR. GORDY WILLIAMS, special assistant, Alaska Department of Fish
and Game (ADF&G), explained to members that SB 122 contains two
parts. The first part establishes a $15 wildlife conservation
pass for certain visitors who use a commercial opportunity to
view wildlife. The second part raises non-resident alien big
game tag fees for certain species. He provided the following
statement:
The Administration believes it is appropriate for a
broad range of visitors to the state to make
contributions to the management of our wildlife
resources. Historically, hunters, fishermen and
trappers have provided the bulk of the funding and we
think it is appropriate that those who are coming to
the state - visitors - help out in that regard when
they're viewing our wildlife. About 1.5 million
visitors come to Alaska annually and the opportunity
to view wildlife is an important part of that
experience for many of them.
The wildlife conservation pass will raise a little
over $7 million annually at the beginning. As provided
in the bill, those revenues will be deposited into a
separate account in the general fund and appropriated
for various wildlife management programs and other
uses.
The pass establishes a requirement for nonresidents
who use a commercial provider of an opportunity to
view wildlife to have one of these passes unless they
qualify for one of the exemptions in the bill. Alaska
residents are exempt from this requirement; all
persons under 16 are exempted; disabled veterans are
exempted; travelers on the marine highway system are
exempted; and any visitor who holds a hunting, fishing
or trapping license good for that year would also be
exempt. We believe that people who come to the state
should make a contribution to wildlife management. If
they're making it through the purchase of a hunting or
fishing license, than that is a contribution enough
[so] that showing that license will allow them to take
the commercial tours.
MR. WILLIAMS said ADF&G believes a portion of the additional
revenue raised can assist the state in reaching match
requirements for the federal-state wildlife grant program.
Alaska receives about $3.9 million under that program. ADF&G is
currently in a planning phase with that funding, which means the
state is only matching it at a rate of 1:3. Once the programs
are implemented, the match rate will increase to 1:1.
He explained that the second part of the bill will raise tag
fees for non-residents and non-resident aliens for caribou,
moose, sheep, and goat in varying amounts from $50 to $100.
Alaska's tag fees fall in the mid-range when compared to fees
charged by other Western states. The Governor believes it is
appropriate to increase these fees for non-residents and non-
resident aliens. He offered to answer questions.
SENATOR ELTON asked Mr. Williams why programs like fish and
wildlife protection or the promotion of tourism were precluded
as appropriate uses of the fund that these fees could be
deposited into.
MR. WILLIAMS said nothing has been excluded as the money will be
deposited into the general fund and the legislature has
appropriation powers.
SENATOR ELTON noted that SB 122 specifies three purposes for
which the legislature intends to use those funds.
MR. WILLIAMS said that ADF&G believes it can make good use of a
portion of these funds but it will be under the purview of
future legislators to decide exactly how the funds are spent.
CHAIR OGAN stated the separate accounting language really pushes
the limits but will have no effect due to the constitutional ban
on dedicated funds. He added if the legislature is going to
raise taxes, he believes the money should go into the general
fund to be used to offset the budget gap.
SENATOR WAGONER asked whether vendors who do not submit the
collected fees to the state will be subject to penalties and
whether any enforcement will be available.
MR. WILLIAMS said that is not specifically addressed in SB 122
but, by adding the wildlife conservation fee to the list of
licenses in the bill, violators will be subject to the same
penalties that apply to a vendor who does not submit revenues
raised from the sale of sport fish licenses. He offered to
provide specific information at a later date.
SENATOR WAGONER noted that vendors will also be collecting the
fees, not just those who sell hunting and fishing licenses. He
asked if a person who runs raft trips will sell the $15 permit
to his or her customers.
MR. WILLIAMS said those business owners will become vendors. He
pointed out that ADF&G has about 1500 vendors who sell fish and
game licenses statewide. ADF&G anticipates that number will
increase significantly if this bill passes because a lot of
tourist operators will want to sell these licenses.
