Legislature(1997 - 1998)

04/08/1997 01:12 PM RES

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
               HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE                              
                         April 8, 1997                                         
                           1:12 p.m.                                           
 MEMBERS PRESENT                                                               
 Representative Bill Hudson, Co-Chairman                                       
 Representative Scott Ogan, Co-Chairman                                        
 Representative Beverly Masek, Vice Chair                                      
 Representative Ramona Barnes                                                  
 Representative Fred Dyson                                                     
 Representative Joe Green                                                      
 Representative William K. ("Bill") Williams                                   
 Representative Reggie Joule                                                   
 MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                
 Representative Irene Nicholia                                                 
 OTHER HOUSE MEMBERS PRESENT                                                   
 Representative Alan Austerman                                                 
 COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                            
 * HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 34                                               
 Relating to proposed regulations of the North Pacific Fishery                 
 Management Council creating a new discriminatory halibut fishery in           
      - MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                 
 * HOUSE BILL NO. 144                                                          
 "An Act authorizing the Department of Environmental Conservation to           
 charge certain fees relating to registration of pesticides and                
 broadcast chemicals; and providing for an effective date."                    
      - MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                 
 CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 22(RES) am                                             
 "An Act relating to qualifications for appointment to the Board of            
      - MOVED HCS CSSB 22(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                
 CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 7(RLS) am                                              
 "An Act reducing certain resident sport fishing, hunting, and                 
 trapping license fees, increasing certain nonresident sport fishing           
 license and tag fees, and relating to nonresident sport fishing and           
 hunting licenses and tags; and providing for an effective date."              
      - HEARD AND HELD HCS CSSB7(FSH)                                          
 (* First public hearing)                                                      
 PREVIOUS ACTION                                                               
 BILL:  HJR 34                                                               
 SPONSOR(S): SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES                                    
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG                 ACTION                                   
 03/27/97       871    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 03/27/97       871    (H)   RESOURCES                                         
 04/08/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 BILL:  HB 144                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: DEC FEES:PESTICIDES AND CHEMICALS                                
 SPONSOR(S): STATE AFFAIRS                                                     
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG                 ACTION                                   
 02/18/97       381    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 02/18/97       381    (H)   RESOURCES, FINANCE                                
 03/11/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 03/11/97              (H)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 03/18/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 03/18/97              (H)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 03/20/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 03/20/97              (H)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 03/25/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 03/25/97              (H)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 03/27/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 03/27/97              (H)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 04/08/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 BILL:  SB 22                                                                
 SHORT TITLE: BOARD OF GAME QUALIFICATIONS                                     
 SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) SHARP, Taylor                                          
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG                 ACTION                                   
 01/03/97        19    (S)   PREFILE RELEASED 1/3/97                           
 01/13/97        19    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/13/97        20    (S)   STA, RES                                          
 01/23/97              (S)   STA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ ROOM 211                     
 01/23/97              (S)   MINUTE(STA)                                       
 01/24/97       124    (S)   STA RPT  CS  4DP 1NR   SAME TITLE                 
 01/24/97       124    (S)   DP:GREEN, MACKIE, WARD, MILLER;                   
 01/24/97       124    (S)   ZERO FISCAL NOTES TO SB (GOV, F&G)                
 01/28/97       146    (S)   ZERO FN TO CS (F&G)                               
 01/31/97       190    (S)   ZERO FN TO CS (GOV)                               
 02/12/97              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                 
 02/12/97              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 02/19/97              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                 
 02/19/97              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 02/20/97       428    (S)   RES RPT  CS  5DP        SAME TITLE                
 02/20/97       428    (S)   DP: GREEN, TORGERSON, LEMAN, SHARP,               
 02/20/97       428    (S)   PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY TO CS                     
 02/21/97              (S)   RLS AT 10:45 AM FAHRENKAMP RM 203                 
 02/21/97              (S)   MINUTE(RLS)                                       
 02/24/97       469    (S)   RULES TO CALENDAR & 1NR   2/24/97                 
 02/24/97       475    (S)   READ THE SECOND TIME                              
 02/24/97       475    (S)   RES  CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT                      
 02/24/97       475    (S)   ADVANCED TO THIRD READING                         
                             UNAN CONSENT                                      
 02/24/97       475    (S)   READ THE THIRD TIME  CSSB 22(RES)                 
 02/24/97       476    (S)   PASSED Y15 N4 A1                                  
 02/24/97       476    (S)   LINCOLN NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION                 
 02/25/97       498    (S)   RECON TAKEN UP - IN THIRD READING                 
 02/25/97       499    (S)   RETURN TO SECOND FOR AM 1                         
                             UNAN CONSENT                                      
 02/25/97       499    (S)   AM NO  1     OFFERED BY SHARP                     
 02/25/97       499    (S)   AM NO  1     ADOPTED Y16 N4                       
 02/25/97       499    (S)   AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING                    
 02/25/97       500    (S)   PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y15 N5                  
 02/25/97       503    (S)   TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                
 02/26/97       478    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 02/26/97       478    (H)   RESOURCES                                         
 04/05/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 04/05/97              (H)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 04/08/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 BILL:  SB 7                                                                 
 SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) DONLEY, Sharp                                          
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG                 ACTION                                   
 01/03/97        15    (S)   PREFILE RELEASED 1/3/97                           
 01/13/97        15    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/13/97        15    (S)   RES, FIN                                          
 01/29/97              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                 
 01/29/97              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 02/03/97              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                 
 02/03/97              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 02/06/97       246    (S)   RES RPT  CS  3DP 2NR    NEW TITLE                 
 02/06/97       246    (S)   DP:  HALFORD, GREEN, SHARP                        
 02/06/97       246    (S)   NR:  LEMAN, LINCOLN                               
 02/06/97       246    (S)   FISCAL NOTES TO SB & CS (F&G-2)                   
 02/11/97       283    (S)   CORRECTED ZERO FN TO SB (DPS)                     
 02/11/97       283    (S)   ZERO FN TO CS (DPS)                               
 02/18/97              (S)   FIN AT  9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                
 02/25/97       491    (S)   FIN RPT  CS  2DP 5NR    NEW TITLE                 
 02/25/97       492    (S)   DP: SHARP, DONLEY;                                
                             NR: ADAMS, PARNELL                                
 02/25/97       492    (S)   NR: PHILLIPS, PEARCE, TORGERSON                   
 02/25/97       492    (S)   FNS TO CS (F&G-2)                                 
 02/25/97       492    (S)   PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY TO CS                     
 02/26/97              (S)   RLS AT 12:30 PM FAHRENKAMP RM 203                 
 02/26/97              (S)   MINUTE(RLS)                                       
 03/05/97       567    (S)   RULES TO CALENDAR W/CS NEW TITLE 3/5              
 03/05/97       567    (S)   DP: KELLY; CALENDAR: LEMAN,                       
 03/04/97       567    (S)   NR: DUNCAN; DNP: TAYLOR                           
 03/04/97       567    (S)   FN TO CS (F&G)                                    
 03/04/97       567    (S)   PREVIOUS FN ( F&G)                                
 03/04/97       567    (S)   PREVIOUS ZERO FN APPLIES TO CS (DPS)              
 03/05/97       575    (S)   READ THE SECOND TIME                              
 03/05/97       575    (S)   RLS  CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT                      
 03/05/97       575    (S)   ADVANCED TO THIRD READING                         
                             UNAN CONSENT                                      
 03/05/97       575    (S)   READ THE THIRD TIME  CSSB 8(RLS)                  
 03/05/97       576    (S)   PASSED Y17 N3                                     
 03/05/97       576    (S)   EFFECTIVE DATE(S) SAME AS PASSAGE                 
 03/05/97       576    (S)   MACKIE  NOTICE OF RECONSIDERATION                 
 03/06/97       604    (S)   RECON TAKEN UP    IN THIRD READING                
 03/06/97       604    (S)   RETURN TO SECOND FOR AM 1                         
                             UNAN CONSENT                                      
 03/06/97       605    (S)   AM NO  1     OFFERED BY MACKIE                    
 03/06/97       605    (S)   AM NO  1     ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT                 
 03/06/97       605    (S)   AUTOMATICALLY IN THIRD READING                    
 03/06/97       606    (S)   PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y17 N3                  
 03/06/97       606    (S)   EFFECTIVE DATE(S) SAME AS PASSAGE                 
 03/06/97       606    (S)   TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                
 03/07/97       576    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 03/07/97       577    (H)   FSH, RESOURCES, FINANCE                           
 03/24/97              (H)   FSH AT 5:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 03/24/97              (H)   MINUTE(FSH)                                       
 03/26/97       848    (H)   FSH RPT  CS(FSH) 1DP 3NR                          
 03/26/97       848    (H)   DP: OGAN                                          
 03/26/97       848    (H)   NR: AUSTERMAN, IVAN, HODGINS                      
 03/26/97       848    (H)   SENATE FISCAL NOTE (F&G) 2/25/97                  
 03/26/97       848    (H)   SENATE FISCAL NOTE (F&G) 3/5/97                   
 03/26/97       848    (H)   SENATE ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DPS) 2/11/97             
 03/26/97       848    (H)   REFERRED TO RESOURCES                             
 04/08/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 WITNESS REGISTER                                                              
 RON SOMERVILLE, Special Consultant to                                         
    the Leadership of the House and Senate                                     
 211 Fourth Street, Number 302A                                                
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 463-3830                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented HJR 34.                                        
 DICK BISHOP, Executive Director                                               
 Alaska Outdoor Council                                                        
 211 Fourth Street, Number 302A                                                
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 463-3830                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HJR 34 on behalf of              
                      the Alaska Outdoor Council and the Territorial           
                      Sportsmen; testified on SB 7.                            
