Legislature(2003 - 2004)
05/15/2003 08:05 AM House CRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS
STANDING COMMITTEE
May 15, 2003
8:05 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Carl Morgan, Chair
Representative Pete Kott
Representative Tom Anderson
Representative Ralph Samuels
Representative Sharon Cissna
Representative Albert Kookesh
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Kelly Wolf, Vice Chair
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 155(RES)
"An Act relating to predator control programs; and providing for
an effective date."
- MOVED CSSB 155(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 63(STA)
"An Act relating to transition provisions related to municipal
mergers, consolidations, dissolutions, reclassifications,
annexations, detachments, and incorporations; and relating to
municipal property taxation in annexed, detached, and newly
incorporated areas."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 183(STA)
"An Act authorizing certain boroughs to use revenue collected on
an areawide or nonareawide basis for economic development."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: SB 155
SHORT TITLE:PREDATOR CONTROL/AIRBORNE SHOOTING
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) SEEKINS
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
03/20/03 0551 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/20/03 0551 (S) JUD, RES
03/31/03 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
03/31/03 (S) Heard & Held
03/31/03 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/04/03 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 211
04/04/03 (S) Heard & Held
04/04/03 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/16/03 (S) JUD AT 1:00 PM BELTZ 211
04/16/03 (S) Moved CSSB 155(JUD) Out of
Committee -- Permanent Time
Change --
04/16/03 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
04/17/03 0892 (S) JUD RPT CS 2DP 2DNP 1NR NEW
TITLE
04/17/03 0892 (S) DP: SEEKINS, THERRIAULT;
04/17/03 0892 (S) DNP: FRENCH, ELLIS; NR: OGAN
04/17/03 0892 (S) FN1: ZERO(DFG)
04/30/03 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/30/03 (S) Moved CSSB 155(RES) Out of
Committee
04/30/03 (S) MINUTE(RES)
05/01/03 1073 (S) RES RPT CS 5DP 1DNP NEW TITLE
05/01/03 1074 (S) DP: WAGONER, DYSON, LINCOLN,
STEVENS B,
05/01/03 1074 (S) SEEKINS; DNP: ELTON
05/01/03 1074 (S) FN1: ZERO(DFG)
05/02/03 1105 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 5/2/2003
05/02/03 1105 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
05/02/03 1105 (S) RES CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
05/02/03 1106 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING 5/3
CALENDAR
05/02/03 1106 (S) COSPONSOR(S): LINCOLN, OGAN,
COWDERY,
05/02/03 1106 (S) GREEN, DYSON, WAGONER,
STEVENS B,
05/02/03 1106 (S) THERRIAULT
05/03/03 1133 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB
155(RES)
05/03/03 1133 (S) COSPONSOR(S): HOFFMAN,
WILKEN, TAYLOR
05/03/03 1133 (S) PASSED Y14 N1 E5
05/03/03 1133 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE(S) SAME AS
PASSAGE
05/03/03 1133 (S) ELTON NOTICE OF
RECONSIDERATION
05/04/03 1147 (S) RECONSIDERATION NOT TAKEN UP
05/04/03 1148 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
05/04/03 1148 (S) VERSION: CSSB 155(RES)
05/05/03 1306 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
05/05/03 1306 (H) RES, CRA
05/08/03 1481 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): MORGAN
05/09/03 (H) RES AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
05/09/03 (H) Moved Out of Committee --
Recessed to 1:00 pm --
MINUTE(RES)
05/10/03 1537 (H) RES RPT 6DP 3AM
05/10/03 1537 (H) DP: MASEK, GATTO, MORGAN,
WOLF, LYNN,
05/10/03 1537 (H) FATE; AM: GUTTENBERG, CISSNA,
HEINZE
05/10/03 1538 (H) FN1: ZERO(DFG)
05/13/03 1619 (H) CROSS SPONSOR(S): WOLF
05/13/03 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
05/13/03 (H) Heard & Held -- Recessed to
Thurs. 8:00 AM --
MINUTE(CRA)
05/15/03 1682 (H) CRA RPT 3DP 1NR
05/15/03 1682 (H) DP: KOTT, ANDERSON, MORGAN;
NR: SAMUELS
05/15/03 1683 (H) FN2: ZERO(DFG)
05/15/03 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
DOROTHY KEELER
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed concerns with CSSB 155(RES).
MIKE FLEAGLE
McGrath, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in favor of [CSSB 155(RES)].
LEO KEELER
Adaptive Management Team
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed concerns with CSSB 155(RES).
ROBERT FITHIAN, Executive Director
Alaska Professional Hunters Association
Copper Center, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of [CSSB 155(RES)].
TED SPRAKER
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of [CSSB 155(RES)].
DONNE FLEAGLE, General Manager
MTNT, Limited
McGrath, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of [CSSB 155(RES)].
