Legislature(2023 - 2024)BUTROVICH 205
04/24/2023 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB104 | |
| SB92 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 92 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 104-EXPEDITED TIMBER SALES
3:37:41 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP announced the consideration of CS FOR HOUSE BILL
NO. 104(RES) am "An Act relating to salvage sales of timber,
negotiated timber sales for local manufacture of wood products,
and expedited timber sales; and providing for an effective
date."
He invited Representative Mike Cronk to introduce the
legislation.
3:38:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE CRONK, District 36, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, sponsor of HB 104, introduced the
legislation speaking to the sponsor statement.
House Bill- 104 is written to accomplish five main
goals:
1. To increase public safety by reducing wildfire
risks.
2. Provide timber resources in abundance for industry
growth.
3. Reduce firefighting costs to the state.
4. Provide fuel for biomass energy production and
expansion.
5. Increase local job opportunities.
Alaska's timber resources are plentiful and sorely
underutilized. In the Interior when a tree is
harvested it is one less tree for Mother Nature to
burn. When insect infestation occurs, timber dies by
the millions of board feet. Even so much of this dying
or dead timber is usable. We must aggressively make
this fire ready, and beetle killed timber available
before it deteriorates.
This legislation directs our State Forester and the
Division to focus on areas of commercial timber where
fire dangers are high as well as areas under insect
infestation as a priority.
HB 104 has the support of: Governor Dunleavy,
Commissioner of Natural Resources, Alaska Forestry
Association, and other Industry users.
3:39:43 PM
DAVID STANCLIFF, Staff, Representative Mike Cronk, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, stated that HB 104 is a culmination
of efforts to develop a more viable and expansive approach to
Alaska's timber industry. The bill addresses several challenges
facing the timber industry. These include an inventory of timber
to grow the industry and long-term sales to facilitate
financing. The bill provides quicker access to timber that:
threatens public safety, is diseased, is insect infested, is
needed to support value added uses, negatively affects soil
stability and the environment, and is degraded and will
negatively affect wildlife populations.
HB 104 streamlines existing processes the Division of Forestry
uses.
3:42:36 PM
MR. STANCLIFF reviewed the salient changes proposed in HB 104
that are designed to save time.
similar AS 38.05.035 explains the requirement for a best interest
finding.
similar AS 38.05.112 explains the requirement for a forest land use
plan (FLUP).
similar Sales under AS 38.05.117 or AS 38.05.124 do not have to be
included in the five year schedule of timber sales.
similar Timber sold under .117 salvage does not require a best
interest finding.
similar Timber sold under .117 and .124 do not require a FLUP.
similar HB 104 will save at least 100 days and up to two years in a
.117 timber sale.
similar HB 104 will save at least 50 days and up to two years in a
.124 timber sale.
3:44:50 PM
MR. STANCLIFF clarified that nothing in HB 104 would remove the
requirement for public notice under art. VIII, sec. 10,
Constitution of the State of Alaska. It says public notice is
required for the disposition of any timber in the state.
3:45:37 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked Mr. Stancliff to present the sectional
analysis.
3:46:15 PM
MR. STANCLIFF presented the sectional analysis for HB 104,
version U.A.
Section 1. Communicates the Legislative intent of
the bill.
Section 2. Removes the requirement for a written
best interest finding requirement for
salvage timber sale. This matches the
current law applied to negotiated sales
under AS 38.05.115. Note: public notice is
still required per Article 8, Section 10
of Alaska's Constitution.
Section 3. Expands the commissioner's discretion on
type of sale to include new section AS
38.05.124 (section 10).
Section 4. Places salvage and expedited sales under
the same forest land use plan exemption as
sales of less than 10 acres.
Section 5. Allows Salvage and Expedited timber sales
to include timber that was not in the
five-year schedule.
Section 6. Sets a 25-year time frame for sales
subject to a forest use plan unless the
purchaser requests a shorter time frame,
or the commissioner makes a written
finding that a shorter term is in the best
interest of the state. Stumpage rates are
to be renegotiated every five years to
reflect changes in market conditions.
Section 7. Amends the salvage sale statues for
clarity between salvage and expedited
sales.
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked if the intent of Section 7 is to monetize
salvage timber before it rots.
MR. STANCLIFF said yes. Beetle killed timber in particular is a
fire hazard and matter of public safety, and it's virtually
unusable after three or four years.
He continued the sectional analysis.
Section 8. Establishes the criteria the commissioner
is to use to qualify sales as salvage.