 RICHARD ANDREW                                                                
 P.O. Box 7211                                                                 
 Ketchikan, Alaska  99901                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 225-2463                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HJR 34.                          
 NORMAN COHEN                                                                  
 204 North Franklin Street                                                     
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 586-2360                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on HJR 34.                                     
 DEAN PADDOCK                                                                  
 P.O. Box 20312                                                                
 Juneau, Alaska  99802                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 463-4970                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HJR 34.                          
 BARBARA COTTING, Legislative Assistant                                        
    to Representative Jeannette James                                          
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 102                                                    
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 465-6822                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented sponsor statement for HB 144.                  
 JANICE ADAIR, Director                                                        
 Division of Environmental Health                                              
 Department of Environmental Conservation                                      
 555 Cordova Street                                                            
 Anchorage, Alaska  99501                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 269-7644                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided department's position and answered              
                      questions regarding HB 144.                              
 JOSEPHINE HARDY, Legislative Secretary                                        
    to Senator Bert Sharp                                                      
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 516                                                    
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 465-3004                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented sponsor statement for SB 22.                   
 KAREN BRAND, Legislative Assistant                                            
    to Senator Dave Donley                                                     
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 508                                                    
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 465-3892                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented sponsor statement for SB 7.                    
 DALE BONDURANT                                                                
 HC1, Box 1197                                                                 
 Soldotna, Alaska  99669                                                       
 Telephone:  (907) 262-0818                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in opposition to SB 7.                         
 SENATOR DAVE DONLEY                                                           
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 508                                                    
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 465-3892                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified as sponsor of SB 7.                            
 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison                                              
 Office of the Commissioner                                                    
 Department of Fish and Game                                                   
 P.O. Box 25526                                                                
 Juneau, Alaska  99802-5526                                                    
 Telephone:  (907) 465-6143                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided department's position and answered              
                      questions regarding SB 7.                                
 ACTION NARRATIVE                                                              
 TAPE 97-38, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 0001                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN BILL HUDSON called the House Resources Standing                   
 Committee meeting to order at 1:12 p.m.  Members present at the               
 call to order were Representatives Hudson, Ogan, Masek, Dyson and             
 Green; there was a quorum.  Representatives Williams, Joule and               
 Barnes arrived at 1:17 p.m., 1:18 p.m. and 1:31 p.m., respectively.           
 Representative Nicholia was absent.  On teleconference were Kenai,            
 Homer, Fairbanks and Anchorage; Mat-Su was scheduled to join later.           
 HJR 34 - NPFMC PROPOSED REGS FOR HALIBUT FISHERY                            
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON announced the first order of business was House            
 Joint Resolution No. 34, relating to proposed regulations of the              
 North Pacific Fishery Management Council creating a new                       
 discriminatory halibut fishery in Alaska.  He called on Ron                   
 Somerville to present the resolution.                                         
 Number 0099                                                                   
 RON SOMERVILLE, Special Consultant to the Leadership of the House             
 and Senate, explained the rationale behind HJR 34.  When the Alaska           
 National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) passed, the                 
 description of areas withdrawn in the conservation units clearly              
 said those units were limited to mean high tide.  That was to                 
 ensure the federal government did not extend jurisdiction into the            
 state's territorial waters.                                                   
 MR. SOMERVILLE said Title VIII of ANILCA indicates some conditions            
 apply.  He referred to Section 815, the limitations and savings               
 clauses, and said there was a list of statutes not affected by                
 ANILCA or this particular section.  One was the Fishery                       
 Conservation and Management Act of 1976, since amended.  The                  
 advance notice regulations contain specific language making it                
 clear the proposed preemption, or extension of jurisdiction, did              
 not apply in some waters in Alaska, particularly beyond territorial           
 MR. SOMERVILLE read an excerpt that says "the board's regulatory              
 authority under this provision" would be limited to the territorial           
 limits of the state and not extend to offshore fisheries beyond               
 Alaska's territorial waters.  All international treaty obligations          
 of the United States with respect to fish and wildlife and their              
 habits also must be adhered to.  He said these make it clear that             
 Title VIII does not extend beyond mean high tide or beyond the                
 "territorial sea."                                                            
 MR. SOMERVILLE advised that in December 1996, the North Pacific               
 Fishery Management Council (NPFMC) received a request to allow                
 legal harvest of subsistence-caught halibut.  In checking with the            
 National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), there appeared to have              
 been two instances, perhaps more, that led to that.  One was the              
 citing of people from villages in the Bering Sea region who had               
 taken home undersized halibut, caught while commercial fishing, for           
 personal use.  Under the regulations and laws of the NPFMC and the            
 International Pacific Halibut Commission, that was illegal.  In               
 addition, someone in Southeast Alaska had used illegal gear, such             
 as a skate, to harvest for personal/recreational use without having           
 Individual Fishery Quota (IFQ) shares.                                        
 Number 0425                                                                   
 MR. SOMERVILLE explained why the NPFMC is involved.  The                      
 International Halibut Treaty created the International Pacific                
 Halibut Commission.  As a result of amendments to the Northern                
 Pacific Halibut Act in 1982, the commission became responsible for        
 overviewing and establishing management strategies and quotas for             
 each halibut area, with the NPFMC responsible for adopting                    
 regulations, implementing that quota through allocation.                     
 MR. SOMERVILLE referred to a newsletter dated February 18, 1997,              
 that lists options from a February 1997 report by the NPFMC Halibut           
 Subsistence Committee.  He advised that April 15-19, 1997, the                
 NPFMC will hold a preliminary meeting on this and other subjects,             
 to hear staff evaluations, prepare preferred options and then                 
 either send out possible options or do nothing.  Their documents              
 indicate a final decision will be made in June, with further                  
 implementing regulations placed by 1998.                                      