OLIVER BURRIS
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Urged the passage of [CSSB 155(RES)].
MIKE TINKER, Chair
Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory Committee
Ester, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Urged the passage of [CSSB 155(RES)].
SHARON McLEOD-EVERETTE
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Urged the passage of SB 155 unamended.
TOM SCARBOROUGH
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Urged the passage of SB 155 without the
amendment that would include the commissioner.
JESSE VANDERZANDEN, Executive Director
Alaska Outdoor Council
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Urged the passage of [CSSB 155(RES)].
MATT ROBUS, Acting Director
Division of Wildlife Conservation
Alaska Department of Fish & Game
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained Amendment 2 to CSSB 155(RES).
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 03-19, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR CARL MORGAN reconvened the House Community and Regional
Affairs Standing Committee meeting at 8:05 a.m. [This is a
continuation of the May 13, 2003, hearing.] Representatives
Morgan and Samuels were present when the meeting reconvened.
Representatives Kott, Anderson, Cissna, and Kookesh arrived as
the meeting was in progress.
SB 155-PREDATOR CONTROL/AIRBORNE SHOOTING
CHAIR MORGAN announced that the committee would continue its
hearing on CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 155(RES), "An Act relating to
predator control programs; and providing for an effective date."
CHAIR MORGAN noted that this legislation had received extensive
public testimony in the House Resources Standing Committee.
Therefore, he announced that the committee will take action on
this legislation by 9:00 a.m.
Number 0205
DOROTHY KEELER provided the following testimony:
Evidently the potential for predator control to create
a tourism boycott is being taken seriously. ... this
new version of SB 155 ... is a vain attempt to hide
who would be responsible. If this bill passes,
Governor Murkowski will have created a state
sanctioned predator control program where he cannot be
directly blamed. If this bill passes, the legislature
has created a smoke screen trying to hide
responsibility. And the six Alaska Outdoor Council
members now sitting on the Board of Game, who were not
elected by the people and were selected based on their
eagerness to kill wolves, may have the power to bring
the State of Alaska to its financial knees with the
tourism boycott -- a tourism boycott that they have a
vested interest in prolonging. Initiating predator
controls [that] meet the harvest objectives set by the
Board of Game is initiating a never-ending predator
control program. The objectives set were based on
historic high levels established after years of
poisoning and aerial hunting of predators. If this
bill passes, you have asked the bullies of the
playground to bankrupt the parents of all the other
kids that want to use it. Nothing would please the
extremists in Alaska more -- their goal is to use the
governor, and now the legislature, to drive out all
those pesky nonconsumptive users who dare try to share
in the use of Alaska's wildlife resources. Pass this
bill and a tourism boycott or initiatives and
referendums are certain. Pass this bill and be
prepared to set aside a lot of money for lawsuits that
are just as certain. Pass this bill and you deserve
the shame of knowing you trashed Alaska's tourism
industry to benefit a handful of extremist hunters
whose dream is to monopolize the use of Alaska's
wildlife and return to the good old days of massive
statewide predator control.
Number 0426
MIKE FLEAGLE informed the committee that he was speaking on his
own behalf, although he is the chair of the Board of Game (BOG)
and is the Tribal leader of McGrath. Mr. Fleagle spoke in favor
of the legislation. As a rural resident in a wolf predation
zone where moose populations have plummeted, he said he is
looking for any attempt by the legislature or the governor to
help restore the balance of predator to prey, which [CSSB
155(RES)] does. This legislation removes the politics and
allows the decisions to be based on biology. Mr. Fleagle
related his understanding that the administration is opposed to
the section that removes the commissioner's written findings,
which some interpret as taking some of the administration's
authority. However, the legislation in its current form leaves
the fiscal and administrative authority in the hands of the
administration and leaves only regulatory authority with BOG.
Mr. Fleagle reiterated his support of [CSSB 155(RES)].
CHAIR MORGAN inquired as to Mr. Fleagle's stance on the
amendment [specifying that the administration has the ultimate
authority].
MR. FLEAGLE answered that he is neutral on the amendment because
the administration already has the ultimate authority through
its administrative and fiscal authority.