Section 9. Sets a minimum term of seven years when
entering into a negotiated contract with a
high-value-added manufacturer, unless
purchaser requests less. The upper limit
remains at 25 years to conform with
section 6. This section also urges the
commissioner to negotiate at least two of
these contracts in each region of the
state.
Section 10. Lays out the criteria the commissioner
must consider when negotiating an
expedited timber sale.
Section 11. Sets an immediate effective date.
3:50:30 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP returned attention to Section 9, page 8, line 1.
He asked if the stumpage rates for a 25-year contract under this
section would be negotiated at least once every three years.
MR. STANCLIFF said that's correct.
3:51:37 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI noted that Section 7, AS 38.05.117 relating to
salvage sales removes the requirement for a written finding that
the disposal will serve the best interests of the state. He
asked what the written finding typically would look like and
whether it's available to the public.
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked Dr. Eng to respond to the question.
3:52:38 PM
HELGE ENG, Ph.D. State Forester and Director, Division of
Forestry and Fire Protection, Anchorage, Alaska, stated that in
this section the commissioner typically would make the
determination that monetizing commercial timber before it rots
would be in the best interests of the state.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked what metrics would be used for that
finding.
DR. ENG requested he clarify the question.
SENATOR KAWASAKI said the previous language required the
commissioner to make a written finding that the disposal will
serve the best interests of the state. The amended language says
the commissioner may make the sale without having made a written
best interest finding. He wondered what would entail a finding
under the best interests of the state.
DR. ENG answered that what normally would entail a finding would
be the fact that the timber would lose value quickly and
represent a net loss of state resources. It therefore would be
in the best interests of the state to expedite the
commercialization of the timber.
3:55:34 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI recounted the major changes in Section 7.
The requirement for the commissioner to make written findings
before offering a salvage timber sale has been removed. The
provision that identifies the reason for the economic loss
"because of insect or disease epidemics or fire," is also
removed. He commented that it looks like the commissioner is
being given carte blanche authority, without protection for
people who might live in or use the area, to declare wide swaths
of land as salvage timber. He asked if there were protections in
place that he missed.
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked Dr. Eng to define salvage timber.
DR. ENG explained that "salvage timber" is timber that is either
already dead or dying or in imminent danger of being infected or
threatened by wild fire.
3:57:20 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI he didn't know that he agreed because the
language doesn't say "salvage timber" it says "may...offer for
salvage sale timber that has lost substantial economic value..."
There is no requirement to make a written finding that the
timber has lost economic value or will lose economic value. He
asked if he missed the requirement.
DR. ENG responded that the requirement that the timber has
already lost value or will lose value in the future is a
determination the commissioner will make based on his/her
expertise and the staff of foresters qualified to make that
determination.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked why the bill removes the requirement
for a written finding that it's in the best interest of the
state to do that. He said he believes many people would agree
that salvaging timber that was dying or already dead was a good
idea, but he didn't understand the reason for removing the best
interest provision.
3:59:26 PM
DR. ENG said the explicit rationale for salvage is that time is
of the essence. The logistics of setting up a logging operation,
which may include constructing a road to get the timber before
it rots on the stump, takes time. The bill seeks to save as much
time as possible.
4:00:18 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR joined the committee.
CO-CHAIR GIESSEL directed Dr. Eng to Section 8 and suggested
that may be part of the members' consternation. AS 30.05.117(b)
is a new subsection that limits a sale to timber that has been
(1) killed by fire, insect, disease, or an act of
nature;
(2) removed for conversion of land to a nonforest use;
or
(3) cleared as part of a fire prevention or
suppression activity.
She said you've discussed timber that's identified under
paragraph (1) and you've mentioned timber that's identified
under paragraph (3) but nothing's been said about the provision
in paragraph (2). She asked for the intention of paragraph (2).
DR. ENG replied the intent is to merchandise trees that have
been removed as part of a conversion process to a nonforest land
use.
4:01:49 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked what state forests in Alaska would be
considered off limits under AS 38.05.110(c) in bill Section 3.
DR. ENG replied that the general concept is that the
commissioner will determine areas that are of extraordinary high
risk of fire and destruction by wild fire. He deferred further
explanation to the sponsor.
4:03:40 PM
MR. STANCLIFF said it's a matter of trusting the judgement of
the commissioner and state forester. Around Tok, for example,
there's a lot of timber that presents a real threat to the
community if it's not harvested. He described the type of
discretion that the bill envisions. The forester might look at
the mature timber in the Tok area and determine it is valuable
to the timber industry and that for public safety it's in the
best interest of the state and community to take down a
perimeter around the community. To the question about whether
this would apply statewide, he said it boils down to how you
feel about the discretion of the commissioner and state
forester.
