Legislature(2017 - 2018)BARNES 124
04/17/2017 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB201 | |
| HB217 | |
| HB218 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 201 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 197 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 217 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 218 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 17, 2017
1:04 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 George Rauscher
Representative David Talerico
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative DeLena Johnson
Representative Mike Chenault (alternate)
Representative Chris Tuck (alternate)
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 201
"An Act relating to municipal regulation of trapping; and
providing for an effective date.
- MOVED CSHB 201(CRA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
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."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL 218
"An Act relating to the state veterinarian and to animals and
animal products."
- 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
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 201
SHORT TITLE: MUNICIPAL REGULATION OF TRAPPING
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) JOSEPHSON
03/29/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/29/17 (H) CRA, RES
04/11/17 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
04/11/17 (H) Heard & Held
04/11/17 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
04/13/17 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
04/13/17 (H) Moved CSHB 201(CRA) Out of Committee
04/13/17 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
04/14/17 (H) CRA RPT CS(CRA) 2DP 2DNP 2NR
04/14/17 (H) DP: DRUMMOND, PARISH
04/14/17 (H) DNP: RAUSCHER, TALERICO
04/14/17 (H) NR: WESTLAKE, FANSLER
04/14/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/14/17 (H) Heard & Held
04/14/17 (H) MINUTE(RES)
04/17/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 217
SHORT TITLE: RAW MILK SALES; FOOD EXEMPT FROM REGS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) TARR
04/07/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/07/17 (H) RES, FIN
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
04/13/17 (H) <Bill Hearing Postponed to 4/14/17>
04/14/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/14/17 (H) <Bill Hearing Postponed>
04/17/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 218
SHORT TITLE: STATE VETERINARIAN;ANIMALS;PRODUCTS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) TARR
04/07/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/07/17 (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
04/13/17 (H) <Bill Hearing Postponed to 4/14/17>
04/14/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/14/17 (H) <Bill Hearing Postponed>
04/17/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
BILL: HB 197
SHORT TITLE: COMMUNITY SEED LIBRARIES
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) JOHNSTON
03/24/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/24/17 (H) RES, FIN
04/10/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/10/17 (H) -- Testimony <Invitation Only> --
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
04/13/17 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
04/17/17 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
NICK STEEN
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 201.
KNEELAND TAYLOR
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of CSHB 201(CRA).
AL BARRETTE
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 201.
ALPHEUS BULLARD, Attorney
Legislative Legal Counsel
Legislative Legal Services
Legislative Affairs Agency
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding CSHB 201(CRA).
CHRISTINA CARPENTER, Director
Division of Environmental Health
Department of Environmental Conservation
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to HB 218.
ARTHUR KEYES, Director
Division of Agriculture
Department of Natural Resources
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to HB 218.
JOHANNA HERRON, Development Specialist
Division of Agriculture
Department of Natural Resources
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered a question during the hearing of
HB 218.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:04:10 PM
CO-CHAIR ANDY JOSEPHSON called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:04 p.m. Representatives
Josephson, Tarr, Birch, Parish, Talerico, Rauscher, and Westlake
were present at the call to order. Representative Drummond
arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 201-MUNICIPAL REGULATION OF TRAPPING
1:04:24 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 201, "An Act relating to municipal
regulation of trapping; and providing for an effective date.
[Before the committee was CSHB 201(CRA).]
1:04:35 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON opened public testimony.
1:04:58 PM
NICK STEEN testified in opposition to HB 201. He said the bill
would give the borough control over trapping regulations on
state and/or federal lands. He stated that this would add a
third level of potential law or regulations on trapping in a
given area state, federal, and borough and would do nothing
to correct a perceived problem. Mr. Steen further maintained
that trap identification is a worthless bit of information
because all a trapper has to do is claim that a trap has been
stolen at the beginning of the season, and the trapper is "home
free" for the rest of the season. He clarified he isn't saying
trappers are illegal, but rather it is an unenforceable
regulation. All the bill would do is add more paperwork to the
already existing problem of too many regulations on hunting and
fishing in the state. For example, when he came to Alaska over
50 years ago the regulations were pocketbook sized, but not any
longer. He recognized that things are becoming more and more
involved because there are more people, but said more laws don't
make it better.
