Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
02/15/2006 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing || Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission | |
| SB262 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | SB 262 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 262-FOREST RESOURCES & PRACTICES STANDARDS
VICE CHAIR RALPH SEEKINS announced SB 262 to be up for
consideration.
MARTY FREEMAN, Manager, Forest Resources Program, Department of
Natural Resources (DNR), said she served as the co-chair of the
two committees that helped develop this bill - a science and
technical committee and an implementation group. She also serves
as the division's liaison to the Board of Forestry. She said
that SB 262 is the result of hard work by many people, which has
resulted in broad support. It responds to a request from the
Board of Forestry that the resources agencies review the
riparian management standards throughout the state. She
previously completed a review for region 1, the coastal region
of Alaska, in 1999 and a similar review for region 3, the
Interior, in 2003.
The review for region 2, parts of Southcentral Alaska, has been
completed. SB 262 is not a wholesale revision of the Act, but
rather targets and is tailored to standards of riparian
management and stream buffer standards that are unique to region
2, which has been using interim standards since 1990. Under the
interim standards, timber harvesting could occur up to the bank
of anadromous streams under certain conditions while the rest of
the state has buffers on all anadromous waters. She said the
Board of Forestry endorsed the bill.
MS. FREEMAN said that key points in the bill's development are
that the process was based on the best available science and was
developed with many diverse interests involved. The proposed
changes help insure that the goals of the Act, to provide
adequate protection to fish habitat and water quality and to
support healthy timber and fishing industries, are met.
The bill classifies water bodies that have anadromous fish or
high-value resident fish into four types. High-value resident
fish are populations that are actually harvested and used by
someone. The four types are types 2A and 2B, and the large
dynamic rivers, both glacial and non-glacial. These have a
recommended buffer of 150 ft. with provisions for widening that
buffer where there are actively eroding banks. The purpose of
these buffers is primarily to get large woody debris into the
stream, which helps to provide fish habitat by creating pools,
islands and providing substrate for growth of the macro
invertebrates that are important for food.
On smaller, and both glacial and non-glacial, dynamic rivers
less than 50 ft. wide, that have stable banks, and on lakes
there is a recommended buffer of 100 ft., which is similar to
the existing standard. For the smallest streams less than three
ft. wide, the buffer would be 50 ft. In the next 50 ft.,
harvesting can occur, but can't cause rutting that would
introduce sediment into the small streams.
MS. FREEMAN said that SB 262 also applies riparian standards to
estuaries that are adjacent to anadromous or high-value resident
fish streams; however region 2 has few of these estuaries. It
also includes a definition for riparian area means for region 2
that is based on the proposed buffer standards. Lastly, the bill
keeps in place a special management zone, which extends out to
300 ft. from the stream bank on anadromous or high-value
resident fish streams and in that area timber harvesting has to
be designed to maintain or enhance important wildlife habitat.
This applies to state land only. This is an existing standard in
the Act, but the bill makes it clear that it's not just
maintenance of habitat; it can be maintenance or enhancement.
She said the recommended buffers are wider than the interim
standards on the large dynamic rivers and the 2A and 2B streams;
they are narrower on the smaller ones, 2D class; and the same on
2C, the remainder of the streams. These buffers are tailored
specifically to the unique conditions in region 2.
Scientists have identified several reasons for using wider
buffers for the dynamic rivers in region 2. First, many more of
the large dynamic rivers occur in forested areas where
harvesting is an option. That's different from either region 1
or region 3. Secondly, the timber volumes per acre are lower
there than in either regions 3 or 1. That means to get the same
amount of wood in the stream to provide habitat, it must be
collected from a larger area. Timber values are also less in
region 1.
4:04:15 PM
Third, more of the wood that is in the riparian area consist of
deciduous trees, particularly cottonwoods, which decay more
quickly and, therefore, don't stay as long in the stream to
provide habitat. Fourth, there is a wider distribution of
anadromous and high-value resident fish streams in the forested
portions of this region and lastly, there is disproportionately
high-use of the fish in high-value fisheries, particularly for
sport fishing. Region 2 covers only about 11 percent of the land
area in the state, but it accounts for 30 to 50 percent of the
recreational fishing.
4:04:53 PM
The bill has one technical error on page 5, line 26, where AS
41.17.118 is repealed and reenacted. It should say AS 41.17.118
(a) only. There is no intent to change the two other
subsections, (b) and (c).
4:05:29 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN said he didn't see letters of support or
opposition, but he figured there had been a lot of work done and
compromise within the industry.
