Legislature(1997 - 1998)
02/26/1997 03:42 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
JOINT SENATE/HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEES
February 26, 1997
3:42 p.m.
SENATE MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Rick Halford, Chairman
Senator Lyda Green, Vice Chair
Senator Loren Leman
Senator Bert Sharp
Senator Robin Taylor
Senator Georgianna Lincoln
SENATE MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator John Torgerson
HOUSE MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Scott Ogan, Co-Chairman
Representative Beverly Masek, Vice Chair
Representative Ramona Barnes
Representative William K. ("Bill") Williams
HOUSE MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bill Hudson, Co-Chairman
Representative Joe Green
Representative Fred Dyson
Representative Irene Nicholia
Representative Reggie Joule
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
BRIEFING: Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal Areas
- Ms. Thyes Shaub, Chairman
- Mr. Steven Porter, past Chairman
- Mr. Stan Leaphart, Executive Director
ACTION NARRATIVE
SENATE TAPE 97-14, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN RICK HALFORD called the Joint Senate/House Resources
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:42 p.m. and announced the
briefing from the Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal Areas.
He noted that Stan Leaphart, Executive Director, has for years been
the spark plug behind a great deal of defense of a great deal of
different interests.
THYES SHAUB, Chairman, Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal
Areas, introduced members of the commission in attendance: Mr.
Steve Porter, Mr. Stan Leaphart, Mr. Del Ackels, Mr. Charlie
Bussell, Mr. Grant Doyle, Mr. Don Finney, Mr. Clarence Furbush,
Senator Sharp, and Senator Halford.
MS. SHAUB said the commission was formed in 1981 shortly after the
passage of ANILCA, which put 104 million acres of land into federal
conservation units and established specific requirements and
restrictions on land use. The commission was formed to watch out
for the interests of Alaskans and access to land in the
implementation of ANILCA.
MS. SHAUB noted that they had developed a good working relationship
with agencies within the Department of Interior and the Department
of Agriculture. One of the things the commission did was initiate
a cooperative effort with agencies to simplify reporting
requirements for air carriers operating on federal conservation
system units so they can file one report instead of several to a
number of federal agencies. This is an example of streamlining
activities they do. They have assisted guides, hunters, private
land owners, miners, loggers, commercial fishermen and Native
organizations on public access and regulatory issues. They have
submitted comments on numerous land plans and proposed federal
regulations such as the Tongass Land Management Plan, Endangered
Species Act, proposed listings, RS 2477 regulations, and other
regulatory issues regarding management of federal lands.
MS. SHAUB said when the commission was first established, there
were five full-time staff people in addition to the 16 members.
They reviewed and commented on all the major land management
documents for federal conservation units and assisted numerous
groups and individuals with their problems in dealing with the
federal government on management issues. The commission is now
down to one staff person.
MS. SHAUB noted that Mr. Leaphart is the only person in state
government who checks the federal register every day and flags
important issues that come up. He has a wide network of
organizations and individuals to whom he gives this information on
a regular basis.
MS. SHAUB said their annual report details the activities they have
been involved in over the last year.
Number 0139
MR. STEVE PORTER said he has noticed some trends in relation to the
state and federal governments. He said the federal government has
influence over the state through the administration in negotiating
international treaties and agreements. One example is the
International Treaty on Polar Bears used last year by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service as their regulatory authority over specific
oil and gas operations on the North Slope. Therefore, we need to
be aware that even international treaties have an impact on
Alaskans.
MR. PORTER said an important item is that international agreements
are generally negotiated in Washington, D.C, like the Alaska Arctic
Off-Shore Oil and Gas Guidelines presently being negotiated between
the various countries of the Arctic. This is being done with very
little or no input from the State of Alaska and we have the only
Arctic waters in the United States. He thought if they are meeting
on U.S. soil, they should meet in Alaska.
MR. PORTER advised that another area that affects Alaska is the
regulatory arena. He said Mr. Leaphart functions as a coordinator
also, because he gets information and sends it out to people who
understand it. A lot of the regulatory changes are being called
"housekeeping" changes, which suggests that this is nothing
important. What is happening, though, is the federal government is
actually stepping forward and increasing their regulatory
authority. One of the most recent changes that has substantially
impacted the people of the state is the RS 2477 interim policy that
the Secretary of Interior just changed. Another thing the federal
government does is clarification of policy, which they track also,
like the National Park Service "navigability water regulations."
