02/15/2017 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB105 | |
| HB40 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 105 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 40 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 15, 2017
1:08 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Andy Josephson, Co-Chair
Representative Geran Tarr, Co-Chair
Representative Dean Westlake, Vice Chair
Representative Harriet Drummond
Representative Justin Parish
Representative Chris Birch
Representative DeLena Johnson
Representative George Rauscher
Representative David Talerico
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Mike Chenault (alternate)
Representative Chris Tuck (alternate)
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 105
"An Act establishing the Gordon Haber Denali Wolf Special
Management Area."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 40
"An Act prohibiting and providing penalties and civil remedies
for trapping within 200 feet of certain public facilities,
areas, and trails; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 105
SHORT TITLE: DENALI WOLF SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) JOSEPHSON
02/03/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/03/17 (H) RES, FIN
02/10/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/10/17 (H) Heard & Held
02/10/17 (H) MINUTE(RES)
02/15/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 40
SHORT TITLE: TRAPPING NEAR PUBLIC TRAILS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) JOSEPHSON
01/18/17 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/13/17
01/18/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/17 (H) RES, FIN
02/06/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/06/17 (H) Heard & Held
02/06/17 (H) MINUTE(RES)
02/08/17 (H) JUD REFERRAL ADDED AFTER RES
02/08/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/08/17 (H) Heard & Held
02/08/17 (H) MINUTE(RES)
02/15/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
BRUCE DALE, Director
Division of Wildlife Conservation
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing of HB
105.
FRAN MAUER
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 105.
KNEELAND TAYLOR
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HB 105.
JOEL BENNETT
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HB 105.
GERALD BROOKMAN
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 105.
AL BARRETTE
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HB 105.
JOHNNY JOHNSON
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 105.
SCOTT OGAN
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 105.
ED SCHMITT
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 105.
PAULINE STRONG
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 105.
JOAN FRANKEVICH, Spokesperson
National Parks Conservation Association
Girdwood, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 105.
MARILYN HOUSER
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 105.
PATTI BARBER
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 105.
JOHN JOHNSON
Willow, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 40.
TEMPLE DILLARD
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 40 and
provided comments that were not on topic with the published
agenda for the hearing of HB 40.
MARK LUTRELL
Seward, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
JOSHUA ROSS
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
PAULINE STRONG
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
WAYNE HALL
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
JASON HOKE, Executive Director
Copper Valley Development Association
Alaska Regional Development Organizations
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development
Glennallen, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Speaking as the executive director of the
Copper Valley Development Association and for himself, testified
in opposition to HB 40.
SYLVIA PANZARELLA
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
MARGARET RUNSER
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HB 40.
KNEELAND TAYLOR
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
JODY LOFGREN
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
MICHAEL STOLTZ
Talkeetna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HB 40.
BILL MOHWRINKEL
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
BARBARA BREASE
Healy, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
JOEL BENNETT
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 40.
NICK STEEN
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 40.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:08:52 PM
CO-CHAIR ANDY JOSEPHSON called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:08 p.m. Representatives
Josephson, Talerico, Parish, Drummond, Johnson, and Westlake
were present at the call to order. Representatives Birch,
Rauscher, and Tarr arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 105-DENALI WOLF SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA
1:09:18 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 105, "An Act establishing the Gordon
Haber Denali Wolf Special Management Area."
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON advised the committee would be a forthcoming
committee substitute (CS) to the bill that would change the
special management area to a critical habitat area. He said
representatives from both the Alaska Department of Fish & Game
(ADF&G) and the Department of Law were online and available for
invited testimony, and the committee had heard previous invited
testimony on the bill.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked Mr. Dale to share his thoughts on the
forthcoming CS that would move control of the special management
area, currently under the Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
to a critical habitat area to be controlled by ADF&G.
1:12:14 PM
BRUCE DALE, Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Alaska
Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), stated that the department
has thirty-two special areas that it currently manages,
including McNeil River State Game Sanctuary and Refuge. He
noted that there are three or four classifications of areas, one
of which is a critical habitat area that generally involves a
management plan with the Division of Habitat. He explained that
the enabling legislation "lines out" the purposes and then the
department creates a management plan to meet those purposes.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked Mr. Dale to clarify whether he is the
director of the Division of [Wildlife Conservation] or the
Division of Habitat.
MR. DALE replied he is the director of the Division of Wildlife
Conservation.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON inquired whether the department holds a
position on HB 105.
