Legislature(1997 - 1998)

04/15/1997 01:07 PM RES

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
               HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE                              
                         April 15, 1997                                        
                           1:07 p.m.                                           
 MEMBERS PRESENT                                                               
 Representative Bill Hudson, Co-Chairman                                       
 Representative Scott Ogan, Co-Chairman                                        
 Representative Beverly Masek, Vice Chair                                      
 Representative Fred Dyson                                                     
 Representative Joe Green                                                      
 Representative William K. ("Bill") Williams                                   
 Representative Irene Nicholia                                                 
 Representative Reggie Joule                                                   
 MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                
 Representative Ramona Barnes                                                  
 COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                            
 CS FOR SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 24(RES)                                    
 Relating to the Tongass Land Management Plan and to continued                 
 Congressional oversight of that plan.                                         
      - MOVED CSSJR 24(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                   
 * HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 35                                               
 Encouraging federal legislation to improve federal fiscal terms for           
 a trans-Alaska gas pipeline.                                                  
      - MOVED HJR 35 OUT OF COMMITTEE                                          
 CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 35(FIN)                                                
 "An Act relating to management of state land, water, and land and             
 water as part of a state park, recreational or special management             
 area, or preserve; relating to reports to the legislature                     
 concerning prohibitions or restrictions of traditional means of               
 access for traditional recreational uses within a park,                       
 recreational or special management area, or preserve; requiring               
 legislative approval before certain land managed under AS 41.21 may           
 be closed or have access restricted; relating to Chilkat State                
      - MOVED CSSB 35(FIN) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                    
 HOUSE BILL NO. 204                                                            
 "An Act revising the procedures and authority of the Alaska                   
 Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission, the Board of Fisheries, and            
 the Department of Fish and Game to establish a moratorium on                  
 participants or vessels, or both, participating in certain                    
 fisheries; and providing for an effective date."                              
      - MOVED CSHB 204(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                   
 (* First public hearing)                                                      
 PREVIOUS ACTION                                                               
 BILL:  SJR 24                                                               
 SHORT TITLE: TONGASS LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN                                     
 SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) MACKIE, Leman                                          
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG             ACTION                                        
 03/18/97       767    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 03/18/97       767    (S)   RESOURCES                                         
 03/26/97              (S)   RES AT  3:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                
 03/26/97              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 03/27/97       891    (S)   RES RPT  CS 5DP 1AM                               
 03/27/97       891    (S)   DP: HALFORD, TAYLOR, TORGERSON, GREEN             
 03/27/97       891    (S)   DP: LEMAN, AM: LINCOLN                            
 03/27/97       891    (S)   ZERO FISCAL NOTE TO CS (S.RES)                    
 04/03/97              (S)   RLS AT 10:45 AM FAHRENKAMP RM 203                 
 04/03/97              (S)   MINUTE(RLS)                                       
 04/03/97       957    (S)   RULES TO CALENDAR  4/3/97                         
 04/03/97       961    (S)   READ THE SECOND TIME                              
 04/03/97       961    (S)   RES  CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT                      
 04/03/97       961    (S)   ADVANCED TO THIRD READING                         
                             UNAN CONSENT                                      
 04/03/97       961    (S)   READ THE THIRD TIME  CSSJR 24(RES)                
 04/03/97       961    (S)   COSPONSOR(S): LEMAN                               
 04/03/97       962    (S)   PASSED Y19 N1                                     
 04/03/97       966    (S)   TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                
 04/04/97       983    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 04/04/97       983    (H)   RESOURCES                                         
 04/15/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 BILL:  HJR 35                                                               
 SPONSOR(S): SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON OIL & GAS                                    
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG             ACTION                                        
 04/10/97      1059    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 04/10/97      1060    (H)   RESOURCES                                         
 04/15/97              (H)   RES AT  1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                       
 BILL:  SB 35                                                                
 SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) GREEN, Pearce, Taylor                                  
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG             ACTION                                        
 01/03/97        23    (S)   PREFILE RELEASED 1/3/97                           
 01/13/97        23    (S)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/13/97        23    (S)   STA, RES, FIN                                     
 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      NEW TITLE               
 01/24/97       125    (S)   DP:GREEN, MILLER, WARD,MACKIE/                    
 01/24/97       125    (S)   FISCAL NOTE TO SB (DNR)                           
 01/28/97       146    (S)   ZERO FISCAL NOTE TO CS (F&G)                      
 01/31/97       190    (S)   FISCAL NOTE TO CS (DNR)                           
 02/05/97              (S)   RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH ROOM 205                 
 02/05/97              (S)   MINUTE(RES)                                       
 02/12/97              (S)   FIN AT 8:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                 
 02/19/97       410    (S)   RES RPT  CS  6DP 1NR      NEW TITLE               
 02/19/97       410    (S)   DP: HALFORD, TAYLOR, TORGERSON, LEMAN             
 02/19/97       410    (S)   GREEN, SHARP;     NR:  LINCOLN                    
 02/19/97       410    (S)   ZERO FNS TO CS (F&G-2)                            
 02/19/97       411    (S)   FORTHCOMING FISCAL NOTES                          
 02/19/97       410    (S)   PREVIOUS ZERO FN APPLIES TO CS (F&G)              
 02/21/97       447    (S)   FNS TO CS (DNR-2)                                 
 02/21/97       447    (S)   ZERO FN TO CS (DNR)                               
 03/12/97              (S)   FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                 
 03/14/97              (S)   FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                 
 03/19/97              (S)   FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                 
 03/19/97              (S)   MINUTE(FIN)                                       
 03/19/97              (S)   MINUTE(FIN)                                       
 03/21/97       800    (S)   FIN RPT  CS  2DP 4NR      NEW TITLE               
 03/21/97       801    (S)   DP: PEARCE, SHARP                                 
 03/21/97       801    (S)   NR: PHILLIPS, PARNELL, DONLEY,                    
 03/21/97       801    (S)   ZERO FN TO CS (S.FIN/DNR)                         
 03/21/97       801    (S)   PREVIOUS FN APPLIES (DNR)                         
 03/21/97       801    (S)   PREVIOUS ZERO FNS APPLY (DNR, F&G-2)              
 03/24/97              (S)   RLS AT 11:31 AM FAHRENKAMP RM 203                 
 03/24/97              (S)   MINUTE(RLS)                                       
 04/01/97       916    (S)   RULES TO CALENDAR  4/1/97                         
 04/01/97       920    (S)   READ THE SECOND TIME                              
 04/01/97       920    (S)   HELD IN SECOND READING TO 4/2/97 CAL              
 04/02/97       938    (S)   BEFORE THE (S) IN SECOND READING                  
 04/02/97       939    (S)   FIN CS ADOPTED Y17 N2 A1                          
 04/02/97       939    (S)   AM NO  1     OFFERED BY DUNCAN                    
 04/02/97       939    (S)   AM NO  1     FAILED  Y7 N12 A1                    
 04/02/97       940    (S)   ADVANCED TO THIRD READING                         
                             UNAN CONSENT                                      
 04/02/97       940    (S)   READ THE THIRD TIME  CSSB 35(FIN)                 
 04/02/97       941    (S)   PASSED Y14 N5 A1                                  
 04/02/97       943    (S)   TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                
 04/03/97       919    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 04/03/97       919    (H)   RESOURCES, FINANCE                                
 04/15/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 BILL:  HB 204                                                               
 SPONSOR(S): SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES                                    
 JRN-DATE     JRN-PG             ACTION                                        
 03/19/97       756    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 03/19/97       756    (H)   FSH, RESOURCES                                    
 03/24/97              (H)   FSH AT 5:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 03/24/97              (H)   MINUTE(FSH)                                       
 03/25/97       825    (H)   FSH RPT  3DP 1AM                                  
 03/25/97       825    (H)   DP: IVAN, HODGINS, AUSTERMAN                      
 03/25/97       825    (H)   AM: OGAN                                          
 03/25/97       825    (H)   ZERO FISCAL NOTE (F&G)                            
 04/15/97              (H)   RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                        
 WITNESS REGISTER                                                              
 SENATOR JERRY MACKIE                                                          
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 427                                                    
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 465-4925                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented Sponsor Statement on CSSJR 24(RES).            
