Legislature(1993 - 1994)
02/07/1994 08:15 AM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 7, 1994
8:15 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bill Williams, Chairman
Representative Bill Hudson, Vice Chairman
Representative Con Bunde
Representative Pat Carney
Representative John Davies
Representative Joe Green
Representative Jeannette James
Representative Eldon Mulder
Representative David Finkelstein
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HB 266: "An Act relating to guide-outfitter and
master guide-outfitter licenses; extending
the termination date of the Big Game
Commercial Services Board; and providing
for an effective date."
CSHB 266(L&C) MOVED FROM COMMITTEE WITH
INDIVIDUAL RECOMMENDATIONS
*HB 343: "An Act relating to resident sport fishing,
hunting, and trapping licenses, to special
nonresident military small game and sport
fishing licenses, and to the fee for a
collecting permit; and providing for an
effective date."
HEARD AND HELD IN COMMITTEE FOR FURTHER
CONSIDERATION
(* First public hearing)
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE GAIL PHILLIPS
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol, Room 216
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Phone: 465-2689
Position Statement: Prime sponsor HB 266
PAUL JOHNSON, Chairman
Big Game Commercial Services Board
P.O. Box 22
Elfin Cove, Alaska 99825
Phone: 239-2211
Position Statement: Supported HB 266
KARL LUCK, Director
Division of Occupational Licensing
Department of Commerce and Economic Development
P.O. Box 110806
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0806
Phone: 465-2538
Position Statement: Supported HB 266
GERON BRUCE
Department of Fish and Game
P.O. Box 25526
Juneau, Alaska 99802
Phone: 465-6143
Position Statement: Supported HB 266 and opposed HB 343
REPRESENTATIVE TERRY MARTIN
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol, Room 411
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Phone: 465-3783
Position Statement: Prime sponsor HB 343
KEVIN BROOKS
Department of Fish & Game
P.O. Box 25526
Juneau, Alaska 99802
Phone: 465-5999
Position Statement: Answered a question
BILL VALENTINE, Director
Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection
Department of Public Safety
450 Whittier Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: 465-4322
Position Statement: Neutral position
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 266
SHORT TITLE: ELIGIBILITY FOR GUIDE-OUTFITTER LICENSE
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) PHILLIPS
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
04/20/83 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
03/30/93 854 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
03/30/93 854 (H) L&C, RESOURCES, FINANCE
04/15/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
04/20/93 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
01/25/94 (H) L&C AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 17
01/25/94 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
01/26/94 2151 (H) L&C RPT CS(L&C) 3DP 4NR
01/26/94 2151 (H) DP: HUDSON, SITTON, MULDER
01/26/94 2151 (H) NR: MACKIE, PORTER, GREEN,
WILLIAMS
01/26/94 2151 (H) -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DCED)
1/26/94
01/26/94 2151 (H) REFERRED TO RESOURCES
02/07/94 (H) RES AT 08:15 AM CAPITOL 124
BILL: HB 343
SHORT TITLE: RESIDENT SPORT AND HUNTING LICENSES
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) MARTIN,PHILLIPS
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/03/94 2017 (H) PREFILE RELEASED
01/10/94 2017 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
01/10/94 2017 (H) RESOURCES, FINANCE
02/07/94 (H) RES AT 08:15 AM CAPITOL 124
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 94-10, SIDE A
Number 000
The House Resources Committee was called to order by
Chairman Bill Williams at 8:15 a.m. Members present at the
call to order were Representatives Williams, Hudson, Bunde,
Carney, Davies, and Green. Members absent were
Representatives Finkelstein, James and Mulder.
CHAIRMAN BILL WILLIAMS announced there was a quorum present
and told committee members they would hear HB 266 by
Representative Gail Phillips and HB 343 by Representative
Terry Martin.
HB 266 - Eligibility For Guide-Outfitter Licenses
(CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS noted for the record REPRESENTATIVE
MULDER had joined the committee at 8:20 a.m.)
Number 016
REPRESENTATIVE GAIL PHILLIPS, PRIME SPONSOR HB 266, read her
sponsor statement. "This bill seeks to accomplish three
things: Extend the Big Game Commercial Services (BGCS)
Board's statutory authority to June 30, 1997; broaden the
statute in one section to enable compliance with a court
decision in Cobb v. State; and reenact and define the
"Master Guide" license. This legislation is submitted on
behalf of the Big Game Commercial Services Board as a result
of their work and deliberations.
