04/13/2017 05:00 PM House RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HJR9 | |
| HB211 | |
| HB177 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 197 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 211 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 217 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 218 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HJR 9 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 177 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 13, 2017
5:02 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Andy Josephson, Co-Chair
Representative Geran Tarr, Co-Chair
Representative Dean Westlake, Vice Chair
Representative Harriet Drummond
Representative Justin Parish
Representative Chris Birch
Representative DeLena Johnson
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative George Rauscher
Representative David Talerico
Representative Mike Chenault (alternate)
Representative Chris Tuck (alternate)
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Representative Jennifer Johnston
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 9
Urging the United States government to continue to work with the
government of Canada to investigate the long-term, region-wide
downstream effects of proposed and existing industrial
development and to develop measures to ensure that state
resources are not harmed by upstream development in British
Columbia.
- MOVED CSHJR 9(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 211
"An Act requiring a nonresident to be accompanied by a guide or
resident spouse or relative when hunting certain caribou; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 177
"An Act relating to the response to, and control of, aquatic
invasive species; establishing the aquatic invasive species
response fund; and relating to the provision of information
about aquatic invasive species to users of the Alaska marine
highway system."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 197
"An Act relating to the duties of the commissioner of natural
resources; relating to agriculture; and relating to community
seed libraries."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 217
"An Act relating to the Alaska Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act;
relating to the sale of milk, milk products, raw milk, and raw
milk products; and providing for an effective date."
- BILL HEARING POSTPONED
HOUSE BILL NO. 218
"An Act relating to the state veterinarian and to animals and
animal products."
- BILL HEARING POSTPONED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HJR 9
SHORT TITLE: CANADIAN MINES ON TRANSBOUNDARY RIVERS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) ORTIZ
01/30/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/30/17 (H) FSH, RES
03/16/17 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
03/16/17 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/28/17 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
03/28/17 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/30/17 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
03/30/17 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/06/17 (H) FSH AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
04/06/17 (H) Moved CSHJR 9(FSH) Out of Committee
04/06/17 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
04/07/17 (H) FSH RPT CS(FSH) 3DP 2NR 2AM
04/07/17 (H) DP: KREISS-TOMKINS, TARR, STUTES
04/07/17 (H) NR: CHENAULT, FANSLER
04/07/17 (H) AM: EASTMAN, NEUMAN
04/10/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/10/17 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/12/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/12/17 (H) Heard & Held
04/12/17 (H) MINUTE(RES)
04/13/17 (H) RES AT 5:00 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 211
SHORT TITLE: NONRESIDENT HUNTING REQUIREMENTS: CARIBOU
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) WESTLAKE
04/05/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/05/17 (H) RES
04/12/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/12/17 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
04/13/17 (H) RES AT 5:00 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 177
SHORT TITLE: AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) TARR
03/14/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/14/17 (H) RES, FIN
04/05/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/05/17 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
04/07/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/07/17 (H) Heard & Held
04/07/17 (H) MINUTE(RES)
04/10/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/10/17 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/12/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/12/17 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
04/13/17 (H) RES AT 5:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
JODE SPARKS, Spokesperson
Alaska Youth for Environmental Action
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 9.
TONY GALLEGOF, Director
Cultural and Natural Resources
Ketchikan Indian Community
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 9.
FREDERICK OLSEN JR, Chairman
United Tribal Transboundary Mining Work Group; Tribal Vice
President
Organized Village of Kasaan
Kasaan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 9.
BRIAN LYNCH, Spokesperson
Rivers Without Borders
Petersburg, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 9.
KAREN MATTHIAS, Executive Director
Council of Alaska Producers
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HJR 9.
GRAHAM NEALE
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HJR 9.
LAURA STATS
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 9.
GUY ARCHIBALD, Coordinator
Mining and Clean Water
Southeast Alaska Conservation Council
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 9.
DEANTHA CROCKETT, Executive Director
Alaska Miners Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HJR 9.
JILL WEITZ, Spokesperson
Salmon Beyond Borders
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing of
HJR 9.
BRUCE DALE, Director
Division of Wildlife Conservation
Alaska Department of Fish & Game
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing of HB
211.
REGGIE JOULE
Kotzebue, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 211.
PAUL (CHRIS) MCKEE, Supervisor
Wildlife Division
Office of Subsistence Management
Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Department of the Interior
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HB 211.
AL BARRETTE
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing of HB 211.
MARK RICHARDS, Executive Director
Resident Hunters of Alaska
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 211.
JAKE JACOBSON
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 211.
TIM STALLARD, Chairperson
Alaska Committee for Noxious and Invasive Pest Management
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 177.
ARTHUR KEYES, Director
Division of Agriculture
Department of Natural Resources
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered a question during the hearing of
HB 177.
MICHAEL NEUSSL, Deputy Commissioner
Alaska Marine Highway System
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing of HB
177.
TAMMY DAVIS, Invasive Species Coordinator
Alaska Department of Fish & Game
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing of HB
211.
ACTION NARRATIVE
5:02:43 PM
CO-CHAIR ANDY JOSEPHSON called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting back to order at 5:02 p.m. Representatives
Josephson, Birch, Parish, Westlake, and Tarr were present at the
call to order. Representatives Drummond and Johnson arrived as
the meeting was in progress. Also present was Representative
Johnston.
The meeting was a continuation of the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting recessed at 3:14 p.m., on 4/12/17.
HJR 9-CANADIAN MINES ON TRANSBOUNDARY RIVERS
5:03:21 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 9, Urging the United States
government to continue to work with the government of Canada to
investigate the long-term, region-wide downstream effects of
proposed and existing industrial development and to develop
measures to ensure that state resources are not harmed by
upstream development in British Columbia. [Before the committee
was CSHJR 9(FSH), Version J].
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON said invited testimony on HJR 9 was heard
4/12/17, and opened public testimony.
