01/29/1998 01:25 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
January 29, 1998
1:25 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bill Hudson, Co-Chairman
Representative Beverly Masek, Vice Chair
Representative Fred Dyson
Representative Joe Green
Representative William K. (Bill) Williams
Representative Reggie Joule
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Scott Ogan, Co-Chairman
Representative Ramona Barnes
Representative Irene Nicholia
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
* HOUSE BILL NO. 296
"An Act extending the termination date of the Alaska Minerals
Commission."
- MOVED HB 296 OUT OF COMMITTEE
* HOUSE BILL NO. 285
"An Act relating to suspension or revocation of commercial fishing
permits and privileges."
- HEARD AND HELD
* SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 49
Relating to opposition to a moratorium on the building of roads in
the roadless areas of national forests.
- MOVED CSSSHJR 49(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 296
SHORT TITLE: EXTEND ALASKA MINERALS COMMISSION
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) BRICE, Therriault, Davies
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/12/98 2022 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/2/98
01/12/98 2022 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/12/98 2022 (H) RESOURCES
01/29/98 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
BILL: HB 285
SHORT TITLE: POINT SYSTEM FOR COMMERCIAL FISH VIOLATIO
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) IVAN
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
05/10/97 1807 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
05/10/97 1807 (H) RESOURCES, JUDICIARY
01/29/98 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
BILL: HJR 49
SHORT TITLE: NAT'L FOREST ROAD-BUILDING MORATORIUM
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) WILLIAMS, Austerman, Hodgins,
Hudson
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/20/98 2088 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/20/98 2088 (H) RESOURCES
01/23/98 2113 (H) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE
INTRODUCED-REFERRALS
01/26/98 2141 (H) COSPONSOR(S): HUDSON
01/29/98 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE TOM BRICE
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 426
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-3466
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 296.
MARY NORDALE, Chairman
Alaska's Miners Association - Fairbanks Branch
100 Cushman Street
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
Telephone: (907) 452-1666
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HB 296.
JULES TILESTON, Director
Division of Mining and Water Management
Department of Natural Resources
3601 C Street, Suite 800
Anchorage, Alaska 99503-5935
Telephone: (907) 269-8600
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HB 296.
REPRESENTATIVE IVAN M. IVAN
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 418
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-4942
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 285.
BRUCE TWOMLEY, Chairman
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
Department of Fish and Game
8800 Glacier Highway, Suite 109
Juneau, Alaska 99801-8079
Telephone: (907) 789-6160
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HB 285.
JOHN GLASS, Colonel, Director
Division of Fish and Wildlife Protection
Department of Public Safety
5700 East Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99507-1225
Telephone: (907) 269-5509
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HB 285.
ED CRANE, President
Alaska Commercial Fishing and Agriculture Bank
P.O. Box 92070
Anchorage, Alaska 99509
Telephone: (907) 276-2007
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HB 285.
MIKE FRICERRO, Fisherman
P.O. Box 2187
Kodiak, Alaska 99615
Telephone: (907) 486-5942
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HB 285.
MARK E. ANGASON, Commercial Fisherman
P.O. Box 532
King Salmon, Alaska 99613
Telephone: (907) 246-7483
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony on HB 285.
JOE McGILL, President
Bristol Bay Herring Marketing Cooperative
P.O. Box 2452
Dillingham, Alaska 99576
Telephone: (907) 842-2452
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to HB 285.
JERRY McCUNE, Representative
United Fishermen of Alaska;
President, Cordova District Fishermen United
P.O. Box 372
Cordova, Alaska 99574
Telephone: (907) 424-7488
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony on HB 285.
BUCK LINDEKUGEL, Conservation Director
Southeast Alaska Conservation Council
419 6th Street, Suite 328
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 586-6942
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to HJR 49.
RACHAEL MORELAND, Representative
Alaska Forest Association, Inc.
111 Stedman Street, Suite 200
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901-6599
Telephone: (907) 225-6114
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HJR 49.
DICK COOSE, Representative
Concerned Alaskans for Resources and Environment
P.O. Box 9266
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Telephone: (907) 247-9266
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HJR 49.
