Legislature(2009 - 2010)BUTROVICH 205
04/08/2010 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview from Conoco Philips | |
| HB210 | |
| HJR40 | |
| HJR26 | |
| HCR10 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HB 210 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HCR 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 26 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 40 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HCR 10-OPPOSE FED. CONTROL OF STATE LAND & WATER
4:49:20 PM
CO-CHAIR MCGUIRE announced consideration of HCR 10 [CSCHR
10(RES) was before the committee].
4:49:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER, sponsor of HCR 10, said the issue behind
this resolution was brought to him by a constituent and is about
the state's ownership of its submerged lands and navigable
waters. It is something that is guaranteed by law, the state's
constitution, and subsequent interpretations unless there is a
specific federal override.
He explained that back in 1996 the National Park Service started
adopting regulations which improperly extend its own claims of
management and enforcement authorities over state-owned
navigable waters within the units of the National Park System.
As evidence he offered a letter from the Alaska Citizen's
Advisory Commission on Federal Areas, dated February 13, 2009.
The Commission identified and analyzed this problem and asked
the governor to file a lawsuit challenging the regulations.
Senator Therriault and Senator Bunde were potential sponsors of
legislation - one of which is gone and the other one almost gone
- so it fell to him to offer it.
REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER said the Commission recognizes the state
is done with attempts at administrative remedies and wanted to
go to court for a legal remedy. That language was toned down in
the resolution, and it now asks the administration to "take all
available actions".
SENATOR FRENCH asked if there is an interplay between this issue
and the Katie John case.
4:54:51 PM
DICK MYLIUS, Director, Division of Mining, Land and Water,
Department of Natural Resources (DNR), replied generally not.
They both deal with navigable waters, but the Katie John case
deals with federal reserve water rights and this deals with a
park service regulation.
SENATOR FRENCH asked if anyone else might have any more to add.
TINA CUNNING, Subsistence and Federal Issues Coordinator,
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), agreed HCR 10 has nothing
to do with the Katie John case, which has to do with only
locating where the federal subsistence priority applies in state
waters. The National Park Service regulations issue is an ANILCA
case related to where federal regulations that are promulgated
for the management of federal lands can apply off of federal
lands onto state waters.
CO-CHAIR MCGUIRE adjourned and then immediately called the
meeting back to order to allow Mr. Sturgeon to testify.
4:56:55 PM
JOHN STURGEON, representing himself, supported CSHCR 10. He said
the State of Alaska owns its submerged lands designated as
"navigable." This includes rivers such as the Yukon. Several
years ago when he was hunting on the Yukon, he was stopped by
the National Park Service police and was told he could not drive
his 5X10 ft. hover craft down the Yukon. They said they had
legal jurisdiction even though they admitted he was on state
land. Later, when he returned to Anchorage he learned that the
state constitution, the statutes, and regulations all very
clearly say the State of Alaska has management authority on its
navigable waters. In addition, he learned that Section 103(c) of
ANILCA says on ANILCA designated units federal conservation unit
regulations do not apply to state and private land. It was an
ANILCA promise that was ignored. He said it is of little use for
the State of Alaska to own its submerged lands on navigable
waterways if the National Park Service is going to override its
management.
4:58:35 PM
CO-CHAIR MCGUIRE closed public testimony and set HCR 10 aside.
Finding no further business she adjourned the meeting at 4:59
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|