MR. DALE answered that the state is neutral to HB 105. He said
the department always remains neutral and makes recommendations
on allocation issues. He noted that this is not a biological
concern, but is an issue surrounding the allocation of resources
between viewers of wildlife and those who have other wilderness
values, versus those who are interested in hunting and trapping.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON inquired whether the department considered
the issue an allocation issue even though there are a few wolf
packs that may no longer exist.
MR. DALE stated that he would not speak on behalf of the
National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Department of the Interior.
He explained that Denali National Park and Preserve ("park")
wolves are harvested at a very low level that does not affect
population size or population dynamics. He said ADF&G looks at
wildlife in terms of populations and is tasked to manage
wildlife on a sustained yield basis. He shared that there has
been little to no disagreement among biologists that the pack
population is not affected by low harvests, and there is no
debate that packs come and go as a part of wolf ecology. He
added that packs can break up and be recolonized - sometimes
with no loss of den and pup production. He referenced a 1997
study that looked into the idea that family groups persist for a
long length of time. He said the study looked at the genetics
of wolves in Denali National Park and Preserve and in the
Superior National Forest, Minnesota, and basically found that
wolves strongly avoid inbreeding, which indicates that there is
regular turnover of the genetic makeup in packs [document not
provided].
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON shared his understanding that the department
is neutral on HB 105. He asked whether data suggesting that the
wolf population decreased from 160 in 1990, to 57 in 2015, was a
concern to the department.
MR. DALE replied there is still a healthy and viable wolf
population there. He informed the committee that wolves are
just like any other game where populations rise and fall. He
affirmed that there is clear evidence of this supported by
publications by the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S.
Department of the Interior. He mentioned a book called "Wolves
of Denali" that explains how caribou numbers fluctuate, caused
by weather events in Denali National Park and Preserve, and that
the wolf population followed that same trend. He noted that
wolf populations that are not heavily harvested are affected
mostly by prey, ungulate availability, and the vulnerability of
prey in terms of environmental conditions, such as snow, and the
nutritional status and condition of the prey species.
1:18:58 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON opined that the department is not concerned
with trapping but instead is interested in climate and browse.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO offered his understanding that the
department currently has no data from the east side of the
Nenana River. He said that he would refer to the wolves of the
area as the Totatlanika pack, the Healy Creek pack, and the Wood
River pack. He asked whether the department was going to have
any data from that area available during [the 2017-2018
legislative] session.
MR. DALE said the department has recent data for the area that
will be presented to the Board of Game (BOG), DNR, meeting
beginning 2/17/17. He said the density of wolves is over twice
as high east of the park as it is in the park.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON reopened invited testimony.
1:21:18 PM
FRAN MAUER informed the committee he is a 46-year resident of
Alaska and has worked as a wildlife biologist for almost 30
years. He stated his support for HB 105 which would establish a
special management area to protect wolves from hunting and
trapping on state lands adjacent to the northeast corner of
Denali National Park and Preserve. He noted that the area is
sometimes referred to as the wolf townships. He said previous
testifiers already described how the area is important for
Denali National Park and Preserve wildlife, especially wolves.
He added that the aforementioned speakers also described
situations where hunters and trappers used extreme methods, such
as bait stations and animal carcasses, to lure wolves out of the
park to their deaths. He explained that ecologists define a
decline in wolf population as a "population sink" if annual
mortality exceeds reproduction on an annual basis. He opined
that a population sink is occurring in the proposed special
management area and would continue to decrease the Denali wolves
as long as "these silly practices are allowed to continue."
MR. MAUER disagreed with Mr. Dale and expressed his
understanding that the bill is focused on wolves and specific
den sites in the northeast part of the park, that are commonly
seen by visitors on the Park Road. Although a decimated wolf
population can repopulate the area, a population sink will
continue as long as mortality rates are higher than reproduction
rates. He pointed out there is evidence that if a breeding male
or female is killed during the breeding season it would affect
the pack by possibly breaking up the entire pack. He opined
that Mr. Dale is "dancing around the actual specifics of what is
going on in Denali." He shared his belief that BOG seems to be
incapable of solving the population sink problem because it only
looks out for hunters and trappers. He recommended fostering a
responsible wildlife viewing program that is renewable and holds
great economic benefit for Alaska. Mr. Mauer urged for the
passage of HB 105.