Number 0778
LEO KEELER, Adaptive Management Team, whose testimony was read
by Dorothy Keeler, as follows:
I was a member of the [Adaptive Management Team] and
developed the draft predator control plan. Before it
was finished, scientific reports showed the moose
population was growing but the bull:cow ratio in
popular hunting [areas] was the true problem. Because
of the new science the team never sent a team-approved
plan to the governor. Mike Fleagle agreed with the
subsistence science that justified reducing the moose
population objectives from 6,000 to 3,500. Now it is
known that hunters keep the bull:cow ratio as low as
six per hundred. He wants to reestablish the old
6,000 objective. This 6,000 figure is a guess made
from past high harvest during extreme predator control
days, not from science. Some legislators hope to
return those extreme predator controls and this
legislation is an attempt to benefit a single
wildlife interest group, hunters. Senate Bill 155
will authorize the Board of Game to continue to ignore
concerns with predator control. If passed, the
legislature will again be ignoring their
responsibility to protect all citizens' interest in
Alaska's resources. If passed, it will lead to
lawsuits, initiatives, and ultimately the collapse of
the Board of Game system. Hopefully, the Wildlife
Board that will replace the Board of Game will
represent all citizens and all users. I hope it will
remove the legislature from the decision process and
place control of Alaska's wildlife resources in the
hands of all citizens, not just extremist hunters. If
an initiative is needed to get a Wildlife Board, let's
start now.
Number 1025
ROBERT FITHIAN, Executive Director, Alaska Professional Hunters
Association, began by informing the committee that he, a master
guide and eco-tour operator, lives within Game Management Unit
13 (GMU 13). He also informed the committee that he has worked
with the Alaska Miner's Association as its elected statewide
president and has served on the McGrath Fish and Game Advisory
Committee. Mr. Fithian said that he has over 20 years of
knowledge of GMU 19 and the game populations near McGrath.
MR. FITHIAN noted that the committee should have a copy of his
written testimony and provided additional testimony as follows:
As you well know, the ability to find resolution on
any issue is to see what the middle ground is and work
to bring both sides to an acceptable point. I would
like to point out to you that Alaska has traded a vast
treasure of our wildlife resources to the animal
rights groups, such as the Alaska Wildlife Alliance,
Defenders of Wildlife, Friends of Animals, et cetera.
Since Alaska lost the ability to manage predators from
the air, in many portions of the state the overall
female populations of our moose, Dahl sheep, and
caribou herds have declined by over 55 percent. The
number of surviving female annual born of these
species is under three-and-a-half percent, which will
not allow any recruitment to the declining
populations. The annual harvest rate of these species
by humans is under 4 percent, while predation is
accountable for over 86 percent of them. Natural
mortality of old age, starvation, or disease accounts
the remaining 10 [percent]. What these facts show is
that if we stopped all hunting of these species in
these large regions today, a year from now there would
still be less of these animals. Human harvest is
having no significant effect on the populations.
Nothing could be more pointed to this demise than the
Chisana caribou herd on the northeastern end of the
Wrangell Mountains within the Wrangell St. Elias
National Park and Preserve. These caribou are the
only genetic strain of woodland caribou indigenous to
the United States. Once stable in population,
numbering in excess of 4,000, they currently number
fewer than 300 with no known survival of annual born
for the past several years, due to predation
predominately by wolves during the first four weeks of
their lives. Alaska and the Yukon Territory
biologists predict that extinction of this treasure
will occur within the next few years if nothing is
done to remedy the problem.
MR. FITHIAN continued:
Committee members and chairman, if any of the groups
that I've previously mentioned really cared about our
common trust wildlife resources, they'd be lined up in
droves picketing in front of the Department of
Interior establishments and threatening boycotts of
their parks. But we don't see any of that today, do
we. It was stated in Monday's testimony that our
population of ungulates is declining because of the
male to female ratios due to hunting, resulting in
poor pregnancy achievement. This is absolutely not
true. In the Kuskokwim and Nelchina regions where we
have the best scientific data available, the senior
biologist are Toby Bodro (ph) in McGrath and Bob Tobey
in Glennallen. I have contacted both of them and
found that there still exists an overall pregnancy
rate of well over 90 percent. In fact, in the McGrath
area every female moose that was tagged in the past
several years that has survived predation where there
is no hunting of cow moose has born calves every year.
It was also stated that the annual wolf harvest has
been increasing every year for the past decade and
that there's no reason to consider additional
management methods. May I point out that the wolves
have the ability to grow in number annually by over 40
percent. And that, yes, the annual harvest of wolves
by trapping and hunting has increased because there
are now well over three times as many wolves as there
were a decade ago.
MR. FITHIAN concluded by urging the committee to carefully
consider his testimony and pass this legislation.
Number 1379
TED SPRAKER informed the committee that his is a 30-year
resident who has recently retired from the Alaska Department of
Fish & Game (ADF&G) where he served as a wildlife biologist for
over 28 years. He noted that although he is a member of the
BOG, he is testifying on his own behalf. Mr. Spraker announced
his strong support of SB 155 because he believes the state is at
a crossroads in which it will rebuild prey populations or
continue to simply monitor their decline. Passage of this
legislation would provide the department with the tools
necessary to again be a proactive agency in the management of
predators. Mr. Spraker told the committee that he has trapped
during his years in Alaska. As a department biologist, Mr.