SENATOR KAWASAKI highlighted the major changes in Section 10
that talk about expedited sales. He said the new Sec.
30.05.124(c) talks about timber that has been burned by fire,
infected by insects or disease, or is threatened by these
things. He noted that a best interest finding addresses four
causes including affecting soil stability and destruction of
habitat for wildlife populations. He said he appreciates those
considerations, but wonders whether somebody who owns a cabin in
a fire prone area would have any say if the area around their
cabin was included in an expedited timber sale. If not, he asked
if there was another avenue to protest an expedited sale around
one's cabin.
4:06:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK said part of the consideration is whether
the timber is commercially viable, so location is a factor.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked whether the bill would apply to all
land that the state owns.
MR. STANCLIFF said the discretion of the commissioner and state
forester would apply statewide on state land. If they determine
there's danger, they can offer a sale to reduce that danger. He
said they might look at a number of areas in the Tanana Valley
State Forest, but in other locations throughout the state the
access and terrain might make a timber sale unworkable for the
timber industry.
4:09:52 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked whether HB 104 would apply to the
forest in the Chugach State [Park] near Anchorage.
MR. STANCLIFF said yes if the timber met all the requirements
laid out in the bill.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI posed a hypothetical scenario in the
Hillside area in Anchorage. Section 7 would authorize the
commissioner to determine there was substantial fire danger and
to propose a clear cut of the entire Hillside area to protect
public safety, and then Section 8 would authorize an expedited
sale. He asked if that could happen.
MR. STANCLIFF deferred the question to State Forester Eng.
4:11:33 PM
DR. ENG said there are several tools to address fire risk in
urban areas like the Hillside in Anchorage. Foremost is to clear
fuel from around homes. His opinion was that a clear cut or
other kind of silviculture in that area would not be feasible.
The logistics would be too difficult. His belief was that sales
contemplated in HB 104 were for rural areas.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI clarified that he was asking whether the
bill authorized a commissioner to offer such a sale, because his
reading was that the commissioner could do that without as much
as a written finding. Then Section 10 allows for an expedited
sale if the commissioner determines there is a fire risk. He
asked if that could happen.
DR. ENG said in theory it could happen, but he thought it was a
relatively theoretical and unlikely event.
4:13:15 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP pointed out that at the end of the day it comes
back to public notice that's required in the state constitution.
He posited that there would not be enough data storage at DNR to
handle all the negative comments if such a sale were proposed.
CO-CHAIR BISHOP returned attention to Section 8. The language on
page 7 in subsection (b)(2) says:
(b) A sale under this section is limited to timber
that has been
(2) removed for conversion of land to a nonforest
use; or
CO-CHAIR BISHOP said paragraph (2) reminded him of Delta
Junction in 1984 when thousands of acres of timber were dozed
into windrows and burned to make way for an agriculture project.
He asked if paragraph (2) would allow that to happen again such
that the state wouldn't get the highest and best use for that
timber.
4:15:22 PM
DR. ENG replied that .117 regarding salvage sales is in existing
statute. The concept is to commercialize the timber before it
rots.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI directed attention to Section 10 on page 8.
Subsection (c) says "the commissioner shall find that the timber
has been burned by fire, infected by insects or disease, or is
in an area threatened by fire, insect, or disease...". He asked
what the temporal relationship is between the best interest
finding and the threat of fire, insect, or disease. Is the
threat imminent, within a month, within a year, or within five
years?
4:16:58 PM
MR. STANCLIFF offered his understanding that the commissioner
and state forester would take the four qualifiers in subsection
(c) into consideration.
DR. ENG said the timing is unknown because a wildfire could
occur tomorrow or in two years. He described it as a probability
informed professional opinion and expertise of foresters and
their experience with the local system, fire weather, and
pattern.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI commented on the applicability of
paragraphs (1)-(4) and asked if he could name any state land
that would not be eligible for an expedited timber sale.
DR. ENG said the public safety issue typically applies to areas
close to population centers. The destruction of habitat or
decrease in wildlife population is based on the professional
opinions of biologists and foresters. He acknowledged that in
the extreme, any area could theoretically be deemed to be at
risk but he believes the professionals would single out the
areas that are at extreme risk and judiciously apply the
criteria.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if he would support an amendment that
says, "area is at extreme risk of fire, insect, or disease."