CHAIR OGAN noted the presence of Representative Kohring.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked how much money SB 122 is anticipated to
raise per year.
MR. WILLIAMS said about $7.5 million in FY 04.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked how much revenue ADF&G receives from the
sale of fish and game licenses each year.
MR. WILLIAMS did not have that information and offered to
provide it at a later date.
SENATOR SEEKINS said it appears to him that the only new purpose
for which this fund would be used is for wildlife viewing. He
asked if ADF&G is currently using any fish and game fees that it
collects for viewing programs.
MR. WILLIAMS said the short answer is yes, for the match of the
state wildlife grant funds. He then deferred to Ms. Sydeman for
the specifics.
MS. MICHELLE SYDEMAN, Assistant Director of the Division of
Wildlife Conservation, told members that ADF&G does not
currently use fish and game funds to match the federal funds it
receives for wildlife viewing programs. The source of the
matching funds for those programs are receipts from the McNeil
River bear viewing area, Pack Creek, and the Round Island walrus
viewing area.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if, under current statute, the receipts
from viewing areas can be used as a match for federal funds.
MS. SYDEMAN said they can.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if SB 122 will just add another category
from the $7.5 million that can be used for matching funds for
those same purposes.
MS. SYDEMAN said the difficulty that Mr. Williams spoke about is
due to the fact that under the statute that pertains to receipt
of the federal funds, the state match rate is 1:3 while wildlife
viewing programs are in the planning phase. As ADF&G moves into
the implementation phase, the required match rate will increase
to 1:1. In addition, ADF&G does not have an adequate source of
matching funds for research or management of non-hunted species
or for any of ADF&G's education programs.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked:
In the total universe of funding that comes to the
department, what percentage would this add? If we were
to pass this, let's say, you know kind of on a weak
manner, as the Chairman said, that you may use these
funds for this purpose, how much as a percentage would
that add to the budget that you are already getting
from these various sources of federal funds - Pittman
Robinson funds, fish and game funds, etcetera, that
are dedicated now to the department?
MS. SYDEMAN replied it is her understanding that the division's
budget totals about $25 million. ADF&G's request to the
administration and to the legislature would be for a portion of
these funds. ADF&G has stated a hope that if this bill passes,
some of this money might be made available to match the state
wildlife grant money. She thought the fees might amount to $3
million of the division's total $25 million budget.
SENATOR ELTON referred to page 1, line 10, and asked what the
breakdown is between state general funds, federal, and other
funds for the wildlife management program.
MS. SYDEMAN said the Division of Wildlife Conservation does not
receive any general funds at this time. It receives about $8
million of fish and game funds, primarily from the sale of
hunting and trapping licenses and other tag fees. It also
receives about $8 million of Pittman Robinson money.
SENATOR ELTON commented that SB 122 makes it sound as if the
fees will replace general fund dollars, while it will actually
add dollars to a program that does not get any general fund
dollars. He then noted that about 800,000 people will visit
Alaska on cruise ships this year. Those ships have programs in
place to collect receipts for onshore tours, a portion of which
is remitted to the businesses. He felt this legislation will
give the cruise ships the opportunity to collect up to $500,000
for something they are already doing. He asked if that is
correct.
MR. WILLIAMS said that cruise ships provide an opportunity to
view wildlife so cruise ship passengers will have to pay this
fee or be exempted when they enter Alaskan waters.
SENATOR ELTON asked if those licenses will be sold by the cruise
ship operators, who will retain $1 for each license.
MR. WILLIAMS said they would be eligible to do that should they
want to become vendors.
SENATOR ELTON noted their profit margin could go up
significantly.
CHAIR OGAN said that "significantly" is subjective if they have
to process 500,000 applications.
SENATOR ELTON asked Mr. Williams if he anticipates any skewing
whereby a person could evade the $15 wildlife viewing fee by
purchasing a fishing license for $10.