 REPRESENTATIVE MARK HODGINS                                                   
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 110                                                    
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 465-2283                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented Sponsor Statement on HJR 35.                   
 PAUL FUHS, Lobbyist for                                                       
    Yukon Pacific Corporation                                                  
 10652 Porter Lane                                                             
 Juneau, Alaska 99801                                                          
 Telephone:  (907)790-3030                                                     
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HJR 35.                          
 SENATOR LYDA GREEN                                                            
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 125                                                    
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 465-6600                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented Sponsor Statement on CSSB 35(FIN).             
 JIM STRATTON, Director                                                        
 Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation                                      
 Department of Natural Resource                                                
 3601 C Street, Suite 1200                                                     
 Anchorage, Alaska  99503                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 269-8700                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented department's concerns with CSSB
 JERRY LUCKHAUPT, Attorney                                                     
 Legislative Legal and Research Services                                       
 Legislative Affairs Agency                                                    
 130 Seward Street, Suite 409                                                  
 Juneau, Alaska  999801                                                        
 Telephone:  (907) 465-2450                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on CSSB 35(FIN).                               
 TUCKERMAN BABCOCK, Legislative Assistant                                      
    to Senator Lyda Green                                                      
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 125                                                    
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 465-6600                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on behalf of sponsor on CSSB
 SUSAN SCHRADER, Executive Director                                            
 Alaskan Environmental Lobby                                                   
 P.O. Box 22151                                                                
 Juneau, Alaska  99802                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 463-3366                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified against CSSB 35(FIN).                          
 SUSAN OLSEN                                                                   
 Alaska Quiet Rights Coalition                                                 
 1119 G Street                                                                 
 Anchorage, Alaska  99501                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 277-9968                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified against CSSB 35(FIN).                          
 RANDY CROSBY                                                                  
 3300 Wesleyan Drive                                                           
 Anchorage, Alaska  99508                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 333-3665                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of CSSB 35(FIN).                    
 TOM MEACHAM                                                                   
 9500 Prospect Drive                                                           
 Anchorage, Alaska  99516                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 346-1077                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on CSSB 35(FIN).                               
 CLIFF EAMES                                                                   
 Alaska Center for the Environment                                             
 519 West 8th Street, Suite 201                                                
 Anchorage,  Alaska  99501                                                     
 Telephone:  (907) 278-5657                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on CSSB 35(FIN).                               
 KEN ROBERTSON, Member                                                         
 Chugach State Park Advisory Board                                             
 733 West 4th Avenue, Suite 200                                                
 Anchorage, Alaska  99501                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 278-5657                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on CSSB 35(FIN).                               
 PAM BARNES                                                                    
 Llama Buddies Expeditions (ph)                                                
 P.O. Box 874995                                                               
 Wasilla, Alaska  99687                                                        
 Telephone:  (907) 376-8472                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified against CSSB 35(FIN).                          
 RALPH FELTS                                                                   
 4053 Fahrenkamp Street                                                        
 Fairbanks, Alaska  99709                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 479-0252                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on CSSB 35(FIN).                               
 JUNE BURKHART, Legislative Affairs Officer                                    
 Alaska Boating Association                                                    
 P.O. Box 204                                                                  
 Willow, Alaska  99688                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 495-6337                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of CSSB 35(FIN).                    
 DAN ELLIOTT, Chair                                                            
 Mat-Su State Park Citizen Advisory Board                                      
 HC 31, Box 5196                                                               
 Wasilla, Alaska  99654                                                        
 Telephone:  (907) 376-5196                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified against CSSB 35(FIN).                          
 AMY DAUGHERTY, Legislative Administrative Assistant                           
   to Representative Alan Austerman                                            
 Alaska State Legislature                                                      
 Capitol Building, Room 434                                                    
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 465-4230                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided sponsor testimony on HB 204.                    
 DALE ANDERSON, Chairman                                                       
 Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission                                         
 8800 Glacier Highway, Suite 109                                               
 Juneau, Alaska  99801                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 789-6160                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 204.                          
 BRAD JOHNSON                                                                  
 P.O. Box 7743                                                                 
 Ketchikan, Alaska  99901                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 225-1424                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 204.                          
 KRAIG NORHEIM                                                                 
 P.O. Box 878                                                                  
 Petersburg, Alaska  99833                                                     
 Telephone:  (907) 772-3995                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 204.                          
 BRUCE SIEMINSKI                                                               
 P.O. Box 1302                                                                 
 Seward, Alaska  99664                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 224-3636                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:   Testified in support of HB 204.                         
 BRENNON EAGLE                                                                 
 P.O. Box 576                                                                  
 Wrangell, Alaska  99929                                                       
 Telephone:  (907) 874-2162                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 204.                          
 BILL KNECHT                                                                   
 P.O. Box 259                                                                  
 Wrangell, Alaska  99929                                                       
 Telephone:  (907) 874-3795                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support of HB 204.                          
 ACTION NARRATIVE                                                              
 TAPE 97-42, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 0001                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN BILL HUDSON called the House Resources Standing                   
 Committee to order at 1:07 p.m.  Members present at the call to               
 order were Representatives Dyson, Green, Ogan, Masek, Williams and            
 Hudson; there was a quorum.  Representative Barnes was absent.                
 Representative Nicholia arrived at 1:08 p.m. and Representative               
 Joule arrived at 1:15 p.m.                                                    
 CSSJR 24(RES) - TONGASS LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN                                
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON stated that the committee would hear CS for                
 Senate Joint Resolution 24(RES), "Relating to the Tongass Land                
 Management Plan and to continued Congressional oversight of that              
 plan.  He said this resolution is identical to one introduced by              
 this committee and passed from committee on a 4-to-2 vote the                 
 previous week.  He called upon Senator Mackie to present the                  
 Number 0096                                                                   
 SENATOR JERRY MACKIE read the sponsor statement into the record:              
 "The purpose of SJR 24 is two-fold.  First, it encourages the U.S.            
 Forest Service to bring the decade-long development of the Tongass            
 Land Management Plan (TLMP) to a conclusion so that the people and            
 communities of Southeast Alaska can move forward with their                   
 economic and personal lives with some degree of certainty.  The               
 resolution supports a level of harvest from the Tongass National              
 Forest sufficient to sustain a forest product industry and prevent            
 further job loss and economic disruption in Southeast Alaska.                 
 "Secondly, the resolution endorses continued oversight by Congress            
 and the Alaska congressional delegation of Forest Service                     
 management activities relating to the Tongass.  This endorsement              
 urges review of the analyses and procedures employed by the Forest            
 Service to ensure that decisions affecting the social and economic            
 well-being of Southeast communities are appropriate and                       
 scientifically credible.                                                      
 "After a decade of false starts, intervening federal legislation,             
 court decisions and several public review drafts, the Forest                  
 Service appears poised to adopt a final version of the land use               
 management plan for the Tongass.  During this time period, the                
 Southeast economy has lost $60 million in forest products payroll             
 and half of its timber jobs.  The continuing decline in available             
 timber supply had closed two pulp mills and one saw mill.  Without            
 a plan that ensures some level of harvesting, the existence of any            
 forest product industry in Southeast is improbable.                           
