Legislature(2003 - 2004)

04/04/2003 01:10 PM RES

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
               HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                         April 4, 2003                                                                                          
                           1:10 p.m.                                                                                            
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
Representative Hugh Fate, Chair                                                                                                 
Representative Beverly Masek, Vice Chair                                                                                        
Representative Carl Gatto                                                                                                       
Representative Bob Lynn                                                                                                         
Representative Carl Morgan                                                                                                      
Representative Kelly Wolf                                                                                                       
Representative David Guttenberg                                                                                                 
Representative Beth Kerttula                                                                                                    
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
Representative Cheryll Heinze                                                                                                   
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT                                                                                                     
Representative Eric Croft                                                                                                       
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
HOUSE BILL NO. 210                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to the Chitina dip net fishery; and providing                                                                  
for an effective date."                                                                                                         
     - MOVED CSHB 210(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 86                                                                                        
"An Act relating to permits issued by the state; and amending                                                                   
Rules 65, 79, and 82, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure."                                                                         
     - MOVED SSHB 86 OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                           
HOUSE BILL NO. 163                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to an annual wildlife conservation pass and the                                                                
fee for that pass; relating to nonresident and nonresident alien                                                                
big game tag fees; and providing for an effective date."                                                                        
     - HEARD AND HELD                                                                                                           
PREVIOUS ACTION                                                                                                               
BILL: HB 210                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE:CHITINA DIP NET FISHERY                                                                                             
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)COGHILL                                                                                            
Jrn-Date   Jrn-Page                     Action                                                                                  
03/24/03     0618       (H)        READ THE FIRST TIME -                                                                        
03/24/03     0618       (H)        RES, FIN                                                                                     
03/28/03     0689       (H)        COSPONSOR(S): STOLTZE                                                                        
04/04/03                (H)        RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                   
BILL: HB 86                                                                                                                   
SHORT TITLE:INJUNCTIONS AGAINST PERMITTED PROJECTS                                                                              
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)FATE                                                                                               
Jrn-Date   Jrn-Page                     Action                                                                                  
02/10/03     0169       (H)        READ THE FIRST TIME -                                                                        
02/10/03     0169       (H)        RES, JUD                                                                                     
02/21/03                (H)        RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                   
02/21/03                (H)        Failed To Move Out Of                                                                        
02/21/03                (H)        MINUTE(RES)                                                                                  
02/24/03                (H)        RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                   
02/24/03                (H)        <Bill Hearing Postponed>                                                                     
03/07/03                (H)        RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                   
03/07/03                (H)        Heard & Held                                                                                 
03/07/03                (H)        MINUTE(RES)                                                                                  
04/02/03     0738       (H)        SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED                                                                
04/02/03     0738       (H)        READ THE FIRST TIME -                                                                        
04/02/03     0738       (H)        RES, JUD                                                                                     
04/02/03                (H)        RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                   
04/02/03                (H)        Heard & Held                                                                                 
04/02/03                (H)        MINUTE(RES)                                                                                  
04/04/03     0798       (H)        COSPONSOR(S): FOSTER,                                                                        
                                   ROKEBERG, HOLM,                                                                              
04/04/03     0798       (H)        KOTT, LYNN, CHENAULT,                                                                        
                                   DAHLSTROM, WILSON                                                                            
04/04/03                (H)        RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                   
BILL: HB 163                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE:NONRES.GAME TAG FEES/WILDLIFE TOUR PASS                                                                             
SPONSOR(S): RLS BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR                                                                                      
Jrn-Date   Jrn-Page                     Action                                                                                  
03/05/03     0433       (H)        READ THE FIRST TIME -                                                                        
03/05/03     0433       (H)        RES, FIN                                                                                     
03/05/03     0433       (H)        FN1: (DFG)                                                                                   
03/05/03     0433       (H)        FN2: (DFG)                                                                                   
03/05/03     0434       (H)        GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER                                                                
03/14/03                (H)        RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                   
03/14/03                (H)        Heard & Held                                                                                 
03/14/03                (H)        MINUTE(RES)                                                                                  
03/17/03                (H)        RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                   
03/17/03                (H)        Heard & Held                                                                                 
03/17/03                (H)        MINUTE(RES)                                                                                  
04/04/03                (H)        RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124                                                                   
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COGHILL                                                                                                     
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified as sponsor of HB 210.                                                                            
RYNNIEVA MOSS, Staff                                                                                                            
to Representative John Coghill                                                                                                  
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   Explained  map on behalf  of Representative                                                               
Coghill, sponsor of HB 210.                                                                                                     
BYRON WHALEY, Trustee Vice-Chair                                                                                                
Board of Directors                                                                                                              
Alaska Outdoor Council (AOC);                                                                                                   
President, Chitina Dipnetters Association                                                                                       
Fairbanks, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  On behalf  of AOC, stated strong support for                                                               
HB 210; as president of  Chitina Dipnetters Association, answered                                                               
a question, saying he'd support  a mutually beneficial land trade                                                               
between the  state and Ahtna, Incorporated,  that would eliminate                                                               
the access problem.                                                                                                             
PAUL C. HOLLAND, Member                                                                                                         
Alaska Outdoor Council;                                                                                                         
Member, Chitina Dipnetters Association;                                                                                         
Member, Fairness for Chitina Dipnetters                                                                                         
Fairbanks, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   Testified in  support of HB 210  insofar as                                                               
the  trespass fee  should  be ended,  but  requested a  long-term                                                               
solution of perhaps putting it into the state's hands.                                                                          
STAN BLOOM, Vice President                                                                                                      
Chitina Dipnetters Association;                                                                                                 
Member, Alaska Outdoor Council                                                                                                  
Fairbanks, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  hearing on  HB  210, testified  in                                                               
support  of repealing  the  fee for  access,  but provided  other                                                               
suggestions for  dealing with services;  proposed the need  for a                                                               
an agreed-upon management plan and appropriate user fees.                                                                       
AUSTIN MAHALKEY                                                                                                                 
Glennallen, Alaska                                                                                                              
POSITION STATEMENT:   During  hearing on  HB 210,  suggested one-                                                               
quarter mile  on either side  should belong to the  state already                                                               
and hence any fees paid should be refunded.                                                                                     
SHARON DANIELS, Business Administrator                                                                                          
Copper Basin Sanitation                                                                                                         
Glennallen, Alaska                                                                                                              
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During hearing  on HB  210, discussed  the                                                               
garbage and human waste created by those using the fishery.                                                                     
GORDY WILLIAMS, Legislative Liaison                                                                                             
Office of the Commissioner                                                                                                      
Alaska Department of Fish & Game                                                                                                
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified on HB 210 and answered questions.                                                                
KELLY HEPLER, Director                                                                                                          
Division of Sport Fish                                                                                                          
Alaska Department of Fish & Game                                                                                                
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered question on HB 210.                                                                               
JIM POUND, Staff                                                                                                                
to Representative Hugh Fate                                                                                                     
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   Explained changes  in SSHB 86  and answered                                                               
questions; explained changes in HB 163, Version D.                                                                              
BRIAN PETERSON, Licensed Master Guide and Outfitter                                                                             
Girdwood, Alaska                                                                                                                
POSITION STATEMENT:   Testified  in support  of HB  163; proposed                                                               
amendment to  increase the  bison tag fee  to correlate  with the                                                               
musk ox  tag fee; spoke in  favor of funding, but  emphasized the                                                               
need for support for the industry and enforcement of Title 8.                                                                   
BRAD PHILLIPS, Owner and Operator                                                                                               
Phillips' Cruises & Tours                                                                                                       
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   Testified in  opposition to HB  163, saying                                                               
it would be a nightmare to administer.                                                                                          
ALAN LeMASTER, Owner                                                                                                            
Gakona Junction Village                                                                                                         
Gakona, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   Concurred  with testimony of  Brad Phillips                                                               
in opposition to HB 163.                                                                                                        
LEN LAURENCE                                                                                                                    
Mariner Inc.                                                                                                                    
Ketchikan, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   During  hearing on  HB 163,  concurred with                                                               
comments of Brad Phillips and said  he opposes a targeted tax but                                                               
wouldn't oppose  a broad-based tax  to raise money for  the state                                                               
budget and tourism marketing, in particular.                                                                                    