1:25:13 PM
KNEELAND TAYLOR said he has lived in Alaska for 41 years and has
served on three BOG subcommittees. He agreed with Mr. Dale that
the problem is an allocation issue between the interests of two
hundred and fifty thousand people who ride the buses through
Denali National Park and Preserve in the summer, versus one to
four hunters and trappers. He explained that according to the
Alaska State Constitution, wildlife is a publically-owned
resource and opined while preferential uses are permitted, in
this choice between the desire of many people to view them,
versus a few individuals who want to take the wolves, the choice
should be obvious. He recalled from 2001 to 2003 he served on a
BOG subcommittee that was unable to reach consensus on the
Denali wolf buffer. As the non-consumptive user representative,
he said he felt "his side" asked for too much land, and he
encouraged the committee to consider a smaller parcel of land
that was only in the wolf township-Stampede Trail area. He said
that protection of a smaller area worked well with the wolves
next to the Park Road and Teklanika and Toklat Rivers. Further,
he related a suggestion from a trapper that when family groups
leave the park, there could be an emergency closure because the
packs could be located by radio collars on alpha wolves.
Recently, there have been several requests for emergency
closures, but the commissioner [of the Alaska Department of Fish
& Game] failed to act because there was no biological emergency.
He suggested the committee consider giving the commissioner
express authority to close areas for trapping and hunting of
wolves when there is information that particular groups of
wolves have left the park. He offered his belief that BOG feels
that the closure of wolf hunting and trapping outside the park
is some sort of a bargaining chip for the state to get the
federal government to be more accommodating to the state. He
reiterated that according to the state constitution wild animals
belong to all and are to be managed for the maximum possible
benefit. Mr. Taylor opined using the animals as a bargaining
chip is unconstitutional.
1:30:30 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON opened public testimony.
1:31:02 PM
JOEL BENNETT said he has lived in Alaska for forth-eight years,
is an active licensed hunter, and disclosed he was legislative
counsel for seven years. Also, he served on BOG for thirteen
years - including 1992 when the first buffer zone was created -
and the debate at the time was an allocation issue and a
recognition that there were competing interests, as well as the
fact something should be done about the issue. Although it was
difficult to define geographic borders, BOG created the buffer
zone in good faith; however, this issue is coming forward again,
after twenty-five years, showing BOG cannot deal with this
issue. In his experience, the legislature becomes involved in
such issues because the greater public interest requires
resolution by statute. He stressed there is an urgency for
action due to the special geography and the location of the wolf
townships that make the issue more than just a trapping and
hunting closure issue. He urged the legislature to create a
special area, if only for economic reasons. Mr. Bennett
reiterated many tens of thousands of visitors to the park are
state residents, and wildlife viewing is growing in popularity.
He urged for the committee to pass a reasonable bill that would
stop the issue from reoccurring.
REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE asked Mr. Bennett for the reason the
past wolf buffer zone agreement included a sunset date.
MR. BENNETT answered that the action of BOG in 1992 was a
compromise, because some wanted a larger area and some a smaller
area.
1:36:12 PM
GERALD BROOKMAN stated that he has been an Alaska resident since
1957 and he currently lives in Kenai. He said he used to hunt,
and trapped with his father as a youth. He expressed his strong
support for the bill and opined the area affected is a
relatively small area. Mr. Brookman urged the committee to pass
the bill as written.
1:37:58 PM
AL BARRETTE said that at the last hearing he heard a lot about
tourism and protecting the tourism economy; in fact, in a recent
state parks and recreational area budget overview it was stated
there were over five million visitors to state parks and
recreational areas. According to his research, tens of millions
of dollars are being invested outside the entrance to the park,
which indicates tourism is thriving. Mr. Barrette stated Denali
National Park and Preserve has had record-setting years with
hardly a decrease in visitations over the past two decades. He
pointed out the bill proposes to protect wolves from being
hunted and trapped, yet trapping will still be allowed in the
area, and he inquired if a trapper incidentally catches a wolf
in a trap not initially set for a wolf, then all other trapping
will be shut down. He referred to evidence that trappers catch
wolves in sets not designated for wolves. Turning to BOG, he
said BOG has to comply with state law and the Alaska State
Constitution. In [Article] 8, [Section] 3, the common use
clause led the legislature to enact AS 16.05.258, which dealt
with subsistence uses, preferences, and priority. He opined
that even if BOG's decisions are not popular, it is bound to
comply with the law. Finally, Mr. Barrette said he was
disturbed that a proposed special use area was named after a
person who was known to commit game violations.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked whether Mr. Barrette was claiming that
the late Gordon Haber committed game violations.
MR. BARRETTE answered yes.