 "On December 20, 1996, the Southeast Regional Timber Task Force               
 passed a resolution urging the federal government to finalize a               
 plan for timber harvest in the Tongass.  The task force determined            
 that a minimum annual harvest level of 300 million board feet                 
 (MMBF) was necessary to re-establish a viable, integrated timber              
 industry.  This volume has been selected by several Forest                    
 Supervisors of the Tongass as the preferred alternative in previous           
 drafts of the TLMP.                                                           
 "Any delay in the finalization of the TLMP plan is detrimental to             
 the social and economic stability of Southeast Alaska.  A plan that           
 adopts a minimum 300 million board feet timber supply will stem the           
 current decline and the associated economic depression of Southeast           
 communities dependent on the forest industry.  SJR 24 requests the            
 completion of the long-delayed plan and that it include a 300                 
 million board foot harvest level."                                            
 SENATOR MACKIE emphasized that this resolution mirrors HJR 32,                
 moved by this committee.  Although the 300 MMBF figure has been               
 criticized, it is not arbitrary.  It was recommended by the                   
 Governor's task force, which was made up of people that represented           
 communities, different organizations, and environmental and                   
 resource developmental agencies around Southeast.  This resolution            
 adopts and recommends their findings.  He believes the task force's           
 results should not be ignored, and he urged support.                          
 Number 0356                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON announced it was not his intention to have                 
 additional testimony, as the committee had heard it before.                   
 Number 0380                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN made a motion to move CSSJR 24(RES), 0-              
 LS0805\B, with individual recommendations.                                    
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked whether there was an objection.  There               
 being none, CSSJR 24(RES) was moved out of the House Resources                
 Standing Committee.                                                           
 Co-Chairman Hudson turned the gavel over to Co-Chairman Ogan.                 
 HJR 35 - ENCOURAGE FED TAX CHANGE FOR GAS PIPELINE                          
 Number 0410                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN SCOTT OGAN announced the committee would take up House            
 Joint Resolution 35, "Encouraging federal legislation to improve              
 federal fiscal terms for a trans-Alaska gas pipeline."                        
 Number 0430                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE MARK HODGINS, sponsor, stated that the resolution              
 encourages federal legislation to improve federal fiscal terms for            
 the trans-Alaska gas line.  He explained that the report by Pedro             
 van Meurs was commissioned by the state on the economic viability             
 of a trans-Alaska gas line.  Pedro van Meurs found that the project           
 would need state and federal fiscal adjustments in order to                   
 stimulate the project's investment structure.  It would be a $12              
 billion to $15 billion project to put the capitalization in place.            
 Right now, at $15 billion, the project would not be economically              
 viable.  He stated that producers, as well as the state and federal           
 governments, should be encouraged to look at the project with the             
 idea that if it is not economically feasible, it will not go.                 
 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS said there needs to be a fiscal regime that            
 will allow this project to be produced.  There is about $150                  
 billion worth of gas going through the pipeline, according to                 
 figures of Pedro van Meurs.  Out of that $150 billion, the federal            
 government would get $26 to $27 billion in taxation.  This pipeline           
 is site-specific to Alaska.  The resolution urges the federal                 
 delegation to come forward with tax incentives, as state and                  
 municipal governments will also have to do in order to see this               
 pipeline built.                                                               
 Number 0601                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY MASEK asked how the congressional delegation           
 feels about the resolution.                                                   
 Number 0617                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS replied that he has not talked with them.              
 However, it is apparent that without some sort of tax incentive,              
 there probably will not be a gas line.  He believes they would                
 encourage this because it would create about 10,000 jobs in the               
 state, plus revenue that will enhance the state for many years and            
 provide an energy base to allow industry to grow for the next 50 to           
 70 years.                                                                     
 Number 0662                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK asked how this would be accepted at the                  
 congressional level.                                                          
 Number 0681                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS replied that basically if this project does            
 not go, the federal government will receive zero in taxation on it.           
 They have $26 billion that will be generated.  If they can come up            
 with a 10 percent or a 15 percent reduction, that would certainly             
 help, over the course of the life of the pipeline, to initiate                
 building of the pipeline.  He indicated both the state and federal            
 government need to give a little, and the producers must come up              
 with a more efficient way of building the pipeline.                           
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN reported that he had recently spoken with                    
 Congressman Young's office to let them know about the resolution;             
 while they had not read it, they were aware of the problem.  They             
 had discussed getting some breaks on the front end of the project,            
 and Co-Chairman Ogan believes they are receptive to looking at the            
 Number 0789                                                                   
 PAUL FUHS, Lobbyist for Yukon Pacific Corporation (YPC), came                 
 forward to testify.  He stated that YPC supports the resolution.              
 They feel Pedro van Meurs' study is more pessimistic than their own           
 economic projections, primarily due to the difference in how soon             
 the project will come to full production.  The YPC believes the               
 economics of the project could be improved by these federal taxes.            
 MR. FUHS referred to a one-page handout, page 115, which shows that           
 the federal government would get 28 percent in taxes from this                
 project, more than twice what the state would receive.  The Pedro             
 van Meurs report also points out that if there are reductions in              
 federal taxes, there will be increases in Alaska state taxes on the           
 project.  He stated that there is the issue of balancing the trade            
 deficit with Japan and other Asian countries, as well as the issue            
 of United States jobs.                                                        
 MR. FUHS advised that YPC has spoken to Senator Murkowski's office,           
 and they welcome this.  He suggested the Senate Energy Committee              
 would probably be the place where this bill would originate; one              
 reason they really favor this is it will be easier for them if the            
 initiative comes from the state rather than from private companies            
 going for the tax breaks.  Mr. Fuhs said the resolution is generic;           
 it does not state specific tax advantages.  He believes that is               
 good because there are things they could do in addition to those              
 pointed out in the Pedro van Meurs report.                                    
 Number 0940                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK suggested including at the bottom of this                
 resolution, where it says "Copies of this resolution shall be sent            
 to", the energy council or whatever congressional committee would             
 be dealing with the issue.  She said if the sponsor does not                  
 object, she would offer that as an amendment.                                 
 Number 0990                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stated that he did not object.  However,                 
 whatever comes from the energy council must be unanimously approved           
 by all states that are members.  He said there may be, by                     
 implication, some members of the federal legislature that look at             
 this as a tie between the state of Alaska and the energy council.             
 He expressed concern over unilaterally tying that body with this              
 resolution until they had a chance to look at it.                             
 Number 1051                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK replied that maybe it can be rephrased and               
 sent to a committee that deals with the energy council on the                 
 congressional level.                                                          
 Number 1072                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked whether Representative Green is on the               
 energy council and when they meet.                                            
 Number 1079                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN replied he is on the council, and they meet              
 four times a year.  They will be meeting in June.                             
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked whether this resolution could be brought             
 before them and whether the council could be asked to put their own           
 resolution together.                                                          
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN replied that they could; however, it probably            
 would not be approved before their December meeting.                          
 Number 1112                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK withdrew her amendment.                                  