MIKE WILLIAMS, Vice President
Chugach Alaska Corporation
540 East 34th Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Telephone: (907) 563-8866
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of HJR 49.
SCOTT ANAYA, Alaskan Sportsman
8120 Lakonia Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99516
Telephone: (907) 348-0436
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to HJR 49.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 98-3, SIDE A
Number 0001
CO-CHAIRMAN BILL HUDSON called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:25 p.m. Members present at the
call to order were Representatives Hudson, Masek, Dyson, Green and
Williams. Representative Joule arrived at 1:30 p.m.
HB 296 - EXTEND ALASKA MINERALS COMMISSION
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON announced the first order of business was House
Bill No. 296, "An Act extending the termination date of the Alaska
Minerals Commission."
Number 0187
REPRESENTATIVE TOM BRICE, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of HB
296, explained the bill is a simple extension of the sunset date
for the Alaska Minerals Commission. In 1997, the mineral industry
invested close to $1.1 billion in extraction, exploration and
further development in the state. The mineral resources are the
state's wealth. The Alaska Minerals Commission makes
recommendations to the legislature and Governor concerning problems
and issues. The report is commonly used as a guide when
introducing legislation. Currently, he noted there is a 23 percent
increase in investment in the minerals industry in the state. The
bill calls for a five year sunset which is normal for a commission
of this magnitude.
Number 0347
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN asked Representative Brice whether the
Alaska Minerals Commission acts in any other manner, other than
data dispersement and assemblage. He asked whether the commission
has a permitting or regulatory function and whether the commission
advocates for mineral development where there are oppressive type
rules and regulations.
Number 0383
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE replied the Alaska Minerals Commission does
not participate in the regulatory process. It does advocate for
legislative changes in terms of onerous rules that the industry
could face, however. For instance, the commission recommended that
the state freeze a permit when a project was placed under
injunction by a court, a bill introduced by Representative Brice
last year. It also advocates for programs such as airborne
geophysical mapping that has led to a boom in exploration in the
Interior of the state.
Number 0535
REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY MASEK commended the sponsor for the bill.
It is pretty straight forward and easy to read.
Number 0584
MARY NORDALE, Chairman, Alaska's Miners Association - Fairbanks
Branch (AMA), testified via teleconference in Fairbanks. She
expressed her deep appreciation to Representative Brice, Therriault
and Davies for introducing HB 296. The Alaska Minerals Commission
is a very important body because it provides (indis.) branch
between government and the industry. The mining community supports
and respects the commission. It has been very helpful to the
general public and to the government of Alaska.
Number 0662
JULES TILESTON, Director, Division of Mining and Water Management,
Department of Natural Resources, testified via teleconference in
Anchorage. The division supports HB 296. Simply, the commission
does good work. It identifies mining related issues that promotes
responsible mining, encourages streamlining, and enhances the
Governor's theme - open for business.
Number 0745
REPRESENTATIVE MASEK made a motion to move HB 296, version 0-
LS1176\A, from the committee with individual recommendations and
the attached zero fiscal note. There being no objection, HB 296
moved from the House Resources Standing Committee.
HB 285 - POINT SYSTEM FOR COMMERCIAL FISH VIOLATIO
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON announced the next order of business was House
Bill No. 285, "An Act relating to suspension or revocation of
commercial fishing permits and privileges."
Number 0795
REPRESENTATIVE IVAN M. IVAN, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of
HB 285, explained there have been violations from the Bristol Bay
side of the commercial fishery causing concerns and recommendations
to address the problem. He read the following sponsor statement
into the record:
"This bill was introduced to address concerns of illegal fishing
activities committed by commercial fishers throughout my district
and other commercial fishing communities throughout Alaska. It has
been said that some of these illegal activities become a philosophy
among some fishers as the 'cost of doing business' should they be
convicted for such activities.
"The intent of this legislation before you is to establish a point
system against a commercial fishing permit for a conviction of a
violation of commercial fishing laws found under AS 16.05.723.