MR. WILLIAMS said that possibility was discussed, but ADF&G does
not believe that will be a significant problem. He said for one
thing, he assumes some folks who choose to sell these passes
will also become full vendors and sell all licenses. He noted
the problem with exempting people who have a $10 one-day fishing
license is the burden it will place on the commercial operators
who must verify that passengers have valid licenses.
SENATOR WAGONER said it would be a lot simpler to avoid the
ability to do that by raising the one-day license fee to $15.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked where the entry point is for collecting
the fees.
MR. WILLIAMS said it is an annual pass and will be purchased the
first time a person avails him or herself of a commercial
opportunity to view wildlife. The pass could be purchased from
the vendor or from other sources.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked what will happen if a person does not have
one.
MR. WILLIAMS said the person would not be eligible to take the
trip.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked who will enforce that.
MR. WILLIAMS said because the program is under Title 16, it will
be enforced in the same way the Division of Fish and Wildlife
Protection deals with other hunting and fishing license
violations.
SENATOR LINCOLN said the Governor's budget reduces the number of
fish and game wildlife protection officers. She expressed
concern that enforcement as proposed in this bill will rely on
an honor system. She pointed out that a tour operator will not
be required to sell these licenses. She then noted the Alaska
Travel Industry Association does not support this legislation
and questioned whether the Administration asked the
Association's opinion of this bill.
MR. WILLIAMS said there are different levels of support in
different sectors of the industry. He said he does not know what
the level of outreach was to specific groups. The Governor feels
this is an appropriate contribution. ADF&G believes a lot of
visitors will be happy to make this contribution because
wildlife viewing is one of the reasons they travel to Alaska.
Regarding enforcement, he pointed out there will be penalties
for the operator and the person who does not hold a license.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked where that provision is located in the
bill.
MR. WILLIAMS repeated it falls under Title 16 so it is not
specifically listed in the legislation.
SENATOR LINCOLN emphasized that someone will have to enforce it
for a person to be penalized. She suggested that with a
reduction in the number of wildlife protection officers, this
will place another burden upon a smaller staff. She then asked
if the Administration has assessed the impact this legislation
will have on the Alaska Visitors Association. She noted she has
not received one letter of support from that Association. She
asked what kind of an assessment the Administration did before
it introduced this legislation.
MS. SYDEMAN said she does not know much about the outreach that
was done, but she does know that the Alaska Wilderness,
Recreation and Tourism Association came forward and said it
supported this concept. That organization represents 300 small
operators.
SENATOR SEEKINS commented that when the Governor provided his
budget, it appeared to be targeted toward meeting a certain draw
down in the Constitutional Budget Reserve (CBR) by cutting
expenses in one place and providing additional revenue
elsewhere. In some respects, this fee was represented as a
source of additional revenue. He asked if ADF&G views it as an
additional source of revenue for the department, not necessarily
as a budget balancing mechanism to provide revenue to offset
other cuts.
MR. WILLIAMS said that ADF&G is hopeful that with this kind of
revenue generating mechanism, it could make a case that a
portion of it should go to the department for needs he described
earlier. He stated it will be a revenue generator for the state
and the Governor has stated support for tourism related wildlife
experiences.
SENATOR SEEKINS said if some of this money is used for
additional matching funds while the intent was to use it to
balance the budget, the legislature would be rather disingenuous
about how it is earmarked. He said he is supportive of more
wildlife management education programs for tourists, but he is
concerned that legislators don't misrepresent the facts that the
funds are to be earmarked for ADF&G rather than to balance the
draw down on the CBR.
CHAIR OGAN noted that he shares Senator Seekins' concern and
suggested striking that language from the bill.
SENATOR SEEKINS noted he is a wildlife viewer for all but the
one time he harvests a moose each year so he appreciates the
value of wildlife viewing and wants to enhance it as much as
possible. He repeated his concern is about the impression the
legislature may leave with SB 122 if not careful.