 Number 1140                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON made a motion to move HJR 35, 0-LSO904\E, with             
 individual recommendations and zero fiscal note.  He asked                    
 unanimous consent.                                                            
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked whether there was an objection.  There being           
 none, HJR 35 was moved out of the House Resources Standing                    
 Number 1170                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN announced the committee would take up CSSB
 35(FIN), "An Act relating to management of state land, water, and             
 land and water as part of a state park, recreational or special               
 management area, or preserve; relating to reports to the                      
 legislature concerning prohibitions or restrictions of traditional            
 means of access for traditional recreational uses within a park,              
 recreational or special management area, or preserve; requiring               
 legislative approval before certain land managed under AS 41.21 may           
 be closed or have access restricted; relating to Chilkat State                
 Number 1180                                                                   
 SENATOR LYDA GREEN, sponsor, explained that two years ago, there              
 was an attempt to close Blair Lake.  This involved the Division of            
 Parks and Outdoor Recreation including Blair Lake to be managed as            
 a state park.  This caused concern; SB 230 followed, which was                
 vetoed.  Following this, there was an announced closure by the                
 division involving South Denali; the Curry-Kesugi Ridge; an area in           
 Fairbanks; and potential partial closure of a marine park in                  
 Southeast Alaska.  She believed the closures were not occurring for           
 the right reasons.  Therefore, she again introduced a version of              
 last year's bill.                                                             
 SENATOR GREEN said CSSB 35(FIN) is essentially the same as the                
 previous year's bill, except for page 3, line 5.  However, the                
 current bill requires that each legislative session, the Division             
 of Parks and Outdoor Recreation would come to the legislature with            
 a report on parks managed by the division but not part of the major           
 state park system.  They would explain reasons for closures.  And             
 if a closure is for over 90 days, the legislature would assess                
 whether the closure was legitimate or request that the division               
 find another way to achieve the same purpose.                                 
 SENATOR GREEN said there is an inclusion relating the authority to            
 designate Chilkat State park.  This language was included because             
 that park is being treated as a state park.  Without final                    
 "adoption" by the state, the state will end up paying a fee for               
 that transfer.  She maintains that the legislature has the mandate            
 to conserve, develop and watch over the resources, including land             
 and water.  Although most of the larger parks have, in statute,               
 been turned over to the division for management and closure where             
 necessary, she believes these smaller parcels, being managed as               
 state parks, need to be carefully kept open.  She said park land is           
 for the use of the people, and that policy should be maintained.              
 Number 1413                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether anyone from the Department of              
 Law would be testifying.                                                      
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN replied no one was scheduled.                                
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN explained he was asking because of a letter              
 claiming problems.  He wanted someone to address that.                        
 Number 1448                                                                   
 SENATOR GREEN referred to that memo of April 15, 1997, from John T.           
 Baker, Assistant Attorney General, to Jim Stratton, Director of the           
 Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation.  She indicated the                  
 contents should be taken as suggestions and not legal mandates.               
 SENATOR GREEN referred to the second paragraph of the memo, which             
 says, "may not manage as part of a park, area or preserve                     
 established under AS 41.21.110" and "This language would likely be            
 interpreted to prohibit the Division of Parks from continuing to              
 manage more than 90 administratively acquired parcels of land as              
 part of the state park system."  She said that is not the case.               
 This bill amends AS 41.21.020 only to prohibit land not                       
 legislatively designated as "parks" from being managed as part of             
 a legislatively designated park.  Therefore, anything already                 
 legislatively designated, such as Denali and Chugach, is not                  
 impacted by this bill.                                                        
 SENATOR GREEN said this bill basically impacts the Interagency Land           
 Management Agreement (ILMA) parcels that abut state parks or are              
 being managed as state parks.   She stated that there needs to be             
 good reasons for closures.  It is not to say there will never be a            
 good reason for a closure; the bill is stating that the legislature           
 would like to look at the reasons.                                            
 Number 1539                                                                   
 SENATOR GREEN noted that this letter is dated April 15, 1997, while           
 this bill was introduced in February.  She suggested it should have           
 been sent earlier.                                                            
 Number 1573                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN agreed with Senator Green about Section 2.               
 However, his concern was with the last paragraph of the letter.  He           
 asked whether the legislature is subjecting itself to possible                
 litigation because the parks are open but no one is there to                  
 regulate activities.                                                          
 Number 1608                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN suggested if it were big concern, the staff of the           
 Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Law would               
 have picked this issue up before today.                                       
 Number 1630                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said his concern is that legislators look to             
 the Department of Law on law issues.  That department has raised a            
 flag; he believes it would be a mistake for the committee to ignore           
 it.  If it is exposing them to litigation, they ought to know that            
 going in.                                                                     
 Number 1678                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN advised that the committee aide was calling the              
 legislative drafter to testify.                                               
 Number 1687                                                                   
 SENATOR GREEN said this bill does not prohibit a warning sign at a            
 park advising not to go on a trail.  In national parks, there is              
 the inherent risk of bears but the entire park is not closed.  With           
 regard to campgrounds, she does not expect a summer site to be                
 maintained through the winter if it is a financial burden.  She               
 said it is the intent to send the message to the division to very             
 carefully make closures on parks, report and get approval for                 
 legitimate reasons.  She stated that any 90-day closure is                    
 acceptable, but anything over 90 days would come to the legislature           
 to be discussed.                                                              
 Number 1844                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked:  If there was an extreme situation and a              
 park needed to be closed for six months, could it be closed for 90            
 days, opened for a day, and then closed for another 90 days?                  
 Number 1860                                                                   
 SENATOR GREEN replied that under the bill, a park can still be                
 closed for more than 90 days.  All that is required is that it come           
 back the next legislative session and be reported on.  Once                   
 approved, the closure could be continued.  If denied, it could not            
 be closed for the same reason the following year.                             
 Number 1924                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN called a brief at-ease at 1:40 p.m.  He called the           
 meeting back to order at 1:41 p.m.                                            
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN noted that the committee had just passed                 
 Representative Masek's bill allowing traditional access over                  
 private land.   He said it seems only reasonable to allow public              
 access over park land as well.                                                
 Number 1951                                                                   
 JIM STRATTON, Director, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation,             
 Department of Natural Resources, pointed out that the                         
 "discretionary function" immunity question had been raised in a               
 letter dated March 24, 1997, sent to Chairman Sharp of the Senate             
 Finance Committee.  He offered to make copies of that letter for              
 the committee.  He emphasized this is not a new issue; they had               
 raised it earlier, and their legal council believes it is an issue            
 of concern that should be looked at.                                          
 Number 2002                                                                   
 MR. STRATTON said there are two kinds of parks, those legislatively           
 designated by vote of the legislature and those that are less than            
 640 acres, which are administratively created and called ILMAs.               
 The latter are primarily campgrounds, boat launch ramps and trail             
 heads.  Although Blair Lake was a proposed closure, that was not              
 enacted because the public did not want it.                                   
 MR. STRATTON referred to Section 1.  He said he understands the               
 legislature's desire to get an annual report of the proposed                  
 closures; therefore, the department has no problem with Section 1.            
 By providing the legislature with the yearly list, the legislature            
 would get what they are looking for, an opportunity to look at                
 actions taken by the division, review proposed closures and be able           
 to take further action if the legislature disagrees.                          
 Number 2108                                                                   
 MR. STRATTON referred to Section 2, subsection (d).  He said the              
 division agrees with the intent of this section, as described by              
 Senator Green; they understand the intent to be that the division             
 will not be able to expand legislatively designated parks through             
 administrative action.  That was what occurred at Blair Lake, and             
 they understand the concern people had about that action.                     
 MR. STRATTON said they are a little concerned, however, with the              
 way subsection (d) is written.  He proposed rewriting it to be less           
 ambiguous.  He noted that the ambiguity issue was raised by the               
 division's legal counsel the previous session when SB 230 was                 
 vetoed, and they brought it up again in Senate hearings.                      