Should 12 or more points be assessed against a permit during any
consecutive 48 month period as a result of convictions of
violations, the Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission would then be
given the authority to suspend the permit. The same is true for an
accumulation of 16 or more points during any consecutive 60 month
period. The commission would be able to revoke an entry or interim
use permit if 18 or more points are accumulated during any
consecutive 72 month period. And to encourage lawful fishing, two
points will be deducted from the total points assessed against a
permit if the permit holder is not convicted of a violation of
commercial fishing laws during a 12 month period after the date of
the last violation.
"The bill outlines the suspension and revocation process, the
notice and appeal process and the notification to the commission by
the Department of Public Safety and the Court System.
"Any points accumulated for commercial fishing violations will be
assessed against the permit not the permit holder. Should the
permit holder decide to transfer or sell the permit, all the points
accumulated by the permit holder will stay with the permit thus
providing a disincentive for a permit holder to transfer a permit
should it be subject to suspension or revocation."
Number 1006
REPRESENTATIVE IVAN explained, after introducing the legislation
last spring, the bill was changed to place points against the
person rather than the permit to alleviate problems during the
revocation process. This was the result of discussions between
Ivan's staff, the Alaska Commercial Fishing and Agriculture Bank
(CFAB), the Division of Investments, and the Commercial Fisheries
Entry Commission. The main intent remains the same, however.
REPRESENTATIVE IVAN further explained the original bill was drafted
to aggressively arrive at a violation point system and fine to
eliminate illegal fishing. This was not fair to commercial fishers
who try to make the most out of fishing activities, lawfully. In
addition, concerns in regard to default loans and lending
institutions to encourage lawful fishing will be addressed later by
CFAB. Representative Ivan further stated it is important to keep
the fishing permits in the state as much as possible and to
minimize the opportunity for outsiders to buy permits. It is also
important to make opportunities equal for commercial fishing while
trying to stop illegal fishing. There is a statute that addresses
the issue but the fines are not enough to keep legal fishing
lucrative.
Number 1249
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked Representative Ivan whether the increase
in fines would cover the additional cost of enforcement. He also
asked how enforcement would be changed for violators. He supported
the bill, but was concerned about the increase in litigation that
would result.
Number 1300
REPRESENTATIVE IVAN replied representatives from the enforcement
side were here to respond to those types of questions.
Number 1309
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON announced the bill would not pass out of
committee today. The intention is to try to understand the
elements of the bill. The sponsor will probably come back with a
substitute to reflect the concern of applying the violation to the
person as opposed to the permit.
Number 1398
BRUCE TWOMLEY, Chairman, Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission,
Department of Fish and Game, stated the commission is intrigued by
HB 285 because the idea emanated from local Bristol Bay fishermen.
The idea is consistent with limited entry policies. The commission
administers fishing privileges while the state reserves the right
to revoke the privileges when conservation laws are not observed.
There might be some cost, as Representative Green noted, for
administering the bill. The commission is trying to get some
definite information from the court system. It will present a
fiscal note upon reviewing the bill as it evolves into a committee
substitute.
Number 1457
REPRESENTATIVE FRED DYSON asked Mr. Twomley what would happen if a
permit was revoked and there is an outstanding balance on the loan.
Number 1469
MR. TWOMLEY replied the current bill addresses the issue. There
would be an opportunity for the lending institutions to be
protected if there was a foreclosure.
Number 1484
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked Mr. Twomley how the commission would
handle the subterfuge of transferring a permit to a deck hand when
it reached 10 points, for example.
Number 1510
MR. TWOMLEY replied the commission is prepared to handle that type
of subterfuge. The question, however, frames the basic issue about
the bill - whether the points should be assessed against the
individual or permit. If the points are assessed against the
individual, it would address the subterfuge problem and make it
easier for the commission to administer. It would be easier to
track an individual rather than a permit.
Number 1557
JOHN GLASS, Colonel, Director, Division of Fish and Wildlife
Protection, Department of Public Safety, stated HB 285 came from a
request of Bristol Bay fishermen to put the chronic offender out of
business. The division strongly supports the bill because it would
aid and assist the division. The division's original intent was to
assess points against the permit thereby making it less valuable
and setting a higher value on the cost of doing business. However,
after discussions with Representative Ivan and staff members, the
division would be willing to work out the best solution.