4:20:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK responded that he didn't believe it would
be a problem.
4:21:12 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR said he'd welcome that kind of amendment because
he couldn't think of any area in the state that wouldn't apply.
He asked for examples when existing law prevented the department
from going forward with a timber sale.
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK said part of the impetus for the bill is
that state forests haven't been managed. The bill seeks to give
the Division of Forestry the tools to do so.
4:23:59 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR questioned whether current statute actually
prevented the Division of Forestry from managing state forests.
He asked if the division could put in a firebreak or make a
commercial sale if it was in the best interest of the state.
MR. STANCLIFF responded by highlighting that it takes about five
years to identify suitable timber and get it to a mill. He said
the timber industry is hamstrung by a maze of bureaucratic red
tape. He described timeframes of up to six years.
SENATOR KAWASAKI noted that the typical sale schedule would
require sufficient information for the public and forest
industry before a sale is held, but Section 5 exempts both
salvage sales and the amended expedited timber sales from that
requirement. He asked if that was accurate.
4:29:06 PM
DR. ENG offered his belief that Section 5 provides an exemption
from the five-year schedule.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if he agreed that there was no limitation
on the size of a salvage or expedited timber sale.
DR. ENG replied that he believes that's correct.
SENATOR KAWASAKI expressed concern that the specific conditions
in AS 38.05.123 relating to direct economic benefit are not
requirements under salvage sales or expedited sales. He asked if
his reading was accurate that salvage sales could be used under
many conditions.
DR. ENG said yes, but it's a matter of trading one public
benefit with another. Being able to commercialize the public's
timber before it rots is deemed sufficient to offset other
requirements. It would become the new standard practice.
4:31:59 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR asked if he thought anyone would use the
traditional process again if this this legislation were to pass.
MR. STANCLIFF said he would hope the professionals would make
sure that happens. The bill seeks to address the highest and
best use for this timber.
SENATOR KAWASAKI referenced salvage sales under .117 and asked
if there's a similar best interest finding for negotiated timber
sales under .123. He said he didn't see that requirement.
MR. STANCLIFF responded that the public notice of a sale will
attract attention and people can articulate their views, but
there also has to be a little trust that the commissioner and
state forester are going to represent the best interest of the
state.
SENATOR KAWASAKI said he recognizes the need to find an easier
way to get commercial logging done and address the needs of
manufacturers of timber, but at the very least there needs to be
a process to ensure the state receives the best value under the
public lands in the Alaska Lands Act. He said he needs assurance
that folks won't lose their traditional hunting grounds to
logging. He reminded members that they heard there is zero
accountability for the acreage in a land sale under both the
salvage and expedited timber sales.
4:37:25 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP opened public testimony on HB 104.
4:37:55 PM
KAITE ROOKS, representing self, Prince of Wales, Alaska,
testified in opposition to HB 104. She stated that she has a
forestry degree and was a timber industry advocate 20 years ago
when she moved to Prince of Wales. She's been a wildland
firefighter, she can cruise timber, do plot surveys, and she
understands the state process for timber sales. She still
doesn't oppose all logging, but there was a lot she did not like
about the way the state logged and sold the timber in Southeast.
MS. ROOKS said the Division of Forestry is poised to kill the
small community of Whale Pass. That relates to HB 104 when you
talk about trusting the commissioner and state forester but
having no stopgaps or public process. The people of Whale Pass
spoke up in opposition to this timber sale under the current
timber program and it's not working. The sale is planned within
the city limits of Whale Pass so why think somebody's cabin in
the middle of the woods will be treated differently. HB 104 will
make it even easier for the DNR commissioner to authorize a
timber sale. She agreed with Senator Kawasaki that timber sales
could go forward with no best interest finding, no acreage
limitation, no threshold, or any other stopgap measure. She
suggested the committee ask the people on Prince of Wales how
bad it can get.
4:40:48 PM
JOE YOUNG, Owner, Young's Timber Inc., Tok, Alaska, testified in
support of HB 104. He reported that Young's Timber Inc. has been
in business since 1993, it has 12 employees, and the business
produces a wide range of value-added products. He talked about
the three forest regions in Alaska that have over mature, dead,
and dying stands of trees, some of which are under attack by
insects and disease. He said these forests are stressed and
they're producing a hormone that attracts the insects.