5:03:49 PM
JODE SPARKS, spokesperson, Alaska Youth for Environmental Action
(AYEA), informed the committee his organization is a group of
diverse, politically-minded teenagers from across Alaska. He
expressed support for HJR 9 because of his support for
sustainable salmon. Other students in his biology class in
Soldotna, and their teacher, also support the resolution. Mr.
Sparks said the bill would have no impact on Alaska industry,
but would help save Alaska salmon. Although Southeast Alaska is
distant from the Kenai Peninsula, the two areas share cultural
and economic dependence on salmon, and residents fish and work
in commercial fishing. Fishing provides employment for over
10,000 workers in Southcentral Alaska and enhances tourism. The
bill would benefit mostly salmon in Southeast, but all Alaskans
support salmon and seek healthy salmon. Alaskans also want the
state to have a say in its industries, and HJR 9 would provide
Alaskans influence over mines that affect Alaska waters.
Representing AYEA, students, salmon-lovers, and young Alaskans,
Mr. Sparks urged the legislature to pass HJR 9.
5:05:39 PM
TONY GALLEGOF, director, Cultural and Natural Resources,
Ketchikan Indian Community (KIC), summarized from a resolution
passed by KIC in support of HJR 9 as follows:
1. The Province of British Columbia (B.C.), Canada,
says its mines can be developed responsibly but
reports found this is not the case
2. KIC is concerned about the long-term health of
fishes and rivers, and seeks enforceable measures to
protect resources in the future
3. Binding, enforceable measures are needed to
address Alaskans' concerns about transboundary mining
activity
4. The [Statement of Cooperation on the Protection of
Transboundary Waters (SOC) does not guarantee or
ensure monitoring and does not provide funding
5. Monitoring without funding is not enough
6. Long-term cumulative impacts from existing and
future mining projects in B.C. affect Alaska's natural
resources
7. HJR 9 is proactive
8. B.C.'s current processes do not provide a
mechanism or funds to ensure proper cleanup and
compensation
9. Concerns are being dismissed
11. The federal Boundary Waters Treaty (BWT) should
be honored
10. B.C. needs to implement a robust monitoring to
ensure protection of waters in perpetuity
Therefore, the Ketchikan Indian Community resolves
that the KIC Tribal Council urge the U.S. government
to work with Canada to investigate long-term
downstream effects of existing and proposed industrial
development in B.C. and develop measures to protect
the state's resources.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH asked how many are represented by KIC.
MR. GALLEGOF said KIC is the second largest Tribe in the state
and represents over 6,000 members.
5:10:03 PM
FREDERICK OLSEN JR, chairman, United Tribal Transboundary Mining
Work Group, and Tribal vice president, Organized Village of
Kasaan, said the Organized Village of Kasaan (Kasaan) passed a
resolution in support of HJR 9, as Kasaan has a close and
personal relationship to its region and the land. Mr. Olsen
recalled previous testimony heard last year created HJR 9, and
he restated Kasaan's support. The resolution could be stronger,
and could stress the U.S. government's fiduciary trust
responsibility in government-to-government relationships that do
not recognize Tribes; on behalf of Alaska Native Tribal
citizens, he called on the U.S. to enforce the formation of the
International Joint Commission under the Boundary Waters Treaty
(BWT) of 1909. Mr. Olsen noted BWT articles address harm and
potential harm; however, the Tulsequah Chief mine is polluting
the Taku River watershed, the Brucejack mine may be affecting
the Unuk River, and the Red Chris mine is threatening the
Stikine River. Mr. Olsen pointed out it is time to implement
BWT on the Alaska/Canada border. Referring to testimony on
4/12/17 from misleading witnesses, he clarified that a treaty
between two countries with federal governments requires federal
enforcement, but that is not federal overreach. Mr. Olsen
suggested greed leads to selling out the health of thousands of
Alaskans. He concluded that the loss of a way of life on this
side of the border should not merely be a cost of doing
business.
5:15:50 PM
BRIAN LYNCH, spokesperson, Rivers Without Borders, stated his
support for HJR 9. He said he is a retired Alaska Department of
Fish & Game (ADFG) commercial fisheries management biologist
with 30 years' experience in Southeast Alaska, and is now
working part-time for Rivers Without Borders. He said the issue
addressed by HJR 9 is not about the management of Alaska's
resources, but is one of ensuring that activities on the other
side of the international border do not harm Alaska's resources
and industries. Furthermore, "HJR 9 has nothing to do with the
Alaska mining industry or how we manage our resources," he said.
Federal involvement would complement the SOC and, although the
Alaska congressional delegation has strongly opposed federal
overreach on other issues, Alaska's senators and congressman
support federal intervention in this issue. Mr. Lynch recalled
testimony during previous hearings expressing greater concern
for the B.C. and Canadian mining industry, than for the Alaska
seafood industry and thousands of existing jobs. In fact, the
economic lifeblood of Petersburg is the seafood industry, and
mine contamination from any of the transboundary watersheds
would have significant and devastating impacts on Petersburg,
all Southeast Alaska, and beyond. Mr. Lynch pointed out river
estuaries support crab and halibut fisheries which, if
contaminated by toxic materials from a mine disaster, would be
difficult or impossible to clean up as demonstrated following
the 2015 Samarco mine disaster in Brazil. He described how
fisheries in the Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea could be impacted
if any transboundary king salmon stocks are listed under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) as a result of a mining disaster.
Mr. Lynch urged the committee to remember that the financial
impacts of a mine disaster could be very extensive, which
explains why enforceable financial assurances, backed by federal
involvement, are absolutely necessary.