1:41:02 PM
JOHNNY JOHNSON testified in support of HB 105. He said he has
lived in Alaska for almost 50 years and has many connections to
Denali National Park and Preserve, beginning in 1968 as a park
ranger, and later as a wildlife photographer. Mr. Johnson said
he has hunted and trapped in the area, although not for wolves,
and was a close personal friend of Gordon Haber. Referring to
testimony by the previous speaker, he informed the committee the
[alleged game violation] incident in question was when Mr. Haber
released a wolf that he was told was trapped in an area closed
to wolf trapping. Mr. Johnson expressed his support for the
proposed bill because it is the right thing to do, and added
that wolves are important to the integrity of the park, and the
park is of great value to Alaska. He acknowledged there are a
lot of people who dislike wolves; in fact, at one time it was
common to poach wolves in the park. For his wildlife
photography business, photographs of wolves are difficult to
obtain, and his best have been taken inside the park and have
contributed substantially to his income. He opined the wolves
hold great value both for tourism and for commercial
photographers.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON shared her appreciation for Mr. Johnson's
photography and testimony.
MR. JOHNSON read from the Alaska State Constitution, [Article 8,
Section 3] as follows:
Wherever occurring in their natural state, fish,
wildlife, and waters are reserved to the people for
common use.
1:45:29 PM
SCOTT OGAN spoke in opposition to HB 105, noting that he spent
25 years working on federal overreach issues. The federal
government is currently managing and classifying more lands as
national parks, and is doing a horrible job managing wildlife on
federal lands, as in the [Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife
Refuge]. He shared that he has spent thousands of hours flying
and in the bush, and it is very rare to see a wolf; in fact, the
proposed bill may decrease wildlife sightings "if there's too
many wolves knocking down the ungulates." He stated that he is
opposed to expanding boundaries beyond the federal park for a
buffer zone. Mr. Ogan restated his strong opposition to extend
federal management scenarios beyond the boundaries of federal
lands.
1:47:20 PM
ED SCHMITT said that although he has only lived in Alaska since
2007, recently he has taken notice of the decline in Denali wolf
pack populations. He mentioned the six-year moratorium BOG
placed on the issue, and added an organization with which he is
involved encouraged BOG to discuss the situation, and although
BOG acknowledged the Denali wolves were disappearing, it still
took no action. He opined management should include an active
and appropriate response to the numbers of wildlife in the
population, which is not occurring from BOG. Mr. Schmitt said
he is in support of the proposed bill and a management plan that
could acknowledge that the importance of wildlife viewing is in
the state's best interest.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO asked Mr. Schmitt to identify the
aforementioned organization.
MR. SCHMITT answered he is the president of the Alaska Wildlife
Alliance.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked whether there were additional
witnesses waiting to testify.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON said there were about 19 and stated his
intention to leave public testimony open on HB 105 and move to
the next bill at 2:00 p.m.
1:50:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH has heard from witnesses who have had to
wait. He inquired as to whether the committee extends the
invitation to testify, and to whom.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON answered that it is the prerogative of the
chair to invite testimony.
CO-CHAIR TARR added that the sponsor of a bill works with the
committee chair to choose invited testimony, for example,
witnesses who are experts on a particular item related to the
bill.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH surmised there is no expectation that
invited testimony will represent both sides of an issue.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON questioned whether in the case of a
committee bill, the committee determines invitees.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON said no. In further response to
Representative Johnson, he said he did not intend to reopen
public testimony during the hearing of the forthcoming CS for HB
105.
CO-CHAIR TARR, in further response to Representative Johnson,
said sometimes a second round of public testimony on a CS is
necessary.
1:53:03 PM
PAULINE STRONG stated her support for HB 105. Ms. Strong said
Alaska should be large enough for one area where a wolf pack can
live without being trapped or hunted. She said Gordon Haber's
studies showed that wolf packs can develop long-term
institutional knowledge that makes them different from wolf
packs with less experienced members [document not provided].
Furthermore, the loss of the eastern buffer zone set up to
protect wolves is the reason long-established wolf packs no
longer exist. Recently, it is common to hear that one of the
remaining few adult wolves - often a pregnant one - was killed,
which breaks up the formation of packs. If baiting stations are
allowed close to the park boundary, the park will not contain
the wolf pack, and wolves on the eastern park boundary need more
room; however, with the reestablishment of a buffer zone, there
is a possibility that a wolf pack could develop naturally, over
time, into more than just a few inexperienced or orphaned
juveniles. Ms. Strong said it would be wonderful to know there
is room in Alaska for at least one truly wild, unaltered wolf
pack.