Spraker said that he has had the opportunity to live capture
hundreds of wolves, aerial shoot wolves, and land and shoot
wolves. From his 28-plus years of experience and discussions
with trappers across the state, Mr. Spraker related that simple
land-based trapping operations aren't going to remove the 70-80
percent necessary to allow the depressed moose populations to
[rebound]. Mr. Spraker mentioned that he has recently spent
time in Aniak where many people have related that it's difficult
to get too far away from the rivers to reach the corridors to
travel. Therefore, these people have expressed the need for
some sort of aerial or land and shoot hunting in order to remove
the high number of wolves necessary in these areas. With regard
to earlier testimony that the wolf harvest is increasing, Mr.
Spraker said that there's strong evidence illustrating that the
wolf harvest is increasing because the number of wolves is
increasing. Regardless, it isn't enough as evidenced by the
situation in McGrath.
MR. SPRAKER clarified that although he supported [CSSB
155(RES)], he doesn't support the amendment to reinstate the
commissioner's control over the board. Mr. Spraker pointed out
that the commissioner still has the ability to issue permits or
not and thus the commissioner continues to have control over any
predator control program that's authorized by the board. He
turned to McGrath, which he characterized as an example of
political involvement in management decisions. The McGrath
[management plan] has been on the books for over eight years,
and furthermore it has been approved by the board three times.
However, nothing has really been done. According to ADF&G,
almost $500,000, has already been spent on McGrath in order to
keep it on the books so that if predator control is authorized
it can be completed.
MR. SPRAKER turned to those who oppose predator control and said
that everyone has to agree that there will never be sufficient
data. If the McGrath program had started, the seasons would
have probably been increased and the department certainly would
have saved money. He recalled earlier testimony regarding the
fact that this is the only issue before the Board of Fish or the
Board of Game in which the commissioner has oversight. He
echoed earlier sentiments that he wasn't concerned with regard
to this administration's support, although he was concerned with
future administrations. Mr. Spraker related his belief that
predator management decisions should be made by the board, after
reviewing information provided by the department and hearing
from the public.
Number 1737
DONNE FLEAGLE, General Manager, MTNT, Limited, informed the
committee that MTNT, Limited, is a village corporation that
represents the villages of McGrath, Takotna, Nikolai, and
Telida. All four of the communities rely heavily on harvested
game and thus the availability of a healthy moose population is
very important. Ms. Fleagle said that [predator control] is
something that these communities have been struggling with for
over 10 years. Repeatedly intensive management plans for the
area have been approved. She related that various scientific
data has been reviewed and there have been discussions with many
statewide organizations. Furthermore, [area residents] as
hunters, trappers, gathers, and subsistence users have taken an
active interest in wildlife management. However, the moose
population continues its downward spiral while the issue seems
to be a public debate versus a [scientific] debate. Ms. Fleagle
acknowledged that there have been some gains in the field,
although she credited those to the local efforts in the region.
Ms. Fleagle announced that MTNT, Limited, supports SB 155
because it provides an additional tool for game management,
which may have an impact on turning the trend in the region.
Furthermore, MTNT, Limited, does support giving BOG the
authority to institute a predator control program because the
scientific data is present [to support] it and the state has the
resources to support it, she said.
Number 1943
OLIVER BURRIS informed the committee that he is testifying on
his own behalf, although he is a member of the Alaska Wildlife
Conservation Association and the Alaska Outdoor Council as well
as many other pro-management groups. Mr. Burris provided the
following testimony:
The Alaska Constitution gives the legislature the
responsibility and the authority to manage game. At
statehood, the legislature gave authority for predator
control to the [Alaska] Department of Fish & Game. In
1983 the Department of Law settled out of court to
transfer predator control to the Board of Game. In
1987 Governor Cowper canceled all predator control on
habitat improvement programs. His authority to do
that was never legally questioned. Since the various
administrations have assumed authority for predator
control and de facto all wildlife management despite
several laws passed by the legislature to force the
administration to manage game as directed by the
constitution.
The referendums that were passed and written into law
by the Department of Law gave the commissioner of [the
Alaska Department of] of Fish & Game the authority for
aerial shooting and same day land and shooting. I
don't believe this was legal, but the legislature has
the authority to correct this and the current Senate
and House bills will do just that. We must return to
active constitutional management of our wildlife
resources; it's necessary for our traditional and
cultural values and the economic health of our state.