 Number 0501                                                                   
 MR. SOMERVILLE referred to the newsletter, which lists three                  
 suboptions under Option 2, "Define eligibility for halibut                    
 "Suboption A.  Members of Alaska Native Federally-recognized Tribes           
 with customary and traditional use of halibut. (Subsistence                   
 Committee definition)                                                         
 "Suboption B.  Alaska rural residents as defined in ANILCA and                
 identified in the table entitled `Alaska Rural Places and Native              
 Groups with Subsistence Halibut Uses,' and will also include other            
 communities for which customary and traditional findings are                  
 developed in the future. (ANILCA definition)                                  
 "Suboption C.  Tribal members and non-Native permanent residents of           
 Native villages who have legitimate subsistence needs. (Migratory             
 Bird Treaty Act definition)"                                                  
 Number 0547                                                                   
 MR. SOMERVILLE referred to Option 3 and said the legal gear is                
 somewhat the same as would be allowed with commercial gear.                   
 Referring to Option 4, he noted size options were either having no            
 minimum size or allowing some exceptions for retention of                     
 undersized halibut taken for commercial purposes in Area 4E, which            
 is the Bering Sea.                                                            
 MR. SOMERVILLE discussed Options 5 and 6, relating to potential               
 customary and traditional trade of subsistence-caught halibut, in             
 addition to potential barter or sale.  He said this raised concerns           
 by legislators.                                                             
 Number 0612                                                                   
 MR. SOMERVILLE said HJR 34 was not designed to take on the whole              
 issue of subsistence.  Instead, it says the legislature supports              
 taking halibut for personal consumption, but supports doing so by             
 modifying existing regulations to accommodate it through                      
 personal/recreational use, rather than creating a whole new                   
 MR. SOMERVILLE said the concern is the legal authority of the NPFMC           
 to do this.  Going through all the documents, including the                   
 International Halibut Treaty, the Northern Pacific Halibut Act and            
 the newly adopted Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and                   
 Management Act, there is no mention of legal authority to establish           
 racially discriminatory regulations or those based on residency.              
 That issue is raised in the resolution.                                       
 MR. SOMERVILLE explained those proposals would conflict with the              
 state constitution if adopted.  That would create enforcement                 
 problems because the state adopts federal regulations by reference.           
 He believes the state would be unable to enforce regulations in               
 conflict with Alaska's constitution.                                          
 MR. SOMERVILLE said there is an argument that while legislators,              
 the delegation and the Governor's office continue to look for ways            
 to provide a long-term, permanent solution to the subsistence                 
 issue, this sort of action could further polarize people, creating            
 a new controversy that he believes is unnecessary.  He advised that           
 they would testify April 16 before the NPFMC on this issue.                   
 Number 0869                                                                   
 DICK BISHOP, Executive Director, Alaska Outdoor Council, came                 
 forward to testify in support of HJR 34.  He specified he was also            
 speaking for the Territorial Sportsmen, a member group of the                 
 council.  He said HJR 34 addresses many of the most objectionable             
 parts of the halibut subsistence proposals soon to be considered by           
 the NPFMC.  First is discrimination on racial grounds or the basis            
 of zip code.  Second is adopting unlimited catch of halibut under             
 subsistence, regardless of the size of fish, season, or so forth,             
 "very much like ANILCA's undefined customary and traditional use              
 priority, which has been defined by federal courts as basically `no           
 closed season, no bag limit.'"                                                
 MR. BISHOP said third is opening the door to commercial sale of yet           
 another so-called subsistence resource.  He noted that federal                
 courts have already established that sales of subsistence-caught              
 fish for tens of thousands of dollars are acceptable under ANILCA.            
 Fourth is providing for a new fishery that is bound to compete, to            
 some degree, with existing fisheries, but on a discriminatory basis           
 as far as priority for the use.  Fifth is that the same strategy              
 could easily be proposed for other marine resources such as crab.             
 Number 0984                                                                   
 MR. BISHOP said these proposed regulations are not about obtaining            
 food by customary and traditional means.  Instead, they are yet               
 another ploy to expand political and institutional approval of                
 special privileges for a racially defined group of people.                    
 MR. BISHOP read from page 2 of the Halibut Subsistence Committee              
 report dated January 22, 1997, to illustrate that committee's                 
 "The committee discussed a proposal to include `other rural                   
 residents in areas of Alaska with halibut uses.'  The committee               
 discussed the opportunities for non-Tribal Alaskans to harvest and            
 concluded that the two-fish-per-day sport fish limit would meet               
 their needs for supplying their families with halibut for food.               
 The determining factor in this conclusion was the stated need to              
 recognize existing, traditional practice at current levels of                 
 halibut removals.  The management plan for a halibut subsistence              
 program should legalize the current halibut removals and fishing              
 practices by Tribal members."                                                 
 MR. BISHOP said it makes it clear that their view is to narrowly              
 benefit one segment of Alaskans, leaving to the sport fish                    
 limitations the opportunities of "non-Tribal" Alaskans to meet                
 their needs to provide food for their families.                               
 Number 1073                                                                   
 MR. BISHOP said Alaska is already being socially shredded by                  
 controversies over subsistence and Indian country.  He urged                  
 passage of HJR 34 to discourage the NPFMC from perpetuating this              
 separatism by establishing yet another set of discriminatory rules            
 relating to use of fish and game.                                             
 Number 1112                                                                   
 RICHARD ANDREW testified via teleconference from Ketchikan in                 
 support of HJR 34.  A 34-year resident of Ketchikan, he is a                  
 commercial fisherman but does not hold any halibut IFQs.  He                  
 supports HJR 34 because creating a new fishery will further federal           
 takeover of the state's resources.  It will also further divide               
 rural and urban residents.                                                    
 Number 1187                                                                   
 NORMAN COHEN came forward to testify, saying he wanted to correct             
 the record.  He said subsistence halibut fishing is not new.  It              
 has occurred for probably hundreds or thousands of years along the            
 coast.  In addition, the International Pacific Halibut Commission             
 has jurisdiction over halibut.  There is no state jurisdiction, nor           
 are state laws affected by this fishery.  Furthermore, it has been            
 counted in the numbers of halibut taken by commercial fishermen,              
 sport fishermen and rural Alaskans who have used halibut for                  
 MR. COHEN said when the commission was created 70 years ago, it               
 neglected to include subsistence-take of halibut as a category.               
 Elsewhere, there have been special allocations to tribes in Canada            
 and Washington, but not in Alaska.  The only purpose of this new              
 regulation is to recognize what has taken place, so that people are           
 not subject to enforcement actions for participating in something             
 they have already participated in.  He said the commission and the            
 NPFMC recognize they have ignored this problem for 70 years and               
 that it is time to do something about it.                                     
 MR. COHEN stated that he works with a group of villages "on the               
 west coast" whose residents harvest halibut for subsistence                   
 Number 1370                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY MASEK asked whether Mr. Cohen opposes HJR
 MR. COHEN said he is strongly against it.  He reiterated that it              
 does not apply to state law, as halibut is allocated under an                 
 international treaty.  In terms of who should qualify, he leaves              
 that to the NPFMC.                                                            
 Number 1385                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK responded that reading materials say the state           
 assists in enforcement of halibut regulations and that the Board of           
 Fisheries adopts halibut regulations by reference.  She suggested             
 what is being proposed by the NPFMC will create serious enforcement           
 problems throughout Alaska's coastal areas.  At best, enforcement             
 abilities will be severely limited.                                           
 MR. COHEN disagreed that it will create enforcement problems.  He             
 believes those have already been created because the use occurs but           
 is not recognized nor regulated.  This will legalize something that           
 has gone on for generations.  If state Division of Fish and                   
 Wildlife Protection officers cannot enforce it, because it turns              
 out to be against Alaska law, then it will simply not be within               
 their jurisdiction.  There are NMFS agents stationed throughout the           
 state who are charged with enforcing these regulations, should they           
 Number 1549                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN inquired what the methods and means of the present           
 fishery are.                                                                  
 MR. COHEN replied that for the people he works with, the normal and           
 traditional way of harvesting halibut is using three hooks instead            
 of two; that is all those people are looking for.  However, in                
 Southeast Alaska, he understands the experience has been different.           