SENATOR WAGONER questioned whether the legislature will set a
bad precedent by allowing the separate accounting language to
remain in the bill. He pointed out that the Administration
already knows that the wildlife viewing stamp will generate so
much money and it is up to the Administration to recommend where
it wants to budget that money, therefore it is not necessary to
keep that language in the bill.
SENATOR SEEKINS commented that the tourism industry would also
like to have a slice of this pie.
SENATOR WAGONER noted that he contacted the tourism industry and
asked where the proposal is that they told legislators they
would be submitting. That proposal was a tax package that would
amount to a 2 percent sales tax on certain tourist-oriented
activities. He was told two weeks ago they would have that
package to the legislature but he has not received it so he said
he is not sure how serious they are.
CHAIR OGAN asked if SB 122 will be a "freebie" for those who
drive up the highway and never use a vendor to view wildlife. He
asked if passengers would owe the state $15 each if they saw a
moose along the highway.
MR. WILLIAMS said the issue of how to charge independent
travelers was raised on the House side. ADF&G anticipates that a
large number of those folks will purchase either a hunting or
fishing license or avail themselves of some commercial
opportunity. He said short of a tollgate at the border, it would
be difficult to collect the fee.
CHAIR OGAN considered renaming the fee and whether visitors
could file a class action lawsuit if they do not see any
wildlife.
TAPE 03-20, SIDE B
SENATOR ELTON noted the Governor is not calling it a tax, he is
calling it a user fee, which means the committee would want to
name it for its intended purpose.
SENATOR WAGONER suggested renaming it the "Alaska State
Conservation Fee." He said the word "wildlife" should be removed
because he agrees with Chair Ogan that people might not see any
wildlife.
CHAIR OGAN informed members that he did not intend to pass SB
122 from committee today.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked how many states have a similar fee and
what amount they charge.
MS. SYDEMAN said the notion of charging to set up a user-pay
system akin to the programs in place for hunting and fishing
licenses has taken a lot of forms. She said she is not aware of
fees in any other states except Louisiana, which requires a
wildlife stamp to visit fish and game state managed lands. Some
states have imposed a sales tax on items used by consumptive
wildlife users and some use a portion of the proceeds from
lotteries. Some countries charge a conservation fee of several
dollars upon exit.
CHAIR OGAN said he thought there was consensus among committee
members to rename the fee the "Alaska Wolf Control Tax" and to
change the intent language so that the money will be used for a
predator control program.
SENATOR ELTON noted that although he does not plan to make a
motion today, he would like the committee to consider amending
the bill to add, on page 2, line 12, after the word "viewing,"
"fish and wildlife protection, tourism promotion,". He explained
that the intent of the amendment would be to use the balance of
the $7 million that is not used for fish and wildlife
conservation for enforcement and tourism promotion. He felt this
money might be an appropriate source to replace those general
fund dollars. He said he would wait for a response from ADF&G
and members of the industry before he offers the amendment.
SENATOR BEN STEVENS noted that as a Senate Finance Committee
member, he is the chair of the subcommittees on the Departments
of Fish and Game and Public Safety. He told members that the
wildlife conservation portion of ADF&G's budget is $29.3
million, an increase of $1.5 million over last year. It receives
no general funds. The Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection's
budget [in the Department of Public Safety] is $15.6 million
with a decrement of about $400,000 under the Governor's
proposal. He noted the Division will lose two administrative
positions, not enforcement positions. He said from his
perspective, ADF&G is asking for a fish and wildlife viewing fee
but the Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection has not been at
the table even though it has the responsibility of protecting
fish and game for everybody. He said he'd be interested in
exploring the concept of using the increased revenues for
existing protection in a department that is already stretched to
fulfill its current obligations. He said that Section 2
[Separate accounting for wildlife conservation pass fees]
concerns him because it says the money will be appropriated for
management, viewing and education programs when the state has a
problem protecting the existing game.
CHAIR OGAN announced that with no further discussion, he would
hold SB 122 in committee and that the committee would take up HB
16.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|