1:06:22 PM
KNEELAND TAYLOR testified in strong support of CSHB 201 (CRA).
He said it is an excellent bill because it provides
clarification on what a municipal government can and cannot do.
He offered his belief that municipalities should have their
authority clearly outlined on regulating the placing of traps
that can cause injury and, in particular, injury to dogs. The
idea that the Board of Game and the Alaska Department of Fish
and Game (ADF&G) can handle this is somewhat far-fetched, he
continued. It is a mind-boggling task on a statewide basis to
identify literally hundreds of trails, hundreds of small public
parks, and densely populated subdivisions where everyone agrees
that traps shouldn't be placed. It is the local governments
that have the expertise and knowledge as to whether traps should
be placed at the end of a particular street, in a particular
subdivision inside that municipality. In the case of federal
lands, he said, a clear delineation of what a local government
can do in terms of setbacks or placing of traps on trails on
federal lands gives those municipal governments a chance to
fight back if the federal government tries to impose its view.
It is an excellent bill because it would provide for local
control.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON, sponsor of HB 201, referenced a letter of
opposition that the committee received from Al Barrette in which
Mr. Barrette states that the Board of Game can handle this. He
asked whether Mr. Taylor is personally aware of residents of the
Matanuska-Susitna Borough who have drafted proposals to deal
with the problem of dogs getting caught in traps.
MR. TAYLOR replied he is not personally aware of whether they
have or have not. However, he continued, he was on a Board of
Game subcommittee that addressed this issue in 2002 and, after
many meetings with trappers, board chairman Ted Spraker said the
board did not think this issue was a problem. Four years ago,
local residents of Cooper Landing submitted a proposal to the
Board of Game that would have designated several trails,
trailheads, and beach along Kenai Lake as places where traps
could not be placed, but that proposal was rejected. In talking
with board members about the rejection of that proposal, he
related, it really boiled down to a people issue. Basically,
one member of the board, Ted Spraker, viewed it as the local
residents asking for too much and therefore they got nothing.
It is a far-fetched idea, he reiterated, that the Board of Game
will be able to do this or would be inclined to assist local
communities in handling this problem.
1:11:07 PM
AL BARRETTE testified in opposition to HB 201. If enacted, he
said, it would be a competing statute with Alaska Statute (AS)
16.05.255, Regulations of the Board of Game, under which the
Board of Game is granted the regulation of wildlife, even for
public safety. Further, he continued, he has a problem with two
competing authorities creating regulations or ordinances because
this would hinder trappers in finding restriction information.
The current trapping regulation handbook distinguishes what
trapping restrictions exist. He said municipalities such as
Fairbanks, Anchorage, Valdez, Skagway, and Prince of Wales have
come before the Board of Game concerning trapping issues and
have received favorable action by the board. Not every proposal
before the Board of Game gets passed. Proposals must meet some
merits and input is taken from regulation specialists within the
Department of Law and other state agencies.
MR. BARRETTE stated he specifically has an issue on page 1, line
13, which states, "trap identification requirements". He said
this provision is unclear and it could be argued what that
actually means. Terminology is everything in a court of law or
in regulations or statute. He then drew attention to the bill
on page 2, line 1, which states, "restrictions on the use of
types of traps likely to cause injury or damage to persons or
property." He said he doesn't know of any trap made that
doesn't cause injury, so he wonders what trap is out there that
would fit this definition if the bill were enacted.
MR. BARRETTE pointed out that the bill doesn't mention the use
of snares and said there is a difference in definition in
regulation between a steel trap and a snare. He suggested this
be clarified. He further pointed out that the bill uses what
trapping means by the statutory definition and maintained that
this definition only relates to furbearers. Other animals are
classified as small game, unclassified game, and fur animals, he
continued, and these animals are allowed to be trapped with a
trapping license or a hunting license. This bill has many
complications, he said, including having two governing bodies,
one which has been appointed and confirmed based on knowledge of
wildlife resources, and the other that is basically elected by
their political views.
1:14:45 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON surmised Mr. Barrette wants the bill to be
more expansive because one of Mr. Barrette's positions is that
municipalities should not have any authority, but when it comes
to what municipalities have authority over Mr. Barrette wants to
expand the definition to even more mammals.
MR. BARRETTE replied that he is pointing out he is not for the
bill as written and that he is further pointing out the errors
and complications in the bill should it be passed as written.