 Some proposals now before the council relate to distinctions in how           
 halibut are harvested.  He estimates, roughly, that a million                 
 pounds are taken statewide for subsistence, out of a 60-to-80-                
 million-pound quota for the entire state.  He added that it may be            
 much less than that, and he said the Department of Fish and Game              
 (ADF&G) has those statistics.                                                 
 Number 1607                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked for clarification about whether the three              
 hooks were on fishing poles, ground lines or what.  He further                
 asked whether someone had not actually won a case in a lower court            
 for having a couple of skates of gear out, claiming to be                     
 subsistence halibut fishing.                                                  
 MR. COHEN specified he was saying there is a distinction in how it            
 is done in various areas of the state.  "The people who I'm                   
 familiar with, and how they use it, it's three hooks on a jig," he            
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked whether Mr. Cohen was not aware of the case            
 he had mentioned.                                                             
 MR. COHEN replied that the people he was speaking for only use                
 three hooks.  Others, in other parts of the state, do use skates.             
 "And that was the subject of a citation, and the case was thrown              
 out, as I understand it," he said.  Mr. Cohen said the question is            
 what the halibut is used for.  The intent is to recognize a                   
 traditional method, means and opportunity, not to create an                   
 unauthorized commercial fishery.  He said after salmon, this                  
 subsistence fishery is the second largest in the state.                       
 Number 1704                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN commented, "Maybe the people you are working with            
 want to have three hooks.  But under Title VIII of ANILCA, plus               
 what they're talking about here with this North Pacific Fishery               
 Management Council, is they're addressing the outright commercial             
 sale of subsistence-caught halibut.  That's one of the issues                 
 that's on the table here.  And that's what we're trying to oppose             
 here."  He stated the belief that Alaska will lose its resource if            
 that happens.                                                                 
 MR. COHEN replied that he and the people he works with adamantly              
 oppose commercialization of halibut from the subsistence fishery.             
 He believes that would be an excellent recommendation from the                
 legislature to the NPFMC, that they prohibit commercialized use of            
 this resource.                                                                
 Number 1757                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN asked whether Mr. Cohen had read the                 
 MR. COHEN replied he had awhile ago but had not planned on                    
 testifying that day.                                                          
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said three things concern him.  He referred to           
 the first, second and fifth "Whereas" sections, addressing the                
 proposed NPFMC options that would provide a discriminatory                    
 preference based on race and residency, and including the                     
 possibility of commercial sale of subsistence-caught halibut.  He             
 stated concern over having the state sanction that.  It borders on            
 a sensitive issue the state has been trying to resolve for quite              
 some time.  To have a federal agency give preference to certain               
 classes of Alaskans would undermine all efforts to defend the state           
 constitution and try to resolve this amicably.  He stated, "So                
 there is a significant difference, I would suggest, between having            
 had it happen, if in fact it has over 70 years, and for the state             
 to sanction it.  And so, in that regard, it seems to me that we, in           
 order to defend the constitution, would have to be opposed to that            
 and support this resolution."                                                 
 MR. COHEN responded that nothing here affects the state government,           
 its constitution or its laws.  It is regulated under an                       
 international treaty and federal law.  And it is not a federal law            
 that only came into place because the state is out of compliance              
 with ANILCA, because ANILCA does not apply to the halibut fishery.            
 Because halibut has a limited-entry system through the IFQ program,           
 there is more enforcement.  They just want to fix a problem that              
 people have ignored for so many years.                                        
 Number 1920                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said his concern is not between two and three            
 hooks.  Rather, it is between types of people who have preference.            
 While it may not be under ANILCA and it may be beyond state                   
 jurisdiction, for the state to sit idly by and permit that is the             
 first step in "a run on the state constitution."  He said as Mr.              
 Cohen had testified earlier, this does get into state waters, which           
 is an issue of the state.                                                     
 MR. COHEN disagreed.  As he understands it, because it is an                  
 international treaty, the state has the same role both inside and             
 outside the three-mile limit.                                                 
 Number 1962                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said there is a preferential portion that                
 violates the state constitution.  The state cannot sit idly by on             
 that issue.  The legislature is duty-bound to defend the                      
 MR. COHEN replied that if the state's position is that everybody              
 needs to be treated exactly the same in this fishery, then the                
 lowest common denominator should not be the two hooks and two fish            
 a day.  Rather, it should be the activity that takes place and has            
 taken place for thousands of years on the resource, whether it was            
 in Western or Southeastern Alaska.                                            
 MR. COHEN suggested changing the sport fishing rules to be the same           
 as these traditional practices, if the legislature wants to support           
 subsistence halibut fishing and those who do it.                              
 Number 2043                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE RAMONA BARNES asked Mr. Cohen to define the present            
 MR. COHEN replied, "The rules are two hooks, two fish a day."                 
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES asked who set that rule.                                
 MR. COHEN said the International Pacific Halibut Commission.                  
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES asked for whom it was set.                              
 MR. COHEN said it was for people who sport fish.                              
 Number 2081                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES asked what the rules are for subsistence                
 users today.                                                                  
 MR. COHEN replied there are none.                                             
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES stated her understanding that this would be             
 a new subsistence fishery.                                                    
 MR. COHEN responded that it would be a new subsistence fishery in             
 name, but they already count these fish in terms of setting the               
 overall quota.  They just ignore how it is caught.                            
 Number 2094                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES said, "Two fish a day, though."                         
 MR. COHEN replied, "No, no.  Whatever they catch."                            
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES referred to the new fishery that would be               
 MR. COHEN said it is an existing fishery that would be recognized             
 as a new category.                                                            
 Number 2145                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES asked how many people would qualify.                    
 MR. COHEN said it depends on which system the NPFMC picks for who             
 qualifies.  There are several options before them.  He guessed the            
 number would be 10,000 or less.                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES asked whether presently one million pounds is           
 being taken for subsistence harvest.                                          
 MR. COHEN said he does not know, nor should he have guessed.                  
 Similarly, he does not know about the 10,000 figure.                          
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES asked, if it turns out to be 10,000 people,             
 how many pounds that is per person.                                           
 Number 2197                                                                   
 MR. COHEN said it is 100 pounds of halibut per person, but he                 
 believes that is probably high.                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES referred to 10,000 people at 100 pounds.  She           
 asked whether Mr. Cohen thinks each of those people eats 100 pounds           
 of halibut per year.                                                          
 MR. COHEN said he does not know the numbers.  He believes there               
 should be no sale of halibut involved with it, and that it should             
 be truly a subsistence fishery, used for food.  He strongly                   
 supports the legislature stating that to the NPFMC.                           
 Number 2241                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES referred to a section on hook-and-line gear             
 with a maximum of 60 hooks.  She said testimony had been about                
 three hooks.  She asked how many fish could be caught on 60 hooks.            
 MR. COHEN said he assumed 60.  However, at least for the people he            
 had been working with, three hooks is fine.  They are not looking             
 to use 60-hook skates.  He said there are regional differences in             
 Alaska that the council will have to deal with in deciding what               
 kind of gear to allow.  The NPFMC would take testimony and make a             
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES referred to Representative Green's remarks on           
 the state constitution.  She asked whether Mr. Cohen did not                  
 believe that, regardless of whether this falls under state                    
 jurisdiction, it still flies in the face of the state constitution            
 because it would be a special-use fishery.                                    
 MR. COHEN responded that this is authorized and regulated under               
 federal law and an international treaty, and it has nothing to do             
 with Alaska's constitution.                                                   
 Number 2369                                                                   
 DEAN PADDOCK came forward to testify in support of HJR 34.  For the           
 past six years, he had devoted five weeks or more, with no                    
 remuneration, to "sitting around the table with some 20 other                 
 people in an advisory capacity to the North Pacific Fishery                   
 Management Council."                                                          
 MR. PADDOCK expressed concern about the proposals before the NPFMC.           