MR. PORTER said another area they have to watch is "studies" which
are seldom truly studies. Very few studies are conducted for
research and understanding; most of the time there is a
predetermined goal set out in advance of the study, and the study
does nothing more than come to the intended conclusion. In the
past, they have examined some of the studies and occasionally have
seen the intent of the study and refuted it. He gave an example of
a study done by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the Colville
Delta. The concern was helicopter impacts on birds; the thesis was
if there was oil and gas development on the Colville Delta,
helicopter overflights might cause birds to run around so much that
they would lose sufficient weight so they couldn't fly south for
the winter and would therefore die. But they killed over 500 birds
and weighed their muscles to make this determination, and they
actually herded thousands of birds over 2 kilometers to capture
them. So the study's impact was substantially greater than 20
years of Prudhoe Bay-type of activity. Their formulas also
randomly doubled a couple of factors. However, once the commission
submitted their response to that, the study disappeared.
MR. PORTER said we need to make it a priority to review all federal
regulations, whether they are couched in housekeeping terms or new
regulatory action. Alaskans can comment on the policy shifts and
the state can sometimes act on policy.
Number 0269
MR. STAN LEAPHART said he has noticed over the last few months a
change in the posture of the federal government towards navigable
waters. In July of last year, the National Park Service adopted
some clarification or housekeeping regulations that specifically
stated that their management authority extends to all waters within
National Parks, including navigable waters. In their assessment,
working with the Attorney General's office, this flies in the face
of the major piece of enabling legislation for most of the park
units, which is the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act
(ANILCA). ANILCA says that state lands are not included; they are
not subject to federal jurisdiction on a lot of issues. In the
fall of last year, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) proposed
similar regulations that have to do with the management of wild and
scenic rivers and wild and scenic study rivers.
MR. LEAPHART said there are six wild and scenic rivers in Alaska
under BLM management; interestingly enough, about four or five of
those are some of the largest mining areas in the whole state.
Once again, the BLM has authority under the Wild and Scenic Rivers
Act to approve or disapprove of any resource project that affects
a segment. He noted that fisheries enhancement projects on this
river would be subject to approval or disapproval by the BLM.
MR. LEAPHART said another set of "housekeeping" regulations are the
BLM law enforcement regulations which are still under review.
These do not affect just Alaska, but there are some particular
concerns for Alaska because they tend to ignore some of the special
provisions Alaska was granted under the Alaska Lands Act.
Number 0354
MR. LEAPHART said the Endangered Species Act is frequently used as
a political tool rather than a biological or management tool.
MR. LEAPHART reported that there is a whole other area of
international area designations, like the Man in the Biosphere
Reserve Program (there are 4) under the United Nations and World
Heritage Site Designations (there are 2). There are an additional
seven areas in Alaska that have been nominated to be included on
the World Heritage Site list. He didn't know enough about them to
know how they affected management one way or the other.
MR. LEAPHART pointed out other concerns are the management plans
the federal agencies started writing since ANILCA in the early
1980s. He said we are about to see in the next four or five years
a whole new round of planning activity for the National Parks and
National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska.
Number 0443
CHAIRMAN HALFORD commented that the federal bureaucrats at Glacier
Bay are attacking the 25 or 30 fishing vessels that traditionally
fish in Glacier Bay on behalf of increasing the number of 800-foot
and 900-foot cruise ships. He thinks it is an environmental issue
and doesn't make any sense.
REPRESENTATIVE RAMONA BARNES commented that committee members
should learn about biospheric reserves because everywhere you have
one, it's not just the designation of that park, but the 250 miles
around it.
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN asked if all the existing biosphere
reserves exist in federal parks.
MR. LEAPHART replied that they do not. He said he wasn't sure of
the difference between the heritage sites and biospheric reserves.
CHAIRMAN HALFORD noted that the commission is traditionally deleted
from the budget by the Governor's office and reinserted by the
legislature.
Number 0490
SENATOR GEORGIANNA LINCOLN said she appreciated the information
they have supplied to the committee. She asked if they had
requested the Attorney General to file any lawsuits in 1996.
MR. PORTER answered that they hadn't recently, but the state filed
one against the National Park Service over its cabin regulations
and lost.
SENATOR LINCOLN said the commission is no longer able to sponsor
public meetings solely for gathering public input on specific
issues, and it bothers her that the general public can't have
access to their meetings, especially in the rural areas.
MR. PORTER replied that one thing they try to do as a commission is
influence the regulators by asking them why they didn't have a
public meeting and basically intimidating them into allowing the
public to speak.
MS. SHAUB said every time they have a meeting, it is public and
their budget doesn't allow them to travel as much as they used to.
SENATOR LINCOLN said she understood that, but it was her concern
that only the folks in Anchorage and Fairbanks could testify at
most meetings, leaving out the rural people.