Number 1611
COLONEL GLASS further stated, in reference to Representative
Green's question, the division does not feel that the bill would
impact them fiscally. There would be an impact on the court
system, however, because there would be more litigation.
Number 1642
REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE JOULE asked Colonel Glass whether there has
been any thought given to penalizing both the permit and the
individual.
Number 1678
COLONEL GLASS replied he has not given the idea any thought, nor
has the idea been a part of any discussions today.
Number 1689
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON stated for the record he is a Bristol Bay
permit holder and has been busted twice in the last twenty-five
years. He never knew, however, whether he was guilty or not.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON further stated he supports strong enforcement
and all the necessary deterrents to keep from fishing "over the
line" deliberately. "What has disturbed me is it didn't seem to me
in the past that the court fines were significantly different for
a group of boats that were fishing middle-bluff in the middle of
the night with no lights, and those who had an equipment failure or
got gear in the prop and drifted over the line as they were
desperately trying to fix it." The process has not been able to
differentiate between conspirators and bad seamanship or equipment
failure. He asked Colonel Glass whether there is a way to work on
that end of the problem.
Number 1753
COLONEL GLASS replied the division has been attempting to increase
its efficiency and effectiveness in regards to the "lines" in
Bristol Bay. The division is constantly and consistently changing
its approach to business at the request of the fishers that
participate there. "We're not perfect, but we're trying to respond
to what their needs are to try to resolve that problem." In
response to the courts, the judges have full authority to hear the
stories and make decisions justly. The division just presents the
cases to the judges. Discussions have been held with magistrates
in the Bristol Bay area and headway has been made.
Number 1794
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON stated the last time that he got busted he did
not know about it until he returned to Anchorage where a state
trooper stopped him to tell him a picture had been taken of him
fishing over the line. There was no way he could recapture what
went on that day in terms of the tide. He asked Colonel Glass
whether the division would be doing those types of things in the
future.
Number 1822
COLONEL GLASS replied the division is trying all different sorts of
things to resolve the over-the-line fishing problem. He would not
say the division would not do that again because it might.
Hopefully, the division would be more effective in getting a notice
to him sooner. There are good ways to keep track of the tides,
however.
Number 1846
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON stated he appreciated the stealth operations
of the division. He would like to modify the laws to help the
division deal with intentional violations.
Number 1876
COLONEL GLASS replied the division thinks HB 285 is a step in the
right direction to help address those types of problems and
concerns.
Number 1908
ED CRANE, President, Alaska Commercial Fishing and Agriculture Bank
(CFAB) testified via teleconference in Anchorage. The bank is one
of only two entities with statutory authority to put a lien on
limited entry permits and to secure loans on pledges of limited
entry permits. The bank is very much in favor of the purpose of HB
285. The bank has discussed with Representative Ivan's office the
unintended consequences of the bill as structured in regards to
liens, and it is understood that the issue will be taken care of by
attaching points to the individual rather than the permit. The
intent of the bill is to get after the scofflaws and remove them
from the fisheries. In addition, attaching points to individuals
would take care of the issues of repeated transfers between
individuals, fisheries, and selling a permit with points and buying
a permit with no points.
Number 2206
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON announced HB 285 will be heard again when it
more accurately reflects the interest of the parties involved.
Number 2222
MIKE FRICERRO, Fisherman, testified via teleconference in Kodiak.
He operates the fishing vessel "Rainy Dawn." He has been fishing
in Egegik at the line for approximately 15 years with no
violations. He supports HB 285 and its intent. It would be a big
deterrent for the group of violators that he is accustomed to
watching. It would be even more effective with the modifications
mentioned earlier. He would like to see a differentiation between
intentional violations and bad judgements. He would also like to
see the problems with the loran system improve, otherwise it puts
the enforcement personnel at a disadvantage. In addition, he would
like to add a transfer period for district registration as a point
violation and a warning for the first violation for both gear and
boat markings. Lastly, he would like to see the appeals process
address a prior record and intent before suspending a license.
Number 2400
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON thanked Mr. Fricerro for his constructive
suggestions.