 He said Alaska is at an important crossroads, with great potential            
 for divisiveness.  He regrets that immensely.  He also dreads                 
 having to consider this at the NPFMC, because it comes at a bad               
 time.  He plans to ask the advisory panel to table this issue.  The           
 state is faced with issues of subsistence and sovereignty, apart              
 from halibut.  He agrees with Mr. Cohen that because halibut is               
 managed by the federal government, they have jurisdiction.                    
 However, he believes the state has a great deal at stake here.                
 TAPE 97-38, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 0006                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked if there were further testifiers, then               
 closed public testimony.                                                      
 Number 0022                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a motion that HJR 34 move from the                 
 committee with individual recommendations and a zero fiscal note.             
 She asked unanimous consent.                                                  
 Number 0036                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE JOULE objected for discussion, saying he                
 opposes HJR 34 but shares concerns regarding commercial use of that           
 subsistence resource.  He concluded by saying it is not creating a            
 new fishery but recognizing a fishery that has been there forever.            
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES said she believes if this fishery has gone on           
 forever for personal consumption, personal consumption should be              
 allowed.  However, if it is being commercialized, she opposes that.           
 She further wants everyone, not just people of one race, to be able           
 to participate.                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE withdrew his objection.                                  
 Number 0199                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS objected for discussion.  He said this           
 is a good example of what the subsistence issue will do to the                
 state until it is taken care of by everyone getting together to               
 fight the federal takeover.  "We have to settle this subsistence              
 issue before we tear ourselves apart," he stated.  He asked the               
 committee to help him ensure the subsistence issue is a priority of           
 the House majority.                                                           
 REPRESENTATIVE FRED DYSON concurred.                                          
 Number 0255                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN objected to the motion for voting purposes.                  
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON acknowledged the request for a vote.  He said he           
 understands what Representative Williams is talking about.  He                
 agrees all players must come to the table to eliminate the fear               
 arising whenever someone proposes a potential new fishery, for                
 example, based on the basis of race or region.  He stated his                 
 readiness and willingness to participate with all members of the              
 House and Senate to try to find an Alaskan solution.                          
 Number 0324                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON requested a roll call.  Voting to move HJR were            
 Representatives Masek, Barnes, Dyson, Green, Williams, Ogan and               
 Hudson.  Voting against it was Representative Joule.                          
 Representative Nicholia was absent.  So HJR 34 moved from the House           
 Resources Standing Committee.                                                 
 HB 144 - DEC FEES:  PESTICIDES AND CHEMICALS                                
 Number 0380                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON announced the next order of business was House             
 Bill No. 144, "An Act authorizing the Department of Environmental             
 Conservation to charge certain fees relating to registration of               
 pesticides and broadcast chemicals; and providing for an effective            
 Number 0416                                                                   
 BARBARA COTTING, Legislative Assistant to Representative Jeannette            
 James, presented the sponsor statement.  Representative James had             
 submitted HB 144 at the request of the Alaska Department of                   
 Environmental Conservation (ADEC), Division of Environmental                  
 Health.  The ADEC oversees pesticide use in Alaska.  Services                 
 consist of applicator training and certification, issuing permits             
 for public use projects and ensuring pesticides are used properly.            
 This includes requiring manufacturers to register their products              
 with the state.  The program is funded in part by the federal                 
 government, with a state match.                                               
 MS. COTTING said every other state pays for its share of the                  
 pesticide program through a registration fee levied against the               
 chemical manufacturers.  The ADEC would like to do the same in                
 Alaska, but statutory authority is needed.  No Alaskan would pay              
 this fee, since there are no chemical manufacturers in Alaska.  The           
 ADEC proposes to charge a $100 fee per label.  At that low rate, it           
 should not even impact these large manufacturers' bottom lines in             
 any meaningful way, but it will have a positive impact on Alaska's            
 general fund, with an expected annual savings of more than $56,000,           
 to be replaced with program receipts.  She invited Janice Adair to            
 answer technical questions.                                                   
 Number 0481                                                                   
 JANICE ADAIR, Director, Division of Environmental Health,                     
 Department of Environmental Conservation, came forward to testify.            
 Alaska has an active but small pesticide program, doing primarily             
 training and certification of applicators.  Since pesticides are              
 chemicals intended to kill living things, it is important they be             
 used properly.  "We have great success, actually, and have very few           
 problems with misuse of pesticides," she commented.                           
 MS. ADAIR said the registration requirement is fairly important,              
 not only to track which pesticides are being used in Alaska, but              
 also because if the ADEC knows a certain pesticide has not been               
 used in Alaska, it is easy to waive the monitoring requirement                
 relating to drinking water.                                                   
 MS. ADAIR said every other state pays for its pesticide program               
 through a combination of a federal grant and fees charged to                  
 manufacturers.  This bill would allow the state to charge chemical            
 manufacturers such as Dow Chemical and Corning for registration of            
 their products in Alaska.                                                     
 Number 0559                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked how change would be handled as far as              
 labels, for example.                                                          
 MS. ADAIR replied that the registration requirement applies to the            
 approved use of the chemical.  She noted that herbicides are                  
 included in the category of pesticides.  She said there is a                  
 certain "block use" the chemical is good for; she would not expect            
 much change in that after registration.  Because a company sends              
 its labels, the ADEC knows the ingredients.                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked what happens when a formula changes.               
 MS. ADAIR said it depends how dramatic the formula change is.                 
 Addition of a different ingredient would probably require a new               
 registration, because it would require watching for an ancillary              
 impact not expected under the prior formula.                                  
 Number 0647                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether, in addition to herbicides,                
 fungicides and so forth are included.                                         
 MS. ADAIR replied, "All those `cides' are pesticides, because                 
 they're all intended to kill a living organism.  And that's                   
 essentially what a pesticide is."                                             
 Number 0676                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked who pays for this.                                     
 MS. ADAIR said the large chemical manufacturers that make the                 
 pesticides pay.                                                               
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked for confirmation that farmers would not pay            
 for it.                                                                       
 MS. ADAIR said theoretically, this $56,000 will impact these multi-           
 million dollar corporations' bottom lines in some fashion.                    
 However, the farmers also pay for programs in 49 other states,                
 which fund it in exactly the same way.  She doubts that farmers               
 would see an increase, although certainly it could be passed along            
 to the consumer, as she assumed already occurs in the other 49                
 states.  "But I will tell you that the farmers in your district do            
 take advantage of this program and, I would think, want to see it             
 continue," she said.  "Certainly that's the comments we've                    
 received, when we just recently did an update to our regulations."            
 Number 0736                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked Ms. Adair whether the ADEC had informed            
 the "Dow Chemicals" of the world that this was impending.                     
 MS. ADAIR replied that the companies have been surprised it has not           
 happened yet.  She said the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)             
 had done a couple of reports to Congress on the pesticide programs            
 operating in the states.  In each of those, Alaska stands out as              
 the only state that does not do this.  She said the companies are             
 aware and have not commented on it specifically.                              
 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked whether it is fair to conclude the                 
 companies had an opportunity to testify that day.                             
 MS. ADAIR indicated it would not have been appropriate for her to             
 set that up.                                                                  
 Number 0787                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON commented, "We didn't call them."  He asked Ms.            
 Adair whether the $100 was a standard fee used by other states.  He           
 suggested Dow Chemical could come up with $1,000.                             