5:19:23 PM
KAREN MATTHIAS, executive director, Council of Alaska Producers
(CAP), informed the committee CAP is a statewide business
association representing large metal mines and some advanced
projects in Alaska; CAP promotes economic opportunity and
environmentally sound mining practices. Ms. Matthias said she
also represents CAP on the [State of Alaska Transboundary
Working Group]. Recognizing the need to protect and enhance the
shared environment, CAP supports dialogue between Alaska and
B.C. on development in B.C. along rivers flowing from B.C. to
Alaska. The state has sought to deepen the existing levels of
communication and cooperation between Alaska and B.C. through
outreach to stakeholder groups, which has resulted in a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and SOC, which she
characterized as "the starting point for greater collaboration
between the province and the state, in fact, the technical work
has already begun." Ms. Matthias encouraged the committee to
request an update from the Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC), the Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
and ADFG on this subject, and to obtain comparisons of B.C. and
Alaska [mine] permitting. She stated CAP is not opposed to
federal involvement, but questioned whether federal involvement
would provide timely or meaningful results, and urged for the
committee to amend the resolution to recognize the value of the
SOC, the work of the technical group, and the efforts of
Lieutenant Governor Mallott to ensure Alaska state regulators
have meaningful access to and influence on the regulatory
process in B.C.
5:21:38 PM
GRAHAM NEALE said he is a miner, an educator, and a volunteer
who has been involved in resources in Alaska and B.C. for 20
years. As a Canadian, he lives in Southeast Alaska, works in a
dynamic industry, and enjoys fishing. He stressed that Canada
is generally respected worldwide as a responsible nation;
regarding this issue, there exists a working relationship, an
open dialogue, and an MOU and SOC between B.C. and Alaska which
were culminated in two years. Furthermore, the Minister of
Energy and Mines, B.C., Bill Bennett, and some proponents of
projects in B.C., have studied modifications and have stated
that they care what Alaskans think even though they don't have
to. Mr. Neale said members of his family were affected by [the
tailings dam failure at] Mount Polley, which caused concern and
disgust, however, the response to the event was a stop to work,
an investigation, repercussions, and a commitment "to be better,
which you can't ask much more from, from your neighboring
country." From an historical perspective, he opined the
aforementioned response was an improvement over past patterns of
mining that were accepted - on both sides of the border - one
hundred years ago. Mr. Neale said his most important point is
that as a father who hopes to fish with his son, he would not
work in an industry or a jurisdiction that would put his values
at risk." In response to Representative Birch, he said he would
submit his written testimony to the committee.
5:24:20 PMs
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH observed most of the miners working at two
of the five biggest mines in Alaska live in his district, and
they work hard for environmental protection. However, he said
he is troubled by some of the egregious mistakes made in Canada,
such as at the Tulsequah Chief and Mount Polley mines, when
compared to practices at Kensington and Greens Creek mines. He
directed attention to [a document in the committee packet
entitled, "Auditor General's Comments," and dated May 2016].
Representative Parish asked what is being done to strengthen the
committee's level of confidence [in Canada's policies].
MR. NEALE said he cannot testify on behalf of a nation or a
province; however, early mining practices left legacy concerns
from activities that occurred while the industry provided modern
conveniences, and before environmental regulations were
established. What was learned from Mount Polley is that there
are repercussions and a commitment to improve. In response to
Co-Chair Tarr, he said he is in favor of the diplomatic policies
that are currently in place between Alaska and B.C., and is
neutral on HJR 9.
5:27:10 PM
LAURA STATS said she is representing herself, her family, and
extended family members who work in the commercial fishing
industry in Southeast Alaska. She opined an Alaskan need not be
a fisherman to understand the bounty of salmon, and the marine
ecosystem. Residents of Alaska witness returning salmon, seals,
sea lions, whales, and other marine life, and in Southeast,
residents witness rare sights. A generation ago, Lynn Canal and
Chatham Strait were filled with herring, and herring roe was
harvested - but no longer. She stressed the importance of
stewardship of Alaska's rare and abundant environment, and urged
the committee to vote in favor of HJR 9. Due to budget
deficits, Alaska is at a crossroad, and it is in Alaskans' best
interest to protect the environment and thereby encourage the
robust continuation of salmon stocks and the economy.
5:29:29 PM
GUY ARCHIBALD, Coordinator, Mining and Clean Water, Southeast
Alaska Conservation Council (SEACC), said he is an environmental
chemist and microbiologist with 20 years of experience. He
referred to a 2016 report by Bowker and Chambers [document not
provided] and said the report shows that "these very types of
modern mines, due to exploiting very low-grade ores and having
to go at an economy of scale, actually fail at a higher rate and
more catastrophically than smaller, older legacy mines."
Further, BC Hydro and Power Authority (BC Hydro), which was
built to power certain mines, is $18 billion in debt, and he
posited the Province of B.C. is "betting the bank on these mines
being developed and, and going into production." Referring to
expert testimony and [a document in the committee packet
entitled, "Auditor General's Comments," and dated May 2016], Mr.
Archibald opined B.C. was to move away from watered tailings
facilities, but six months after the Mount Polley [tailings dam]
disaster, B.C. permitted the Red Chris [mine] tailings facility,
which is a watered tailings facility, and the Brucejack [gold
mine project] that will store tailings underwater. Other
proposed mines, including the Kerr-Sulpherets-Mitchell (KSM),
Schaft Creek, and Galore Creek mines, have not changed their
plans of operation to move away from watered tailings
facilities. Mr. Archibald acknowledged B.C. has modified some
of its practices as follows: formed a nonbinding review board
to review tailings designs; now requires mines to submit a
management plan; now requires mines to give an annual report;
created a web site. He closed, expressing concern about the
idea that federal involvement might be too little/too late, and
pointed out that the KSM mine, proposed to mine the largest ore-
body in the world, has a post-closure operating plan covering
200 years. He said, "I think the federal government can have an
impact sometime between now and 200 hundred years from now."
5:33:06 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON questioned whether the KSM mine has a 200-
year lifespan.
MR. ARCHIBALD explained the operating plan is mining for 52
years, and active water treatment and post-closure activities
for 200 years, which is the maximum time-period for the plan's
predictive model. The rate of water treatment would be 119,000
gallons per minute discharged into the Unuk River for 200 years.
He said he wondered why industry associations are opposed to the
tools and expertise federal agencies would provide.