1:55:01 PM
JOAN FRANKEVICH, Spokesperson, National Parks Conservation
Association (NPCA), said NPCA is a nationwide nonprofit, with
over 2,000 members in Alaska, that was founded in 1919 to
protect national parks. She said NPCA supports HB 105, noting
that the issue addressed by HB 105 really needs a long-term
solution. She stated that this is not a hunting versus a non-
hunting issue, nor is it a state versus federal issue. Ms.
Frankevich opined that the best question to ask is, "What is in
the best interest of the state, and what makes the most sense on
how wolves are managed on this land?" One of the core services
of the Division of Wildlife [Conservation], ADF&G, is to
maintain and enhance opportunities to hunt, trap, and view
wildlife. Furthermore, she said in 1992, when BOG created the
first wolf buffer, it clearly wrote in its findings, "The wolves
that inhabit Denali National Park are valued resources of the
people of Alaska and the United States" and she agreed. Ms.
Frankevich stated she and her husband are employed in tourism
and tourism feeds many Alaska families. In a manner similar to
the state protection of bears in the [McNeil River State Game
Sanctuary and Refuge], and walrus in the [Walrus Islands State
Game Sanctuary], it needs to protect the wolves primarily
inhabiting Denali National Park and Preserve because they can be
easily seen in the wild by Alaskans and visitors. Finally, she
invited the committee to visit the park and use a map to
understand how state land, and critical habitat for caribou,
extends into the park and creates an issue in need of a
permanent solution.
1:59:27 PM
MARILYN HOUSER stated that she supports HB 105, which would
protect wolves by establishing a no hunting, trapping area on
state land adjacent to the northeastern park boundary. She
observed that the removal of an established buffer area in 2010
by BOG has led to a reduction in the number of wolves and stable
wolf packs in the park, and has significantly reduced viewing
opportunities for both Alaskans and tourists. She opined that
in the time of dwindling revenue, the state needs to do all that
it can to support the tourism industry, and wildlife viewing is
a primary motivation for many of the visitors who come to
Alaska. Ms. Houser said that in the almost 40 years she has
lived in Alaska, during numerous trips to Denali National Park
and Preserve, she used to occasionally hear or see a wolf in the
park, but in recent years she has not. She urged the committee
to quickly move the bill from committee.
2:01:01 PM
PATTI BARBER stated that she is opposed to HB 105. She
explained that anti-trapping groups petitioned BOG to establish
a protective zone along the boundary of Denali National Park and
Preserve, but later it was removed because animals did not
observe the boundaries. She surmised that the proposal is a
back door attempt to close hunting and trapping near national
parks around the state. Wolf packs have eaten all of the
available ungulates. Ms. Barber requested a map of the area
that would be affected by the proposed bill.
2:02:09 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced HB 105 was held over with public
testimony open.
HB 40-TRAPPING NEAR PUBLIC TRAILS
2:03:18 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the final order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 40, "An Act prohibiting and providing
penalties and civil remedies for trapping within 200 feet of
certain public facilities, areas, and trails; and providing for
an effective date."
[Public testimony on HB 40 was opened at the hearing on 2/8/17.]
2:03:56 PM
JOHN JOHNSON said he traps with his family and HB 40 restricts
the use of trails by trappers who are disabled, elderly, and
overweight. Limiting trapping to 200 feet from a trail would
create another trail, or paths of least resistance, that would
become points of curiosity for canines and might lead them right
to a trap. He described various types of traps that are
outlawed in the bill which could not possibly trap a dog, such
as beaver, weasel, and squirrel traps. Mr. Johnson said the
bill prevents those trappers who cannot get 200 feet from a
public use trail, from using trails on which they have a right
to travel. In the Matanuska-Susitna (Mat-Su) valley, trappers
work with dog mushers as trappers do not want to trap a dog. He
stated his opposition to the bill.
CO-CHAIR TARR, in regard to Mr. Johnson's concerns about the
200-foot distance, asked whether he could offer a reasonable
compromise.
MR. JOHNSON explained trap placement allows a trapper to be
species specific. However, if a dog is loose the likelihood is
high that the dog will be caught as winter is breeding season
for canines, and if a fox travels off the main trail, a dog's
natural instinct is to follow the fox.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON noted the number of concerns throughout the
state about this issue. He inquired whether Mr. Johnson held
the opinion that it should be the policy of the state, relative
to dogs getting into traps, to do nothing.