 MS. ADAIR explained that most other states have a much larger                 
 pesticide program, especially in agricultural areas.  Their fees              
 are based not only on numbers of products, but also on the amount             
 of certain chemicals by weight, for example.  She offered to                  
 provide one of the EPA's reports; however, she did not have it with           
 her.  Those reports address different funding mechanisms adopted by           
 other states.  Few have only a flat, per-label fee.  Almost all               
 have something in addition because they have bigger programs to               
 Number 0941                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON made a motion to move HB 144 from committee              
 with individual recommendations and zero fiscal note.  There being            
 no objection, HB 144 moved from the House Resources Standing                  
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON turned the gavel over to Co-Chairman Ogan for              
 the next order of business.                                                   
 CSSB 22(RES) am - BOARD OF GAME QUALIFICATIONS                              
 Number 0989                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN announced the next order of business was CS for              
 Senate Bill No. 22(RES) am, "An Act relating to qualifications for            
 appointment to the Board of Game."  Before the committee was                  
 version 0-LS0195\F, Utermohle, 4/4/97, adopted as a work draft at             
 the previous hearing.                                                         
 Number 1020                                                                   
 JOSEPHINE HARDY, Legislative Secretary to Senator Bert Sharp, came            
 forward to testify.  She advised that Senator Sharp, sponsor,                 
 wished to leave it to the committee to make necessary changes.                
 Number 1046                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN offered Amendment 1, 0-LS0195\F.2, Utermohle,                
 4/8/97, which read:                                                           
      Page 1, line 12:                                                         
           Delete "must [SHALL] be"                                          
           Insert "must have been [SHALL BE]"                                
      Page 1, line 13:                                                         
           Delete "state, and a"                                           
           Insert "state for the four years preceding appointment to         
           the board.  A"                                                    
      Page 2, line 1, following "of the board":                              
           Insert "[AND]"                                                      
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN explained that Amendment 1 requires Alaska                   
 residency for four years preceding appointment.                               
 Number 1105                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a motion to adopt Amendment 1.                     
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN said he believes it is important for board members           
 to have lived in Alaska long enough to have a feel for, and                   
 experience with, game management.  The residency requirement had              
 been discussed extensively with Legislative Legal and Research                
 Services personnel, who indicated five years is considered the                
 maximum not subject to constitutional challenge.  Therefore, a                
 four-year requirement was chosen.                                             
 Number 1167                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES stated that qualifications are required of              
 members of different boards.  There is also a minimum length of               
 time required to run for office in Alaska.  She said when a person            
 goes into Alaska's wilds, there should be some knowledge of what is           
 out there.  She does not believe that is acquired overnight.                  
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN concurred.                                                   
 Number 1251                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said he did not understand the last part of              
 the amendment, addressing page 2.                                             
 Number 1312                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN called an at-ease at 2:29 p.m.  He called the                
 meeting back to order at 2:32 p.m.                                            
 Number 1320                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES referred to the section of Amendment 1                  
 addressing page 2.  She made a motion to amend Amendment 1 by                 
 replacing "of the board" with "to the board".  Amendment 1 would              
 then read:  "Page 2, line 1, following `to the board':"  She                
 suggested that beginning on page 1, line 15, and continuing to page           
 2, it should say:  "preceding the appointment to the board and the            
 members of the board shall be appointed without regard to"                    
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if that was the intent.  He suggested to           
 make the amendment correct, the period must be included after                 
 "board" as a deletion.  Furthermore, the "and" should be lower                
 case, as should the "t" on "the".                                             
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES concurred and said that was her motion.                 
 There being no objection, Amendment 1 was amended.  There being no            
 further objection, Amendment 1, as amended, was adopted.                      
 Number 1450                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a motion that the bill, as amended, move           
 from the committee with individual recommendations and attached               
 fiscal notes.                                                                 
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE and REPRESENTATIVE DYSON objected.                       
 Number 1501                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said the bill attempts to guarantee that board           
 members have relevant experience and commitment, quite narrowly               
 defining it.  It implies lack of trust in the Governor's good sense           
 in nominating and in the legislature's good sense in confirming               
 appointees, and it goes contrary to how good government ought to be           
 run.  He suggested using good judgment instead of micro-management.           
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES said qualifications are set in statute for              
 people serving on boards and commissions.  She believes the                   
 legislature has been remiss in not doing that for fish and game               
 resources.  Nor does she believe in automatic approval of the                 
 Governor's appointees.  She said appointees could serve on the                
 board for probably a year before the legislature confirms them.  In           
 that time, they may have done harm.                                           
 Number 1747                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE questioned how far qualifications should go.             
 A hunting license does not confer knowledge of hunting nor about              
 policy for governing game resources.  In that vein, he does not               
 support the bill.  Furthermore, he knows at least three good,                 
 contributing former board members who may not have been able to               
 serve under this regime.                                                      
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN concurred that having a hunting license or being             
 a four-year resident does not necessarily make a good member.                 
 However, he believes it is a step in the right direction.                     
 Number 1927                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK said while she supports the residency                    
 requirement, she has a problem with the requirement of having held            
 a hunting license.  There might be intermittent years when a person           
 does not hold a license, for example.                                         
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated his belief that board members should have             
 an intensive interest in hunting.                                             
 Number 2097                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON apologized for not having been present at the              
 previous hearing.  He noted that five of seven members must have              
 held a hunting or trapping license or an identification for people            
 age 60 or more; one could presumably apply for the latter without             
 any qualifications.  While philosophically he can see the residency           
 requirement and the need for advocacy, he is uncertain about                  
 supporting such exclusive criteria.                                           
 Number 2267                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN advised that at the previous hearing, he had             
 suggested changing that to four members out of seven.  With 70                
 percent of the board being either hunter-oriented or having to                
 obtain a license, he concurs that it is too exclusive.                        
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES recalled that the sponsor had indicated 100             
 percent of Alaska's game management is paid for by hunting                    
 licenses.  She suggested those wishing to participate should                  
 contribute through buying a license.                                          
 TAPE 97-39, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 0001                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN advised that Representative Green's motion at the            
 previous hearing had been withdrawn; it had not failed.                       
 Number 0099                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE said while any governor may have the                     
 opportunity to nominate, the legislature can concur or not.  He               
 asked:  If the system is not broken, why fix it?                              
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked if the objection was maintained.                       
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE said yes.                                                
 Number 0187                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN requested a roll call on moving SB 22, version 0-            
 LS0195\F, Utermohle, 4/4/97, as amended, from committee.  Voting              
 for it were Representatives Masek, Barnes, Dyson, Williams, Hudson            
 and Ogan; voting against it was Representative Joule; and                     
 Representative Green abstained.  Representative Nicholia was                  
 absent.  So HCS CSSB 22(RES) moved from the House Resources                   
 Standing Committee.                                                         
 Number 0278                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN announced the next order of business was CS for              
 Senate Bill No. 7(RLS) am, "An Act reducing certain resident sport            
 fishing, hunting, and trapping license fees, increasing certain               
 nonresident sport fishing license and tag fees, and relating to               
 nonresident sport fishing and hunting licenses and tags; and                  
 providing for an effective date."  The version before the committee           
 was HCS CSSB 7(FSH).                                                          
 Number 0321                                                                   
 KAREN BRAND, Legislative Assistant to Senator Dave Donley,                    
 presented the sponsor statement on his behalf.  She said it is not            
 a new concept; Senator Donley had introduced similar legislation              
 two years before, which had numerous hearings in the Senate                   
 Resources Committee.                                                          
 MS. BRAND explained that the bill slightly increases nonresident              
 sport fish license fees.  It also increases the nonresident annual            
 sport fish license from $50 to $150; for this, it restricts                   
 purchase to nonresidents involved in a commercial fishery,                    
 possessing a commercial deck hand license or having a limited entry           
 permit.  In addition, it slightly decreases resident sport fish               
 license combination fees, resulting in less funds going back to               
 vendors and less paperwork for the department.                                
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked why it was introduced.                               
 Number 0537                                                                   
 MS. BRAND responded that Senator Donley had been tracking this                
 issue for many years.  She noted that packets include articles                
 referring to sting operations by the Division of Fish and Wildlife            
 Protection on the Kenai Peninsula and around the state, relating to           
 increased numbers of nonresidents who sport fish and then                     
 commercially process that fish for sale.  One article refers to a             
 couple who smoked salmon and then sold it at a flea market in the             
 Lower 48 to help pay for their annual trip to Alaska.  Although the           
 problem is not widespread, it is increasing.  This bill addresses             
 some of that misuse of Alaska's sport fish resources.                         