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND asked for an alternative to watered
tailings storage.
MR. ARCHIBALD said one alternative is a dry stack as utilized by
Greens Creek mine on Admiralty Island. The "technical panel"
recommended that safety, and not economics, should be the
"driver" behind tailings dam design; currently, tailings dam
design is based on three considerations: economics and
financial feasibility, environmental impacts, and impacts to
society. Although water did not cause the dam failure at Mount
Polley, the water mobilized the tailings, thus more damage was
caused than if the tailings were dry stacked.
5:36:06 PM
DEANTHA CROCKETT, Executive Director, Alaska Miners Association
(AMA), informed the committee AMA is the professional trade
association for Alaska's mineral industry, mines large and
small, and has branches in eight locations statewide. She
directed attention to a letter in the committee packet from AMA
dated 3/15/17, which addressed "the first version" of HJR 9, and
that noted the collaboration between the state and B.C. led to
the MOU and SOC agreed upon by the two governments, and to the
beginning of technical work to further collaboration. At the
time of the letter, AMA suggested the resolution reflect the
aforementioned advancements by which to address any concerns
regarding transboundary mining. However, HJR 9, Version B,
includes new language insisting on federal government
intervention, in addition to the ongoing collaboration. Ms.
Crockett expressed surprise that the legislature would be
requesting federal overreach into the management of Alaska's
natural resources, and the regulatory management of its
resources. Instead, she said, the legislature should support
Alaska's collaboration and the regulatory mission of state
agencies, and thereby avoid compromising the formalized
collaboration. Results from collaboration by Lieutenant
Governor Mallott and B.C. officials include the state's
participation on the mining review committee for the Brucejack
and KSM projects, and demonstrates that the two governments are
working to address common interests and to protect waters and
fisheries. Ms. Crockett concluded that asking for federal
involvement is unnecessary and cedes Alaska's authority to
manage its resources to the federal government.
5:38:25 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON, after ascertaining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony, and before the committee was
CSHJR 9(FSH).
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH expressed his support for the resolution
and opined the resolution does not undercut the efforts of
Lieutenant Governor Mallott, nor of the State of Alaska
Transboundary Working Group. Returning attention to a document
[in the committee packet entitled, "Auditor General's Comments,"
and dated May 2016], that revealed B.C. regulatory failures such
as the catastrophe at Mount Polley and the ongoing contamination
of salmon waters by the Tulsequah Chief mine, he said Alaska has
stringent expectations of its mines, and its expectations are
met because of robust regulatory authority. Representative
Parish cautioned that lower bonding, lower expectations, and lax
enforcement from Alaska's Canadian neighbors puts Alaska
fisheries at risk.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH urged the committee to recognize that
government officials from Alaska and B.C. are working closely
together toward resolving the issues under discussion;
furthermore, Alaska and B.C. share a large economic component in
a successful river system. He said he agreed with previous
testimony from those expressing concern about inviting the
federal government to take the lead in the management of
Alaska's resources.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if there are any rivers flowing
from Alaska into Canada that would be affected by transboundary
issues.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON said no.
CO-CHAIR TARR expressed her support for the resolution, which
she characterized as a preventative measure. She agreed that
the resolution would not detract from ongoing collaboration, and
pointed out the only legally binding agreement between Alaska
and B.C. must come from the federal governments.
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND expressed her support for the
resolution.
5:44:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON directed attention to the resolution on
page 2, lines 15-17, which read:
WHEREAS the federal-provincial environmental
assessment process does not address the long-term,
cumulative effects of industrial development in the
transboundary region; and
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked for more information on "the
federal-provincial environmental assessment process."
5:45:46 PM
JILL WEITZ, spokesperson, Salmon Beyond Borders, explained in
2012, the Harper Administration [Stephen Harper, Prime Minister
of Canada from 2/6/06 to 11/4/15] removed a stipulation within
Canada's environmental assessment process that suggested a
project leaving its jurisdictional boundaries would require a
federal environmental assessment.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked for a reference to said assessment
process.
MS. WEITZ said she believed the relevant reference is to section
36 of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act; section 36 was
removed from the Act during the Harper Administration.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON directed attention to the resolution on
page 2, lines 5-9, which read:
WHEREAS the proposed mines would generate billions of
tons of acid-generating tailings, which would be held
behind huge dams and could pose the threat of acid
rock drainage for centuries, if not in perpetuity; and
WHEREAS the tailings would need monitoring,
maintenance, water treatment, and possible remediation
for centuries, if not in perpetuity; and
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked whether the mine plans are on file.
In response to a request to clarify her question, Representative
Johnson remarked:
So, it's the State of Alaska making a statement saying
that ... [the mines] would generate billions of tons
of acid-generating tailings, ... and I'm wondering
where the facts come from.
5:50:25 PM
MS. WEITZ confirmed that the projects have plans that have been
reviewed by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) - as well
as independent scientists - regarding the permitting review
process and mines in operation.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON inquired as to whether Ms. Weitz can attest
to have reviewed evidence supporting the resolution on page 2,
lines 5-7, and that many mines would generate billions of tons
of acid-generating tailings.
MS. WEITZ said yes.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON understood it is "well-known" that a large-
scale, open-pit mine poses some threat of acid-rock drainage and
must be monitored for a long period of time, which is
acknowledged in mine operating plans.
MS. WEITZ advised every mining plan is different and thus she
would not generalize. Mining plans identify mine life and the
proposed water treatment; for example, the KSM Project has
projected 200 years of water treatment.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON remarked:
... I have to be aware that what we expect from
upstream in Canada we should be very much prepared to
do upstream ... in Alaska as far as any drainage. ...
I understand ... this is just a resolution, but I
think it's important to remember it's a statement
that, that is ... still action of the legislature. ...
It seems like, a little bit like hyperbole when we
say, when we start talking about what could happen.
We know a lot of things could happen.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked Representative Ortiz if Alaska
would want the resolution applied to it as well [as to Canada].