MR. JOHNSON answered absolutely not. He said trappers must
choose an area in which to trap and dog owners should never let
their dogs off leash when in trapping areas. He suggested
people should be notified of set traps in an area, and in urban
environments during certain times of the year dogs may be loose,
but not in the bush.
2:08:20 PM
TEMPLE DILLARD said he is a lifelong resident and Native
Alaskan. Mr. Dillard opined HB 40 is a solution to an urban
problem that inflicts a 200-foot setback onto the rest of the
state. The bill is so vague and openly written that a trapper
thousands of miles from a road would have to set a trap line 200
feet from a trail, which would then establish another trail, and
the same individual would have to set traps another 200 feet
from the newly-formed trail. In regard to trapped dogs, he
noted that there is a leash law in the Fairbanks North Star
Borough that is almost universally ignored. He shared that he
frequently traps within 100 miles of Fairbanks and he has yet to
trap a loose dog. Mr. Dillard provided comments that were not
on topic with the published agenda for the hearing of HB 40.
2:12:01 PM
MARK LUTRELL testified in support of HB 40. He said the bill
will help protect dogs from traps set on popular trails by
careless and clueless trappers, such as the trap that killed a
neighborhood dog in West Anchorage recently. Mr. Lutrell said
in Seward there is support for protecting family pets and there
are many trails in Seward heavily used by mushers, skiers, and
hikers. Dogs and traps are allowed on the trails; however, he
opined that traps should not be allowed on the trails because
traps kill and maim. He stated that trappers will not be
significantly inconvenienced by placing their traps farther into
the woods, and have a responsibility to protect other users.
Mr. Lutrell acknowledged that trappers are self-policing, and
don't intend to trap dogs, but trappers need to be accountable
for careless cruelty.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked whether Mr. Lutrell was aware that
the trap set in West Anchorage was an illegal trap, and
questioned if Seward has any constraints against trapping within
city limits.
MR. LUTRELL said he was aware the trap in West Anchorage was set
illegally. He said traps are not allowed within Seward city
limits.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON related the Matanuska-Susitna Borough
attorney believes the borough has very limited ability to
control this issue.
2:15:35 PM
JOSHUA ROSS spoke in support of HB 40. He shared a personal
story of his family dog caught in a trap along a main trail
system his relatives have used for over 30 years. Mr. Ross said
Alaska's laws are not sufficient to protect all user groups. He
pointed out that 4 percent of public land users are registered
trappers, and others' use of the trails is restricted, which is
not appropriate management.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked what type of trail Mr. Ross was
traveling when his dog was trapped.
MR. ROSS answered it is a public use trail that is maintained
full-time by one of the snow machine associations on the Kenai
Peninsula.
2:17:36 PM
PAULINE STRONG spoke in support of HB 40. She opined that a
general statewide regulation is reasonable, as is the footage
setback. She said she was unsure of all the rules on trails
regarding dogs that are off-leash.
2:19:03 PM
WAYNE HALL spoke in support of HB 40. He said he is a long-time
Alaska resident and he doesn't like trapping for a number of
reasons. He shared his belief that trapping is prevalent in
Alaska because it is largely out of sight. Mr. Hall said making
compromises is in trappers' long-term interest. Referring to a
previous suggestion that dog owners avoid areas where there are
traps, he added that without required notice or marking of trap
lines, there is no way to know where traps are located.
2:20:49 PM
JASON HOKE, Executive Director, Copper Valley Development
Association, Alaska Regional Development Organizations,
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development, said
he was speaking on his own behalf and for many others in his
region. He stated his opposition to HB 40 because it usurps
existing leash laws throughout the state. He reminded the
committee that his region is an unorganized borough and the
legislature is its borough assembly. Illegal trapping and
incidents with dogs happen within other boroughs, and should be
dealt with by borough regulations. Speaking on behalf of his
Alaska Regional Development Organization, he advised in his
region many live a subsistence or supplemental lifestyle and
trapping in the winter helps support their families; he
questioned whether there was information on the beneficial
economics of the furbearer industry to the state. Furthermore,
putting a ban on trapping within 200 feet of a trail would
hamper trappers' abilities to trap. Mr. Hoke related trapping
is part of Alaska's history and of its cultural history
throughout the state.
MR. HOKE continued testifying on his own behalf and told a
personal story of trapping with his family, and of learning to
trap on a traditional Native trap line that is now a state
trail. He suggested the sponsor work with the boroughs on this
issue, including appropriations to cover the enforcement of
trapping violations, within legislation that does not include
unorganized boroughs.