We have lost millions of dollars, maybe billions, in
the loss of meat and other economic benefits to
resident hunters because of declining game
populations. Economic loss for nonresident hunters,
who are the original Alaskan tourist, has been equal
or greater. The bottom line is we manage our
renewable wildlife resources or we lose them. You
have heard testimony that the decline of our moose and
caribou are inevitable, and it's just not true. SB
155 is a great step in the right direction and I urge
you to pass this bill on. The proposed amendment that
came about to give the commissioner a seven-day veto
period on predator control, I'd just like to comment
that the commissioner has no more ability to determine
the effectiveness of airborne shooting than the Board
of Game. From 1978 to 1986 the Board of Game made
that determination. From 1959 to 1972 the department
regulated public aerial shooting and ... same day
aerial shooting. My bottom line message is use it or
lose it -- management or lose it.
Number 2129
MIKE TINKER, Chair, Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory Committee,
urged the legislature to take back the responsibility of game
management given by the constitution. The Fairbanks Fish and
Game Advisory Committee would like to see Alaska's wildlife
resources utilize the habitat because it's the only way all the
user groups can be helped, he related. Mr. Tinker urged the
committee to look upon these threats of lawsuits and referendums
with disdain, those folks have never been successful with a
boycott in North America and there's no reason why they would be
now. Furthermore, it remains important for Alaska to stand up
for what it believes to be right in managing its wildlife so
that it utilizes its habitat and can be used by Alaskans. The
aforementioned is why predator control is necessary, he said.
Mr. Tinker concluded by urging the passage of this legislation.
Number 2244
SHARON McLEOD-EVERETTE clarified that although she is a member
of the Board of Game, she is testifying on her own behalf. Ms.
McLeod-Everette informed the committee that she has lived in
Alaska all but the first 11 months of her almost 54 years. She
noted that she grew up in Unit 13 when it was still quite rural.
For meat, her family hunted moose and caribou and snared rabbits
and caught fish. Ms. McLeod-Everette said that her family has
seen firsthand the demise of the moose population in Unit 13,
primarily when airborne hunting of wolves ended. She recalled
her childhood when moose were [plentiful]. In 1983 she was an
assistant guide who spent about a month each fall up close with
wildlife and by 1989 it was clear that populations of animals
were changing. The moose were dwindling and the predators
exploded. For example, it became the norm to have six different
bear tracks in her tracks every day and no moose calves for
about five years. Finally, there are about one or two calves a
year in areas where there were once lots of single calves and
twins.
MS. McLEOD-EVERETTE said she is very much in favor of this
legislation in its unamended version. She pointed out that
Alaska's constitution lays out goals and activities, which she
paraphrased as follows:
First, the legislature provides for the use and
conservation of all of our natural resources, which
includes fish and game for the maximum benefit of the
people. Second, that these resources are reserved for
common use. Third, that these resources are supposed
to be used, developed, and maintained on the sustained
yield principle, which means that they're supposed to
be nurtured, weeded, and maintained so that they last
in perpetuity. And fourth, the legislature can
provide for improvements of services to assure greater
use and development of fish wildlife and waters.
MS. McLEOD-EVERETTE said SB 155 provides the tools to achieve
these mandates for Alaska's game resources. Ms. McLeod-Everette
related that when Governor Murkowski asked each prospective
member to serve on the BOG, he made it clear that he wanted to
return game to abundance in Alaska and manage it for maximum
sustained yield. She said she agreed to work to achieve those
goals. She informed the committee that there are many areas
that have suffered from the failure to reduce predators, such as
McGrath, the remainder of Unit 19 and Units 13, 20, 21, and 24.
From testimony at the March 3, 2003, BOG meeting it sounds as if
Units 14 and 16 also have dreadfully low moose numbers
accompanied by high predators. This legislation [SB 155] takes
great strides to ensure that the constitutional mandates can be
met and that the state isn't stuck with the wait-and-see
approach. By allowing airborne hunting, a tool is returned to
the management toolbox in order to keep predators in check.
Removing the commissioner approval step, which hasn't always
been present, for the airborne activity for a BOG authorized
management program assures that future administrations can't
[oppose] the board's finding to reduce predators by airborne
methods. Ms. McLeod-Everette urged the passage of SB 155
unamended.
Number 2434
TOM SCARBOROUGH noted that he is testifying on his own behalf,
although he is a member of various pro-management organizations.
He reiterated that wildlife is a valuable resource. He recalled
that in the 1980s ADF&G produced a study which valued each moose
in the amount of about $6,500. With inflation the
aforementioned would amount to over $10,000 today. Therefore,
the decline of Alaska's wildlife has cost the state probably
into the billions. Mr. Scarborough characterized SB 155 as a
step in the right direction, and therefore he urged its passage
to the House floor without the amendment including the
commissioner.
Number 2578
JESSE VANDERZANDEN, Executive Director, Alaska Outdoor Council
(AOC), provided the following testimony:
We represent about 50 outdoor clubs for a collective
membership of nearly 12,000 Alaskan hunters, fishers,
trappers, and public access advocates. I appreciate
the opportunity to testify today in support of one of
our top priorities for this legislative session, ...