5:53:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ORTIZ said absolutely. He agreed that
international water treaties and agreements work both ways, and
potential cooperation leading to agreements between the
governments of Canada and the U.S. would be binding, which is
commonly accepted.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON directed attention to the resolution on
page 1, lines 12 and 13, which read:
WHEREAS large-scale mining in British Columbia is
experiencing unprecedented and rapid expansion within
the Taku, Stikine, and Unuk watersheds; and
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON questioned whether the foregoing
statement is true.
REPRESENTATIVE ORTIZ said the mines are now being proposed in
large numbers, and they are big mines that did not exist before.
The specific purpose of building [BC Hydro] is to provide energy
to the new mines, and he said, "On the Canadian side, they're at
this point now where they see it's to their benefit economically
to develop, to develop these mines now ...." In further
response to Representative Johnson, he stressed the resolution
addresses proposed mines that would potentially affect the Taku,
Stikine, and Unuk watersheds.
There followed a brief discussion on the character of
resolutions in general.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH clarified that a few rivers in the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge flow northeast, but they are outside
the scope of HJR 9.
5:58:30 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR moved to report [CSHJR 9(FSH)] out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal
note. There being no objection, CSHJR 9(FHS) was reported from
the House Resources Standing Committee.
5:58:47 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 5:58 p.m. to 6:01 p.m.
HB 211-NONRESIDENT HUNTING REQUIREMENTS: CARIBOU
6:01:52 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 211, "An Act requiring a nonresident to
be accompanied by a guide or resident spouse or relative when
hunting certain caribou; and providing for an effective date."
6:02:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE, speaking as the sponsor of HB 211,
informed the committee the bill is about more than game
management unit (GMU) 23, but addresses the migrating caribou
herds - wherever they traverse - to perpetuate the health of the
herds. He paraphrased from the sponsor statement as follows:
House Bill 211 affords Alaskans an opportunity to
harvest vital subsistence resources while allowing
nonresident hunters, without a second degree of kin,
to hunt through requiring a licensed professional
guide in order to take a caribou any of these four
arctic herds: Western Arctic, Central Arctic,
Porcupine, and Teshekpuk.
The Central Arctic Herd population has fallen by 69%
since 2010 while the Western Arctic Herd has decreased
by 41% since 2003. With no definitive cause yet
determined for the population decline, now more than
ever is the time to take extra precaution when
managing these herds, which are a vital resource that
many rural communities depend on for subsistence.
Recently, game management unit 23 has experienced
over-harvesting issues and hunting has been federally
closed to anyone that does not reside in the area. It
is my hope that by requiring nonresident hunters to be
accompanied by a licensed guide who is familiar with
the areas and migration patterns of these magnificent
herds, the need for game unit closures similar to the
one in 23 will be prevented.
REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE advised brown bear, sheep, and goat all
have guide requirements because of the inherent dangers of
hunting, and the need for guide requirements for caribou is
sought to avoid conflicts with local residents, the need for
hunters to be familiar with the territory, and respect for the
resource. Furthermore, guides would have a vested interest to
not disrupt caribou migration patterns. He advised that
subsequent to the closure of GMU 23 - due to the decline in
caribou - the subsistence harvest, the resident harvest, and the
guided resident harvest declined; however, the nonresident
unguided - or transporter - harvest increased. Representative
Westlake pointed out that in Canada, the Porcupine Caribou Herd
is managed with guide requirements for nonresidents, and HB 211
would bring Alaska's caribou regulations "just in line [with
Canada] and looking at a successful model." He concluded the
bill is a vision for the last great herd in America.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked for information related to caribou
herd population decline, herd management, and statistics.
6:08:02 PM
BRUCE DALE, director, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Alaska
Department of Fish & Game, said the herds represented in HB 211
have mixed histories. The Western Arctic Herd has declined from
500,000 to 200,000 due to a combination of factors including
nutrition, weather, and age structure, and at the current rate
will further decline substantially; however, in the last two
years there have been good signs such as good calf cohorts
[groups], good body condition, and better pregnancy rates. He
said ADFG has concerns about both the herd and the local
residents. In its last major decline, the Western Arctic Herd
declined to about 75,000; in fact, in the early '70s there were
250,000 caribou in the state, and now there are about 750,000.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH recalled there was a wanton waste issue in
the region at one time; he asked for the level of hunting
pressure on the caribou, in general.
MR. DALE stated hunting did not cause the caribou decline. With
the population now at 200,000, hunting needs to be restricted
through actions by the Board of Game, ADFG, and the Federal
Subsistence Board, U.S. Department of the Interior. He said
"... on the other extreme, the Porcupine herd is at 200,000
caribou and it's as big as it has ever been. East of that, in
Canada, herds have declined catastrophically." [ADFG] is also
investigating the declines of the Central Arctic and Teshekpuk
herds. In further response to Representative Birch, Mr. Dale
explained calving occurs in the north and northwest, and herds
migrate to the south to spend winter in the boreal forest.
6:12:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH asked for the potential ecological and
economic impacts of the bill.
MR. DALE advised the ecological impact would be very small
because the nonresident harvest is a small component for most of
the herds. He was unsure of the economic impact, but he
estimated that 80 percent of nonresidents hunt without guides,
thus the bill may cause a reduction in the number of nonresident
harvests; as a result of the federal closure, the number is
zero.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH concluded there would be a decrease in the
overall number of nonresident hunters, and an increase in the
number of guided hunts.
MR. DALE agreed, but said the degree of decrease/increase is
unknown.
6:14:19 PM
REGGIE JOULE stated his support for HB 211, and said the bill
addresses several issues, such as a declining herd and many user
conflicts in certain areas. Mr. Joule opined relegating out-of-
state hunters to guided hunts would have a small impact, but
would make a difference. He suggested the subject of
transporters before the [Big Game Commercial Services Board,
Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development] is a
larger and difficult issue, but a close look reveals that
[funding] resources are needed to manage [natural] resources.