ROD ARNO                                                                                                                        
Palmer, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in support  of HB 163, but said it                                                               
needs amendments and deletions; offered suggestions.                                                                            
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
TAPE 03-23, SIDE A                                                                                                            
Number 0001                                                                                                                     
CHAIR  HUGH FATE  called the  House Resources  Standing Committee                                                             
meeting  to order  at  1:10 p.m.    Representatives Fate,  Masek,                                                               
Gatto, Lynn, Wolf and Guttenberg  were present during the call to                                                               
order.    Representatives  Morgan and  Kerttula  arrived  shortly                                                               
thereafter.   Representative  Heinze was  excused.   Also present                                                               
was Representative Croft.                                                                                                       
HB 210-CHITINA DIP NET FISHERY                                                                                                
Number 0206                                                                                                                     
CHAIR FATE  announced that the  first order of business  would be                                                               
HOUSE  BILL NO.  210, "An  Act relating  to the  Chitina dip  net                                                               
fishery; and providing for an effective date."                                                                                  
Number 0257                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN  COGHILL, Alaska State  Legislature, sponsor,                                                               
explained that  HB 210  would eliminate the  Chitina dip  net fee                                                               
permit,  which now  costs  $25.   He  credited then-Senator  Pete                                                               
Kelly with obtaining  funding for a recent survey  with regard to                                                               
the  public right-of-way  relating  to the  fishery; this  survey                                                               
found  about 60  percent of  the  land between  the pavilion  and                                                               
O'Brien Creek  has public  access and  thus requires  no trespass                                                               
fee.  Part  of the fee has  been used as a trespass  fee [paid to                                                               
two  Native corporations],  and  part has  been  used for  [waste                                                               
management services and  to pay for administration  of the permit                                                               
program  and services].   He  referred to  a color-coded  map and                                                               
asked his staff to explain it.                                                                                                  
Number 0401                                                                                                                     
RYNNIEVA  MOSS,  Staff  to Representative  John  Coghill,  Alaska                                                               
State  Legislature, explained  that orange  and dark  orange show                                                               
private  lands  owned  by Native  corporations;  purple  shows  a                                                               
Native  allotment;  brown is  the  right-of-way;  and blue  shows                                                               
bodies of water.                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL  noted  that  the latter  is  the  Copper                                                               
River.  He offered his belief  that the board changed that from a                                                               
subsistence to  a personal-use fishery;  he surmised  the license                                                               
fee  would   be  sufficient   [to  offset   costs].     He  asked                                                               
consideration  of that  when looking  at the  fiscal note,  which                                                               
shows $2  [of the $25  has been]  used for administration  of the                                                               
permit program, $5 for contractual  waste management, and $18 for                                                               
contractual  agreements  with  [Chitina  Native  Corporation  and                                                               
Ahtna, Incorporated, the two Native corporations].                                                                              
Number 0568                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL began  discussion of  Amendment 1,  which                                                               
read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                           
     Page 2, Line 3                                                                                                             
     Page 2, line 9                                                                                                             
     Lines 9 through 20                                                                                                         
REPRESENTATIVE  COGHILL  referred  to  [Section  2]  on  page  2,                                                               
subsections (b)  and (c).  Noting  that the matter had  just been                                                               
called  to his  attention, he  suggested those  subsections don't                                                               
need to  be included and  are due to inadvertent  drafting error.                                                               
Pointing  out  that subsection  (a)  says  the department  [shall                                                               
prepare  a publication  showing public  access routes  to fishing                                                               
sites  on public  land], Representative  Coghill  said he  didn't                                                               
necessarily want to add another burden of posting.                                                                              
Number 0633                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE    COGHILL     characterized    the     bill    as                                                               
straightforward,  saying no  other fishery  in Alaska  would have                                                               
this type  of charge and  he believes it  is a matter  of equity.                                                               
He acknowledged issues relating to  cleanup, but said he believes                                                               
that issue is separate from this particular fee setup.                                                                          
CHAIR  FATE  noted that  available  on  teleconference to  answer                                                               
questions were personnel from the  Department of Transportation &                                                               
Public  Facilities   (DOT&PF)  and  the  Department   of  Natural                                                               
Resources (DNR).                                                                                                                
Number 0713                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  GUTTENBERG  informed  members  that  this  was  a                                                               
project he and then-Representative John  Davies worked on, on the                                                               
House  side, with  regard to  determining boundary  lines and  so                                                               
forth, since both are avid Chitina fishermen.                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL expressed appreciation for that.                                                                         
Number 0842                                                                                                                     
MS.  MOSS, in  response  to Representative  Masek, explained  the                                                               
genesis of Amendment  1.  Through discussions  with John Bennett,                                                               
DOT&PF  right-of-way officer  in the  Northern Region  - who  she                                                               
said probably has more knowledge  than anyone else with regard to                                                               
this survey -  Ms. Moss said it became apparent  that perhaps too                                                               
much wording  was being  included in the  bill.   The departments                                                               
had been  under the impression they  might be expected to  put up                                                               
more signs than they'd originally planned.  Ms. Moss added:                                                                     
     They conducted  a survey.   There are survey  markers -                                                                    
     monuments - every  0.2 of a mile on the  road.  And the                                                                    
     brochure would  refer to these 0.2  monuments, so there                                                                    
     would be  no question  as to where  the public  land is                                                                    
     and where the private land is.                                                                                             
     There's about $54,000  remaining in that appropriation.                                                                    
     They  feel  they can  design  the  brochure, print  the                                                                    
     brochure,  and have  additional money  to maybe  put up                                                                    
     two  larger informational  signs, one  at the  pavilion                                                                    
     and one at O'Brien Creek.                                                                                                  
Number 0927                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  WOLF  noted  that  the Kenai  Peninsula  dip  net                                                               
fishery has  a "disaster cleanup  issue" associated with it.   He                                                               
requested advice on how [the  Chitina fishery] takes care of this                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  surmised that  it will  be a  question in                                                               
almost  every area  that  has  public access  to  fisheries.   He                                                               
expressed concern that  a single fishery not be  singled out, and                                                               
suggested it should be looked at more broadly.                                                                                  
Number 1015                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO asked  whether this  bill indicates  people                                                               
have been  charged for something  they shouldn't have had  to pay                                                               
for, for a number of years.                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL answered:                                                                                                
     The land  settlement was ...  an open discussion.   And                                                                    
     ... up until last  year, when ... Representative Davies                                                                    
     and Senator  Kelly began the  discussion, they  did not                                                                    
     know exactly  where those boundaries  were.  So  it's a                                                                    
     work in  progress.   And the answer  is yes,  but there                                                                    
     was  an agreement  that there  could  be trespass,  and                                                                    
     therefore  I  think it  was  appropriate  [to have  the                                                                    
     fee].   At  this  point, I  think,  we've settled  that                                                                    
Number 1075                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE    GUTTENBERG    expressed    appreciation    that                                                               
Representative  Coghill has  brought  this  forward, saying  this                                                               
needs to be "cleaned up and taken care  of in a lot of ways."  He                                                               
offered his  understanding that  the point  of doing  the marking                                                               
was to  give people  guidance as to  where public  access exists.                                                               
He  expressed concern  about  where  that stands  now.   He  also                                                               
agreed that there should be no  permit fee, but said there should                                                               
be some allocation to pay  for campground facilities and cleaning                                                               
up, and he noted the impact is fairly severe there at times.                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL  responded, "Certainly,  last year  we did                                                               
give the  parks some  receipt authority, and  I think  that would                                                               
fall within this  area."  He added that the  biggest access areas                                                               
need to  be the most  clearly defined.   He indicated that  it is                                                               
his responsibility to  put signs up on his  own private property,                                                               
for example, and offered his  expectation of a cooperative effort                                                               
on both sides.                                                                                                                  
CHAIR  FATE noted  that although  Representative  Coghill had  to                                                               
leave the  meeting, Ms.  Moss would  remain to  answer questions.                                                               
He also informed  members that someone from  Alaska Department of                                                               
Fish & Game (ADF&G) was available to answer questions.                                                                          
Number 1336                                                                                                                     
BYRON  WHALEY, Trustee  Vice-Chair,  Board  of Directors,  Alaska                                                               
Outdoor    Council   (AOC);    President,   Chitina    Dipnetters                                                               
Association,  testified on  behalf of  AOC in  strong support  of                                                               
HB 210, noting  that executive director Jessee  Vander-Zanden was                                                               
unable to  testify.  Mr. Whaley  also noted that he  is president                                                               
of the  Chitina Dipnetters Association,  but said  vice president                                                               
Stan Bloom would testify on behalf of that organization.                                                                        
MR.  WHALEY  told  members that  AOC  represents  the  collective                                                               
membership of about 12,000 Alaskans,  many who participate in the                                                               
Chitina dip  net fishery.   He said  HB 210 is  one of  AOC's top                                                               
priorities,  and  called  it  timely  because  a  survey  of  the                                                               
affected land,  completed in 2001,  shows that 60 percent  of the                                                               
area utilized  is public land  and also identifies  corridors for                                                               
access to  fishing sites.   Suggesting the  $25 fee is  no longer                                                               
necessary, he referred  to letters in members'  packets, one from                                                               
then-Governor  Knowles  [to]  Chitina  Native  Corporation  dated                                                               
April 25,  2002, which said  ADF&G was considering a  proposal to                                                               
repeal [or reduce] this access fee.                                                                                             
MR. WHALEY, still speaking on behalf  of AOC, noted that the bill                                                               
doesn't prohibit  private owners from charging  for access across                                                               