 Number 0613                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON suggested as a result, people wishing to stay              
 all summer would have to buy a license every other week.                      
 MS. BRAND replied that those not involved in a commercial fishery,            
 and not deck hands nor holders of limited entry permits, would be             
 required to purchase a license every 14 days; that was the longest            
 license they could purchase.  It would create somewhat of a paper             
 trail for enforcement officers.                                               
 Number 0681                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON inquired about the net change in revenues.                 
 MS. BRAND referred to the fiscal notes.  She advised that there is            
 uncertainty over how many people will purchase each type of                   
 license.  The best guess is an additional $4.5 million in sport               
 fish revenues, to be deposited into the fish and game fund.                   
 Number 0742                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether the current sport fish license             
 fee is still $10.                                                             
 MS. BRAND affirmed it is $10, unchanged by this bill.                         
 Number 0769                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to testimony in committee the                   
 previous week by George Utermohle, Legislative Counsel.                       
 Representative Green said for a 14-day license, there would be a              
 five-fold difference between resident and nonresident licenses.  He           
 expressed concern about whether this would pass muster, not that he           
 opposes it.                                                                   
 MS. BRAND replied this has come up before.  The "magic number" is             
 a three-to-one ratio for commercial license fees.  However, this is           
 for sport fish, which is "want-based."                                        
 Number 0893                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN recalled that Mr. Utermohle had indicated                
 commercial activity affects a person's livelihood and therefore               
 requires some upper limit.  He questioned whether an increase from            
 three-to-one to twenty-to-one might not still be a problem.  He               
 again advised he was not passing judgment on it.                              
 MS. BRAND agreed there is a difference in ratios studied for                  
 constitutionality for commercial activities.  She believes in one             
 state, a ten-to-one ratio for nonresident-versus-resident sport               
 fish license fees had been held constitutional.                               
 Number 0981                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to the fiscal note and increased                
 funding.  He asked whether that took into account additional                  
 paperwork for repeated licenses.                                              
 MS. BRAND did not recall specific comments about that.  She advised           
 that an ADF&G representative was present.                                     
 Number 1015                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES expressed concern over the bill.  She cited             
 her own children as an example.  Previous residents, if they lived            
 outside Alaska and visited for the whole summer, they would have to           
 buy repeated licenses.  She believes that is wrong.  She suggested            
 trying to solve one problem may create other, bigger problems.                
 Number 1065                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked what the response had been from the guided           
 sport fish industry.                                                          
 MS. BRAND explained there had been provisions in the previous SB
 128 dealing with hunting.  There had been a lot of testimony from             
 both hunting and sport fishing guides on that.  This year, all                
 those hunting issues had been taken out.  The ADF&G had worked with           
 guides to help get the legislation to a point where guides could be           
 satisfied with it.  She said several guides on the Kenai River had            
 indicated they were happy to have the new seven-day license in                
 Number 1129                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked whether the guided sport input on this               
 version has been supportive.                                                  
 MS. BRAND said there had either been no comment or no stated                  
 Number 1184                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN reported that he had heard from two or three             
 sport fish guides who would prefer the full-season license.  He               
 offered to provide their names, if necessary.  He noted that it was           
 not a consensus opinion.                                                      
 Number 1219                                                                   
 DALE BONDURANT testified via teleconference from Kenai, saying he             
 does not think this is fair.  He suggested if Representative                  
 Green's figures were "crunched" further, on a per-day basis it                
 would be a 90-to-one ratio.  For combination licenses, a                      
 nonresident would pay 25 or 30 times as much as a resident,                   
 depending on the license.                                                     
 MR. BONDURANT indicated nonresidents pay 85 percent of the total              
 cost of management of sport fisheries.  Furthermore, this                     
 presupposes dishonesty by nonresident noncommercial fishermen and             
 honesty by nonresident commercial fishermen.  The latter have the             
 same opportunity to run cottage industries.  Mr. Bondurant believes           
 this is another attempt to bash visitors.  He asked whether anyone            
 had thought about military veterans who visit Alaska.  He suggested           
 nonresidents, who furnish more funds than residents, should perhaps           
 even get their licenses for less money.                                       
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN recognized the arrival of Senator Donley, sponsor.           
 Number 1388                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON referred to the impact of denying an annual                
 license.  He asked how Senator Donley envisions long-term visitors            
 handling this.  For example, would a visitor to the Kenai River               
 periodically go to Kenai or Soldotna to buy a new license?                    
 SENATOR DAVE DONLEY, sponsor, said that was one reason they had not           
 sought to amend the one-day license, which costs $10.  He believes            
 that is the best way out for nonresidents who stay in Alaska for a            
 long time.                                                                    
 [Co-Chairman Hudson chairing, as Co-Chairman Ogan left the room]              
 Number 1449                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES restated her earlier comments for Senator               
 Donley's benefit.  She concluded by saying although she understands           
 the goal, this is overkill, especially for former residents.                  
 SENATOR DONLEY replied that he also has relatives who want to                 
 visit.  However, he believes that is a small percentage in the                
 overall scheme.  He further believes nonresident fishing license              
 fees should not be crafted to address their relatives.  He                    
 expressed concern over commercial harvesting under a sport fish               
 license.  He said the good news is that fees go towards developing            
 the same resource that benefits purchasers.                                   
 Number 1560                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES asked how nonresident military is handled.              
 SENATOR DONLEY said the existing military scheme remains the same.            
 Number 1574                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN advised Senator Donley of earlier discussion             
 on fee ratios and asked whether he believes a twenty-to-one ratio             
 will stand muster.                                                            
 SENATOR DONLEY explained there is U.S. Supreme Court case law on              
 the subject.  The standard for commercial operations is between               
 three and four times as great for nonresidents over residents; that           
 falls under the commerce clause of the U.S. constitution, and there           
 are many more restrictions applying to commerce between states.               
 However, that clause does not apply to sport fish, which falls                
 under the privileges and immunities clause and does not rise to the           
 same level of scrutiny for discrimination between residents and               
 nonresidents as do more crucial elements in people's lives.                   
 Senator Donley advised that the ten-to-one ratio for the                      
 nonresident annual option under this legislation has been held by             
 the U.S. Supreme Court to be constitutional in other cases.                   
 Therefore, that is the usual standard he himself follows.                     
 [Co-Chairman Ogan returned]                                                   
 Number 1695                                                                   
 SENATOR DONLEY said in past years, there had been the argument,               
 "We'll wait until the commercial case was done because somehow                
 they're linked, they're related."  He continued, "And we won the              
 commercial case this year.  And that was a three- or four-to-one              
 ratio, and we prevailed in that."  He said case law from other                
 states indicates where a three- or four-to-one ratio is allowed               
 commercially, they have allowed a ten-to-one ratio noncommercially.           
 Number 1717                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN suggested while this would increase fees for             
 people staying and canning salmon, for example, it would also                 
 penalize people such as Representative Barnes had mentioned.  He              
 suggested the possibility of changing the amount of processing                
 allowed for sport-caught fish, rather than changing the license.              
 SENATOR DONLEY replied that in working on this bill over the years,           
 he has frequently heard that the Board of Fisheries will deal with            
 this problem.  However, as indicated in a recent newspaper article            
 in committee packets, the board declined this year to address the             
 issue.  He said the board had looked extensively at punch cards and           
 bag limits but had been unable to come up with a plan they like.              