 MR. STRATTON referred to the top of page 4, subsection (e).  A new            
 section not in SB 230 the previous year, it was added on the Senate           
 side.  This is the section the division has the most concern with.            
 It puts the legislature first in line to work with the public on              
 all closures, of all types, in all park units, for public safety              
 reasons, for resource protection reasons and aesthetic reasons.               
 MR. STRATTON said his understanding is that the intent is to have             
 this section only focus on ILMA parks, which are 640 acres or                 
 smaller.  However, the first line of this section states, "Except             
 as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter".  There is                
 nothing in the enabling language of the legislatively designated              
 parks that makes a specific reference to traditional access.  Legal           
 counsel has told the division that without that specific reference            
 to traditional access in the enabling language of the legislatively           
 designated parks, this clause does not exempt any of these                    
 legislatively designated parks.  Therefore, this section applies to           
 all of the park units, regardless of size.                                    
 Number 2284                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked whether the legislature would have to issue            
 legislation and approve every action.                                         
 Number 2301                                                                   
 MR. STRATTON replied that is his understanding.   One approach                
 would be listing all actions; another would be clustering parks by            
 types of closures.  The division has been implementing closures on            
 state park land for 25 years, taking direction from the legislature           
 and creating the closures.                                                    
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked for an example.                                      
 Number 2328                                                                   
 MR. STRATTON cited examples of the kinds of things the division has           
 been doing that would, under this bill, have to be brought before             
 the legislature for closure.  First are wildlife-human conflicts.             
 These are generally for less than 90 days and therefore would be              
 exempt.  However, there is a clause added by the Senate that states           
 a closure made in a subsequent year of less than 90 days will also            
 have to be brought to the legislature for approval.                           
 MR. STRATTON said occasionally, a campground must be closed for an            
 entire season, as was the case in the Captain Cook Recreation Area,           
 when a bear was in the area for the entire summer.  In addition,              
 there are construction closures for refurbishment of a facility,              
 for example.  Those restrict traditional access, typically for                
 longer than 90 days, and are for safety reasons.  Furthermore,                
 facilities damaged by natural disasters, such as the Perseverance             
 Trail, have been closed for longer than 90 days and would have to             
 be brought back to the legislature for approval.  Also, in areas              
 with teenage party sites, where vandalism has become a problem, the           
 hours are modified or sites are permanently closed, which would               
 require legislative approval.  Mr. Stratton noted that all the                
 parks in Sitka are closed at 10:00 p.m. for public safety reasons.            
 MR. STRATTON said it is these kinds of closures, which they have              
 traditionally done for public safety, that the division will no               
 longer have discretion to make, or to make permanent, because                 
 everything would need to be brought to the legislature for                    
 approval.  This is where discretionary immunity enters into it.  If           
 the division does not have discretion to close facilities or if               
 closures were lifted, the division is concerned about being open to           
 tort litigation.                                                              
 Number 2449                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE JOULE asked whether these smaller parks are             
 generally located around communities.                                         
 MR. STRATTON said most state park units are on the road system.               
 TAPE 97-42, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 0006                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE asked:  In regard to the length of the                   
 closure, when it is somehow tied to budgetary constraints, what is            
 the legislature's obligation?  He further asked what that would               
 mean for the general public in terms of the legislature perhaps not           
 meeting its obligation to keep parks open.                                    
 Number 0040                                                                   
 MR. STRATTON replied that when the division needs to close a                  
 facility due to budget constraints, it restricts traditional                  
 recreational access; they would need to bring that back to the                
 legislature for approval.  Those closures would be dealt with                 
 twice, first at the budget level and then when the division made a            
 decision based on the budget it received, if that resulted in                 
 Number 0061                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated that as he interprets it, when the                    
 legislature gets the list of closures and a good case is made, the            
 legislature approves it.  If there is a problem, the legislature              
 will not include that in the bill listing approved closures.  He              
 stated that he did not see the problem.                                       
 Number 0089                                                                   
 MR. STRATTON replied that the concern is if for some reason the               
 bill does not pass or gets caught up in politics, for example, the            
 division would be hampered from protecting the public in the park             
 system.  The division is asking, under the reporting requirements             
 of Section 1, that the legislature pick from that report the                  
 actions it does not like, and then pass a bill addressing those.              
 Otherwise, everything will need to pass the legislature or "go                
 away."  The way subsection (e) is written, there is an uncertainty            
 Number 0139                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN suggested if the governor does not like something,           
 he can veto it.                                                               
 Number 0142                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON expressed concern over the timeliness of the               
 passage of bills in the legislature.  He further asked why the                
 Administration had not stepped forward earlier to discuss this                
 MR. STRATTON replied that subsection (e) was not in the original              
 bill.  The division had no problem with the original bill.                    
 Subsection (e) is the problem.                                                
 Number 0222                                                                   
 MR. STRATTON stated that Section 3 was put into the bill at the               
 division's request for the "land and water conservation fund                  
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN advised that Mr. Luckhaupt was present from the              
 Department of Law to answer Representative Green's earlier                    
 Number 0261                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN explained that his question was on the third             
 paragraph of the memo from John Baker to Jim Stratton, dated April            
 15, 1997, relating to "discretionary function" immunity.  He was              
 unsure how a statement like this from the Department of Law may               
 cast a shadow over legislators who would approve the language in              
 the bill, after having been notified by the Department of Law of a            
 potential problem.  He asked whether this increases the                       
 legislature's potential liability or whether the legislature is               
 ignoring a warning from counsel.                                              
 Number 0306                                                                   
 JERRY LUCKHAUPT, Attorney, Legislative Legal and Research Services,           
 Legislative Affairs Agency, explained that the letter says there is           
 the possibility that it could increase the state's liability.                 
 However, it is not clear whether it will do so.  The discretionary            
 function immunity exists as part of the state's sovereign immunity,           
 which the state has waived except in cases where state officials              
 are exercising their discretion.                                              
 MR. LUCKHAUPT said the courts have made a distinction between                 
 whether that discretion is being utilized in the policy making area           
 or as a matter of operations.  Decisions by the Department of                 
 Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT/PF), for example, to                
 close or not close roads due to conditions have been held to be               
 discretionary; therefore, the state is not liable if someone has an           
 accident on a road when the state has refused to close it.  He said           
 the Alaska Supreme Court has also rejected the argument of                    
 liability if the reason the road was unsafe and kept open was due             
 to inadequate budgetary resources.  The decision whether to provide           
 budgetary resources is something the court said was part of that              
 policy making discretion area for which the state is not liable.              
 MR. LUCKHAUPT said it could be argued that a decision by the                  
 legislature that the Department of Natural Resources cannot close             
 various trails or campgrounds in the state park system removes                
 discretion to do that; therefore, the state may be liable for that.           
 One could also say that knowing they cannot close a trail or                  
 campground, their decisions to post notice of dangerous conditions,           
 for example, is where discretion will be utilized.  Therefore, how            
 well they inform the public of existing dangers in an area they               
 cannot close would still be a discretionary function, and there               
 would be no greater liability to the state.                                   
 MR. LUCKHAUPT said there is no easy answer as to automatic                    
 liability.  The decision to close a park for 90 days and then get             
 legislative approval would be discretionary, as part of the                   
 division's policy making powers; therefore, there would be no                 
 liability.  That seems to fit in with decisions of the DOT/PF to              
 close or not close roads.  If, in response to a closure, the                  
 legislature refuses to accept that closure, it could be argued that           
 the legislature is exercising their policy making power and there             
 would be no increase in liability.  There are many possibilities              
 and no easy answers.  He does not know whether this would increase            
 the state's liability, and it is unclear what would happen.  "We              
 won't necessarily know these answers until someone presents them to           
 a court and the court decides," he said.                                      