Number 2413
MARK E. ANGASON, Commercial Fisherman, testified via teleconference
in Naknek. He wrote a letter to Colonel Glass suggesting a point
system against the boat and permit because the violations were
getting worse.
TAPE 98-3, SIDE B
Number 0000
MR. ANGASON continued by stating the burden of fishing illegally
should be placed upon the fishermen themselves. He would like to
see a point system placed against the boat and individual, if it is
not placed against the permit. Generally, illegal fishing is to
help make a boat payment. "Well, it isn't my problem that they
have such a huge boat payment, but that's the reason for them
saying that they got to go over the line to catch more fish." It
is wrong and the boat should be taken out of the fishery. Whatever
is decided he would support, as-long-as, the points are severe
enough to deter a person from fishing illegally.
Number 0050
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON stated it was an interesting thought to place a
detriment on a boat or equipment.
Number 0066
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON suggested to the committee members to look at
Mr. Angason's written suggestions on modifying the violation point
system. They are reasonable and worth paying attention to.
Number 0094
JOE McGILL, President, Bristol Bay Herring Marketing Cooperative,
testified via teleconference in Dillingham. He has been fishing in
Bristol Bay for fifty seasons without a violation. He does not
mean he is incapable of getting one. He is opposed to HB 285. It
is aimed strictly at Bristol Bay when some of the worst violations
are in Area M. In addition, the mandatory points/regulations just
mean a lot more litigation when the legislature should really fund
more money for enforcement. More enforcement would allow for more
fines to be collected eventually paying for itself.
Number 0160
JERRY McCUNE, Representative, United Fishermen of Alaska;
President, Cordova District Fishermen United, cautioned the haste
to regulate one fishery when other fisheries are different. In
response to attaching a violation to a boat, some are worth
$100,000, some are worth $50,000, while some are worth $500,000.
"I wouldn't get too hasty on looking at that one." Points should
be attached to an individual noting whether or not he or she has a
permit. In response to multiple permit holders, an individual
would have to choose between fisheries, unless it was in somebody
else's name. Therefore, he would like to see the points stuck to
the fishery where the violation occurred.
MR. McCUNE referred the committee members to page 2, line 3,
subsection (b), "(1) fishing in closed waters - 6 points," and
stated the violation needs to be clarified more. There are closed
waters, line fisheries, and moving lines. For example, in Prince
William Sound there are three different lines around a hatchery.
MR. McCUNE referred the committee members to page 2, line 3,
subsection (b), "(3) fishing with more than the legal amount of
gear - 6 points," and stated in some areas gear is hung by someone
else.
MR. McCUNE referred the committee members to page 2, line 3,
subsection (b), "(6) fishing with more than the legal amount of
gear on vessel - 4 points," and stated it is obvious when people
are fishing with more gear than necessary.
MR. McCUNE stated he was primarily concerned with Prince William
Sound where people hang their gear and suggested a warning rather
than a six-point violation. He announced he would work with the
sponsor to ensure the bill addresses the issues statewide, not just
one area.
Number 0310
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON reiterated it is not his intention to move HB
285 from the committee today. More work is needed.
Number 0325
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked Co-Chairman Hudson, if the bill was
written so that the points accrued against an individual, would the
individual be able to fish as a crew member on a different boat or
his or her own boat.
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON replied it is an important distinction and needs
to be addressed. He suggested putting all concerns and questions
into writing and forwarding them to the prime sponsor of the bill.
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON announced HB 285 will be held over for further
consideration.
SSHJR 49 - NAT'L FOREST ROAD-BUILDING MORATORIUM
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON announced the next order of business was Sponsor
Substitute for House Joint Resolution No. 49, Relating to
opposition to a moratorium on the building of roads in the roadless
areas of national forests.
Number 0400
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON explained there was a committee substitute and
asked for a motion to adopt it.
Number 0407
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to adopt proposed committee
substitute for SSHJR 49, version 0-LS1402\B, Luckhaupt, 1/28/98,
for discussion. There being no objection, it was before the
committee.
Number 0415
REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS, sponsor of SSHJR 49, read the
following statement into the record:
"The Forest Service recently announced a sweeping two-year
moratorium on development of 'roadless' areas of national forests.