their lands.  He called  this "win-win legislation" and suggested                                                               
that any  funds for services  such as outhouses, garbage,  and so                                                               
forth should  come from DNR or  DOT&PF, as would be  expected for                                                               
other public lands  in Alaska.  If  there is a fee,  it should be                                                               
for  those services,  he  said, not  for  a personal-use  fishing                                                               
permit fee.   He said  dipnetters have  to buy a  sports license;                                                               
any funds  from the sports  fishing budget  must be used  for the                                                               
sports  division,  research,  and  management,  rather  than  for                                                               
public  [services],  and  that   includes  the  Chitina  dip  net                                                               
Number 1602                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG  asked Mr. Whaley, as  president of the                                                               
Chitina Dipnetters  Association, whether he would  support a land                                                               
trade  between the  state and  Ahtna, Incorporated,  to eliminate                                                               
any access issues.                                                                                                              
MR. WHALEY  answered yes, it  would be  wonderful to have  a land                                                               
trade  in kind,  depending upon  what sort  of trade  it was,  in                                                               
order to  get rid of the  access problem.  He  expressed the need                                                               
to make sure it would benefit both parties, however.                                                                            
Number 1676                                                                                                                     
PAUL C. HOLLAND, Member, Alaska  Outdoor Council; Member, Chitina                                                               
Dipnetters Association; Member,  Fairness for Chitina Dipnetters,                                                               
expressed support  for the bill  insofar as wanting  the trespass                                                               
fee to end.   However, he had  a difference of opinion  on how to                                                               
handle to  private-property issues  there.  He  expressed concern                                                               
that marking would  slow things down, and suggested  it should be                                                               
a separate  issue.  He also  suggested that it has  been somewhat                                                               
of  a mistake  in the  past for  the state  to represent  private                                                               
[landowners] by  collecting the fee  and then having  to identify                                                               
where  that private  land is  for  the landowner.   He  suggested                                                               
those should be separated, but said  the main thing is to end the                                                               
MR.  HOLLAND noted  that  he'd  talked with  [now-Representative]                                                               
Guttenberg the  previous year, and Representative  Guttenberg and                                                               
Representative  Davies had  been  very sensitive  to the  private                                                               
landowners.   He then pointed out  that the road is  closed about                                                               
one-half mile  past O'Brien  Creek and  that most  people walking                                                               
down  to the  river cannot  get there  [that way]:   it  requires                                                               
taking a charter down the  river and staying below the high-water                                                               
mark; therefore, it  is state land.  He also  estimated that most                                                               
dipnetters  reach the  river through  state land,  because it  is                                                               
those nearby areas  that people will walk down to;  he said there                                                               
are big pieces [of private land]  between the road and the river,                                                               
without paths.                                                                                                                  
MR.  HOLLAND,   as  far  as  the   state's  representing  private                                                               
landowners with regard  to marking the land, said  he didn't know                                                               
whether that is  done in Kenai, where  there are private-property                                                               
issues as  well.   He suggested  to some  extent it  is incumbent                                                               
upon private landowners to know where  their land is, and if they                                                               
want no crossing of their land, to  put up a fence.  He mentioned                                                               
having  a long-term  solution, and  estimated  that this  private                                                               
land is largely  worthless in that it  is on the side  of a cliff                                                               
and isolated.  He therefore agreed  that if there would be a fair                                                               
deal, it should be put into  the state's hands.  Mr. Holland also                                                               
asked a DOT&PF representative to  comment on short- and long-term                                                               
ideas about opening up that road.                                                                                               
Number 1973                                                                                                                     
STAN  BLOOM,  Vice  President,  Chitina  Dipnetters  Association;                                                               
Member,  Alaska Outdoor  Council,  saying is  a  member of  other                                                               
"sporting  clubs" around  town as  well,  informed the  committee                                                               
that this isn't  a simple problem with a simple  answer.  He said                                                               
[Mr. Whaley]  and he  have been  trying to  solve this  since the                                                               
1970s,   attending   meetings   with   the   state   and   Native                                                               
organizations,  for example.    He  said as  long  as ADF&G  lets                                                               
80,000  people fish  for free,  he can't  sympathize, since  that                                                               
number  of   fishing  licenses  would  bring   in  $1.2  million.                                                               
However,  he suggested  ADF&G  shouldn't be  in  the business  of                                                               
providing outhouses, for example.                                                                                               
MR. BLOOM  expressed dismay at  actions of ADF&G  including those                                                               
relating to  repealing the fee;  refusing to take "sport"  out of                                                               
the  resident license  regulation, and  instead having  a general                                                               
fishing  license;   lowering  dipnetters'  take;   spending  high                                                               
amounts of money for less  access; and not retaining enough money                                                               
to  monitor  its  contracts,  including   those  for  access  and                                                               
outhouses.   He  said a  subsistence hunter  must have  a hunting                                                               
license - even  the federal government requires that  - and asked                                                               
why  a subsistence  user  doesn't  need a  fishing  license.   He                                                               
offered to  send photographs  of "our great  services."   He also                                                               
accused  [ADF&G's  Division  of  Sport  Fish]  of  not  realizing                                                               
Alaskans don't want to do  catch-and-release fishing, but want to                                                               
eat the fish they catch.                                                                                                        
Number 2153                                                                                                                     
MR.  BLOOM stated  support for  repealing the  trespass fee,  but                                                               
said there is a better way  to resolve the service-fee issue.  He                                                               
offered specific suggestions as follows:                                                                                        
     If you have to have a  service fee, it should go to DNR                                                                    
     and let  them run the  upland area.  You  should repeal                                                                    
     the requirement  for a  sport [license]  for dipnetters                                                                    
     and replace it with  a personal use/subsistence license                                                                    
     for  $15.   Let [the  Division of  Sport Fish]  do what                                                                    
     they want with a sport license.                                                                                            
     You should  require [ADF&G],  DNR, and  [DOT&PF], along                                                                    
     with  Native groups  and representatives  from the  ...                                                                    
     dipnetters, to  come up  with a  management plan  and a                                                                    
     plan for  making the area some  kind of a dip  net park                                                                    
     [run] by  DNR, with appropriate user  fees.  Dipnetters                                                                    
     are  going to  hate me  for this,  but the  Natives and                                                                    
     commercial [users] already do, so what's 10,000 more?                                                                      
     You should  sunset any  change to be  in two  years, at                                                                    
     which [time] the  plan must be ready  from DNR, [ADF&G,                                                                    
     and DOT&PF].  In the  meantime, you should keep the $25                                                                    
     fee, but not  pay it to the Natives [for  access].  Use                                                                    
     it  to  force DNR  to  build  toilets that  meet  state                                                                    
     standards; keep  the $25  fee for  two years,  and that                                                                    
     would bring in  ... $250,000 a year, and  they ought to                                                                    
     be able to build toilets and  fix the road and do a lot                                                                    
     of things  with that  much money.   Have ...  DNR build                                                                    
     and maintain a boat launch  and charge for its use like                                                                    
     they do other places.                                                                                                      
     Have [DOT&PF] finish the survey  and mark the survey so                                                                    
     the dumbest dipnetter  easily can tell where  he is, at                                                                    
     any time.   Those little posts  at every 0.2 of  a mile                                                                    
     ain't  going to  tell  you [anything]  if  you have  to                                                                    
     measure 936  feet past this  post and that's  where you                                                                    
     can  access the  river;  that's ridiculous.   The  maps                                                                    
     must be of such scale and  clarity that even I can tell                                                                    
     ...  if I  am trespassing,  without  the use  of a  GPS                                                                    
     [Global Positioning System].                                                                                               
     Have the state pay a share  of the dumpster fee that is                                                                    
     caused  by  the  Chitina residents'  saving  all  their                                                                    
     trash till  the dumpsters come  in the summer  and then                                                                    
     loading them up.                                                                                                           
Number 2265                                                                                                                     
MR. BLOOM predicted what might happen if the foregoing                                                                          
suggestions aren't acted upon:                                                                                                  
     We will  have to pay  ... to  buy a sport  license, and                                                                    
     it'll be about a hundred bucks.   We will have to pay a                                                                    
     fee  for  services, and  it  will  be about  a  hundred                                                                    
     bucks.   [ADF&G] will be furnishing  two outhouses, and                                                                    
     they  will  be the  same  wooden  ones with  the  doors                                                                    
     hanging off  now.  The legislature  will have forgotten                                                                    
     us.    [ADF&G]  will  spend our  money  on  sports-fish                                                                    
     projects and ignore  us.  We will war  with the Natives                                                                    
     on trespass.   Troopers  will spend their  time solving                                                                    
     trespass  problems and  writing  tickets  for the  high                                                                    
     crime, if not  cutting fish sales off.  We  will have a                                                                    
     poorly  marked trail  that long  ago  was abandoned  by                                                                    
     [DOT&PF] and a 20-year-old brochure nobody can read.                                                                       
     When dipnetters  reach 25,000, dipnetting will  be such                                                                    
     a  problem  that  it  will  be done  away  with.    The                                                                    
     commercial  fishers who  are left  will celebrate  more                                                                    
     than they did when Stan  Bloom died.  The richest state                                                                    
     in the  Union will lament  that there was  nothing they                                                                    
     could  do about  it.   The commercial  fish board  will                                                                    
     have made the limit two fish,  only one of which can be                                                                    
     a king,  and you can  only keep  the king every  one in                                                                    
     ... four years.                                                                                                            
CHAIR FATE reminded Mr. Bloom of time constraints.                                                                              
MR. BLOOM concluded by saying DNR  has come up with a $27-million                                                               
plan to  put a bicycle  trail there.   He suggested some  of that                                                               
money  be spent  instead  on fixing  up the  first  10 miles  for                                                               
dipnetters, to make a place where people are proud to go.                                                                       
Number 2408                                                                                                                     