2:25:13 PM
SYLVIA PANZARELLA said she has lived in Alaska for almost 18
years. She testified in support of HB 40, noting that public
trails are made for the public. Although adults need to control
pets and children, she opined that a hurt child or a dead or
maimed dog is too much of a price to pay for veering off of a
public trail. Ms. Panzarella restated that trails belong to
everyone and expressed her belief that a 200-foot setback would
not prevent trappers from trapping.
2:26:41 PM
MARGARET RUNSER said she has lived in the Anchorage and Palmer
areas for over 54 years and she has seen a great increase in
trapping in heavily-used public use areas over the past ten
years, especially in the Lazy Mountain/Knik River Public Use
Area, of which the nearby population is over 3,000 residents.
She said there are traps placed near private property and on
trails used by hundreds of pedestrians, bicyclists, horseback
riders, and skiers with dogs. Ms. Runser said she hikes with
her trained trail dog who stays with her and alerts her of any
potential threats from wildlife.
2:30:47 PM
KNEELAND TAYLOR said he has provided the committee written
testimony related to local control, in particular to that of
second class boroughs. He expressed his support for HB 40 and
urged for clarity in the legislation so all parties and
municipal governments will know the parameters of their
authority.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON informed the committee Mr. Taylor is an
attorney who has experience working on wildlife management
issues. He asked Mr. Taylor whether he believed the Board of
Game (BOG), Alaska Department of Fish & Game, could allow
trapping in Kincaid Park in Anchorage over the objection of the
Anchorage Assembly.
2:32:54 PM
MR. TAYLOR offered his understanding that there currently is no
municipal ordinance in Anchorage that forbids trapping in
Kincaid Park. However, BOG enacted a regulation many years ago
that prohibited trapping in the Anchorage Management Area,
ADF&G, that includes the City of Anchorage from "the top of the
mountains you can see when you're in Anchorage all the way to
the sea." Therefore, there is no trapping in Kincaid Park by
state regulation, but BOG could authorize trapping if it wished,
and then the city could pass an ordinance prohibiting trapping.
Mr. Taylor further explained Anchorage is a home rule
municipality which, in his opinion, has the authority to
prohibit trapping in developed areas.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked for clarification that home rule
municipalities can [prohibit trapping] and governments without
home rule status cannot [prohibit trapping].
MR. TAYLOR answered that it was more complicated than that, and
expressed his hope legislation would bring some clarity to the
issue, particularly for the Matanuska-Susitna (Mat-Su) Borough.
He restated that some municipalities have the power to restrict
trapping and some have limited authority.
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND urged for changes to the bill in order
to address problems in urban areas without affecting rural
Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON encouraged the committee to direct its
focus on a local solution.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON said he was researching case law on special
class legislation and exceptions to special class legislation;
in fact, there is an argument that the bill should not be
applied statewide.
REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE told of a trapper from Utqiaguik who
runs a trap line 200 miles long with 60 traps, and pointed out
that is one of the "things that we do" in his district. Whether
restricting the placement of traps is a good idea or not,
municipalities and boroughs already enforce ordinances, and he
cautioned that state interference is overreach.
2:38:02 PM
JODY LOFGREN testified in support of HB 40. She has been an
avid hiker since 1982 and was shocked to find out there is
active trapping on public use trails. Ms. Lofgren expressed her
concern about kids and dogs in areas of increased population.
She is not against trapping, but said the proposed bill is
common sense regulation and 200 feet on either side of a public
trail is a small buffer to help protect children and pets. In
addition, she spoke in support of identification requirements
for traps in a manner similar to those for vehicles, boats, and
snowmobiles. Although most trappers are responsible, it is
important that irresponsible trappers are held accountable.
Lastly, she said the bill may save the state money by preventing
a possible lawsuit.
2:41:22 PM
MICHAEL STOLTZ said he owns lodging in Talkeetna that allows
dogs, and his guests come from Anchorage, Eagle River, and
Palmer. He expressed his support for HB 40 although he
suggested the bill focus on second class boroughs. He spoke of
the effects of rapid growth and tourism on Mat-Su that has
impacted all parts of life in addition to the use of trails. In
response to Co-Chair Josephson, he clarified trails in areas,
including Glennallen, are heavily used in winter. Due to
increasing populations, he suggested unincorporated areas should
incorporate and govern themselves, as does the Matanuska-Susitna
Borough.