He remarked:
Currently, the situation is, at least in the Western
Arctic Caribou Herd, local residents were allowed to
hunt fifteen a day, every day of the year - fifteen
caribou - we're down to five. Now, we make that work.
And, there were no closed seasons at one point in
time, and now we have closed seasons for both bulls
and cows at various times of the year, when it's
appropriate. And people are making that work:
everybody is giving in a little bit here. And the
local residents certainly understand that.
MR. JOULE, as an aside, observed predators - wolves and bears -
are out of control. He concluded that HB 211 would impact the
local economy, but Alaska residents would be able to use
transporters and provide for their families. In response to
Representative Birch, he said his experience is that the
population of the herd has declined to a combination of factors:
predators are more successful in years of low snow, and hunters
are responsible for taking less than 30,000 out of a herd of
250,000. Therefore, all [conservation] measures should be
carefully considered.
6:20:38 PM
PAUL (CHRIS) MCKEE, Supervisor, Wildlife Division, Office of
Subsistence Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S.
Department of the Interior, informed the committee the Federal
Subsistence Board closed GMU 23 to non-federally qualified users
from [7/1/16 to 6/30/17], and has received a special action
request submitted by the Northwest Arctic Subsistence Regional
Advisory Council, Federal Subsistence Management Program, U.S.
Department of the Interior, seeking another closure for the
upcoming year. If approved, GMU 23 would remain closed from
7/1/17 to 6/30/18. He said his staff is responsible for writing
the analysis of the request for closure, but he was unsure how
the board would rule, and expressed his intent to provide the
analysis in a timely manner so that the board can issue its
decision prior to hunting season. Also, the North Slope
Subsistence Regional Advisory Council, Federal Subsistence
Management Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, submitted a
special action request to close caribou hunting in GMUs 26A and
26B to non-federally qualified users as well. If both requests
are approved, all of GMU 23 and all of GMUs 26A and 26B would be
closed to non-federally qualified users, including nonresidents
and nonrural Alaska residents. Mr. McKee added that a U.S.
Department of the Interior interagency group meeting will be
held [4/17/17], attended by representatives of the Federal
Subsistence Management Program, the National Park Service, the
Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and also attended by
representatives from ADFG, all of whom will seek ways to avoid
unit-wide closures. He expressed hope that participants can
"come up with some options that can avoid, you know, having all
of unit 23 closed out, so that's kind of where we're at,
currently, on the federal side."
6:25:08 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON opened public testimony.
6:25:23 PM
AL BARRETTE said mandatory guiding is not, and should not be, a
tool used to limit nonresident hunting opportunities. He
stressed that this purpose is not the intent - or the reason -
mandatory guiding is in statute. He directed attention to the
bill on page 1, line 1, which read [in part]:
"An Act requiring a nonresident to be accompanied by a
guide or resident spouse or relative when hunting
...."
MR. BARRETTE opined "spouse or relative" should read, "a second
degree of kindred," which is defined in statute. He then
directed attention to page 1, lines 12-14 which read [in part]:
... misdemeanor and upon conviction is punishable by
imprisonment for not more than one year, or by a fine
of not more than $5,000, or by both.
MR. BARRETT urged for this language in the bill to comport with
proposed HB 129 or proposed SB 60. Lastly, he directed
attention to page 2, lines 9-12 which read:
(g) In addition to the animals listed under (a)
of this section, it is unlawful for a nonresident to
hunt, pursue, or take caribou from the Porcupine,
Central Arctic, or Western Arctic caribou herds unless
the nonresident is accompanied by a person who is
qualified under the terms of (a) of this section.
MR. BARRETT pointed out the bill stipulates the Porcupine,
Central Arctic, and Western Arctic caribou herds and he
questioned how - for enforcement purposes - one would
distinguish a Teshekpuk caribou from a Western Arctic caribou or
others as the Teshekpuk herd lies in between the Western Arctic
and [Central Arctic] herds.
6:27:54 PM
MARK RICHARDS, Executive Director, Resident Hunters of Alaska,
referred to written testimony from Resident Hunters of Alaska
dated [4/10/17] in opposition to HB 211 [document not provided].
He said Resident Hunters of Alaska believes only the legislature
should have the authority to add to the list of species that
must be guided under AS 16.05.407 and AS 16.05.408. Mr.
Richards informed the committee the Board of Game (BOG), Alaska
Department of Fish & Game, without legislative approval, has
added moose and black bear to the list of "must be guided
species" in some areas. This action in the Interior has
restricted resident opportunities for the purpose of
guaranteeing an allocation to guides. As has been previously
stated, all nonlocal federally qualified subsistence hunters
have been prohibited from hunting the Western Arctic Herd on
federal lands in GMU 23, including all nonresidents and all
Alaskans who do not live in the region. At the recent BOG
meeting in Fairbanks, the board severely reduced seasons and bag
limits in the Central Arctic Herd, for both residents and
nonresidents, which came about "via" a Resident Hunters of
Alaska proposal. Further, under consideration is a federal
wildlife special action request to restrict all nonlocal
federally qualified subsistence hunters from hunting the Central
Arctic Herd on federal land. Mr. Richards stated:
If the intent of this bill is to reduce nonresident
harvest when caribou herds are in steep decline, that
is something Resident Hunters of Alaska agrees with
and has already been proposing to the Board of Game:
That in all cases, if and when any wildlife population
is in decline, and [residents'] needs and opportunity
are going to be restricted, we should first reduce or
eliminate all nonresident hunting opportunities.
Those are functions of the Board of Game, which the
legislature has given authority to deal with these
matters. Requiring nonresidents ... to hire a guide
to hunt these herds, however, in order to reduce
nonresident harvest, is in no way a solution to less
nonresident hunting and harvest. What this bill would
do is create a new subsidy to guides, that wasn't
there before, and we can't use the current percentages
of unguided versus guided caribou hunters on the North
Slope, and say that those percentages would remain the
same should this bill pass.