"The first part of this bill is self-explanatory. The board
has reached the end of it's tenure and currently is in it's
sunset year which expires in June 1994. This important
board governs a 100 million dollar a year industry. It
received high marks on last year's legislative audit report
and enjoys tremendous support and respect statewide. The
second section of the bill deletes language on client
recommendations required for obtaining a guide-outfitter
license. This part of the current statute language is too
narrow to adequately and fairly address some situations the
board has come across. For example, the law states that an
applicant for this license must have two recommendations per
year for the most recent three years. If an applicant had
become incapacitated during one of those years and could not
guide, they would be ineligible regardless of the number of
clients they had guided in previous years.
Number 030
"Since the premise underlying the licensing criteria is
historical experience, the board would like to see the
minimum number of client recommendations changed from six to
eight, and have the wherewithal to tailor the qualifying
years to fit the situation. In order to respond to these
situations in a timely fashion, it is desirable to have a
board with the ability to set these requirements in
regulations, where they can be fine tuned more quickly than
having to go through the legislative process. The BGCS
Board Chairman, Paul Johnson, is here today and can answer
specific questions on the section."
Number 045
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS continued: "Section three of CSHB
266 details the changes needed to make the master guide
classification fair and workable. Statutes enacted in 1989,
grandfathered in some master guide licenses without
provisions to accommodate future qualified candidates.
While the state recognizes no substantive difference between
the master guide and regular guide-outfitter license, the
ability of those grandfathered in to advertise as master
guides is unfair to those of equal experience who may only
advertise as guide-outfitters. This bill lays out
requirements for the master guide license, including
primarily the minimum number of client recommendations, and
minimum years of participation as a guide-outfitter, which
are substantially above those requirements for a regular
guide-outfitter license.
"The House Labor and Commerce Committee heard this bill, and
amended it to include the 1997 sunset date, and the new
language in subsection 10 of section 2. The bill was passed
out of that committee with three Do Pass, four No
Recommendation, and zero do not pass votes. I strongly
support HB 266. The continuation of this board is vital to
the continued health of our big game resources, and the
industry it serves."
Number 063
PAUL JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN, BIG GAME COMMERCIAL SERVICES BOARD,
stated problems in the guiding industry are being worked
through and felt it is important to keep the board
functioning.
REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE asked if all guides will eventually
be master guides, resulting in master guides losing their
edge in advertising.
MR. JOHNSON responded if someone had a clean bill of health
for a period of years, showed that they respected the
resources of the state and did not have any ethical problems
with their clients, they were put in the category of master
guide. In 1988, it was determined the master guide
classification needed to be removed, which it was but
grandfathered those already in the category. This caused a
conflict in advertising.
Number 085
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE questioned how many master guides will
be added in the next five years.
MR. JOHNSON replied approximately 70.
(CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS noted for the record that REPRESENTATIVES
JAMES AND FINKELSTEIN had joined the committee at 8:20 a.m.)
Number 096
REPRESENTATIVE PAT CARNEY noticed on line 19, page 2, the
number eight replaced the number six and the language "and
meets other requirements established by the board in
regulation" was added, and asked Mr. Johnson what other
requirements he would envision.
MR. JOHNSON stated licensing is presently based on two
recommendations per year from the most recent past three
year period. HB 266 will allow additional recommendations,
but the board will have the ability to determine the
qualifying years. The bill will delete the requirement for
a set number of recommendations per year over the most
recent three year period. The qualifying years will be the
other requirements.
REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY expressed concern that the proposed
language leaves it up to the board to decide what
requirements will be established in future years.
MR. JOHNSON responded there are other sections of current
statutes with the same language and the board has
historically been very reasonable.
Number 115
REPRESENTATIVE BILL HUDSON agreed the language is somewhat
standard. He felt the language creates a stronger standard
for the master guide classification.
KARL LUCK, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT expressed
support of HB 266 and said he was available for questions.