Although the announced 'land freeze' appears to have exempted the
Tongass National Forest from the policy, that is not necessarily
the case.
"The public has 30 days to comment on the roadless policy, after
which the Tongass could be included in the moratorium. Also, the
Chief of the Forest Service, Mike Dombeck, has said that the final
long term policy will apply to all forests.
"The resolution speaks to the inappropriate manner in which the
White House is dictating management of our national forests. The
Forest Service has turned the public process upside down by
announcing their policy first, then searching for scientific
evidence to support their position and reaching out for public
participation.
"The resolution also speaks to the Tongass Land Management Plan.
We spent over 10 years and $13 million dollars revising how we
manage the Tongass. It would be wrong to come back later with
unilateral amendments which alter the balance struck in the plan.
"I urge your swift passage of the resolution, as the 30 day public
comment clock is ticking."
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS stated there are a lot of things in the
plan that have not been looked at, in particular, a socioeconomic
study for the residents in Southeast Alaska.
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON called on the first witness to testify.
Number 0521
BUCK LINDEKUGEL, Conservation Director, Southeast Alaska
Conservation Council (SEACC), stated SEACC opposes the resolution.
He explained SEACC was founded in 1970 as a coalition of 15
volunteer citizen groups in 12 different Southeast communities.
The council is dedicated to preserving the integrity of Southeast
Alaska's unsurpassed natural environment while providing for
sustainable use of its remarkable resources. The council does not
believe that the 1997 Tongass Land Management Plan (TLMP) is a
reason to exempt it from the roadless policy. The forest service
has failed to meaningfully consider a range of alternatives that
address the needs of local communities in Southeast to protect the
areas in terms of subsistence, recreation and commercial use of
fish and wildlife. He cited the following areas: Cleveland
Peninsula, Port Houghton/Cape Fanshaw, East Kuiu Island, Poison
Cove/Ushk Bay, Upper Tenakee Inlet, and Castle River. The roadless
area moratorium would not prejudge the ongoing TLMP appeal because
there is a substantial amount of suitable and available timber
scheduled under the plan within a mile of the existing road system.
It would not require expensive or environmentally damaging roads.
The council believes the forest service should adjust its timber
planning activities to take advantage of providing the timber needs
of the transforming timber industry in Southeast Alaska.
MR. LINDEKUGEL cited in 1996 the industry cut only 100 million
board feet (mmbf). In 1997 the industry cut about 109 mmbf. At
the same time, the forest service authorized for export 113 mmbf of
cedar, spruce and hemlock logs from the Tongass National Forest.
There is plenty of timber in the pipeline that could be used by the
industry as the forest service goes through its transformation.
MR. LINDEKUGEL stated, in conclusion, a strong moratorium is
consistent with SEACC's vision for the development of a new Tongass
National Forest timber industry. It would put Alaskans to work
making products from Alaskan wood instead of exporting timber and
jobs to the Pacific Northwest or Asia. The industry would also be
compatible with the long-term use and supply of fish and wildlife
resources for subsistence, recreation and commerce in Southeast
Alaska.
Number 0765
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked Mr. Lindekugel, according to his
understanding, whether the resolution would apply directly to the
Chugach National Forest.
MR. LINDEKUGEL replied, "Correct."
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked Mr. Lindekugel, according to his
understanding, whether the Tongass National Forest would be exempt.
MR. LINDEKUGEL replied, according to his understanding, the Tongass
National Forest would be exempt from the moratorium by rule. The
forest service is taking comments on that portion of the rule for
the next 30 days.
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON stated, therefore, it is not conclusive whether
the moratorium would or would not apply to the Tongass.
MR. LINDEKUGEL stated an announcement excluding the nation's
largest national forest is a pretty strong indication of where the
forest service will end up. It is not final at this point,
however.
Number 0829
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS stated, in regards to the testimony of 100
and 109 mmbf, he lives in Ketchikan and Saxman and works as a
longshoreman. He is aware of the amount of work going on in the
timber industry today. The sawmill in Ketchikan last year ran for
only four months. There were jobs for only four months. And there
were fewer jobs in Metlakatla. Therefore, the amount of 100 mmbf
is totally bogus. It is agreeable that the TLMP is not complete
because a socioeconomic study has not been done. And, as a result,
the Southeast is feeling it today where 83 percent of timber
receipts have been cut.