1:15:33 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON recalled Mr. Barrette's statement that the
Board of Game responds to municipal interests in this regard,
but stated that he thinks there is evidence the board does not
respond to municipal interests. He inquired why there is a
problem with the bill if the Board of Game does respond to
municipalities. He posed a scenario in which a local government
is concerned for public safety, which is within the local
purview, and wants to regulate around a schoolyard. He said Mr.
Barrette's position is that the board will accommodate that and
therefore he doesn't understand the concern.
MR. BARRETTE responded that his main issue is with state lands.
He offered his belief that Co-Chair Josephson is correct that
boroughs and municipalities have ownership of their lands;
however, there have been times when state land was an issue. He
recalled that Juneau brought a [proposal] to the Board of Game
that was passed. Municipalities can write a proposal and bring
it to the board, he continued. It will be vetted through the
deliberation and public comment processes but there is a chance
it might not pass, which happened in Cooper Landing's case.
Justification was put on record as to why the board didn't pass
it, he said, not all proposals get passed.
1:17:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE noted the committee has been working on
making this back into a local control issue. He said he sees
where Mr. Barrette is coming from and that Mr. Barrette is
talking about state regulations versus municipal regulations.
Representative Westlake offered his understanding that if, for
example, his village wanted to opt in and create its own laws
and ordinances for trapping within the city limits, it could do
that, and the state would have no real say, but beyond the city
or borough limits it would go back over to the state. He asked
Mr. Barrette whether he is misunderstanding something.
MR. BARRETTE answered that he thinks Representative Westlake has
it perfectly. The Board of Game controls state land and private
property and the boroughs control their property.
1:18:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH said he shares Mr. Barrett's concerns. He
related that the Matanuska-Susitna Borough has implemented some
sort of local control on trapping, as has Anchorage. He offered
his appreciation for Mr. Barrette's concerns and said local
control works well from his experience.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked legal counsel Alpheus Bullard whether
snares would be something a local government could regulate
under HB 201.
1:19:36 PM
ALPHEUS BULLARD, Attorney, Legislative Legal Counsel,
Legislative Legal Services, Legislative Affairs Agency,
acknowledged it's possible that the [regulation of snares] is an
inadequacy in this legislation. But if it is, he continued,
it's also a problem in the state's fish and game statutes
because the definition of trapping that's provided for all of
Title 16 is referenced in this legislation and that definition
of trapping is what controls what can be taken with a trapping
license. So, he added, if snares are allowed under Title 16,
then a local municipality could regulate them under this
legislation.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON noted the committee has an opinion from the
Matanuska-Susitna Borough attorney. He requested Mr. Bullard's
opinion on whether municipalities have the power within their
purview to regulate trapping within their borders.
MR. BULLARD responded that to the extent it is a legitimate
ordinance and it protects human life and property within the
municipality's boundaries, it is a legitimate local concern and
well within the municipality's purview.
1:21:11 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON closed public testimony after ascertaining no
one else wished to testify.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER inquired whether he is correct that the
bill does not reference private lands.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON answered that the bill doesn't speak to
private lands except by implication. It would be a heavy lift,
he said, for a member of a city council or assembly to offer an
ordinance to regulate trapping on someone's private land; but
there would be nothing prohibiting it in this bill.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER understood there is nothing prohibiting
that and asked whether that means it is inclusive.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON replied it is inclusive per page 1, line 10.
He said bills that list everything become very long.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH stated he does not support the bill because
it is unnecessary. As said by Mr. Bullard, he continued, local
communities can take care of themselves and can implement
trapping regulations as was done by the Matanuska-Susitna
[Borough]. He said his preference is that it be left up to the
local communities to manage their own affairs.
1:24:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO remarked that it is clear as mud as to
where this will fit in the actual charter code of ordinances for
particular municipalities and ordinances that they have adopted.