 Number 0558                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked for verification that there was a small            
 possibility that the state could incur some liability by not                  
 keeping a park closed.  He understood that Mr. Luckhaupt felt that            
 through discretionary authority, the state was not taking a big               
 chance in leaving the parks open.                                             
 MR. LUCKHAUPT responded that he was trying to give an opinion that            
 went both ways.  He expounded on this.                                        
 Number 0745                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked whether Mr. Luckhaupt knew of anyplace in            
 statute where the legislature forces a road open at the expense of            
 MR. LUCKHAUPT replied that Title 19 states that the DOT/PF can                
 restrict traffic and close roads.  It operates from the assumption            
 that the roads are open to begin with.                                        
 Number 0773                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON said if a trail was directed open by a law                 
 passed by the legislature, he believes the state is assuming some             
 greater liability by this legislation.                                        
 Number 0845                                                                   
 MR. LUCKHAUPT responded that is a conclusion one could draw.  He              
 cited examples and said it is not clear what removes state                    
 liability.  For instance, it is not clear that the state has no               
 liability on the Perseverance Trail just because it is posted as              
 "closed," as people continue to use the trail.                                
 Number 0981                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE asked what level of effort is needed to warn             
 people of trail closures.  For example, there is a question of                
 where signs should be posted, as there can be access at places                
 other than the head of the trail.                                             
 Number 1042                                                                   
 MR. LUCKHAUPT replied that all factors enter into the liability               
 issue.  If it is a discretionary policy making area, the state is             
 not liable, no matter how reasonable or unreasonable they were.  If           
 it is in the operational area, it is a jury question of whether the           
 state was reasonable.  In operational areas, the state's actions              
 must be unreasonable before there is liability.                               
 Number 1206                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether there is a difference in                   
 liability if the park is open, versus closed, and someone is                  
 attacked by a bear.                                                           
 MR. LUCKHAUPT replied he did not know.  He cited the example of the           
 federal government being held responsible in Yellowstone National             
 Park even though they hand out warnings to park guests.  He                   
 expounded on it, then emphasized that there are no clear answers in           
 this area.                                                                    
 Number 1488                                                                   
 TUCKERMAN BABCOCK, Legislative Assistant to Senator Lyda Green,               
 said the bill states that the Division of Parks and Outdoor                   
 Recreation does not have the ability to restrict access unless the            
 legislature gives them authority to do so.  The legislature has               
 specifically given the division authority to restrict incompatible            
 uses and to decide what are incompatible on every established park            
 area or preserve.  However, there is a loophole for land managed as           
 a park or tiny parks that the legislature has not given the                   
 bureaucracy authority to close.                                               
 MR. BABCOCK said one approach is to leave it to the bureaucracy to            
 restrict public access, and the legislature will not do anything              
 about it unless it passes a bill.  This bill says the bureaucracy             
 cannot make permanent closures to public access unless there is               
 specific legislative authority to do so.  Mr. Babcock said he                 
 anticipates that during the interim, the division will give a great           
 deal of thought to what kind of authority they wish to seek from              
 the legislature to close parks due to threats to public safety, for           
 example.  He specified that SB 35 does not require an annual review           
 of every park and little closure.                                             
 MR. BABCOCK referred to discussion of Section 2 in the memo of                
 April 15, 1997, and said he does not read the statute as they do.             
 He said, "The specific exemptions for the land already designated             
 as parks, they do maintain their ability to close.  The McHugh                
 Creek, the Cook Inlet, Captain Cook examples are all already in               
 state parks that are established by the legislature, for which                
 specific authority to close has been given.  And this would only              
 apply to the smaller parks for which there's no legislative                   
 Number 1699                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked whether Mr. Babcock thinks legislative            
 approval authority should be delegated to an interim approval                 
 agency such as the Office of Budget and Management under certain              
 circumstances.  He expressed concern about public safety issues.              
 Number 1770                                                                   
 MR. BABCOCK replied that he thinks the Division of Parks and                  
 Outdoor Recreation, working with the legislature, would come up               
 with a bill that comprehensively addresses what restrictions would            
 be par for the course on small parks.  He said nothing prevents the           
 division, on every small park, from posting warning signs for                 
 bears, washed-out trails, and so forth, without actually posting              
 "closed" signs.                                                               
 Number 1855                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK asked how this bill would help out areas such            
 as Blair Lake.                                                                
 Number 1880                                                                   
 MR. BABCOCK replied it would address Blair Lake because that is               
 land managed as land designated as part of the park; it would                 
 prohibit the division from closures there.  But for land already              
 within the park, they would have authority to restrict access.                
 Number 1908                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE said there is a difference between the                   
 previous year's bill and this one.  The current bill deletes the              
 Denali Park section and there are parts of last year's bill not               
 included in this legislation.                                                 
 Number 1956                                                                   
 MR. BABCOCK concurred.                                                        
 Number 1991                                                                   
 SUSAN SCHRADER, Executive Director, Alaskan Environmental Lobby               
 (AEL), said the bill has taken on many permutations since first               
 introduced.  The AEL feels that in its current form, it severely              
 cripples the ability of the Division of Parks and Outdoor                     
 Recreation to protect the safety of citizens and to provide                   
 recreational opportunity for all users in a balanced manner.                  
 MS. SCHRADER said there are a number of issues of ambiguity in the            
 bill.  The fact that it can be read that areas cannot be closed               
 longer than 90 days for public safety is a great concern, not only            
 for public safety but for habitat protection.  The AEL is also                
 concerned about the increased litigation possibility.                         
 MS. SCHRADER said the AEL's greatest concern is it will prohibit              
 the division from protecting the serenity and quite enjoyment of              
 the land it manages from intrusion by motorized activities.  She              
 acknowledged this is a contentious and difficult issue.  She said             
 unfortunately, she does not believe this type of legislation will             
 be of any help in dealing with user conflict problems.  The AEL               
 encouraged the legislature to work a little more constructively               
 with the various interests involved, to try to get a little better            
 balance between motorized and nonmotorized users.  She stated that            
 the AEL is opposed to the bill.                                               
 The gavel was turned over to Co-Chairman Bill Hudson.                         
 Number 2221                                                                   
 SUSAN OLSEN, Alaska Quiet Rights Coalition, testified via                     
 teleconference from Anchorage.  She said if the interpretation is             
 correct that Section 2 does not affect Denali State Park, then she            
 does not have many concerns.  However, she noted that Chapter 21              
 includes all these parks; therefore, she does not understand the              
 assertion that the language only affects the little parks.                    
 MS. OLSEN said on the assumption this does affect big parks, the              
 coalition believes the legislation prevents the division from doing           
 its job of managing the park for present users, as well as                    
 preserving them for future generations.  The constitution requires            
 that all resources, which she believes includes state parks, are to           
 be available for all users.  However, the purpose behind the                  
 legislation is to give special privileges to those who enjoy                  
 motorized recreation.  This legislation would prevent parks from              
 dealing with the growing conflict between persons wanting quite               
 recreation and those wanting motorized activities.  She stated that           
 public policy should be for fair allocation of the state's                    
 resources.  This precludes that.                                              
 Number 2411                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON stated that he would find out whether this                 
 applies to Denali State Park.                                                 
 Number 2460                                                                   
 RANDY CROSBY testified via teleconference, saying he is a                     
 commercial use permit holder in Denali State Park and Chugach State           
 Park.  He conducts snow cat tours and recreates in both a motorized           
 and nonmotorized manner in the state park system.  He fully                   
 supports the bill.                                                            
 TAPE 97-43, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 0006                                                                   
 MR. CROSBY said one stipulation in his Denali State Park permit               
 requires him to block access of other recreational users from using           
 his trail on state park land.  He said park staff say this is                 
 necessary for public safety reasons.                                          
 MR. CROSBY advised that, on the other hand, his Chugach State Park            
 permit requires that he groom and share the trail with other                  
 recreational users.  He believes Denali State Park staff do not               
 want certain citizens of Alaska to have an easy, high-quality,                
 accessible route to the area of Curry Ridge.  He believes this bill           
 will address restrictions and closures of state parks to motorized            
 The gavel was turned over to Co-Chairman Ogan.                                