SENATOR LINCOLN referenced a letter dated December 4 and said she
would be interested in the response.
MR. LEAPHART replied that there was no response, but what typically
happens is in the final regulations, they list the organizations
that have commented on them and summarize the comments. It's not
normal to get a direct response to a particular letter.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked whether they had looked into proposed
regulations on trapping on federal wildlife preserves.
MR. LEAPHART said this is one of the areas where he got copies and
sent it to the world. On this issue, his concern was that there
was supposed to be a task force, but they "fooled around" for 90
days, then issued another letter saying they didn't have time to do
it in the time given and so just threw it out for public comment.
This action does not meet the requirement of the appropriation,
which was to put together a task force.
He said an argument supported by statute is that all activities on
a wildlife refuge are subject to compatibility determinations.
ANILCA, which established most of the refuges up here, while it
doesn't specifically authorize trapping, makes it very clear in the
intent language and the general authority language that it is a
traditional activity and will be allowed.
MR. PORTER said their concern was that there was an appropriation
for a study of leg-hold traps. So they contacted all the trappers'
associations here and in the Lower 48 to let them know what was
going on. What they expect to see are regulations and a
determination saying that this is not proper.
MS. SHAUB said they are considering attending meetings in the other
western states to talk about areas of common interest.
SENATE TAPE 97-14, SIDE B
Number 0001
SENATOR ROBIN TAYLOR asked whether the Federal Land Management
Policy Act (FLMPA) had become law.
MR. LEAPHART replied yes and explained that it is sort of the
organic act of BLM. It's a general authority.
SENATOR TAYLOR said the part that alarms him is where they proposed
for the federal government to contract with local enforcement
officials in the performance of their duties. Another part that
concerns him is, "... search, without warrant or process, any
person, place, or conveyance according to any federal law or rule
of law and seize, without warrant or process, any evidentiary item
as provided by federal law." It goes on to provide extensive
penalties should one resist. He found it frightening.
MR. LEAPHART reiterated that these regulations have not been
enacted and they are under public review; the comment period ends
a week from tomorrow.
Number 0534
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked whether discharging a firearm was
creating a disturbance.
SENATOR LYDA GREEN said yes it was, and the wording was on page 7.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said he shared Senator Taylor's concerns,
especially regarding our due process rights.
MR. GRANT DOYLE, Member, Citizens' Advisory Commission on Federal
Areas, said one of the things that concerns him is a provision in
the new statutes allowing the BLM to commandeer local law
enforcement to fulfill the regulations. They understand there will
be a lot of resistance; so they make us use our own police to
enforce the laws.
CHAIRMAN HALFORD asked where the commission would suggest they
prioritize financial allocations. He asked them for a proposal
that is specific enough to be budget items.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked, regarding page 9, section 92.65.43, whether
subsistence use resources are regulated by BLM and other federal
land management agencies referenced as 50 CFR, part 100. He asked
if they encompassed enforcement concepts similar to those Mr. Doyle
mentioned or that he referenced in the proposed regulations.
MR. LEAPHART answered that those were Department of Interior
regulations, their part of the federal subsistence regulations.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked whether the BLM became the police officers for
enforcing subsistence regulations on BLM land.
MR. LEAPHART replied yes.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked whether the U.S. Forest Service was the
enforcement on U.S. Forest Service lands.
MR. LEAPHART said that is correct.
SENATOR TAYLOR said he thought there was significant duality in the
manner in which those regulations are currently being enforced. He
said they are being stringently enforced on the Stikine River,
which is in his back yard, but he was also aware that BLM was not
enforcing their regulations in a similar fashion up north. He said
this because he had watched people from Anchorage and Fairbanks
participate in subsistence activities in those communities,
particularly caribou hunts, where they would literally be poachers
if they were enforcing the law as written. He is very concerned
about that, especially because in his district right now, the new
proposed subsistence regulations say that no one from Ketchikan
will be allowed to hunt on Prince of Wales Island for deer. He
thought they chose to discriminate in the manner in which they
enforce their own regulations.
Number 0445
SENATOR LOREN LEMAN asked, regarding page 11, what BLM rules must
he follow if he's in an outstanding natural area, if the term
"outstanding natural area" is not found in existing regulations.
MR. LEAPHART answered that was an excellent question. He said it
wasn't in the proposed regulations' definition of terms section.
CHAIRMAN HALFORD thanked them for their presentation, their past
efforts, and their ongoing efforts. He said that concluded the
subject matter for their joint hearing and asked the Senate members
to remain to address a resolution.
(END OF JOINT MEETING)
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|