AUSTIN MAHALKEY  testified that he  has been trying for  10 years                                                               
to get  information about the  original railroad land  there, but                                                               
has been told  by both the state and the  federal government that                                                               
such  information doesn't  exist.   He offered  his understanding                                                               
that one-quarter mile on either  side of the railroad belonged to                                                               
the state prior to the  land-settlement Act; he suggested perhaps                                                               
legislators  could obtain  that information.   He  suggested that                                                               
any  fees paid  for trespassing  on this  land is  for land  that                                                               
already  belongs  to  the  state,  and  said  it  all  should  be                                                               
refunded.    He  expressed  hope  that  somebody  will  get  that                                                               
information to him.                                                                                                             
Number 2465                                                                                                                     
CHAIR  FATE responded  that he  would direct  staff to  look into                                                               
Number 2496                                                                                                                     
SHARON DANIELS, Business  Administrator, Copper Basin Sanitation,                                                               
told  members  that her  company  either  was the  contractor  or                                                               
supported the contractors that provided  sanitary services in the                                                               
Chitina area  for several  years.  She  emphasized the  volume of                                                               
human  waste and  garbage from  the area.   For  human waste,  it                                                               
amounted to about  5,000 gallons during the  2002 fishing season,                                                               
and just shy  of 6,000 gallons in 2001.   For garbage, it totaled                                                               
about 275 cubic yards [during  the 2002 season] that was strictly                                                               
from the  Copper River road or  "south of Chitina" road,  with an                                                               
additional  470 [cubic]  yards from  the rest  of the  public-use                                                               
dumpsters in the area, for a  total of 744 cubic yards; the total                                                               
for 2001  from both areas  was 642  cubic yards, of  which nearly                                                               
300  cubic yards  came just  from the  O'Brien Creek  road.   She                                                               
asked legislators  to keep in  mind that this  is a lot  of waste                                                               
that must be handled in some way.                                                                                               
MS. DANIELS  reported that the  toilet contract was  for twice-a-                                                               
week  service and  involved about  180 gallons  each time;  seven                                                               
portable toilets were serviced every three or four days.                                                                        
Number 2627                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  GUTTENBERG   asked  whether  this   contract  was                                                               
adequate or whether a higher frequency was needed.                                                                              
MS. DANIELS answered  that it was adequate, and  said the toilets                                                               
weren't fully used.   The ones "closest to the  people" were used                                                               
most, whereas  those 20  feet away weren't  used nearly  as much.                                                               
At no time were all the toilets at full capacity.                                                                               
Number 2669                                                                                                                     
CHAIR FATE asked whether anyone  on teleconference was waiting to                                                               
testify on this bill; there was no response.                                                                                    
Number 2693                                                                                                                     
GORDY WILLIAMS, Legislative Liaison,  Office of the Commissioner,                                                               
Alaska Department of Fish & Game,  reported that there has been a                                                               
Chitina dip net fee  since 1992; it was raised to  $25 in 2000 as                                                               
part of  a bill that called  for several other things.   That was                                                               
when  the  fishery  went  from  being  personal-use  to  being  a                                                               
subsistence fishery.   That bill also called for  the land status                                                               
in the area  to be determined.  There was  a survey undertaken by                                                               
[DOT&PF]  and direction  to the  department  to try  to work  out                                                               
longer-term   agreements  with   the  two   corporations  [Ahtna,                                                               
Incorporated, and Chitina Native Corporation].                                                                                  
MR. WILLIAMS reported working with  the corporations annually but                                                               
being unable  to arrive at more  than an annual contract  in 2000                                                               
and 2001.   Last  session, he  noted, SB  366 was  introduced and                                                               
called for  the permit fee to  drop to $10, with  the intent that                                                               
the $10 would address waste and  garbage pickup in the area; that                                                               
bill was  amended in the  Senate Resources Standing  Committee so                                                               
that the  fee would be  zero after  remaining in place  for 2002,                                                               
but  didn't  receive action  by  the  House  at  the end  of  the                                                               
session.    Communications  with   the  corporations  during  the                                                               
[legislative] interim weren't productive  with regard to arriving                                                               
at  long-term   solutions,  Mr.   Williams  noted,   adding  that                                                               
discussions are ongoing  with folks about those issues.   Thus at                                                               
this point there is no contract in place.                                                                                       
MR. WILLIAMS  told members although  the permit fee  under HB 210                                                               
is zero, [ADF&G] still would  issue permits because that provides                                                               
discrete information about the fishery.   He noted that last year                                                               
there'd been  discussions with [DOT&PF]  about how  marking would                                                               
occur and brochures would be  prepared, for instance.  Because of                                                               
the timing, the decision was  made by the legislature and [ADF&G]                                                               
to enter  into another  one-year contract.   Although  the Native                                                               
corporations have  expressed interest  in entering into  a three-                                                               
year contract now, there was an  inability to do so until [ADF&G]                                                               
got   some   public  policy   direction   on   how  to   proceed.                                                               
Mr. Williams  noted that  Mr. Hepler  was  on teleconference  and                                                               
could address other issues.                                                                                                     
Number 2867                                                                                                                     
MR. WILLIAMS pointed  out that the fiscal note shows  how the $25                                                               
fee  was broken  out:   $18  for the  corporations,  with $10  to                                                               
Chitina Native Corporation and $8  to Ahtna, Incorporated; $5 for                                                               
cleanup; and $2 for the  department for administration.  He added                                                               
that the fiscal note doesn't  reflect additional revenue that may                                                               
come  from the  necessity  of some  people  to buy  sport-fishing                                                               
licenses now, and suggested ADF&G will look at those numbers.                                                                   
Number 2912                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked whether, prior  to the $25 or $10 fee,                                                               
there ever was a voluntary fee there.                                                                                           
MR. WILLIAMS  recalled a lot  of public  support for the  $25 fee                                                               
when  it   was  instituted,  included  support   by  the  Chitina                                                               
Dipnetters Association because of the undetermined land status.                                                                 
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG  asked what  the point  is of  having a                                                               
contract now with the two Native corporations.                                                                                  
MR. WILLIAMS answered  that last year, as this  idea was debated,                                                               
mixed comments were heard from  the public, the corporations, and                                                               
so forth.                                                                                                                       
TAPE 03-23, SIDE B                                                                                                            
Number 2989                                                                                                                     
MR. WILLIAMS  continued, "I  think you  would probably  hear from                                                               
them that  they feel there's  some obligation from the  state for                                                               
the  contracts."    He  indicated   ADF&G  is  working  with  the                                                               
legislature and the administration  currently to try to determine                                                               
the public policy issue.                                                                                                        
REPRESENTATIVE  GUTTENBERG  noted  that   there  is  no  contract                                                               
currently.  If the bill is passed  with a zero fee, which he said                                                               
he supports,  and a  contract is signed  later, he  asked whether                                                               
those  contractual obligations  can be  met somehow  with general                                                               
fund dollars.                                                                                                                   
MR. WILLIAMS  said yes,  noting that  there are  restrictions and                                                               
that  Mr.  Hepler  could address  what  fish-and-game-type  funds                                                               
could be used.  For example,  he said, he doesn't believe federal                                                               
funds can be  used for a personal-use fishery.   Straight general                                                               
funds  could  certainly  be  used   for  a  contract,  he  noted.                                                               
Mr. Williams added:                                                                                                             
     We  do have  concerns, and  we believe  that the  state                                                                    
     does have  some responsibilities on the  cleanup issue;                                                                    
     I  think  you  heard  about the  volume  of  waste  and                                                                    
     whatnot  there.   And with  the  fee going  to zero,  I                                                                    
     think  there's a  recognition that  ... that  would not                                                                    
     provide the  current funding source ...  for cleanup in                                                                    
     the area.   And [we] certainly want  the legislature to                                                                    
     be  aware that  ... even  in the  absence of  contracts                                                                    
     with  the  corporations,  there's  going  to  be  costs                                                                    
     incurred  in  that area.    And  this was  the  funding                                                                    
     source for those.                                                                                                          
Number 2913                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  GUTTENBERG posed  a  situation in  which the  fee                                                               
goes to  zero and the  contracts have to  be paid out  of general                                                               
fund dollars.   He asked what the appropriate fee  is for cleanup                                                               
and maintenance of the campgrounds, and who would administer it.                                                                
MR. WILLIAMS replied:                                                                                                           
     Well, those  are discussions  we're having  amongst the                                                                    
     administration,  is  which  division.    Last  year,  I                                                                    
     believe, our  fiscal note on  ... Senate Bill  366 that                                                                    
     reduced the  fee to $10  indicated that the  numbers we                                                                    
     have  here  - the  $70,000  or  $80,000 that  would  be                                                                    
     collected at  a $10  fee, which is  what that  was last                                                                    
     year that  we would  have "RSAed" [used  a reimbursable                                                                    
     services agreement] to the  ... [Department of] Natural                                                                    
     Resources, for them to handle  that, either by contract                                                                    
     or through their own procedures ...                                                                                        
Number 2875                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  GUTTENBERG asked  whether  that  would cover  the                                                               
same  thing as  a  contract  with a  firm  such  as Copper  River                                                               
MR.  WILLIAMS said  he guessed  that was  right.   He added  that                                                               
testimony would be heard that the  level of services thus far has                                                               
been at  the low end  of what some consider  to be required.   He                                                               
offered  the belief  that perhaps  additional  dollars should  be                                                               
spent toward that end.                                                                                                          
Number 2852                                                                                                                     
CHAIR FATE  asked Mr. Williams  where the belief comes  from that                                                               
cleanup costs will escalate.                                                                                                    