6:31:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH was unclear how the bill would result in a
new subsidy for guides, although he agreed it would result in an
increase in guided hunts. He asked whether Mr. Richards
expected the bill would result in a reduction to the allocation
for Alaska residents.
MR. RICHARDS answered the allocation is a function of BOG, and
there are examples of BOG actions that have added new must-be-
guided species resulting in restrictions on residents, "because
the board is then beholden to provide that allocation." He
provided an analogy. Mr. Richards clarified that a guaranteed
client base is the subsidy. In further response to
Representative Parish, he said not all contracting guides are
Alaskans, and a larger percentage of assistant guides are
nonresidents.
6:33:19 PM
JAKE JACOBSON stated he lives in Kodiak and Kotzebue, and is
representing himself and his Alaskan family members. Mr.
Jacobson said he has hunted and eaten caribou from the Western
Arctic Herd for 50 years and has guided in the region for 45
years. In the '70s and '80s he worked for ADFG, when there was
a focus on caribou in GMUs 23 and 26. In 1972, the population
of the Western Arctic Herd was estimated at 242,000, and ADFG
was concerned that the herd would overgraze and then decline;
therefore, the department closed areas on the North Slope and
elsewhere, and compared grazed tundra with un-grazed tundra. He
said botanists noticed no difference, and there was no great
threat of overgrazing with a herd size at 242,000. However,
ADFG remained concerned and opened the hunting season with no
limits, and allowed [hunted] caribou to be sold - and many were
- at $35 per carcass. Mr. Jacobson said the herd is now over
200,000, the harvest is estimated at 12,000-15,000 for local
subsistence users, and at 500-600 for nonlocals - those being
transported and guided hunts. The harvest records for the
transported and guided hunts are accurate, and estimated for
local harvest, he added. Mr. Jacobson spoke in favor of the
bill and agreed that the language "relative" should be clearly
defined as "second degree of kindred." Furthermore, the bill
would reduce and defuse user conflicts in GMU 23, and would
restore resident access to caribou hunted in GMU 23, provided
the federal subsistence board does not continue to prevent all
but local subsistence users access to the herd. He urged for
the passage of HB 211.
6:36:41 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON, after ascertaining no one further wished to
testify, closed public testimony.
[HB 211 was held over.]
6:37:09 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON passed the gavel to Co-Chair Tarr.
HB 177-AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES
6:37:29 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 177, "An Act relating to the response to, and
control of, aquatic invasive species; establishing the aquatic
invasive species response fund; and relating to the provision of
information about aquatic invasive species to users of the
Alaska marine highway system."
CO-CHAIR TARR said public testimony was opened [during the
hearing of HB 177 on 4/7/17] and remained open.
6:38:02 PM
TIM STALLARD, Chairperson, Alaska Committee for Noxious and
Invasive Pest Management (CMPM), which is the professional
association for the study and management of invasive species in
Alaska, expressed CMPM's support of HB 177. Mr. Stallard
informed the committee invasive species are defined as those
that cause harm to natural resources, health, and economic
value; in fact, across the U.S. invasive species cause the loss
of hundreds of billions of dollars each year in crop losses,
damage, and ecological harm. Alaska's low population and
extreme climate have slowed the arrival and establishment of
invasive species, but the state needs to be prepared to take
rapid action when necessary, in a manner similar to the
prevention of, and quick response to, wildfires. The intent of
the bill is to allow the Alaska Department of Fish & Game
(ADFG), the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and other
state agencies to respond quickly to the presence of invasive
species. Mr. Stallard pointed out additional invasive species
vectors should be addressed in statute and regulation, such as
watercraft arriving via land borders, marine ports, aircraft,
and imported material and equipment with access to Alaska
waterbodies. Additional issues are the release of pets,
aquarium dumping, illegal stocking, and the instate movement of
boats and equipment. Further, CMPM seeks to ensure state
agencies hold authority to write effective regulations related
to aquatic invasive species. He expressed concern that the
Division of Agriculture, DNR, is over five years behind updating
its regulations regarding "the noxious weeds list." Mr.
Stallard closed, noting that Alaskans rely on the state's
natural resources for food, work, and fun, and invasive species
threaten the Alaska way of life. He urged for passage of HB 177
this session.
6:42:05 PM
ARTHUR KEYES, director, Division of Agriculture, Department of
Natural Resources, said the noxious weed regulations "are just
one of many of the regulations that we have on our plate to
update." He said the division is looking to have progress on
updating regulations this year.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH asked for an approximate number of
trailers and vessels coming into the state annually.
6:44:24 PM
MICHAEL NEUSSL, deputy commissioner, Office of the Commissioner,
Alaska Marine Highway System (AMHS), Department of
Transportation & Public Facilities (DOTPF) directed attention to
a written response [in the committee packet dated 4/10/17] that
included information on traffic volumes entering the state from
Bellingham, Washington and Prince Rupert, British Columbia. He
said the traffic volumes include vehicles other than boats. The
definition of boat or watercraft is nebulous and may include
kayaks, canoes, and personal watercraft carried on vehicles that
are not tracked individually.
CO-CHAIR TARR reported from the aforementioned written response:
From Prince Rupert, 77 port calls and 2,753 vehicles embarked;
from Bellingham, 68 port calls and 5,689 vehicles embarked.
MR. NEUSSL added AMHS does track nonmotorized vehicles embarking
with walk-on passengers such as bicycles, kayaks, and canoes;
the total number systemwide was 1,755 for nonmotorized forms of
transportation.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH reasoned from the provided response that
.3 percent of 8,000 vehicles embarked would be about 240
trailers entering the state from Prince Rupert and Bellingham
during fiscal year 2015.
MR. NEUSSL clarified the definition of trailers includes
trailers not carrying boats. In further to Representative
Parish, he expressed his belief that DOTPF does not have
information on the number of boats entering the state on roads.