 "I was hoping they would do something," he stated.  "Frankly, if              
 the fish board would have acted, and come up with some alternative            
 plan, I probably would have been supportive to having just an                 
 annual license available for everybody that's a nonresident in                
 here.  But since they failed to do anything along those lines, I              
 still believe that limiting it to making people buy a series of 14-           
 day licenses."  He believes the series of 14-day licenses provides            
 a tool to examine whether people are habitually buying those,                 
 raising a red flag to perhaps inspect what those people are doing.            
 Number 1878                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked how anyone would know people were doing            
 that if licenses were purchased in different locations.                       
 SENATOR DONLEY replied that he believes it can be developed as a              
 tool.  He said clearly, at the end of the first year, the pattern             
 of purchase would be identifiable.                                            
 SENATOR DONLEY said the most difficult question has been whether to           
 have an annual nonresident license.  He indicated the section on              
 page 2, linking sport licenses to commercial ones, is an effort to            
 coordinate with legislation introduced by Representative Austerman.           
 If that legislation does not pass, Senator Donley would support               
 removing the exceptions from his bill, which would make it much               
 cleaner.  Another option would be to say everyone may get a                   
 nonresident license for $150; however, that loses the tracking                
 advantage and possible development of an enforcement tool.                    
 Number 1933                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN advised that no one from the Division of Fish and            
 Wildlife Protection was present.  He asked whether Senator Donley             
 knew that division's position on the bill.                                    
 SENATOR DONLEY responded that the division had acknowledged over              
 the years that this is a problem, and they had run a sting                    
 operation on the Kenai River relating to this.   However, they do             
 not believe allowing a maximum of 14 days per license would be                
 useful to them, nor do they endorse that.  "I think we were all               
 hoping the fish board would address it with some sort of bag limit            
 or punch card, and they just haven't done it," he added.                      
 Number 1986                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE said he was not sure yet whether he supports             
 the bill.  The way the legislature is proposing to cut the budget,            
 specifically as relates to fish and game enforcement, he wonders              
 how that will impact continued efforts to enforce these kinds of              
 operations.  He asked whether other possibilities for getting at              
 people marketing Alaskan fish had been looked into, such as fines             
 or other incentives.                                                          
 SENATOR DONLEY replied that he believes this bill more accurately             
 adjusts nonresident sport fishing fees to where they should be.               
 That is the bottom line.  Denying annual sport fish licenses has              
 the extra benefit of possibly creating an enforcement or assessment           
 tool.  Although money generated by the bill cannot be used directly           
 for enforcement, it can be used for enhancement of the fishery for            
 sport fish projects.  He stated that this money goes into a fund to           
 be used for that.  This would generate additional fees to be used             
 for those kinds of projects.                                                  
 Number 2093                                                                   
 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner,                 
 Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), came forward to testify.  The            
 ADF&G had been discussing this bill with Senator Donley since first           
 introduced a year or two ago.  After working to narrow their                  
 differences, one major difference remains:  The ADF&G wants an                
 annual nonresident license available for purchase by any                      
 nonresident.  The three categories of concern are family members              
 coming for an extended stay; seasonal workers; and new residents              
 moving to the state in the spring or summer, who otherwise would              
 have to remain an entire year before being able to purchase an                
 annual license.  Therefore, the ADF&G is asking the committee to              
 amend the bill to provide a general, annual nonresident sport                 
 fishing license for $100 to $125.  Mr. Bruce advised that the price           
 is not as big an issue as availability.                                       
 MR. BRUCE agrees the proposed fee schedule is not unfair.  The                
 ADF&G further supports raising fees for long-term licenses rather             
 than short-term ones.                                                         
 Number 2235                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON stated his understanding that there is a 30-day            
 requirement for new residents.                                                
 SENATOR DONLEY responded that statutes contain variable residency             
 requirements, depending on the benefit gained by residency.  For a            
 sport fish license, there is a one-year requirement.                          
 Number 2282                                                                   
 DICK BISHOP, Executive Director, Alaska Outdoor Council, came                 
 forward to testify about concerns the council has with the bill.              
 They support a general annual nonresident sport fishing license,              
 for reasons stated by others and because U.S. citizens would feel             
 disadvantaged by having to qualify as commercial fishermen, for               
 example, in order to obtain an annual license in Alaska.  In                  
 addition, Alaska competes with other areas of the country for             
 visitors and sport fishermen, as well as with Canada.  He believes            
 there is a real risk in raising Alaska's fees, unless it is state             
 policy to discourage visitors.  He concluded by recommending                  
 inclusion of an annual sport fishing license generally available              
 for nonresidents, with a fee of $100, rather than $150.                       
 Number 2368                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked what Canada's fees are.                                
 MR. BISHOP said he does not know.  He does know that "they                    
 advertise like crazy" in fishing magazines.                                   
 SENATOR DONLEY indicated he had some information about it.                    
 Depending on the exchange rate, Canadian fees would be a little               
 lower than Alaska's if the legislation were to pass as it is.                 
 Number 2406                                                                   
 MR. BRUCE advised that the ADF&G Division of Sport Fish had looked            
 at the fee schedule in many western states.  Under Senator Donley's           
 proposed schedule, Alaska would fall on the high side but generally           
 within the range.  The ADF&G believes that given the quality of               
 experience in Alaska, as well as its resources, being on the high             
 end of the range is appropriate.                                              
 Number 2435                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS referred to issues relating to the Kenai              
 River and said he would like to hear how this could be used as a              
 SENATOR DONLEY responded that at the end of each year, there would            
 be an assessment of how many of these particular licenses were sold           
 and how many were repeat sales.                                               
 TAPE 97-39, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 0006                                                                   
 SENATOR DONLEY suggested multiple purchases would indicate how many           
 nonresidents use the resource for the entire season or for long               
 periods of time.  He believes that would be helpful.  Now, it is so           
 cheap to buy an annual license that people staying two weeks might            
 buy one in case they might return.  Although he had heard of                  
 examples of problems, he had no hard data to determine their                  
 extent.  In the future, through computers, the information could be           
 a possible enforcement or management tool.                                    
 Number 0068                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON referred to page 2 of the bill and suggested               
 that removing all the qualifiers on lines 16 through 28 would                 
 restore the general annual sport fishing license at the rate of               
 $150.  He noted that as the bill stands, an annual license is the             
 next increment beyond a 14-day license.  He suggested possibly                
 adding a 30-day license as well.                                              
 SENATOR DONLEY said he believes in the 14-day license theory.                 
 However, if the committee restores the general annual license                 
 option, deleting lines 16 through 28 on page 2 is appropriate.  He            
 said he hates to lose the management aspect.  He therefore                    
 requested that the committee also assist him in drafting intent               
 language to call on the Board of Fisheries to revisit this issue.             
 He suggested putting that at the front of the bill.  He again                 
 expressed disappointment that the Board of Fisheries had not acted            
 on it this year.                                                              
 Number 0164                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN concurred.  He announced he would hold the bill              
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked Senator Donley to work on intent language            
 to bring before the committee at the next hearing.                            
 SENATOR DONLEY agreed to do so.                                               
 Number 0188                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS commented that this is a hot issue,                   
 especially on the Kenai River.  He said the problem is there are              
 too many out-of-state fishermen there.  He suggested if they are              
 concerned about sport fishermen in Alaska, they should say so.                
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN said it is an issue statewide, though perhaps                
 harder to track in Southeast Alaska.                                          
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON said he believes Representative Williams is                
 right.  He has heard tales of case after case of canned salmon                
 coming in from Pelican, for example.  He does not believe it is an            
 isolated problem.  He suggested the key is getting information.  He           
 said we do not want nonresidents coming up here, staying and                  
 literally going into a commercial business.  He believes this is on           
 the right track.                                                              
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN recalled an instance where the Division of Fish              
 and Wildlife Protection became aware of a restaurant in Germany               
 selling salmon that could only have been caught with a rod and              
 reel, under a sport license.                                                  
 [SB 7 was held over]                                                          
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN adjourned the House Resources Standing Committee             
 meeting at 3:43 p.m.                                                          

Document Name Date/Time Subjects