2:43:48 PM
BILL MOHWRINKEL testified in support of HB 40. He said his dog
was trapped this winter on a trail close to his house in Palmer.
He stated he is not anti-trapping, and has friends who are
ethical trappers. Mr. Mohwrinkel is a hunter and fisher, and
pointed out there are few regulations for trapping except for
guidelines for ethical trapping, which are insufficient. The
bill applies to high-use recreational areas, which ethical
trappers should support because they do not intend to trap dogs.
He reported finding a trap two feet off a high-use trail nearby
a school and playground, and said there was nothing to be done;
however, HB 40 would allow a response to traps found close to
trails. He restated his support for the bill. In response to
Co-Chair Josephson, he said he could not remember the name of
the school.
2:48:16 PM
BARBARA BREASE said she has lived year-around in the Denali
Borough for almost 35 years. She said HB 40 is a sensible bill;
in fact, one of the pleasures of living in Alaska is the
opportunity to enjoy the wilderness with her dogs, and she feels
shut out of the woods and trails because of traps concealed near
trails. She noted that trappers refuse to tell where the traps
are, although signs may warn of traps on trails. She related
two incidents of family dogs caught in traps. Ms. Brease
suggested that the proposed bill could be a "default over the
state," subject to local ordinances, and said she been unable to
"make it happen in my borough."
2:51:32 PM
JOEL BENNETT previously disclosed he served on BOG and was
legislative counsel for seven years. He said he was on BOG when
a rather extensive and comprehensive system [related to
trapping] was devised for Juneau, and supports HB 40 because it
seeks to impose a statewide standard. If clearly defined, he
opined HB 40 is a limited and conservative standard on a
contentious issue that most residents can support; in fact,
regulations in some areas of the state, such as Juneau, are more
strict. The system in Juneau was established over 20 years ago
and is undisputed. The system imposes a one-quarter mile
distance requirement all along the coastline, lakes, and on a
list of commonly-used trails. At that time, BOG recognized a
compromise in this regard was necessary for specific urban areas
of the state, and Mr. Bennett said this idea is good public
policy.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON observed BOG disallowed a Southeast rule that
traps need to be tagged, and overruled the "local option." He
referred to the restrictions in the City and Borough of Juneau
and asked whether BOG intervened, or has the ability to do so.
MR. BENNETT said the Juneau restrictions are a BOG regulation
that applied to Juneau, and which was devised after extensive
public testimony as part of an effort to raise public support
for trapping. Gustavus and Yakutat have specific BOG
limitations on trapping related to snare size and trap check
requirements. He opined that there is room for progress on the
issue and HB 40 is a step in the right direction.
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND noted BOG has avoided this issue for
several years, yet established limits for Juneau. She inquired
whether the regulations were at the request of Juneau.
MR. BENNETT answered that it was a very different BOG; at that
time, BOG was a blend of interests working for solutions to
contentious issues. Furthermore, there was widespread local
testimony due to the fact there were regulations for the city of
Juneau that did not affect the borough. The board responded to
a public request to develop reasonable trapping restrictions,
and he added that one-quarter mile is a commonly-used distance
by enforcement authorities.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON noted a document supporting a 500-foot buffer
on federal land was included in the committee packet.
2:58:20 PM
NICK STEEN testified in opposition to HB 40. He said the
distances in the bill are unenforceable and, as written, the
bill would potentially close trapping along all waterways
throughout the state. He questioned whether under HB 40 a trail
that was put in by a trapper, after another person walks on it,
would become a public trail. He restated the regulations are
unenforceable and should be left up to BOG.
2:59:33 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced HB 40 was held over with public
testimony open.
3:01:30 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:01 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| CSHB105 vers J.pdf |
HRES 2/15/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 105 |
| HB105 Letters in Support.pdf |
HRES 2/15/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 105 |
| HB040 Letters of Support.pdf |
HRES 2/15/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB040 ver j.pdf |
HRES 2/15/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB105 Letters in Support 2.pdf |
HRES 2/15/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 105 |
| HB040 Letters in support 2.pdf |
HRES 2/15/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB040 letters of opposition.pdf |
HRES 2/15/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB105 Letters in Support 3.pdf |
HRES 2/15/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 105 |
| HB040 Letters of Opposition 2.pdf |
HRES 2/15/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB040 Letters of Support 3.pdf |
HRES 2/15/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 40 |
| HB105 Letters of Support.pdf |
HRES 2/15/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 105 |