6:48:00 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR closed public testimony. Before the committee was
HB 177.
6:48:07 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR moved to adopt Amendment 1 which read:
Page 1, line 3:
Delete "users of the Alaska marine highway
system"
Insert: "certain persons registering or
transporting boats"
Page 1, following line 4
Insert a new bill section to read:
"*Section 1. AS 05.25.055 is amended by adding a
new subsection to read:
(j) To the extent possible, the Department
of Administration shall ensure that a person who
registers a boat under this section is provided with
any information relating to aquatic invasive species
that has been published in pamphlet form by the
Department of Natural Resources or the Department of
Fish and Game."
Page 1, line 5:
Delete "Section 1
Insert "Sec. 2
6:48:17 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON objected for discussion purposes.
CO-CHAIR TARR restated the bill is creating infrastructure for a
rapid response fund to prevent delays in the state's response to
the presence of invasive species. Because prevention is less
expensive than treatment, Amendment 1 expands the dissemination
of prevention information to include not only persons
transporting boats via AMHS, but through the Department of
Administration, and thereby the Division of Motor Vehicles, to
those registering a boat in the state. As an aside, she said
floatplanes are regulated by the Federal Aviation
Administration, U. S. Department of Transportation.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked whether AMHS is still required to
educate and inform.
CO-CHAIR TARR said yes; individuals traveling on AMHS would
receive information, and individuals registering a boat would
receive information from the Division of Motor Vehicles.
6:52:03 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON withdrew his objection.
6:52:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND objected. She asked where the bill
directs AMHS to provide information to passengers with boats.
CO-CHAIR TARR directed attention to the bill on page 3, lines 4-
10, which read:
*Sec. 2. AS 19.65 is amended by adding a new section
to read:
Sec. 19.65.033. Provision of information
relating to aquatic invasive species. To the extent
possible, the commissioner of transportation and
public facilities shall ensure that a person who
purchases a ticket for vehicle deck space on a ferry
for the purpose of transporting a vessel into the
state is provided with any information relating to
aquatic invasive species that has been published in
pamphlet form by the Department of Natural Resources
or the Alaska Department of Fish & Game.
6:52:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND removed her objection. There being no
further objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH directed attention to [the bill on page 1,
line 14, and page 2, lines 1 and 2] which read [in part]:
response to, and management of, an aquatic invasive
species under (a) of this section shall be given
priority over activities regulated by the department
in the area where an incipient population of an
aquatic invasive species is being targeted.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH questioned whether "given priority over
activities regulated by the department," for an invasive
population that could not be eradicated in a reasonable period,
would override other vital activities of the department.
6:54:12 PM
TAMMY DAVIS, Invasive Species Coordinator, Alaska Department of
Fish & Game, in response to Representative Parish after he
restated his question, said, "When I read that statement, I
would believe that responding to that introduced population
would be the number one priority."
CO-CHAIR TARR pointed out the purpose of the bill is to enable
rapid response and thus is supposed to create the infrastructure
necessary [for ADFG] to immediately respond. Otherwise, an
"expensive regulatory process" must be followed.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH gave the example of Sitka, which has a
severe [Didemnum vexillum (Dvex)] problem, and stated his
concern that the bill would direct ADFG to move resources away
from other critical activities. He asked Ms. Davis whether the
bill would change the way ADFG has been managing the incipient
aquatic invasive population of Dvex in Sitka.
MS. DAVIS said she is a biologist, "more so than a policy
person." She explained the "Dvex efforts" in Sitka thus far
have not taken from other management priorities of ADFG;
however, the department requested that boaters avoid Whiting
Harbor because of the invasive species, although it does not
have enforcement authority. She said Representative Parish has
asked a policy question, and she was not comfortable responding
to how the proposed statute would be interpreted.
7:00:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH proposed [a conceptual amendment] deleting
the language "over activities regulated by the department in the
area," and thereby the intent would remain that priority is
given where an incipient population of an aquatic invasive
species is being targeted.
CO-CHAIR TARR restated the intent of the bill is to enable ADFG
to legally prioritize management of an aquatic invasive species
outbreak, because the department has other statutorily-mandated
obligations. She expressed her understanding ADFG seeks the
ability to separate its responsibilities in order to prioritize
managing an outbreak and take immediate action. Co-Chair Tarr
opined ADFG would not want said language deleted.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH suggested changing "shall" [on page 2,
line 1] to "may."
CO-CHAIR TARR said she would not support the change because it
would change the intent of the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH related he has received reassurance from
ADFG that the abovementioned language in the bill "is more of an
intent statement, and not one that would prevent them from
accomplishing other high priority activities," and said his
fears are assuaged on that point. He then directed attention to
page 2, lines 16-18 which read [in part]:
... the department shall respond in a manner
determined to cause the least harm to noninvasive fish
populations that are used for recreational, personal
use, commercial, or subsistence purposes.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH observed often the manner that causes the
least harm is the most expensive.
CO-CHAIR TARR noted that the fund created by the bill is not
funded at this time, but should there be an aquatic invasive
species outbreak, there would be "a place for the money to go."
She expressed her preference for the use of mechanical - over
chemical - means of managing an invasive species. In
transportation corridors pesticides are less expensive than
mechanical control methods, and the language in the bill gives
the department flexibility.
7:05:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH gave an example of an elodea outbreak in
which an herbicide is deemed the most effective means for
eradication, but would be more harmful than a mechanical
approach. He opined the bill would mandate the use of a
mechanical method and thus provide only an "incomplete
solution."
CO-CHAIR TARR said the alternative selected would not provide an
incomplete solution because the goal is eradication of an
aquatic invasive species; however, there are concerns about
using chemicals in freshwater lakes and streams to control
northern pike, and she wants the bill to minimize the potential
for harm.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH is also opposed to poison in lakes and
suggested the bill should direct "minimal total ecological
impact."
7:07:26 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
7:08:03 PM
HB 177 was held over.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 7:08 p.m.