MR. WILLIAMS replied that DNR,  DOT&PF, and ADF&G talked recently                                                               
via teleconference  about these issues.   He said that  he hadn't                                                               
personally  been there  at  the fishery  [at  Chitina], but  that                                                               
people on teleconference  could offer their knowledge  of how the                                                               
level of  service could be  improved with respect to  garbage and                                                               
human waste.                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FATE asked if anyone  on teleconference wanted to weigh in.                                                               
[There was no audible response.]                                                                                                
Number 2807                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK asked whether a  board has been put together                                                               
for this area.                                                                                                                  
MR. WILLIAMS noted  that the Chitina Dipnetters  Association is a                                                               
private association of people who fish in the area.                                                                             
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK  queried, if  the bill passed,  whether that                                                               
association or  users who  fish there would  put together  a task                                                               
force to take care of maintenance and operations.                                                                               
Number 2743                                                                                                                     
MR.  WHALEY responded  that although  his organization  could put                                                               
something together  and work on it,  he believes it is  up to the                                                               
state  - DNR,  for example.   He  expressed concern  that if  his                                                               
organization  starts doing  something like  this, it  will set  a                                                               
precedent for  the rest of  the state  and force others  into the                                                               
same deal.                                                                                                                      
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK  remarked that she'd  thought it might  be a                                                               
way to compromise.                                                                                                              
Number 2715                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF asked whether a  person is required to have a                                                               
sport-fishing license in order to  participate in the Chitina dip                                                               
net fishery.                                                                                                                    
MR. WILLIAMS  answered, "You will be  this year.  The  last three                                                               
years,  the fishery  has been  a subsistence  fishery in  which a                                                               
sport-fish license  wasn't required."   He  noted that  in either                                                               
December or January  the Board of Fisheries returned  it to being                                                               
a personal-use fishery.  Thus a sport-fish license is required.                                                                 
REPRESENTATIVE  WOLF  recalled that  in  2000  and 2001,  to  his                                                               
belief, the  receipts for sport-fish  licenses in  Alaska totaled                                                               
almost $24  million to  ADF&G.  He  asked whether  those receipts                                                               
can go  towards the costs of  trash and the thousands  of gallons                                                               
of human waste.                                                                                                                 
MR. WILLIAMS deferred to Mr. Hepler.                                                                                            
Number 2646                                                                                                                     
KELLY   HEPLER,  Director,   Division  of   Sport  Fish,   Alaska                                                               
Department of Fish & Game, responded:                                                                                           
     Fish and  game dollars ...  can be  used that way.   We                                                                    
     haven't done that in the  past. ... There's a number of                                                                    
     places that  we've actually  provided some  services to                                                                    
     some fisheries, like ... along  the road system ... out                                                                    
     of Susitna, like at Willow  Creek, Caswell, some places                                                                    
     like  that;  these  are  fairly  small  fisheries,  but                                                                    
     they're  done  more  with  federal-aid  dollars,  which                                                                    
     means you need  to actually have a rod and  reel, not a                                                                    
     dip net,  in your hand.  ... And  some of the  fish and                                                                    
     game   dollars  we   used   initially   to  help   out,                                                                    
     Representative  Wolf,  in  your district  down  at  the                                                                    
     mouth of the  Kenai, until the City of  Kenai took that                                                                    
     over and  started charging people  $10 there;  ... then                                                                    
     they're on their own at that point.                                                                                        
     We typically,  when we try  to help fisheries  out, ...                                                                    
     it's  where  we   have  a  land  interest   or  are  in                                                                    
     partnership with  the Department of  Natural Resources,                                                                    
     Division of  Parks [and  Outdoor Recreation].  ... It's                                                                    
     not done on  this kind of a large scale  where we don't                                                                    
     have a land interest ourselves.                                                                                            
     I'm not  aware, though,  technically, of any  reason we                                                                    
     couldn't  use our  fish  and game  dollars.   It's  not                                                                    
     something  I  like  to do,  because,  obviously,  those                                                                    
     dollars  go to  the management  and ...  what are  core                                                                    
     functions  ...  in  our  division   -  that's  for  the                                                                    
     research and management of the  fisheries. ... We could                                                                    
     do it, though.                                                                                                             
Number 2581                                                                                                                     
CHAIR FATE asked whether anyone else wished to testify; he then                                                                 
closed public testimony.                                                                                                        
Number 2530                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK moved to adopt Amendment 1 [text provided                                                                  
previously]; she requested unanimous consent.                                                                                   
Number 2516                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA requested an explanation from Ms. Moss.                                                                 
CHAIR FATE announced that he would treat that as an objection                                                                   
[for discussion purposes].                                                                                                      
MS. MOSS explained that it  derived from a conversation with John                                                               
Bennett.   She said  there'd seemed to  be a  misunderstanding of                                                               
what was  expected of  [DOT&PF], which  conducted the  survey and                                                               
was designing  a brochure  to adequately  notify people  of where                                                               
the public access  is so that they'd also know  where the private                                                               
access is and could avoid trespassing.  She added:                                                                              
     They just  felt we had  too much verbiage in  there and                                                                    
     preferred  [that]  the  first paragraph  would  clearly                                                                    
     state that  what we expect  is for them to  continue on                                                                    
     the  road  that  they're  going  on,  without  any  new                                                                    
     demands.   However, they  have said,  if money  is left                                                                    
     over, they  will put a  couple of  larger informational                                                                    
     signs  up, one  at [the]  pavilion and  one at  O'Brien                                                                    
Number 2468                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK  noted that  money had been  appropriated by                                                               
the 2001 legislation.   She asked whether the belief  is that the                                                               
money already appropriated isn't going to be enough for signage.                                                                
MS. MOSS  replied that the  money was appropriated  for surveying                                                               
and placing brochures.   She indicated the  survey monuments will                                                               
serve  to  mark  where  the  public land  is.    She  added  that                                                               
[DOT&PF], on its  own, has said that if there  is extra money, it                                                               
will go to  the further effort of putting  up informational signs                                                               
with maps  so that  people will  have no  doubt where  the public                                                               
access is.                                                                                                                      
Number 2419                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK renewed her motion to adopt Amendment 1.                                                                   
Number 2409                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA removed her objection.                                                                                  
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG  surmised that the whole  issue will go                                                               
away if a  successful land swap is negotiated  [between the state                                                               
and the two Native corporations].                                                                                               
CHAIR FATE agreed that it would be a whole new scenario.                                                                        
Number 2387                                                                                                                     
CHAIR  FATE asked  whether  there was  any  further objection  to                                                               
adopting  Amendment 1.    There  being no  objection,  it was  so                                                               
Number 2378                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK  emphasized that  the bill  doesn't preclude                                                               
private landowners  from charging for access  across their lands,                                                               
should  the public  wish  to use  that method  of  access to  the                                                               
Number 2318                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG  announced that he would  be working on                                                               
an  amendment to  be considered  in the  House Finance  Committee                                                               
with regard to  a fee to cover maintenance of  the facilities and                                                               
campgrounds, which isn't addressed currently.                                                                                   
MS. MOSS indicated the sponsor would  be working on that as well,                                                               
and suggested doing so together.                                                                                                
Number 2286                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK moved  to report HB 210, as  amended, out of                                                               
committee  with individual  recommendations and  the accompanying                                                               
fiscal notes;  she requested unanimous  consent.  There  being no                                                               
objection, CSHB  210(RES) was reported  from the  House Resources                                                               
Standing Committee.                                                                                                             
The committee took an at-ease from 2:15 p.m. to 2:23 p.m.                                                                       
HB 86-INJUNCTIONS AGAINST PERMITTED PROJECTS                                                                                  
CHAIR FATE  announced that  the next order  of business  would be                                                               
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE  FOR HOUSE  BILL NO. 86,  "An Act  relating to                                                               
permits issued by  the state; and amending Rules 65,  79, and 82,                                                               
Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure."                                                                                               
Number 2185                                                                                                                     
CHAIR  FATE, sponsor,  asked that  his staff  person present  the                                                               
sponsor substitute.                                                                                                             
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK moved  to adopt SSHB 86.   [No objection was                                                               
Number 2164                                                                                                                     
JIM  POUND,  Staff  to Representative  Hugh  Fate,  Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,  explained  that  SSHB  86  was  a  rewrite  of  the                                                               
original  bill in  order  to pass  "constitutional  muster."   It                                                               
relates to asking  for and receiving injunctions  that delay work                                                               
on already  permitted projects.   Under current law,  a plaintiff                                                               
who  files for  an injunction  against a  project and  ultimately                                                               
loses in  court is responsible  for part of the  costs, including                                                               
court costs  and attorney fees  of the defendant.   This language                                                               
will   give   guidance  to   the   judiciary,   but  will   leave                                                               
determinations to the  discretion of the [courts].   Thus SSHB 86                                                               
makes  those   who  improperly  seek  and   cause  an  injunction                                                               
responsible  for full  court costs  and attorney  fees.   It also                                                               