GERON BRUCE, ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME (ADF&G)
expressed support of HB 266 and said the department had not
developed a position on the bill, as the sponsor did not ask
the department to do so. He stated ADF&G appreciates the
work the BGCS board does and believes it is important that
the board continues.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES asked if the intent of the
language "has been favorably recommended in writing by eight
big game hunters" is to get recommendations from hunters who
had been on eight separate different hunts.
MR. JOHNSON replied that was correct.
Number 151
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON made a motion to MOVE CSHB 266(L&C)
out of committee with INDIVIDUAL RECOMMENDATIONS.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections.
Hearing none, the motion PASSED.
HB 343 - Resident Sport & Hunting Licenses
Number 163
REPRESENTATIVE TERRY MARTIN, PRIME SPONSOR HB 343, stated HB
343 is a common sense bill which attempts to lower
administrative costs of issuing licenses every year and make
it more convenient to the residents by offering the option
of buying a one, two or three year license for sport
fishing, hunting or trapping. He said there is also an
attempt to use a different type of paper for the licenses
themselves. He noted that there were 176,000 fishing
licenses issued last year and 182,000 issued the year before
involving revenues of $6.6 million. Hunting licenses
brought in revenue of $5.2 million. He stated there is a
lot of paper work involved each year and this bill would
decrease the load on ADF&G.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN explained there is a $5 incentive each
year; if a person wants to advance their license for three
years, they will save $5 each year. He felt multiple year
licenses will save ADF&G a lot of work and money. He said
ADF&G feels there will be many people who will get multi-
year licenses and go out of state, be a nonresident and come
back to the state. He commented long time residents and
property owners are known and he felt it will not be a
problem.
Number 244
REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY stated on page 3, line 21 the bill
talks about an annual free license for disabled veterans.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN responded he believes it was an
oversight as there is no reason why a free license cannot
also be a multi-year license.
REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY felt if the intent of the bill is to
make it simpler for people, the free license does not
accomplish that.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN recommended the committee make that
change.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVID FINKELSTEIN asked if Representative
Martin was suggesting multi-year licenses will only be
available to people who have lived in the state 10-15 years
or own property.
Number 261
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN replied he was not sure what to
suggest. He knows people who go fishing every year and he
did not know what criteria should be used to prove they are
not going to go out of state, become a nonresident and sneak
back in to save $5.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN asked if there was any
relationship between the criteria set in HB 343 or existing
law. He said he did not recall owning property as being a
significant factor in the current regulation.
Number 280
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN replied it is not. He said he was
just trying to think of ideas to help solve the problem of
people cheating and misusing their multi-year licenses,
which ADF&G feels is an important issue.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON stated sections eight and nine address
nonresidents. He said an annual license as opposed to a
multi-year license in those sections is what should be kept
in regulation. The only difference is that nondisabled
people get the license at the annual fee and at half of the
nonresident game fee, but if a person is disabled 50 percent
or is in the Alaska Territorial Guard, they get an annual
license free.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN said he was not anxious to change
military licenses.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN commented the sponsor summary
says "HB 343 would allow military personnel, and their
dependents, who are permanently stationed in the state but
do not qualify as a "resident", to obtain special annual
nonresident military small game and sport fishing licenses
at the same rate as the annual rate of a resident license."
He asked how that relates to section eight.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN replied section eight would still
require an annual license. He said it is like automobile
tags; while nonresident military members are in the state of
Alaska, they get a special fee rather than a nonresident
fee.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN said it seems that AS
16.05.340(d) says that nonresident military get their tags
at one-half of the nonresident rate but in the sponsor
summary, it says the nonresident military get it at the same
fee as a resident.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN replied they get a special discount.
Number 345
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON said under section eight, it states
"the annual special nonresident military small game and
sport fishing at the annual rate" and then says "big
game..." issued at one-half of the nonresident rate. He
said the difference is that one is small game and fishing
and the other is big game. He explained what HB 343 does is
give nonresident military small game and fishing licenses at
the annual rate but it requires one-half of the nonresident
rate for big game licenses.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN said it appears in section eight,
there are no substantive changes made in the law.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES felt if the sponsor summary was
amended to read "it would also continue to allow..."