[The committee] could probably get a legal opinion to say it
will be land use regulation because theoretically it could be
said that an ordinance has been written that traps cannot be put
on the ground in particular spots. However, he continued, the
issue is that most of the codes for land use regulation that he
is familiar with deal with boundaries and lines and community
plans and that type of structure, not restrictions on these
other things. The other avenue, he said, would probably be the
adoption of public safety powers. However, whether real or
imagined, a fear in smaller municipalities is that if they adopt
public safety powers they are not far away from losing their
state trooper when the state then steps in saying that because
the municipality has public safety powers it must now take
responsibility.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO said his biggest issue has to do with
previous experience in that he is very defensive of Title 29 in
its current form and the way it is written. Before any changes
are made, he continued, he would have to hear from an enormous
number of municipalities saying they need this particular change
in Title 29. He argued that a municipality choosing a trapping
ordinance would not have enforcement provided by the Alaska
Wildlife Troopers because these troopers do state regulatory
issues. He said he opposes the bill, but appreciates the idea
of trying to figure out a way to resolve this issue, but the
bill does not resolve it for him.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON responded he takes the aforementioned point,
but said that if a municipality passes an ordinance and doesn't
wish to enforce it, it just will not be enforced very well.
1:27:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE inquired whether HB 201, as proposed,
would grant more power to municipalities or boroughs. For
example, he said, whether it would move it over to the local
level where the local level can use these powers and enforce
these powers on their own.
MR. BULLARD answered that if the legislation is passed and
enacted, it would be in the general powers in AS 29.35 and it
would provide that both for general law and home rule
municipalities, this is the power that municipalities have and
in that way, it would clear up what power these municipalities
have to enact an ordinance like this.
1:29:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE asked whether it would then be up to the
municipality or borough to enforce these powers.
MR. BULLARD replied yes, correct, it would be completely up to
whatever municipality that passed it to enforce it.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON added that a local government would have to
make a legitimate claim that the restriction was necessary to
prevent injury or damage to persons or property and that it was
in an area or location where that injury or damage could occur.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER said he appreciates that "may" was used
so many times in the bill and appreciates that the sponsor was
working with municipalities and their abilities to choose by
using the word "may". However, he continued, what the
legislature does with people's private property and how the
legislature regulates it is of worry to him. He said he had an
amendment that he didn't offer because he didn't think it would
have passed. He stated he is not in favor of the bill, although
he appreciates that the sponsor is trying to work on a problem.
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH noted that the bill explicitly expands the
authority of municipalities/local governments into an area where
it would be thought that they already have the authority to say,
for example, no traps near the local school regardless of
whether that school is on state or private property. He
recalled a tragic story told by Representative Westlake about a
child who came too close to a cyanide trap and the child's dog
died but the child was able to rinse his own eyes. He said he
thinks it appropriate to explicitly give the power to
municipalities to be able to say that there are some areas where
they do not want traps that could harm people or property. The
sort of trap that doesn't harm persons or property would be live
traps, and these types of traps are used frequently for nuisance
animals. He said it is a useful bill that he supports.
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON noted that HB 40 [a bill he sponsored] was
clearly a much more ambitious bill in regard to 200-foot buffers
near public trails. He said the feedback on HB 40 was that it
should be handled by the local governments and so that is the
bill now before the committee. The criticism of HB 40 was vast,
he continued, while the criticism of HB 201, to his knowledge,
has been restricted to a couple letters.
1:34:39 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR moved to report CSHB 201(CRA) out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO objected.
1:35:44 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Westlake, Drummond,
Parish, Tarr, and Josephson voted in favor of CSHB 201(CRA).
Representatives Rauscher, Talerico, and Birch voted against it.
Therefore, CSHB 201 (CRA) was reported from the House Resources
Standing Committee by a vote of 5-3.
[CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON passed the gavel to Co-Chair Tarr.]
1:35:48 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 1:35 p.m. to 1:38 p.m.
HB 217-RAW MILK SALES; FOOD EXEMPT FROM REGS
1:38:05 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR announced that the next order of business would be
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."
1:38:55 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR, prime sponsor of HB 217, said the materials
provided in the committee packet are to show her intent with the
bill. She recounted that she first learned about what is called
the Food Freedom Movement when she met a representative from
Wyoming. In 2015 Wyoming became the first state to pass a food
freedom bill, which has now caught on and a number of western
states have legislation. She explained that the purpose of the
legislation is to allow for the sale and consumption of homemade
foods, and to encourage the expansion of agricultural sales by
farmers markets, ranches, farms and homebased producers.