adds  statutory  language  to   require  that  damages  or  costs                                                               
incurred  as a  result  of the  delay  will be  paid  for by  the                                                               
responsible party.                                                                                                              
MR. POUND listed included costs:   wages and salary for employees                                                               
working  on  the  project,  material  costs,  and  penalties  and                                                               
interest on contracts associated with  the project.  He said when                                                               
a project is  permitted before a contractor goes  to work, hiring                                                               
employees  and  purchasing  materials   are  commitments  that  a                                                               
contractor makes.   Improper delay  of a project costs  more than                                                               
just attorney fees and court costs;  it disrupts the lives of the                                                               
contractor, his or her employees,  and those other companies that                                                               
have subcontracted to do the work.   Mr. Pound offered the belief                                                               
that it  is unreasonable for  someone to  have an effect  on that                                                               
many lives without being responsible for the true costs.                                                                        
Number 2064                                                                                                                     
CHAIR  FATE turned  attention to  page 2,  line 12,  the language                                                               
"bad  faith  litigant".     Saying  this  is  the   meat  of  the                                                               
legislation, he  asked Mr.  Pound to  define it.   He  also asked                                                               
whether  there  are problems  in  the  court system  and  whether                                                               
present codes are unclear as to what a bad faith litigant is.                                                                   
MR. POUND, in response, said  "bad faith litigant" precedence has                                                               
already been set by the Alaska  Court System on several cases and                                                               
Number 2001                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA posed a situation  in which a party seeks                                                               
an  injunction but  won't substantially  prevail in  a challenge.                                                               
She asked if it  would have to be proved that it  was a bad faith                                                               
MR. POUND  responded that essentially,  that's correct.   He said                                                               
if somebody comes in  with misinformation, incorrect information,                                                               
or   exaggerated  information   and   succeeds   in  getting   an                                                               
injunction, and then  through the process it  is determined those                                                               
[allegations  are  based  on]   incorrect  information  and  [the                                                               
plaintiff] loses as a result [and  it is determined to be] a bad-                                                               
faith  suit, then  it  becomes a  case wherein  the  judge is  to                                                               
determine damages.                                                                                                              
Number 1938                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  KERTTULA   mentioned  penalties  for   bad  faith                                                               
litigation in everything from punishment  during a case to severe                                                               
discipline  [by the  bar  association].   She said  it  is a  bit                                                               
confusing because it seemingly mixes  the bad-faith idea with the                                                               
[attorney  fees  under Rule  82  of  the  Alaska Rules  of  Civil                                                               
Procedure]  with  regard to  the  one  who doesn't  substantially                                                               
prevail.  She asked if the idea is to put the two together.                                                                     
MR. POUND  conveyed his understanding  that this only  applies to                                                               
the  court  process,  not  the   administrative  process,  so  it                                                               
certainly covers  that part of  it.   He relayed his  belief that                                                               
[the  bill]  gives the  courts  guidance,  rather than  directing                                                               
them.  He  said the intent is that [the  courts] look beyond just                                                               
court costs and attorney fees  when [considering] damages for bad                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA  expressed concern  about mixing  the two                                                               
standards  and  adding  new  things  as well.    She  noted  that                                                               
normally someone has to prove damages  as part of a case in order                                                               
to receive  [a monetary  award for those  damages] and  that this                                                               
isn't done  as punishment; she  said it is an  odd way to  do it.                                                               
Representative  Kerttula also  expressed concern  that there  are                                                               
some  really fine  lines on  what "substantially  prevailing" is.                                                               
She explained, "You could prevail on  four out of six causes, but                                                               
that means you still haven't  substantially prevailed, and ... it                                                               
just seems to open up for some close calls there, too."                                                                         
MR. POUND offered his belief that  that's why the bill is written                                                               
this  way, to  give  guidance, not  direction,  to the  [courts].                                                               
Traditionally, he  said, in  the type  of suits  being discussed,                                                               
for the  most part there  has only  been a determination  [that a                                                               
losing plaintiff would]  pay part of the attorney  fees and court                                                               
costs; however, this  bill provides for full  attorney fees, full                                                               
court costs, and damages.                                                                                                       
Number 1748                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  KERTTULA  suggested  that  the  court  costs  and                                                               
attorney fees have  been the court's decision, and  that it would                                                               
not necessarily change because of  this [bill].  She asked, "They                                                               
could seek it; they might not get it, right?"                                                                                   
MR.  POUND turned  attention to  page 2,  line 4,  paragraph (4),                                                               
which  read  in part,  "actual  litigation  cost related  to  the                                                               
disruption, including  full attorney fees  and court costs".   He                                                               
said he thought the aforementioned would be full costs and fees.                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA told Mr. Pound  he may be right, but that                                                               
it could  be a problem.   She posed a situation  in which someone                                                               
win  fours out  of six  causes of  action; she  questioned having                                                               
that person [be responsible] for  full court [costs] and attorney                                                               
fees, as well as tying the court's hands that way.                                                                              
Number 1690                                                                                                                     
CHAIR FATE  specified that the  intent is to allow  discretion of                                                               
the court  to make  that determination.   He  told Representative                                                               
Kerttula  [the  situation she  posed]  brings  up an  interesting                                                               
point.  Chair Fate remarked:                                                                                                    
     If the four  points ... that the defendant  lost out of                                                                    
     the six  were of minor  consequence, and the  other two                                                                    
     are  a  major  consequence   to  the  disruption  of  a                                                                    
     project, I  think the  court would  be obliged  to take                                                                    
     that under  consideration; that  would be  that court's                                                                    
     And so, as  we thought this over, in trying  to make it                                                                    
     the  kind of  legislation ...  that allows  the system,                                                                    
     without any obstacles to ...  recourse to an injunctive                                                                    
     process,  which this  doesn't  stop -  to  any type  of                                                                    
     litigation,  [which] this  doesn't  stop,  which was  a                                                                    
     complaint [about]  the former version  of this HB  86 -                                                                    
     we have,  in the attempt  to make this  absolutely fair                                                                    
     [in]  the legal  procedure as  it is  today, ...  given                                                                    
     some  discretion  to  the  courts  to  determine  these                                                                    
     But we've  also given  notice legally  that there  is a                                                                    
     liability attached to ... an  injunction that was filed                                                                    
     and granted in  bad faith.  So, that  liability is what                                                                    
     people  have to  take note  of;  it's still  up to  the                                                                    
     court to determine  what that liability is.   So, we're                                                                    
     not stopping any type ... of a civil process at all.                                                                       
Number 1558                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  posed an example  in which he  sues someone                                                               
who has done such  a bad job working on his car  that he sues the                                                               
mechanic for  $10,000 and wins;  under Rule 82 currently,  he can                                                               
recover a  portion of  his attorney  fees.  He  asked if  Rule 82                                                               
would go  away [under the  bill].  He  noted that it  talks about                                                               
changing Rule 82.                                                                                                               
MR.  POUND   offered  his  belief  that   it  wouldn't  eliminate                                                               
[Rule 82],  but  could  possibly  be  interpreted  to  mean  that                                                               
someone would have to pay full attorney fees and court costs.                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO  asked if Mr.  Pound was saying  it enhances                                                               
Rule 82, then, rather than diminishing it.                                                                                      
MR. POUND  offered his belief that  it would, but said  he didn't                                                               
think  this bill  was particularly  aimed at  that type  of civil                                                               
case.    He added  that  he  wasn't  sure  how the  courts  would                                                               
interpret that  language to cover  a case such  as Representative                                                               
Gatto had mentioned.                                                                                                            
Number 1464                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  KERTTULA  referred  to  page  2,  paragraph  (4),                                                               
lines 4-5, and  to Rule 82.   She  surmised that this  applies on                                                               
the counts on which the person doesn't prevail.                                                                                 
CHAIR FATE said the  intent was not to modify it,  but to make it                                                               
a higher standard and "bump it up."                                                                                             
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked if it was even less under Rule 82.                                                                
AN UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER answered, "Yes."                                                                                        
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA  offered her understanding that  the bill                                                               
bumps up Rule  82 because there is  a fixed fee.   She said right                                                               
now  awards of  fees are  limited because  attorney fees  can get                                                               
pretty high.   Representative Kerttula suggested  this bill might                                                               
encourage some high attorney fees.                                                                                              
MR. POUND said he wouldn't know anything about that.                                                                            
Number 1277                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF posed a situation  in which a permitted high-                                                               
risk tree-cleaning  project is stopped  [and a fire  results that                                                               
destroys a public  school].  He asked if SSHB  86 would allow for                                                               
a bad  faith public  litigant to be  held accountable  for public                                                               
property loss.                                                                                                                  
CHAIR  FATE  offered  his understanding  that  the  determination                                                               
would  be   made  by  the   court,  and  that   other  mitigating                                                               
circumstances would have to be  taken into consideration before a                                                               
[determination could be made].                                                                                                  
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF remarked:                                                                                                   
     When they  ... look  at high-risk management,  it's one                                                                    
     of those things that's been  ... determined that it's a                                                                    
     high risk  to public  property or  public safety.   And                                                                    
     ...  a  project needs  to  be  moved forward;  it  goes                                                                    
     through the  public process; permits  are issued.   And                                                                    
     because there's a bad faith  litigant, they go to court                                                                    
     to try to stop it anyway.                                                                                                  
CHAIR FATE  offered his  assumption that the  public would  get a                                                               