Senate Bill 155. I also appreciate the folks who
testified before me in support of this bill. They did
a superb job making the case for passage of this bill.
Perhaps it's most appropriate to start by stating what
this bill is not. It's not about fair chase or
ethics. It's not about aiding and abetting trophy
hunters. It's not about fostering, as I've heard in
previous testimony, wild-eyed Super Cub pilots. And
most important, it's not about eliminating wolves or
even being against predators. These are popular myths
created by folks who seek to put wolves on a pedestal,
and by doing so, create public sympathy for them at
the expense of other wildlife species. This
undermines the integrity of scientific wildlife
management and every Alaskan who wishes to utilize
wild food for sustenance. These myths can and should
be refuted. You have an opportunity to do that today.
This bill is about asserting the state's right to
manage wildlife in a scientific manner for the benefit
of its citizenry. It's about helping the state meet
its statutory and constitutional obligations of
managing wildlife for sustained yield. It's about
putting wildlife management back into the hands of
professional managers who know it best - who know
population levels, predation impacts, habitat and
weather conditions, use patterns, and the myriad of
factors that must be accounted for in managing
wildlife for sustained yield.
This bill is narrow in focus. It would limit airborne
or same day airborne predation management to only
those areas where big game populations are depressed
and where predation has conclusively been determined
to be a factor in that decline. This management tool
could only be activated on 10-20 percent of Alaska's
lands once federal lands, closed areas, urbanization,
and "rocks and ice" are accounted for.
This bill requires authorization by the Board of Game
to conduct airborne or same day airborne predation
management within the context of an approved wildlife
management plan. These plans are founded on the
recommendations of professional wildlife managers and
are regularly scrutinized and commented on by the
public in one of the most open and deliberative public
processes in the nation.
This bill seeks to establish consistency and clarity
regarding the commissioner's role in the board's
process. Currently, the commissioner cannot intervene
in the Board of Fisheries' process unless by emergency
authority. This authority is generally only exercised
during times of conservation crisis resulting from
unforeseen circumstances that could not and were not
addressed by the board beforehand. The authority for
such matters should be consistent between the Board of
Fisheries and the Board of Game.
It should be recognized that airborne or same day
airborne predation management is not a widespread
practice, but one we believe must be available to
respond to ever changing environmental and predator-
prey dynamics. It's also available in nearly every
other state in the Union and given Alaska's
challenging geography and wildlife management, it
should be allowed here.
This bill also ties predation management to approved
population objectives. These objectives seek to
establish how many moose and how many predators could
co-exist in a long-term sustainable manner in a
certain area. Predators are part of the management
equation - they are conserved for, they are accounted
for, and they are managed for, not against. It's not
a question of how we manage wolves - it's a question
of how we manage wildlife. These population
objectives also account for human harvest; they must,
if hunting is to continue and if predator and prey
populations are to be conserved and maintained.
And herein lies the crux of the issue before you
today. We believe that human harvest of wildlife for
sustenance is vitally important and should be factored
into the wildlife management equation. Airborne and
same day airborne predator management is an essential
part of keeping that equation manageable. Animal
rights groups opposed to this bill - quite frankly -
often do not believe human harvest should be managed
for; they would rather discontinue predator harvest
altogether in favor of a "natural" predator-prey cycle
void of human intervention. By taking this position,
we believe they relegate food for harvest to the
lowest common denominator of wildlife management. I
submit to you that if the legislature wants to talk
about ethics, that's the question.
We urge you to put Alaskans who utilize wild food for
sustenance, who share a strong conservation ethic for
nature's predators and prey, who rely on individual
responsibility back into the management equation by
passing this bill out of committee and sending it to
the floor.
The committee took an at-ease from 8:50 a.m. to 9:05 a.m.
CHAIR MORGAN noted that there are two amendments to be offered.
Number 2926
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA moved that the committee adopt Amendment
1, which reads as follows:
Page 2, lines 22 and 23:
*Sec.2. AS 16.05.783 is amended by adding a new
subsection to read:
(e) When the Board of Game authorizes a
predator control program that includes airborne or
same day airborne shooting, the board shall establish
predator reduction objectives and limits and the
methods and means to be employed. Authorized predator
control programs shall be carried out only by
Department of Fish and Game employees.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON objected.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA explained that Amendment 1 attempts to
address what she and her constituents feel to be the most
problematic part of this issue.
TAPE 03-19, SIDE B
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA related that the analysis that she has
reviewed specify that people have mixed feelings about predator
control and there seems to be a wide disparity of views on this
issue. However, there appears to be uniform concern with regard
to having professionals execute predator control that is based
on evidence-based scientific decisions made with local input.
This amendment doesn't speak to who should make the final
decision.