 Number 0152                                                                   
 TOM MEACHAM testified via teleconference from Anchorage, saying he            
 lives adjacent to Chugach State Park and is concerned about the               
 effect this bill would have on that park.  He stated that he was              
 surprised to hear the sponsor say the bill covers only small parks,           
 because the bill talks about park areas or preserves established              
 under Chapter 21, under which both legislatively designated parks             
 and other parks were established.  He believes that must be                   
 clarified if the intent of the legislation is to be much narrower             
 than it appears.                                                              
 MR. MEACHAM believes Chugach State Park should be managed for all             
 users.  He said many conflicting potential incompatible users and             
 user groups have been accommodated.  Any necessary zonings or                 
 closures have only been adopted after extensive public hearings,              
 with broad public support.  Not everyone is happy, but he believes            
 everyone is happy there are areas where they can pursue their own             
 recreational interests without hazard and conflict from other                 
 groups.  He believes this bill would lead to anarchy in the state             
 parks, where the loudest, fastest, most expensive means of access             
 would dominate over all other uses.  All user groups need to be               
 considered by wise management techniques.  He does not believe the            
 legislature has either the time or the inclination to deal with               
 specific situations that develop in state parks that cry out for              
 management solutions, either for public safety or for equitable use           
 by the general public.                                                        
 Number 0331                                                                   
 CLIFF EAMES, Alaska Center for the Environment, testified via                 
 teleconference from Anchorage, saying his organization has                    
 approximately 4,000 members.  They do not object to the reporting             
 requirement imposed by the bill.  However, they object to stripping           
 the Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation of its authority to              
 manage motorized recreation.  He believes this authority is needed            
 for the small parks, which frequently are campgrounds, and he                 
 believes many people in these campgrounds would like motorized use            
 to be managed so they can enjoy their stay there.  He asked:  By              
 stripping the division of authority, would parks be available for             
 the enjoyment of all Alaskans or just the motorized recreation                
 users?  The center advocates a balance between areas available for            
 motorized recreation users and those available for other Alaskans             
 and their visitors.                                                           
 Number 0492                                                                   
 KEN ROBERTSON, Member, Chugach State Park Advisory Board, testified           
 via teleconference from Anchorage, indicating Chugach State Park              
 has been sensitive to the public's needs.  Whenever there is a                
 contentious issue, public hearings are held and everyone's views              
 are considered.  He said he is concerned for reasons raised by Mr.            
 Stratton, Mr. Eames and Mr. Meacham, and he believes this is a                
 cumbersome way to target a small problem.                                     
 MR. ROBERTSON endorsed Mr. Stratton's suggestion of dealing with              
 only those closures with which the legislature disagrees.  He                 
 believes the bill should be tailored to achieve its objective, at             
 a minimum.  He also believes it fixes a problem that does not                 
 exist.  Things are run well now, and he believes the legislature              
 should deal with issues as they arise, rather than implement a                
 cumbersome procedure to essentially strip people who have knowledge           
 and expertise from doing their job.                                           
 Number 0629                                                                   
 PAM BARNES, Llama Buddies Expeditions (ph), testified via                     
 teleconference from Anchorage.  Both a commercial and personal user           
 of state parks, she opposes the bill.  She said the division works            
 for public safety reasons or for resource protection; she is                  
 satisfied with the balance of management.  This bill would take               
 away the ability to respond to changing conditions in a timely                
 manner.  She would like the division to remain responsible for                
 management and decision making of closures, without requiring                 
 legislature approval for those types of decisions.                            
 Number 0696                                                                   
 RALPH FELTS testified via teleconference from Fairbanks, concurring           
 with Mr. Stratton that this is a bit of overkill to address a                 
 couple of issues.  He stated that overall, the division is doing a            
 good job.  A park user, he is sympathetic when a park closure                 
 arises.  Although he has no problem with the legislature getting              
 involved when there is a problem such as Curry Ridge or Blair lake,           
 he believes the legislature should not try to micromanage just to             
 solve those situations.  "Let Parks do their job; they're doing a             
 pretty good job of it," he concluded.                                         
 Number 0768                                                                   
 JUNE BURKHART, Legislative Affairs Officer, Alaska Boating                    
 Association, testified via teleconference, saying she was                     
 presenting her own views as well as those of the association, which           
 has several hundred members across the state operating "every kind            
 of motorized vehicle you imagine."  She said public waterways are             
 owned collectively by all residents, and restrictions should be               
 implemented only when necessary to ensure safety and environmental            
 protection.  She stated that when these are the reasons for a                 
 closure, the association has asked for objective data supporting              
 the risks; in most cases, they had not received it.                           
 MS. BURKHART said the previous week there was a public hearing in             
 Anchorage on the draft management plan for Kenai Lake and Kenai               
 River, which specifically recommended prohibition of jet skis,                
 hydro-planes, hovercraft and similar motorized craft on Kenai Lake.           
 Several members of the association asked for data supporting the              
 prohibition.  She said they were told, "There is no real problem,             
 there are very few users, we are just trying to drop a problem                
 before it starts."   They do not feel that is a just reason, and              
 they support this legislation.                                                
 Number 0920                                                                   
 DAN ELLIOTT, Chair, Mat-Su State Park Citizen Advisory Board,                 
 testified via teleconference, saying the system works.  This bill             
 does not allow for changing circumstances; public safety is only              
 one issue.  He is afraid of having to rely on the legislature to              
 manage due to the constraints of time, budget and politics that               
 affect it.  He stated that the Division of Parks and Outdoor                  
 Recreation was intended to manage the parks, and they should.  He             
 said helicopters are a traditional means of access to Denali State            
 Park, and hunting is a traditional recreational activity; he                  
 wondered whether hunting by helicopter would now become legal.  He            
 stated that in general, the division should be allowed to use its             
 own discretion, and the legislature should only be involved in                
 cases where they disagree.                                                    
 Number 1045                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked if anyone else wished to testify and then              
 closed public testimony.                                                      
 Number 1068                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE offered an amendment, which read:                        
      Page 4, lines 1 - 10                                                     
      Delete all of (e)                                                        
 Number 1079                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN objected and stated that there is a 24-hour rule             
 on substantive amendments.  He then indicated he would allow it.              
 Number 1108                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN called an at-ease at 2:58 p.m. and called the                
 committee back to order at 2:59 p.m.  He asked whether the sponsor            
 objected to the amendment.                                                    
 SENATOR GREEN said yes.                                                       
 Number 1150                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE explained that subsection (e) is the                     
 contentious area.  The amendment removes the section of the bill              
 that is bringing all the concern.                                             
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated his objection to the amendment, saying the            
 legislature would like to take back this portion of authority that            
 it has delegated.                                                             
 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE noted that the committee had heard a lot about           
 this issue regarding public safety as well.                                   
 Number 1218                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE IRENE NICHOLIA asked whether there was a response              
 from the department.                                                          
 Number 1227                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN said there would be no response.                             