chance to  voice an  opinion before  any high-risk  projects were                                                               
MR. POUND said  that this bill is primarily aimed  at the private                                                               
sector and that  the term "person" normally  references a private                                                               
individual and not  a government [entity].  He  said in reference                                                               
to the  school's burning down  that he would think  that wouldn't                                                               
be the case.                                                                                                                    
CHAIR FATE  said regardless  of whether  it's public  or private,                                                               
certain  procedures  have  to  be  [followed]  in  any  high-risk                                                               
Number 1084                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA suggested the  other standard, or perhaps                                                               
the  main standard,  is that  it's a  bad faith  challenge.   She                                                               
asked  for clarification  of  the definition  or  what the  court                                                               
[would use to make a determination].                                                                                            
MR. POUND said  he was unsure what the  court's specific language                                                               
was  for bad  faith.   He  said  he  knows it  has  been used  in                                                               
precedent before.   He indicated  he would research  those cases,                                                               
but hadn't done so yet.                                                                                                         
Number 1039                                                                                                                     
CHAIR  FATE indicated  [the  courts] have  dealt  with bad  faith                                                               
cases previously  and would have  a better understanding  of what                                                               
constitutes bad faith.                                                                                                          
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK  suggested that  many of  the aforementioned                                                               
concerns could  be addressed in  the next committee  of referral,                                                               
the House Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                                         
Number 0973                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK  moved to  report SSHB  86 out  of committee                                                               
with  individual  recommendations  and  the  accompanying  fiscal                                                               
notes.  There  being no objection, SSHB 86 was  reported from the                                                               
House Resources Standing Committee.                                                                                             
HB 163-NONRES. GAME TAG FEES/WILDLIFE TOUR PASS                                                                               
CHAIR FATE  announced that the  final order of business  would be                                                               
HOUSE  BILL NO.  163,  "An  Act relating  to  an annual  wildlife                                                               
conservation  pass  and  the  fee  for  that  pass;  relating  to                                                               
nonresident  and  nonresident  alien   big  game  tag  fees;  and                                                               
providing for an effective date."                                                                                               
Number 0897                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  MASEK  moved  to  adopt  the  proposed  committee                                                               
substitute (CS),  version 23-GH1098\D,  Utermohle, 3/18/03,  as a                                                               
work draft.                                                                                                                     
CHAIR FATE, hearing no objection,  announced that [Version D] was                                                               
Number 0832                                                                                                                     
JIM  POUND,  Staff  to Representative  Hugh  Fate,  Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,  addressed   changes  from  the   previous  version,                                                               
indicating  Version  D  consolidated   several  amendments.    On                                                               
page 1, line 11, new [paragraph] (3) reads:                                                                                     
          (3) a large portion of the financial resources                                                                        
     expended by  the state to maintain  healthy populations                                                                    
     of  wildlife directly  benefits  nonresidents who  view                                                                    
MR. POUND noted that [paragraph] (4) reads:                                                                                     
          (4)  the $15 fee charged to nonresidents for an                                                                       
     annual  wildlife  conservation  pass is  less  than  or                                                                    
     equal  to Alaska  residents' pro  rata  share of  state                                                                    
     revenue  that is  devoted  to wildlife-related  matters                                                                    
     associated  with   nonconsumptive  uses  of   fish  and                                                                    
     wildlife, including wildlife viewing;                                                                                      
MR.  POUND  turned  attention to  [paragraph]  (8),  language  on                                                               
page 2, line  12, that had been  on line 5 in  the original bill.                                                               
In that  paragraph, "individuals"  is changed  to "nonresidents",                                                               
and on  line 13  the words  "a portion"  have been  replaced with                                                               
"their fair share".  Thus paragraph (8) reads:                                                                                  
          (8)  nonresidents who do not obtain a hunting or                                                                      
     fishing license  and employ  a commercial  provider for                                                                    
     an opportunity to view wildlife  should bear their fair                                                                    
     share  of  the  cost  of wildlife  management  in  this                                                                    
Number 0736                                                                                                                     
MR. POUND  explained that on page  4, line 18 [Section  6], which                                                               
relates  to bonding  requirements for  the Alaska  Marine Highway                                                               
System (AMHS)  and the Alaska Railroad  Corporation (ARRC), those                                                               
entities don't have to post a  bond in order to sell the wildlife                                                               
viewing passes.  And line 26  [Section 7] allows AMHS and ARRC to                                                               
collect a fee as any  private-sector vendor would.  Both entities                                                               
will incur costs from having to  sell these passes, and should be                                                               
able to  keep the funds  just like any  other vendor in  order to                                                               
offset those costs.                                                                                                             
Number 0605                                                                                                                     
MR. POUND  drew attention to [Section  12, paragraphs (c)(5)-(7),                                                               
beginning] on  page 6, line  15.   He noted that  several similar                                                               
amendments  change "person"  to  "resident" in  order to  clarify                                                               
between  residents  and  nonresidents.   The  exceptions  to  the                                                               
change  to "resident"  are a  person under  the age  of 16  years                                                               
[paragraph (c)(1)]  and a  person who  is currently  employed and                                                               
has verifiable proof of employment  in the commercial provider or                                                               
transportation industry and provides  direct services to tourists                                                               
in  Alaska  [paragraph  (c)(8)],  which he  said  is  individuals                                                               
working on cruise  ships and so forth; they  wouldn't be required                                                               
to have this pass.                                                                                                              
Number 0525                                                                                                                     
MR.  POUND said  the only  other  change is  on page  7, line  26                                                               
[paragraph (f)(5)], where the word  "ferry" has been added to the                                                               
list of transportation  modes; he said this "rolls  back in" with                                                               
the Alaska Marine Highway System.                                                                                               
Number 0481                                                                                                                     
CHAIR  FATE asked  whether anyone  wanted to  testify who  hadn't                                                               
testified previously.                                                                                                           
Number 0369                                                                                                                     
BRIAN  PETERSON, Licensed  Master Guide  and Outfitter,  spoke on                                                               
his own behalf.   He began by proposing an  amendment to the bill                                                               
to also  increase the bison  tag fee, suggesting that  fee should                                                               
correlate  directly  with the  current  musk  ox  tag fees.    He                                                               
explained that bison are the  wildlife resource in highest demand                                                               
in  the state,  with approximately  10,000-12,000 applicants  for                                                               
100-130  permits.   Presently,  he  said, that  would  be a  $500                                                               
resident  tag fee,  a $1,100  nonresident tag  fee, and  a $1,600                                                               
nonresident  alien tag  fee.   The system  used to  harvest bison                                                               
would then  be incorporated by  the Board of Game,  he suggested,                                                               
using an alternate system that  is presently already used by [the                                                               
Department  of Fish  and Game  (ADF&G)] in  managing some  of the                                                               
state's brown bear hunts and the musk ox hunt on Nunivak Island.                                                                
MR. PETERSON offered  his belief that this  would benefit Alaskan                                                               
residents because  of the need  to generate revenue;  he surmised                                                               
there'd be no shortage of applicants,  even with the tag fee.  He                                                               
acknowledged that  the bill's title  would have to be  changed if                                                               
this were added, but said  [the bison] isn't a subsistence animal                                                               
because it was  introduced.  Mr. Peterson said musk  ox and bison                                                               
have similar histories  and he feels it would  be very beneficial                                                               
to make this change now.   Offering his understanding that such a                                                               
tag-fee change  can only occur  through statute, he  told members                                                               
that this [bill] is the first  vehicle that has come along in the                                                               
several years since nonresident tag fees were updated.                                                                          
Number 0181                                                                                                                     
MR. PETERSON turned  attention to the bill in  general, saying he                                                               
supports it.   Noting that he is a member  of the Alaskan hunting                                                               
community   and   several    professional   hunting   and   other                                                               
associations in the  state as well as  national and international                                                               
ones, Mr.  Peterson said the  industry has a 100-year  history of                                                               
supporting itself.  He told members:                                                                                            
     Right  now, we  support 80  to 90  percent of  wildlife                                                                    
     management,  harvesting approximately  8 to  12 percent                                                                    
     of the game.   And we will continue to  do that because                                                                    
     we do believe in supporting our industry.                                                                                  
     The one  thing I  do want  to stress  is that  when you                                                                    
     compare  our  nonresident  tag fees  for  some  of  the                                                                    
     animals  that   we're  looking  at,  relative   to  the                                                                    
     Canadian  provinces  that  we  are  having  competition                                                                    
     with,  we  are  beginning to  get  significantly  above                                                                    
     them.   And the  thing you have  to realize,  under the                                                                    
     present system in Title 8,  the product we offer has to                                                                    
     be  better  than what  the  Canadians  are offering  in                                                                    
     order for  us to compete.   The  last thing we  want to                                                                    
     see  is   a  decrease  in  nonresident   use  of  these                                                                    
MR.  PETERSON,  speaking  for  himself   and  not  the  industry,                                                               
although he said  he'd spoken with many members  of the industry,                                                               
spoke in  favor of  funding for the  industry, but  expressed the                                                               
need to have support for his industry and to have enforcement.                                                                  
TAPE 03-24, SIDE A                                                                                                            
Number 0001                                                                                                                     
MR.  PETERSON  expressed  concern  that Title  8  isn't  enforced                                                               
anymore,  and suggested  the need  for a  new assistant  attorney                                                               
general to pursue  wildlife-related crimes.  He said  a few years                                                               
ago 30 to  40 violations weren't prosecuted by  the Department of                                                               
Law  because   of  lack  of   resources.    Although   these  are                                                               
misdemeanors, Mr.  Peterson indicated  each carries  a punishment                                                               