CO-CHAIR TARR related that the Wyoming legislation removed some
of the regulatory restrictions on the aforementioned types of
sales. If this is done in Alaska, she said, care must be taken
that people's health is not put at risk. To that end, Wyoming's
legislation includes the words "informed" and "consumer". These
products must be properly labeled so that an individual can be
an informed consumer and know what product is being purchased.
An informed consumer who knows the product being purchased
should have the right to choose to buy that product. She
pointed out that foodborne illness has not eliminated by
purchasing through grocery stores.
CO-CHAIR TARR explained that a challenge in starting a business
is economies of scale - it is difficult to produce enough
initially to be able to get into a grocery store. This means
instead selling through subscribership or farmers markets to
build up a customer base that allows expansion into retail
opportunities. Restrictions on sales include [the requirement
of using] a certified kitchen, she said. Entrepreneurs in
Alaska are renting kitchen space from restaurant owners during
the time when the restaurant is closed, but this is limiting
because there are not enough [restaurant kitchens] available.
Conversation is currently ongoing between the Division of
Agriculture, Department of Natural Resources, and the Anchorage
School District about using the district's certified [kitchen]
facility. She said HB 217 seeks to open up some of those
opportunities.
1:44:36 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR noted that HB 217 also includes provisions for raw
milk that were previously in proposed HB 46, a bill about
product procurement preference statute and marketing for Alaska
Grown. She explained that it was decided to split out the raw
milk from HB 46 and put it into HB 217 because HB 217 is more
about regulation.
CO-CHAIR TARR reviewed the provisions in HB 217. She said the
first section of HB 217 includes statutory references to some of
the new things that are being added, including the raw milk.
Section 2 is about raw milk sales, which, she allowed, some
people find controversial. However, she pointed out,
individuals are currently able to buy raw milk through cow
shares, which is a bit difficult to manage and doesn't provide
as much opportunity for small-scale retail sales. She said that
opening up raw milk sales would allow direct producer-to-
consumer sales with [required product] labeling. Someone having
concerns about raw milk can take it home and boil it, which is
essentially pasteurization. Also accomplished would be the
support of an Alaskan business and Alaskan family with dollars
that will stay in the Alaskan economy. Section 3, she
continued, is about the exemptions. It provides that these
products can be sold but must be sold to the end consumer, the
products are only for home consumption and not for commercial
sales in any way, sales occur only within the state, and the
sale of meat products is not involved except for the specific
exemptions listed. Section 3 includes the wording of the
information that must be provided to the consumer and how the
wording must be displayed for the consumer to see and read.
CO-CHAIR TARR stated that since passage of its legislation,
Wyoming has been a huge increase in local food production sales,
access to local foods, and economic development. Interest in
local food production is growing in Alaska, she said. It is a
great business opportunity and helps food security and increases
in the aforementioned would be great for Alaska. She again drew
attention to the various materials and articles included in the
committee packet. She noted that Colorado entitled its bill
"The Cottage Food Act." Other states are doing this, she
continued, and foodborne illnesses have not increased in those
states.
CO-CHAIR TARR noted she is not trying to move HB 217 today, but
rather she is providing preliminary information on the bill.
Over the coming summer, she said, she will be engaging farmers
and others in the bill so that further work can be done on it.
1:50:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND said she shops at the Spenard Farmers
Market near her home in Anchorage, at which an organic farmer
from Sutton sells her produce every weekend. She offered her
understanding that this farmer is already allowed to produce
food at her farm and sell it without a license. However, she
continued, this farmer is finding that the Municipality of
Anchorage's health department is limiting what can be sold in
the farmers markets. A way must be figured out to set these
farmers free, she said, because many come from outside the
municipality and are suddenly restricted from food freedom when
they hit the municipality's border. She asked whether that
would be allowed within this bill so that municipalities can be
helped in being less bureaucratic, especially in regard to
farmers markets, which have been so successful.
CO-CHAIR TARR responded that state statute would supersede
municipal code on that issue. The Alaska Administrative Code
includes some existing exemptions, she said, but specifically
putting it in statute allows for being very prescriptive in what
kind of exemptions are wanted. That is one of the reasons for
not trying to push this quickly, she pointed out. Once a bill
is introduced, those people who are interested will start
responding and time will be spent with each regulatory agency.
People are worried about public health, a concern that she also
shares. However, she continued, a balance can be struck between
informed consumer choice and managing for consumer health.