Number 2856
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS said that it seems that if the desire is
to hunt the predators, the season could be opened for those.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA agreed that it could be done.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS remarked that then there could just be a
hunting season as opposed to only allowing ADF&G employees the
ability to execute predator control. He related his belief that
the [predator] populations could most efficiently be managed by
increasing the bag limits.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON mentioned that the governor doesn't want
the type of change [proposed in Amendment 1].
Number 2816
SENATOR SEEKINS said that the governor has specifically said
that he wants local involvement not department personnel or
aircraft to perform airborne hunting. Senator Seekins noted
that it isn't uncommon for there to be certified airborne
gunners throughout the nation. Furthermore, properly trained
private citizens are as capable and humane as department
personnel. Moreover, when private individuals perform this the
state doesn't bear any expense, although it can monitor the
program.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA offered an amendment to Amendment 1, which
would insert language such that the bold and underlined language
would read as follows: "Authorized predator control same day
airborne programs shall be carried out only by Department of
Fish and Game employees."
SENATOR SEEKINS opined that most of the communities outside of
downtown Anchorage have no problem with that because the desire
is to have effective, efficient, and humane predator control.
Senator Seekins pointed out that the federal Airborne Hunting
Act requires only that those who participate be properly
permitted or licensed by the controlling state organization.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA turned to the two statewide initiatives on
same day airborne predator control and said that she has to pay
attention to those.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON remarked that this is a matter of
opinion with regard to the process. He noted that this
amendment would oppose the intent of the legislation, and
therefore he maintained his objection.
A roll call vote was taken. Representative Cissna voted in
favor of the adoption of Amendment 1 as amended.
Representatives Samuels, Anderson, and Morgan voted against it.
Therefore, Amendment 1 failed by a vote of 1-3.
Number 2557
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON moved that the committee adopt Amendment
2, which reads as follows:
Page 1, line 9, through page 2, line 17:
Delete all material and insert the following:
"(1) the Board of Game has determined based
on information provided by the department
(A) in regard to an identified big game prey
population under AS 16.05.255(g) that [COMMISSIONER OF
FISH AND GAME ACTING UNDER A REQUEST FROM THE BOARD OF
GAME MAKES WRITTEN FINDINGS BASED ON PREY POPULATION]
objectives set by the board for the population have
not been achieved, [UNDER AS 16.05.255(g) that
[(A)] predation is an important cause for
the failure to achieve the objectives set by the board
[FACTOR CONTRIBUTING TO A LOW OR DECLINING PREY
POPULATION THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH A GAME MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM AUTHORIZED BY THE BOARD OF GAME], and that a
reduction of predation can reasonably be expected to
aid in the achievement of the objectives [RESULT IN
AIDING AN INCREASE IN THE PREY POPULATION OR IN
ARRESTING THE DECLINE OF THE PREY POPULATION]; or
(B) that a disease or parasite of a predator
population
(i) is threatening the normal
biological condition of the predator population; or
(ii) if left untreated, would spread to
other populations; unless [AND]
(2) the commissioner, within seven days after
adoption of the plan, determines in writing that
[AIRBORNE OR] same day airborne shooting is not
necessary to achieve the objectives set [ACCOMPLISH A
GAME MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AUTHORIZED] by the Board of
Game."
CHAIR MORGAN objected for discussion purposes.
Number 2514
MATT ROBUS, Acting Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation,
Alaska Department of Fish & Game, explained that Amendment 2
attempts to offer a compromise between the original SB 155 and
HB 208. There were proposals for some fairly technical
adjustments to the current statute in order to overcome the
difficulty of having the commissioner go through the finding
process at the request of the BOG for the McGrath predator
control program that BOG forwarded to the department. However,
the legislation has changed into a much broader change of the
existing same day airborne statute. Mr. Robus acknowledged that
Senator Seekins and his staff have been good about working with
the department and modifying some language. However, whether or
not the commissioner will retain a role in generating a
predation control program that involves aerial methods or same
day airborne methods remains. The main reason the commissioner
doesn't have a role in the current bill is because currently,
the commissioner can receive a request from the board and never
make a finding. Furthermore, the commissioner doesn't have to
give a reason for not making the finding.
MR. ROBUS explained that Amendment 2 specifies that a predator
control program would go forward unless the commissioner, within
a seven-day window after the board takes action, justifies in
writing why [the action] should not occur. The administration
believes the aforementioned would prevent the indefinite delay
of a program while allowing the commissioner and the
administration as a whole to have a role in finalizing the
predator control programs.