of a year  in jail and $10,000 to $30,000  in fines.  Reiterating                                                               
support for the bill and  surmising that the industry supports it                                                               
as well,  he concluded  by stating the  need for  "enforcement on                                                               
the issues" and saying [Alaska] is  getting out of whack with the                                                               
international industry on these resources.                                                                                      
Number 0140                                                                                                                     
BRAD  PHILLIPS, Owner  and Operator,  Phillips' Cruises  & Tours,                                                               
noted that his company is  in Anchorage and Prince William Sound.                                                               
He began  by questioning  whether the  bill's drafter  knows much                                                               
about the tourism  industry.  Calling the bill  "a deadly thing,"                                                               
Mr.  Phillips  said he  has  been  in  the industry  since  1947,                                                               
helping to  build it and  taking lots of  risks.  In  those early                                                               
days, it was considered a good  year if there were 2,000 visitors                                                               
to Alaska,  whereas there  are more than  1.5 million  visitors a                                                               
year now.   He said:                                                                                                            
     That just didn't happen.   We've been doing most of the                                                                    
     marketing ourselves in  the industry.  And  the last 10                                                                    
     years the  state hasn't helped  very much, and  we have                                                                    
     slipped from  number 3 of  all the 50 states  to number                                                                    
     37 in marketing ... of what we have to sell here.                                                                          
     We've taken  it on  the chin  several times  during ...                                                                    
     this  period   of  time.    The   1964  earthquake  was                                                                    
     devastating, and  we had  no recovery  on that  - also,                                                                    
     the '89  oil spill.   Then when [the  terrorist attacks                                                                    
     of September  11, 2001] came  along, that next  10 days                                                                    
     we   lost   a  quarter   of   a   million  dollars   on                                                                    
     cancellations, and ... most of  our operators in Alaska                                                                    
     were off somewhere between 20  and 25 percent last year                                                                    
     because  people ...  aren't traveling.    And this  war                                                                    
     that came on didn't help:   I've had cancellations from                                                                    
     overseas   clients   constantly  'cause   they're   not                                                                    
     And this  [proposed legislation]:   we've  already sold                                                                    
     three-quarters  or  80  percent  of  our  tickets,  and                                                                    
     there's no way that I can  go back and ask somebody for                                                                    
     $15  more for  their cruise.  ...  I'd lose  all of  my                                                                    
     customers, and  I'm already losing some  tour operators                                                                    
     that, when  they hear about  this ... -- it's  going to                                                                    
     do a lot of damage ....                                                                                                    
MR. PHILLIPS  questioned whether many committee  members had been                                                               
involved in  the tourism industry,  and asked them  to understand                                                               
the  damage from  the proposed  $15  fee.   He concluded,  "We're                                                               
being targeted  for something that  we don't have anything  to do                                                               
with, on that $15 thing.  And  I am absolutely opposed, and so is                                                               
the rest of our industry."                                                                                                      
Number 0370                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked Mr. Phillips  whether his company does                                                               
the glacier cruise.                                                                                                             
MR. PHILLIPS affirmed that.                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  GATTO  asked whether  that  is  usually the  only                                                               
[excursion]  for people  visiting Alaska,  or whether  it may  be                                                               
their second, third, or fourth one.                                                                                             
MR. PHILLIPS said it depends on the tour operator.  He added:                                                                   
     They ...  usually have a  land program, and  we're part                                                                    
     of it.  If there are  people that just fly up - they're                                                                    
     independents  - they  may do  one  or two  things.   If                                                                    
     there are  crewmembers on,  say, Alaska  Airlines, that                                                                    
     want  to  have  a  day   there  and  they  want  to  do                                                                    
     something,  they  come down.    But  there isn't  [one]                                                                    
     answer to that ....                                                                                                        
     And I think  the administration of this  thing would be                                                                    
     a nightmare. ...   We don't sell all  the tickets; they                                                                    
     go through  travel agents  all over  the world  ... and                                                                    
     tour operators, ... and there  isn't any way I can know                                                                    
     who qualifies and who doesn't                                                                                              
Number 0468                                                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked  whether a person who buys  a $15 pass                                                               
wouldn't just have  it, and the person collecting  the charge for                                                               
the trip would see  the pass and would be able  to write down the                                                               
number of the existing pass.                                                                                                    
MR.  PHILLIPS replied  that first  of all,  he wouldn't  sell any                                                               
passes  but  would  let  somebody  else worry  about  that.    He                                                               
disagreed  with Representative  Gatto's perception,  however, and                                                               
said  somebody who'd  booked a  tour in  San Diego,  for example,                                                               
wouldn't be  seen by Mr.  Phillips until they stepped  aboard his                                                               
boat.  Not  all people who go  on the boat are seen  in the sales                                                               
office.  He reiterated that it looks like a nightmare.                                                                          
[Chair Fate  called upon  John Hall, but  he wasn't  available on                                                               
Number 0605                                                                                                                     
ALAN LeMASTER,  Owner, Gakona Junction Village,  noting that he'd                                                               
testified  the previous  week, concurred  with  the testimony  by                                                               
Brad Phillips in opposition to HB 163.                                                                                          
Number 0663                                                                                                                     
LEN  LAURENCE, Mariner  Inc., testified  that he  is a  marketing                                                               
consultant  in tourism  in Ketchikan,  representing  a number  of                                                               
businesses; has  been involved  with the  travel industry  for 35                                                               
years; and is past president  of the Alaska Visitors Association.                                                               
He  specified that  he  was  opposing not  HB  167,  but the  $15                                                               
wildlife conservation pass.  Saying  he would echo the sentiments                                                               
of Brad  Phillips 100  percent, Mr. Laurence  said the  tax poses                                                               
"significant legal, administrative, and policing prohibitions."                                                                 
MR.  LAURENCE  explained  that  this  particular  tax  is  highly                                                               
targeted; will impact  a large segment of  the industry, creating                                                               
adverse  publicity  for  Alaskan tourism  nationwide  because  no                                                               
other state has  a similar viewing fee; and falls  on the tourist                                                               
industry   without  putting   additional  revenue   into  tourism                                                               
marketing.  He concluded by adding  that he, along with others in                                                               
the  travel industry,  isn't opposed  to a  broad-based tax  that                                                               
will  raise  money  for  the state  budget  and,  in  particular,                                                               
tourism marketing.                                                                                                              
[Chair  Fate  called upon  Brien  Salazar,  but was  informed  he                                                               
wasn't available on teleconference.]                                                                                            
Number 0841                                                                                                                     
ROD ARNO  testified that he  has been a licensed  wilderness tour                                                               
guide since  1974 and today  mainly does big-game  hunting tours.                                                               
He spoke  in support of the  bill, but said he  believes it needs                                                               
amendments and  deletions.   Referring to  Section 2,  page 2, he                                                               
mentioned  separate   accounts  and   said  he  believes   it  is                                                               
inappropriate;  instead,   it  should   say  that   the  wildlife                                                               
conservation pass fee  shall be deposited into  the general fund;                                                               
under that,  then, it would  say the legislature  may appropriate                                                               
matching funds out of the general  fund to match the federal CARA                                                               
[Conservation and  Reinvestment Act] money, "which  is similar to                                                               
the Pittman-Robertson  money, which  is hunter money  that's come                                                               
into  the  state before  statehood  to  the  tune of  about  $170                                                               
million for wildlife management to date."                                                                                       
MR. ARNO explained  his reasoning, saying there isn't  a need for                                                               
millions of  additional dollars  to go  to ADF&G  for management.                                                               
He  said the  money that  goes to  management today  from hunters                                                               
hasn't  achieved much.    Asking  what can  be  done to  increase                                                               
viewing,  he mentioned  educational programs  and suggested  CARA                                                               
money  could  certainly take  care  of  that,  "but not  at  that                                                               
MR. ARNO referred to  a survey done in the summer  of 1993 by the                                                               
McDowell [Group].   He indicated it was  entitled "Alaska Visitor                                                               
Expenditures" and was  done with the state's  Division of Tourism                                                               
in what was  then called the Department of  Commerce and Economic                                                               
Development.   Mr. Arno said  the greatest impact to  Alaska from                                                               
this "tourist  industry that  puts very little  back into  it" is                                                               
infrastructure in rural areas.   He reported that the 1993 survey                                                               
showed that three-quarters  of tourists who came to  Alaska - 1.2                                                               
million  - stayed  in  urban  areas doing  day  tours and  salmon                                                               
bakes.  By contrast, 1,200  people [surveyed] took adventures for                                                               
wildlife viewing.   Clearly, Mr.  Arno said, there is  an expense                                                               
to the  state:   "the infrastructure,  the hotels,  the railroad,                                                               
the airport, all of that that  these tourists are using, and that                                                               
there's no money  back to the state  to take care of  these."  He                                                               
said he believes that is more important.                                                                                        
Number 1051                                                                                                                     
MR.  ARNO proposed  having a  resident fee  as well  as a  higher                                                               
nonresident fee  of perhaps $100, for  instance.  As to  the idea                                                               
that  guides who  are "operators  for  watchable wildlife"  don't                                                               
have to  buy the license,  he indicated every [hunting]  guide in                                                               
Alaska has  to buy a  state license,  and also must  purchase and                                                               
carry a  hunting license,  regardless of  whether that  person is                                                               
hunting.   Calling this bill  a step  in the right  direction, he                                                               
reiterated his  concern that  the tourist  industry has  put very                                                               
little into the general fund in the last 10 years.                                                                              
Number 1123                                                                                                                     
CHAIR FATE asked  whether anyone else wished to  testify; he then                                                               
closed  public testimony.   He  announced  that HB  163 would  be                                                               
held over.                                                                                                                      
There being no  further business before the  committee, the House                                                               
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:09 p.m.                                                                 

Document Name Date/Time Subjects