 Number 1238                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN called for a brief at-ease at 3:02 p.m. and called           
 the meeting back to order at 3:03 p.m.                                        
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN requested a roll call vote.  Representatives                 
 Masek, Dyson, Green, Williams, Hudson and Ogan voted against the              
 amendment.  Representatives Nicholia and Joule voted in favor of              
 the amendment.  Representative Barnes was absent.  So the amendment           
 Number 1280                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE FRED DYSON made a motion to move CSSB 35(FIN), 0-              
 LSO274\L, with individual recommendations and zero fiscal note.               
 Number 1298                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked whether there was an objection.  There being           
 none, CSSB 35(FIN) was moved out of the House Resources Standing              
 The gavel was turned over to Co-Chairman Hudson.                              
 HB 204 - MORATORIA ON COMMERCIAL FISHERIES ENTRY                             
 Number 1312                                                                   
 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON stated that the next order of business was House           
 Bill No. 204, "An Act revising the procedures and authority of the            
 Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission, the Board of                    
 Fisheries, and the Department of Fish and Game to establish a                 
 moratorium on participants or vessels, or both, participating in              
 certain fisheries; and providing for an effective date."                      
 Number 1330                                                                   
 AMY DAUGHERTY, Legislative Administrative Assistant to                        
 Representative Alan Austerman, read the following sponsor statement           
 into the record:                                                              
 "House Bill 204 amends the existing moratorium law to provide for             
 workable and effective moratorium law as part of Alaska's existing            
 fisheries management process.  The current moratorium statute has             
 proved unworkable and confusing.  The current process involves                
 multi-steps where a fisher seeking a moratorium must first go to              
 the Commissioner of Fish and Game, who in turn must seek                      
 authorization from the Board of Fisheries.  Once authorization is             
 granted from the Board of Fisheries, the commissioner may then                
 petition the CFEC to provide a moratorium.                                    
 "The commission is then authorized to go forward if it can make               
 findings required by the current statute, which are difficult to              
 understand and mutually inconsistent.                                         
 "This cumbersome and confusing process prevents a quick response in           
 fisheries that are growing too rapidly to ensure effective                    
 management.  As a result, the resource and the economic livelihood            
 of fishers could be jeopardized.  In some situations, ADF&G's only            
 recourse is to close the fishery or refuse to open a new fishery if           
 effort cannot be controlled.                                                  
 "HB 204 would allow fishers seeking a moratorium to petition the              
 commission directly.  This legislation also gives the commission              
 the authority to place a moratorium on vessels and gear as well as            
 individuals.  This is important in a fishery like the Bering Sea              
 [Korean] hair crab fishery and scallops, where large vessels may              
 use a number of different skippers in a season.                               
 "Under the current statute, eligibility to participate during the             
 moratorium is based on past participation.  This requirement                  
 precludes the use of a moratorium in new fisheries or in fisheries            
 that have remained closed for years.  In these two situations,                
 participation levels in an open access fishery may be initially too           
 great to promote resource conservation and sustainable fisheries.             
 HB 204 would allow the commission to implement a moratorium in such           
 fisheries and base eligibility on other reasonable standards such             
 as participation in similar fisheries.                                        
 "Additionally, HB 204 would allow the state to extend its                     
 moratorium authority to offshore fisheries adjacent to state waters           
 when consistent with federal law.                                             
 "Improving the moratorium law is consistent with our concern for              
 developing and protecting jobs, as well as streamlining government            
 and resource protection."                                                     
 MS. DAUGHERTY advised that there was one amendment.                           
 Number 1464                                                                   
 DALE ANDERSON, Chairman, Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission                
 (CFEC), stated support for the bill.  He said there is a                      
 dysfunctional statute that creates an undue burden on fishermen.              
 The CFEC would like to streamline access to be able to request a              
 moratorium, rather than going through the convoluted process in               
 place right now.                                                              
 Number 1505                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked whether anyone has petitioned the CFEC            
 against this change in the statutes.                                          
 Number 1513                                                                   
 MR. ANDERSON replied that the CFEC received a letter from the                 
 Petersburg Vessel Owners Association asking for some                          
 clarifications.  The CFEC met with the director, who expressed                
 concern with the elimination of the board's participation in the              
 moratorium process.                                                           
 Number 1550                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked whether Mr. Anderson had seen the                 
 proposed amendment and whether he supports it.                                
 MR. ANDERSON said he had seen it and supports it.  There is no real           
 substantive change; it makes the bill easier to read.                         
 Number 1577                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked whether the amendment is being offered            
 by the prime sponsor.                                                         
 MS. DAUGHERTY said yes.                                                       
 Number 1645                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE MASEK made a motion to adopt the amendment, 0-                 
 LSO802\A.1, Utermohle, 4/14/97, which read:                                   
      Page 3, lines 25 - 26:                                                   
           Delete all material.                                                
           Insert "vessel permit to another vessel if the original             
      permitted vessel is sunk, destroyed, or damaged to the extent            
      that the vessel is inoperable for the fishery for which the              
      permit is issued."                                                       
 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked if there was any objection.  There                
 being none, the amendment was adopted.                                        
 Number 1683                                                                   
 BRAD JOHNSON testified via teleconference from Ketchikan, saying he           
 is strongly in favor of the bill.  He said it is important to                 
 understand that in the time it takes to declare a moratorium on a             
 fishery, the number of participants in the fishery can snowball               
 overnight.  For example, in one fishery, the hint of impending                
 limited entry caused the number of permits to go from 186 to 332 in           
 one month.  With this bill in place, that would not happen.                   
 Number 1741                                                                   
 KRAIG NORHEIM testified via teleconference from Petersburg in                 
 support of the bill.  He participates in the shrimp fishery, which            
 is going into a limited entry process; 150 additional boats have              
 been let into the fishery.  Although the fishermen can take it, the           
 resource cannot handle this increased pressure.  He believes the              
 date of the limited entry should have been moved back to January              
 1st of the year when they decided to adopt limited entry.  He                 
 believes this bill will eliminate rushes into soon-to-be-limited              
 Number 1817                                                                   
 BRUCE SIEMINSKI testified via teleconference from Seward.  He                 
 suggested when an impacted species gets "back on line," there                 
 should be provisions increasing the number of permits.  He stated             
 that he favors the bill.                                                      
 Number 1904                                                                   
 BRENNON EAGLE testified via teleconference from Wrangell in favor             
 of the bill.  The CFEC would have much more flexibility when                  
 deciding to limit a fishery.  He gave the example of the pot shrimp           
 fishery, which had a cut-off date to apply for a permit seven weeks           
 following announcement of limited entry.  With a moratorium, an               
 extra 150 people could have been kept out of the fishery.                     
 Number 1848                                                                   
 BILL KNECHT testified via teleconference from Wrangell in favor of            
 the bill.  He stated that this legislation is a necessary tool to             
 help regulate fisheries "so they don't explode out of the viable              
 realm."  He said he represents an association of about 25 members.            
 They are 95 percent in support of this; the other 5 percent are               
 undecided.  He also sits on the Wrangell Fish and Game Advisory               
 Board.  With this tool in place, they will not have to spend                  
 numerous hours trying to figure out how to slow down the Southeast            
 pot shrimp fishery.                                                           
 Number 2029                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA made a motion to move HB 204, as amended,             
 with individual recommendations and the attached fiscal note.                 
 Number 2040                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked if there were any objections.  There              
 being none, CSHB 204(RES) was moved out of the House Resources                
 Standing Committee.                                                           
 Number 2072                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON adjourned the House Resources Standing                  
 Committee at 3:21 p.m.                                                        

Document Name Date/Time Subjects