Number 2344
SENATOR SEEKINS expressed concern with the following language of
Amendment 2: "unless [AND] (2) the commissioner, within seven
days after adoption of the plan, determines in writing that
[AIRBORNE OR] same day airborne shooting is not necessary to
achieve the objectives set [ACCOMPLISH A GAME MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
AUTHORIZED] by the Board of Game." The language doesn't specify
that the commissioner has to publish findings as to why same day
airborne shooting isn't necessary, which isn't a scientifically
based program, he opined. Senator Seekins then drew attention
to a document in the committee packet entitled "ACTIVATION
POINTS FOR AN AIRBORNE PREDATOR CONTROL PLAN" and pointed out
that the process is extensive and requires departmental
participation, and thereby the commissioner, through his people,
is involved in the entire process. Furthermore, it's an open
public process. Senator Seekins pointed out that paragraph
number three on the document entitled "ACTIVATION POINTS FOR AN
AIRBORNE PREDATOR CONTROL PLAN" specifies that the board must
determine that the objectives established by the board haven't
been achieved, predation is an important cause, and a reduction
of predation could reasonably be expected to aid in the
achievement of the objectives. The aforementioned information
would be provided by degreed scientists in the department.
Therefore, Senator Seekins opined that there are plenty of
avenues for the commissioner's input regarding whether the
program would be necessary or not. He said that he couldn't
agree with the language in Amendment 2 because it interjects
politics. However, Senator Seekins informed the committee that
during the earlier at-ease he spoke with the governor's staff
and agreed to continue to review additional information such
that an emergency method could be developed. Without Amendment
2, the current program assures that any decision to activate an
airborne program is based on the best available science.
Number 2127
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if there is any way to add language
to Amendment 3 that would answer Senator Seekins' hesitation
because the buck ultimately stops with the commissioner. She
said it seems like a good idea to include the commissioner.
SENATOR SEEKINS pointed out that no other place in ADF&G
regulations does a commissioner have veto power; it was done for
political purposes. Furthermore, the Alaska Supreme Court has
ruled that the commissioner cannot effectively veto a decision
by the Board of Fisheries. Senator Seekins highlighted that the
governor appoints the Board of Game who have to be approved by
the legislature. If the board is given this responsibility,
shouldn't it also have the authority to carry out its job, he
asked. Senator Seekins pointed out that although he understands
the governor's concern, the legislature can act to correct an
abuse. However, he didn't believe that the BOG would put forth
an ill-conceived airborne control program and the legislature
wouldn't allow that to happen. Senator Seekins opined that if
the governor was able to show that something was done on a
scientifically unsound basis or that the process wasn't followed
correctly, then [the administration] could go to court to stop
it. Senator Seekins said that he wouldn't have a problem with
having an emergency order option to stop a program that isn't
based on sound science.
MR. ROBUS said that [the department] is willing to continue to
work with Senator Seekins and the administration on this issue.
SENATOR SEEKINS announced that he would continue to work with
the chair of the House Rules Standing Committee.
Number 1851
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA inquired as to how much testimony has been
heard on [the issue encompassed in] Amendment 2.
SENATOR SEEKINS answered that in the Senate there was no
testimony on a [similar amendment], although it was proposed.
He noted that [the similar amendment] was rejected. He said
that there was extensive testimony on [the issue encompassed in
Amendment 2] in the House Resources Standing Committee. He
recalled that at least 99 percent of the testimony has not been
in favor of Amendment 2.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if there is anyone who wished to
testify on Amendment 2.
MS. KEELER said that she would like to specifically speak to
Amendment 2.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON cautioned [allowing testimony on
Amendment 2] because if everyone who testified was allowed to
speak to each amendment before the committee, a committee
couldn't get through even one piece of legislation. Therefore,
he suggested that Ms. Keeler not be allowed to speak to
Amendment 2 otherwise everyone would have to be allowed to speak
on Amendment 2 and every other amendment.
CHAIR MORGAN agreed with Representative Anderson and related his
belief that Amendment 2 has had ample discussion in this
committee and the House Resources Standing Committee.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA said that she hasn't heard any testimony,
save the department, on Amendment 2.
SENATOR SEEKINS recalled that he heard several members of the
Board of Game testify in opposition to Amendment 2 as well as
the representative of AOC and a couple of folks from the
Fairbanks Legislative Information Office.
CHAIR MORGAN reiterated his belief that Amendment 2 has received
ample discussion. He noted that he believes those on-line and
off-net did know about Amendment 2. He reminded the committee
that there is a motion to adopt Amendment 2 before the
committee. He maintained his objection to Amendment 2.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Anderson, Samuels,
and Morgan voted against it. Representative Cissna abstained.
Therefore, Amendment 2 failed by a vote of 0-3.
The committee took an at-ease from 9:36 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.
Number 1504
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON moved to report CSSB 155(RES) out of
committee with individual recommendations [and the accompanying
fiscal notes]. There being no objection, CSSB 155(RES) was
reported from the House Community and Regional Affairs Standing
Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Community and Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 10:02 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|