MR. YOUNG stated that the current timber sale process is not
working. There hasn't been a sawlog timber sale in the Tok area
since 2019. Young's Timber Inc. typically harvested 40 acres per
year but he's now harvesting 100-150 acres per year because of
the Willow and the Manh Choh projects. He has one year's supply
of timber left and he doesn't know where or when he'll get
another timber sale.
He opined that the expedited timber sale will cure many value-
added producers' needs for a long-term, stable supply of timber.
He urged the committee to pass HB 104.
4:42:50 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP asked how many board feet Young's Timber Inc.
cuts in a year and the maximum output of the mill.
MR. YOUNG said he cuts about 500,000 board feet/year and he
could handle twice that amount.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if Young's Timber uses the negotiated
timber sale process.
MR. YOUNG said yes; he's had two negotiated timber sales. The
first he leveraged into about $600,000 worth of value-added
equipment, and the second he leveraged into about $400,000 worth
of value-added equipment. The timber industry in Tok is booming
and he'd like to expand but it's been five years since there was
a timber sale in the area.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if he'd taken advantage of any salvage
sales under AS 30.05.117.
MR. YOUNG said yes, after the 1990 Tok River fire.
SENATOR KAWASAKI read the new Sec. 38.05.124 Expedited timber
sales in Section 10. He asked Mr. Young if he agreed that timber
that has burned or has been infected by insects or disease may
not have value but the adjacent timber would.
MR. YOUNG said the value doesn't leave burned timber for about
15 years, but beetle killed trees that are standing will rot in
about three years.
4:46:18 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the industry standard in Alaska is
to plant new trees to replace the harvested ones.
MR. YOUNG responded that the problem in the boreal forest is
there are too many stems per acre and that suppresses growth.
4:47:17 PM
CHERYL FECKO, representing self, Craig, Alaska, testified that
she opposed HB 104 when it was in House Resources and the bill
today has several major changes that may have serious negative
impacts. She opined that the public deserves to have time to
read through the bill and internalize the changes that may
affect places like Prince of Wales Island and Whale Pass. She
expressed hope that there would be additional opportunity to
comment on the bill.
CO-CHAIR BISHOP said the bill isn't leaving the committee today.
He suggested she email the committee her thoughts after she'd
had time to review the bill.
4:48:46 PM
ANDREW TRAXLER, Owner, Papoose Milling, Big Lake, Alaska,
testified in support of HB 104. Responding to an earlier
question, he confirmed that he would continue to use the
existing five-year timber sale schedule. He relayed that he's
currently using green spruce logs from Nenana to produce good
lumber and he uses the fire and beetle killed timber in the
return loads because people in Nenana need dry firewood. He
continued that Papoose Milling currently uses the expedited
timber sale process through the MatSu borough that is similar to
the process proposed in HB 104. Forests at risk of fire are
being harvested near populations and the logging companies are
paying the borough for the salvage harvest. He compared that to
the state paying loggers to harvest timber to provide
essentially the same protection.
4:50:41 PM
CO-CHAIR BISHOP held HB 104 in committee with public testimony
open.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 104 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SRES 4/24/2023 3:30:00 PM |
HB 104 |
| CS HB 104 Ver. U.A.pdf |
SRES 4/24/2023 3:30:00 PM |
HB 104 |
| HB 104 Fiscal Note DNR 03.17.23.pdf |
SRES 4/24/2023 3:30:00 PM |
HB 104 |
| HB 104 Support Document Time Saved 04.21.23.pdf |
SRES 4/24/2023 3:30:00 PM |
HB 104 |
| Foreign Polluters Fee Presentation 04.24.23.pdf |
SRES 4/24/2023 3:30:00 PM |
|
| SB 92 Explanation of Changes Ver. S to Ver. U.pdf |
SRES 4/24/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 92 |
| SB 92 CS WORKDRAFT Version U 04.23.23.pdf |
SRES 4/24/2023 3:30:00 PM |
SB 92 |
| HB 104 Sectional Analysis Ver. U.A 04.24.23.pdf |
SRES 4/24/2023 3:30:00 PM |
HB 104 |
| HB 1045 Support Document DNR Briefing Paper Timber Sale Process.pdf |
SRES 4/24/2023 3:30:00 PM |
HB1045 |
| HB 104 Support Letters Native Village of Tetlin, RDC, YTI.pdf |
SRES 4/24/2023 3:30:00 PM |
HB 104 |
| HB 104 SRES Public Testimony rec'd by 04.24.23.pdf |
SRES 4/24/2023 3:30:00 PM |
HB 104 |