Number 0921
MR. LINDEKUGEL replied, according to SEACC, there is sufficient
timber under contract right now for operators. There is over 500
mmbf that will be going to the mills during the next several years.
Therefore, the impact of the moratorium would be negligible on the
industry. In addition, the industry is going through a tremendous
transformation, and SEACC is trying to work with operators who are
interested in avoiding controversial areas.
Number 0971
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON stated a company would not build a new road if
it did not have to. "We don't want a moratorium on building new
roads when it is clearly, economically, in the best interest of
getting to good, harvestable timber." A blanket moratorium would
stifle even legitimate economic opportunities.
Number 1015
MR. LINDEKUGEL replied road credits are subsidized by federal tax
payers. Therefore, there will always be concern nationwide about
how much money is used to subsidize development.
Number 1049
RACHAEL MORELAND, Representative, Alaska Forest Association, Inc.,
testified via teleconference in Ketchikan and read the following
statement into the record:
"The forest products industry in Southeast Alaska is heavily
dependent upon the purchase of timber from the Tongass National
Forest. The Tongass Land Management Plan Revision of 1997 has
greatly reduced the land within the Tongass that is available for
timber harvest from 1.7 million acres to a mere 676,000 acres, and
the maximum average annual allowable sales quantity from 520
million board feet (mmbf) to 267 mmbf. This is considerably below
the amount the industry needs to sustain the remaining mills in the
region. The promises made by Congress in 1990, at the time the
Tongass Timber Reform Act was made law, that sufficient volume
would be made available to sustain direct timber employment in
Southeast Alaska have now proven to be hollow.
"The impact on southeast Alaska of the reduced harvest of Tongass
timber has been drastic. Thousands of jobs have been lost through
mill closures, and Federal payments to communities in the form of
timber receipts have fallen to a tiny fraction of what they were
previously. Recently released data indicate that timber receipts
this year will be down by 83 percent compared to last year. This
money is used for schools and road maintenance, so the decline
hurts all the residents of the region.
"Now comes the Clinton Administration with its proposed roadless
moratorium. This policy is being superimposed upon the National
Forest System in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act
and the National Forest Management Act, both of which require a
public process, not unilateral government actions unrelated to
sound science and public review. The government's new roadless
policy is top-down management of the worst sort. It subverts
public process and asserts a political strategy in place of sound,
scientific, professional forest management. It is bad public
policy and is aimed only at promoting the radical environmental
agenda of stopping all logging on federal land. The much-touted
'exemption' for the Tongass and other Western forests is not, in
fact, an exemption, but an announcement that the policy will be
applied through a different mechanism; that is, through forest plan
amendments.
"The recent TLMP revision took more than 10 years to write and cost
the taxpayers more than $13 million. It includes protection of
some 90 percent of the roadless areas remaining on the Tongass.
The Chugach Land Management Plan revision is just beginning, and
the Chugach National Forest is more than 98 percent roadless.
Application of the new roadless policy to the Chugach amounts to
predetermining the plan revision in the direction of no development
at all. Among other consequences, this will effectively prevent
the Forest Service from addressing the growing spruce bark beetle
devastation through active forest management. In the case of both
Alaska national forests, the roadless policy is unnecessary and
very harmful to Alaska's economic future.
"The estimated impact on the Tongass timber program is 202.5 mmbf
per year over the life of the plan. Given an Allowable Sale
Quantity of 267 mmbf, and expected offerings of around 200 mmbf, it
doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that this would
finally spell the end to industrial logging in the Tongass.
Furthermore, full implementation of the roadless policy (whether
through direct application or through a plan amendment) will
immediately result in a further reduction in timber receipts -
amounting to as much as $2.5 million in FY98. Alaska simply cannot
afford this government boondoggle into anti-development politics.