MS. FREEMAN agreed that was correct. Letters have come in from
the Mental Health Trust Land Management Office, the Resource
Development Counsel (RDC), Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC). The Alaska Forest Association also supported
SB 262.
4:06:27 PM
VICE CHAIR SEEKINS said he didn't want to clutter up statutes
with findings and asked if the department would object if those
were eliminated and the committee attached a letter of intent.
MS. FREEMAN replied that she understood that would be fine. The
Board of Forestry wanted the findings included to make it clear
that these provisions apply specifically to region 2.
4:08:27 PM
SENATOR SEEKINS asked her to explain in more detail why region 2
was treated differently than regions 1 and 3.
MS. FREEMAN replied that the forest conditions and the species
and distribution of the fish are different in those regions.
SENATOR SEEKINS said that the buffer is double in region 2
compared to regions 1 and 3.
MS. FREEMAN replied that the buffer is 66 ft. in region 1 on
state land and 100 ft. on private and public land; in region 3,
it's 100 ft. The difference is the extent of overlap between the
large dynamic rivers and forest habitat where there's potential
for harvesting and the conditions of the forest - lower timber
volumes, higher fish value and for a species that don't reside
in the water as long, in terms of their ability to provide fish
habitat. That is specific to the large dynamic rivers.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked what the standards are in 2B waters for
regions 1 and 3.
4:10:23 PM
MS. FREEMAN replied that the classification system for waters is
different in each region. In region 1, types 1A are the
anadromous waters that are low gradient streams - the most
productive are salmon streams. Type 1B waters are anadromous,
but with a higher gradient. Type C and D waters are tributaries
to anadromous streams that are not anadromous, themselves, and
those are broken out based on different gradients above and
below 12 percent. The standards for type 1A on public land are
100 ft. in both cases; on private land it's 66 ft.. On type B
streams it's 66 ft. or to the break of the slope, whichever
comes first. Those are streams that are typically incised and
controlled by bedrock so the channel isn't moving around.
4:11:11 PM
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if that includes the outer bends that are
subject to erosion.
MS. FREEMAN replied that those rivers are typically not eroding
in the same way that 50 ft. wide and greater rivers are. Those
have a very dynamic channel. The channels for the 1A and 1B
waters where they are overlapping with the harvested areas are
not the same kind as those of a large dynamic river, typically.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if the buffer for 2B waters in
subparagraph (2), is 325 ft. in region 2, but 66 ft. in regions
1 and 3.
MS. FREEMAN replied yes - the 325 ft. buffer is only on actively
eroding bends and if a terrace doesn't exist that would prevent
the riverbank from actually eroding.
She explained that large woody debris gets into rivers in two
different ways. On the large dynamic rivers it occurs by natural
erosion of the bank; on the smaller streams it occurs by tree
fall from the bank into the stream. Where the stream bank is
stable, the buffer is set basically by the height of the tree.
Within two-thirds of tree height, you get 95 percent of the
large woody debris into the stream. On the large dynamic rivers
it occurs by the river actually moving.
4:12:37 PM
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if the standards in the bill have been
agreed to by the timber industry.
MS. FREEMAN replied yes.
SENATOR SEEKINS said he was confused by the line that was drawn
half-way down the middle of the Kenai Peninsula.
MS. FREEMAN informed him that the line is actually a division
between forest types. The east side of the Kenai Peninsula has
coastal forest with Sitka Spruce and Western Hemlock; the west
side has white spruce and mixed hard woods.
She pointed out that one of the important things for the
industry in SB 262 is that on the smaller streams the buffers
are narrowed. Many of them are unnamed and unmapped, but there
is a very dense network. In region 2, they are anadromous if
they have water for the most part, which is very different than
region 1 that has high-gradient streams. The existing buffer on
those streams is 100 ft. now and that was of concern to the
industry, because it's very difficult to design around a network
of very tiny streams.
SENATOR SEEKINS said he thought the Kenai River was in both of
those districts.
MS. FREEMAN replied that it does flow through both; it is one of
the three glacial rivers that has stable banks and has a 100 ft.
buffer - a type 2C.
4:14:34 PM
RICK SMERIGLIO, Moose Pass, said he is a member of the Board of
Forestry, which has endorsed the proposal. He said there was a
lack of opposition, because of the consensus that went into it.
He was assured by the governor's special assistant for resources
that it was not the intent to delete (b) and (c) of AS
41.17.118(a)(b)(c) and that it was a drafting oversight that
could be fixed with a technical amendment.
VICE CHAIR SEEKINS said he would hold SB 262 for further work
and adjourned the meeting at 4:20:31 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|