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN said HB 343 is being described to
accomplish two things that he does not think it actually
does.
Number 383
REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES felt the words "annual" has
to be put in section eight because they get a special
nonresident military license at the rate for the residential
license, which then could entitle them to an annual,
biennial, or triennial license.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN agreed but said the sponsor
summary has two sentences in it; the first is correct and
the second sentence does not have anything to do with the
bill.
REPRESENTATIVE ELDON MULDER remarked he liked the idea of
multiple year licenses and asked Representative Martin if he
would consider just doubling the fee on a biennial license
and tripling the fee on a triennial license.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN said many people rely on licenses not
just for the fun of sport but for food on the table. He
said if they can pay the fee ahead of time for a two year or
three year license, they are given an incentive of saving $5
each year. He added that the idea is to also decrease the
demand on government.
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER asked what it costs to replace a lost
license.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN replied it costs five dollars.
Number 450
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN observed when reviewing the
initial year, the second year, and the third year of
proposed resident sport fishing license fees, there is a $5
savings for the second year and a $10 savings for the third
year but hunting goes from $5 to $15. He asked why there is
a disproportionate jump in hunting licenses.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN replied $5 is still saved per year.
He said, referring to section two, lines 13 and 14, a two
year license would be $50 and HB 343 makes it $45.
Number 475
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stated that was not the issue. He said
there is a $5 savings per charge or a combined charge
savings of $10, but it is the following year he was
referring to where fishing goes down five more dollars and
hunting goes down $10. He noted that if a person was to buy
individual licenses, there would be a $10 break on a three
year fishing license but a $15 break on a three year hunting
license. Representative Green felt to make it consistent
the hunting license the third year should be $65 instead of
$60.
Number 515
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said he has been buying hunting and
fishing licenses for over thirty years and he has never lost
his license, thrown it in the river, or had it fall apart.
He suggested people put their licenses in zip lock bags. He
noted that the bill is attempting to save money, yet is
proposing two new free licenses. Representative Bunde
suggested on page two, line 20, delete those free licenses
and not add any new free licenses.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN said what Representative Bunde was
referring to is current law and those people go through an
extra step to prove their income level to qualify.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES expressed her support of multiple year
licenses as they do reduce administrative expenses. She
said she is not sure it is necessary to give people an
incentive to get multi-year licenses but suspected if there
is not an incentive, people probably will not do so. She
did not think the state's license fees are excessive and she
would not have any problem raising the fees. She said there
is a need for a more durable license such as a laminated
license.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES commented that the so-called free
licenses are not new, they are in existing statutes.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON noted that two years ago, the state
went through a massive fee increase in licenses. Many of
the current fees were adopted because Alaska is in direct
competition with Canada.
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER clarified that Representative Martin
would be willing to go with rates of annual-$15; biennial-
$30; and triennial-$45.
REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN replied that was fine.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN felt laminating licenses would be a
good idea.
REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY expressed concern that what is being
discussed is getting complicated and felt if the same fee is
going to be charged every year, people will not take
advantage of it. He said the only incentive to get a three
year license is money saved.
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS advised if licenses were to be laminated,
each store would have to have a laminating machine and it
would get very costly.
Number 689
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES felt if the committee is going to make
fees consistent, page 2, lines 6 and 16 should be modified.
The triennial licenses should be amended from $95 to $100.
TAPE 94-10, SIDE B
GERON BRUCE, DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME, stated there are
other reasons why annual renewal of licenses is important.
In order to get the federal money that both the Wildlife
Conservation Division and the Sport Fish Division receive
annually, ADF&G has to annually certify to the federal
government, the sales of sport hunting and fishing licenses
which Alaska issues. He said ADF&G could still certify the
sales if the state went to a biennial or triennial system
but it would be complicated. Instead of simplifying the
process and reducing administrative work, it will make it
more complicated.
MR. BRUCE pointed out that in some fisheries and hunts where
there is a seasonal bag limit, people are required to record
harvests on the back of their licenses. This will require a
larger stock of paper to enable a person to record two or
three years of harvest. He reminded committee members that
it is vendors who issue the licenses, not ADF&G. When a
laminated license is considered, the vendors will be
affected by the change.