"In short, the government's proposed roadless policy is bad for
national forests, bad for the American public, and particularly bad
for Alaska. The Alaska Forest Association urges the legislature to
take immediate action to protest this terrible public policy by
quickly passing House Joint Resolution 49. We should send a
message to the Clinton Administration on behalf of Alaskans and on
behalf of our counterparts in other states, that the Alaska people
will not tolerate the Administration's attempts to force a radical
agenda upon the people of this state and of this country."
Number 1340
DICK COOSE, Representative, Concerned Alaskans for Resources and
Environment (CARE), testified via teleconference in Ketchikan. He
stated CARE wants responsible access to economic development of
Alaska's natural resources, therefore, it strongly supports HJR 49.
Political medaling of the Clinton Administration of our national
forests needs to stop. It is causing economic disaster in many
communities that rely upon national forest resources for
livelihoods.
MR. COOSE recommended including language in the resolution to
prevent any moratorium on any national forest in the United States.
In addition, he suggested inserting an additional "WHEREAS" on page
2, line 8, that reads, "the proposed moratorium would eliminate the
timber industry that remains on many national forests to nearly
zero." He also suggested inserting the language "or any national
forest land management plan" on page 2, line 19 after the word
"Plan".
Number 1495
MIKE WILLIAMS, Vice President, Chugach Alaska Corporation (CAC),
testified via teleconference in Anchorage. The CAC supports HJR
49. The CAC is currently trying to build a road across Chugach
National Forest land to access lands given to the corporation under
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in the Copper River
area. The CAC owns approximately one million acres of land of
which 40 percent requires road access across forest service lands.
Therefore, the CAC is very concerned that the moratorium on no new
roads would kill or delay plans.
MR. WILLIAMS further stated the roadless policy would frustrate the
intent of ANCSA and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation
Act (ANILCA) resulting in costly and timely appeals. The forest
service is already subverting its own planning regulations under
Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations which require the
agency to solicit tribal and Alaskan Native input on all planning
processes that impact the management of Native and Indian owned
lands.
MR. WILLIAMS further stated the roadless policy would restrict the
CAC from developing its resources valued in excess of $1 billion,
a payroll value worth $250 million. It would also impact revenues
statewide due to ANCSA's sharing provision between Native
corporations.
MR. WILLIAMS further stated the actions of the forest service have
been developed in a vacuum. The forest service has forgotten that
its policies impact in-holders and adjacent landowners. Ninety-
eight percent of the Chugach National Forest is inventoried as
roadless and virtually all of its roadless area is either within or
adjacent to conservation units which would result in automatic
lock-ups of almost the entire national forest under the proposed
roadless policy.
MR. WILLIAMS further stated, in conclusion, with so much of the
Chugach National Forest and the state of Alaska already protected
and in a roadless condition, there is no need for this policy in
Alaska.
Number 1660
SCOTT ANAYA, Alaskan Sportsman, testified via teleconference in
Anchorage. He stated roads are an irreversible impact and there is
sound science that indicates roads negatively impact the fish and
wildlife. Fish and wildlife are a far more lasting and long-term
investment for Alaskan families, businesses and economies that
thrive on them. The roadless policy would allow other types of
logging without the irreversible damage or roads. For example, on
the Kenai Peninsula, the brown bears have lost 70 percent of their
habitat. There has not been a fall brown bear hunt for the past
three or four years. And, in addition, thousands of dollars are
being spent to study the impact of logging roads on the world-class
fishing streams. This is an example of the cost that logging roads
would bring to the Tongass National Forest and Alaska.
Number 1776
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS asked Mr. Coose to fax his recommendations
to him. He would like to move the resolution out of the House
Resources Standing Committee today. He would consider
recommendations either on the floor of the House of Representatives
or the Senate.
Number 1814
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to move the proposed committee
substitute for SSHJR 49, version 0-LS1402\B, Luckhaupt, 1/28/98,
from the committee with individual recommendations and attached
zero fiscal note. There being no objection, CSSSHJR 49(RES) moved
from the House Resources Standing Committee.
Number 1859
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON announced he was trying to arrange a
presentation by the Exxon Valdez Trustee organization. He was
interested in an overview of where the $900 million account rests
today.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 1940
CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON adjourned the House Resources Standing Committee
meeting at 2:52 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|