Number 040
MR. BRUCE stated that ADF&G does respect and concur with
Representative Martin's intention to improve the convenience
for the public. However, he felt there might be better ways
in which that could be accomplished including the purchase
of licenses through the mail. He noted there are a number
of subtle complexities in HB 343 which need to be
considered. The fiscal impact on ADF&G will be significant.
He said ADF&G is trying to get as many dollars as possible
out in the field to manage resources and provide the maximum
opportunities to harvest them.
Number 067
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked if ADF&G will lose federal
revenue because of the three year cycle or because of the
actual fee levels.
MR. BRUCE replied he did not say they would lose funding,
but rather to receive funding, ADF&G is required to submit
certain reports certifying the sale of licenses and what is
done with the money received from the licenses. It is a
very complicated process and the administrative difficulty
will be increased by having a biennial and triennial license
system rather than an annual process.
Number 083
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES said he can understand there will be a
disruption in the transition period, where in one year there
will be an increase in revenues and a corresponding decline
in the subsequent two or three years, but felt it will
average out in the long run to be the same amount of annual
revenue to be reported. He asked if most licenses require a
report on the back of the license.
MR. BRUCE responded the reporting on the reverse of the
license verifies a person is in compliance with seasonal
limits. It is not something used in ADF&G's harvest
monitoring, but rather is an enforcement tool in places
where there is a seasonal bag limit.
Number 105
REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY inquired the amount of federal money
received by the state.
MR. BRUCE explained the amount is determined from a formula
based on the number of licenses sold and the acreage of the
state. He did not know the exact amount but estimated ADF&G
receives several million dollars annually from the federal
government for sport fish and wildlife conservation
programs.
Number 120
REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY felt if the state went to a multiple
year licensing process, ADF&G will probably have more
licenses issued. He asked if the only reason harvests are
recorded, is so an enforcement officer can stop someone in
the field and check to see if that person has recorded the
correct amounts. He wondered how often enforcement officers
arrest people because they have not put the right amount on
the back of their license.
MR. BRUCE answered it does work on the honor system. He
said there is a risk in that if someone catches something
and does not record it and is questioned by an officer, that
person is clearly in violation and can be arrested.
Number 146
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES felt there will be no differences in
reporting to the federal government. She agreed there may
be people who buy multi-year licenses and then leave the
state, resulting in credit for them buying a license the
following year when they are not really here, possibly
giving the state more money from the federal government.
She felt the problems discussed in regard to paper quality
and the requirement for recording harvests could be designed
into a new form. She stated she has seen lots of licenses
on different kinds of material which are more durable than
what is used currently. Representative James asked if there
will be administrative relief if the state goes to a
multiple year licensing process.
Number 175
MR. BRUCE replied the primary administrative savings
incurred will involve ADF&G not having to pay vendors for
selling licenses on an annual basis, but rather paying just
one fee. There will also be less data entry costs, although
those costs are minimal. He said instead of having one
resident license, the form will need to accommodate three
different kinds of licenses or will need to have separate
stock. A mechanism will also be needed to ensure vendors
report and get an accurate account of when they sell a one
year license compared to a two year or three year license.
If all that is done on one form, accurate accounting becomes
particularly important. ADF&G likes having a multiple stock
as it makes accounting easier. Mr. Bruce summarized that
ADF&G does not see significant administrative savings and
said the main issue is increased convenience for the public.
He also pointed out that the fiscal note does include an
estimate for having a different kind of stock paper which
would result in additional costs.
Number 228
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said laminated licenses had been
discussed and asked if those types of licenses are used, how
will the required stamps be affixed to the back of licenses.
MR. BRUCE replied those are the kinds of problems associated
with a laminated license. A different stock paper might be
a more workable solution. He pointed out even though
licenses might be issued on a two or three year basis, there
is still a need to get the stamps and tags required each
year and questioned whether multi-year licenses are a real
convenience or a perceived convenience. He felt there may
be other ways to accomplish the convenience goal, such as
licensing through the mail.
REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE stated in sections eight and nine,
there is one category of free licenses and another category
of reduced fees licenses and wondered what the fiscal impact
will be.
KEVIN BROOKS, DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME, replied there are
statistics available on the number of licenses currently
issued in those classes but he did not have them with him.
He said he will be happy to make them available to the
committee.
Number 278
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER asked what ADF&G's position would be
if the rates were changed to reflect a two year and three
year rate and there would be no fiscal impact.
MR. BRUCE responded ADF&G's single largest concern is the
fiscal impact.
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER questioned what the vendors are paid
to issue licenses.
MR. BRUCE answered vendors get ten percent, plus an
additional dollar of compensation for each tag sold.
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER asked if overall costs could be
reduced if there is a standard fee for vendors. He also
commented he did not see how there could be an increase in
violations with HB 343.
MR. BRUCE felt it is a valid position. There have been
problems confirming residency and having individuals apply
for resident licenses when they do not qualify. He said
there is a significant dollar difference between resident
and nonresident big game hunting licenses.
REPRESENTATIVE MULDER asked what is required to apply for
federal funds.
Number 335
MR. BRUCE responded he does not perform the certification
process himself but he will be happy to get one of the staff
members familiar with the process and provide a written
briefing or testify before the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN asked if ADF&G has the power to
require a certain number of years residency or people to be
property owners to qualify for multi-year licenses. He
questioned what the current residency requirement is for a
resident license.
Number 360
MR. BRUCE stated the current residency requirement for
licenses is one year. He asked committee members to
remember that licenses are issued by vendors and no proof of
residency is required. If a proof of residency is to be
required, vendors will have to enforce the requirement which
could be inconvenient and complicated.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN clarified ADF&G does not have the
power under current regulation to require higher levels of
proof such as being a property owner or a 15 year resident.
MR. BRUCE replied ADF&G does not have that power.
Number 395
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON referred to AS 16.05.940 which is the
definition of residency and stated it goes well beyond just
12 consecutive months voting residence in the state.
REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY wondered if the state receives federal
funds on the free senior licenses which are currently issued
in the state.
MR. BRUCE said he could not answer the question.
REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY asked if there is a relationship
between what the state charges for licenses and the amount
of federal money received.
MR. BRUCE replied the federal formula is not based on the
cost of the licenses the state sells, rather it is based on
the number of licenses and the physical geographical size of
the state.
REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY remarked if the state is not
collecting federal money for senior licenses because the
state is not charging for them, he felt the state should
charge a minimal amount so that federal money can be
collected.
Number 430
BILL VALENTINE, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
PROTECTION, stated the division's position on HB 343 is
neutral. He said their concerns relate to residency and the
ability to detect violations. He pointed out the division's
real concern relating to residency is in the big game arena,
not in the sport fishery. Once a person becomes a resident
as described in the statute quoted by Representative Hudson,
he can leave the state with two years of free big game
hunting privileges. Tags in the big game arena for
nonresidents are very expensive and some require the hiring
of a guide. He stressed the division's ability to detect
violations will not be good and are not good currently. He
described current techniques used.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES observed that when buying licenses in
other states, there is a requirement for proof of residence.
REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN asked what the most valuable
benefit a person can get by leaving the state and trying to
retain resident status.
Number 535
MR. VALENTINE replied there are three species a nonresident
needs a guide for: sheep, brown bear, musk oxen and in some
areas, goat. A resident does not need a guide for any
species and does not have to pay a tag fee which can be
quite expensive.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON suggested that resident licenses be
issued through the permanent fund application which could
save much cost and effort.
MR. VALENTINE agreed, but added that the residency
requirements for the permanent fund are much more stringent
under the permanent fund regulations than they are for
hunting and fishing.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON felt there would be an even stronger
indicia of residency.
MR. VALENTINE stated one of the division's proposed
amendments to HB 343 was that licenses be tied to the
permanent fund application.
Number 576
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS remarked there are many unanswered
questions on HB 343 and suggested a subcommittee be
established to work on the questions. VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON,
REPRESENTATIVE CARNEY and REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES volunteered
to work on the bill.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS announced the committee will meet
Wednesday, February 9 at 8:15 a.m. to take up HB 33 relating
to mining locations on state selected land, and HJR 50
relating to the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council
Comprehensive Rationalization Plan.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the House
Resources Committee, Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting
at 9:40 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|