1:53:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO expressed his support for the bill,
thanked the sponsor for her comments on startup businesses as
the state tries to develop its agriculture, and agreed that a
starting point is needed. He shared that during his youth he
enjoyed raw milk and recalled that it develops many layers once
bottled and that these layers have many benefits to them. He
further recalled the adjustment he had to make when he went from
raw milk to store-bought milk. He said the bill would be
beneficial to all the state's growers and those people who want
to start doing this.
CO-CHAIR TARR replied she received many comments about raw milk
when [HB 46] was introduced, most of them in support. Several
of those emails, she related, included similar stories about the
benefits of raw milk. The point of HB 217 is to allow consumers
the choice of such things as a raw milk option. She noted that
Fred Meyer's grocery store carries raw milk cheese as one option
for consumers to select from, and she would like to see these
opportunities made available to Alaska farmers.
1:55:50 PM
HB 217 was held over.
HB 218-STATE VETERINARIAN;ANIMALS;PRODUCTS
1:56:34 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 218, "An Act relating to the state
veterinarian and to animals and animal products."
1:56:40 PM
CO-CHAIR TARR, prime sponsor, explained that HB 218 is an
attempt to strengthen agriculture opportunities in Alaska by
moving the position of state veterinarian from its current
location within the Department of Environmental Conservation
(DEC) to the Division of Agriculture, Department of Natural
Resources (DNR). Many states have a Department of Agriculture,
she said, but Alaska doesn't and instead has a Division of
Agriculture. Typically, state veterinarians are housed with
agriculture because of the close relationship to inspecting
livestock and supporting agriculture. She noted that Alaska's
state veterinarian has responsibilities related to livestock and
agriculture as well as for illnesses, shellfish testing, and
environmental health testing.
CO-CHAIR TARR pointed out that moving the state veterinarian
position from DEC's environmental lab and integrating it into
the Division of Agriculture is not as simple as is outlined in
the bill. Bringing forth the bill is the first phase of the
idea of moving the position, she explained, and the next phase
is working together on the necessary structural changes to be
included. Current statute specifically places some of the
responsibilities for the state veterinarian under DEC, and
Legislative Legal Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, has
advised that this needs to be resolved. If the position is
moved, she continued, the more complex part will be deciding
whether to reclassify some of the support staff under the
veterinarian and whether to reclassify some of the
responsibilities. It will be necessary to resolve who is housed
where, who is responsible for what, and whether it means
different positions, she said, so there is reason to be
thoughtful and do it right. For example, shellfish testing
might stay with the environmental health lab while things
related to livestock and typical agriculture responsibilities
would go over to the Division of Agriculture.
2:00:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH inquired whether it would be DEC's or the
Division of Agriculture's responsibility should avian flu come
to Alaska, given that avian flu would be an issue of health and
well-being of the population.
CO-CHAIR TARR replied that health-related illness testing is
currently the responsibility of DEC. She deferred the question
to DEC.
CHRISTINA CARPENTER, Director, Division of Environmental Health,
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), responded that
DEC has authority over a disease outbreak in animals and in
domestic poultry. She said her division's Food Safety and
Sanitation Program coordinates that effort with the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), Department of the Interior.
Coordination across agencies and programs is required because
avian flu could spread from a domestic flock to wild flocks or
to the human population.
CO-CHAIR TARR remarked she is glad for the question because it
shows the problem of overlapping jurisdiction.
2:02:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked which agency would take care of a
problem involving raw milk sickness.
CO-CHAIR TARR answered it would be DEC. She invited Ms.
Carpenter to present DEC's statement on the bill.
MS. CARPENTER said DEC is very supportive of Representative
Tarr's efforts to grow the agricultural industry in Alaska and
looks forward to working on this with DNR and others during the
interim. She pointed out the importance of recognizing that the
agricultural and fishing industries are dependent on the work
that the state is performing as part of the larger food safety
and animal health team within DEC. She said DEC is willing to
work together to try to find the resources that the Division of
Agriculture needs to implement its plans to grow the agriculture
industry in Alaska, while continuing to meet DEC's
responsibilities and demands.
2:03:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER inquired whether DEC has a position on
the raw milk bill.
MS. CARPENTER replied that her division is looking forward to
continuing the conversations with the stakeholders during the
interim. The existing cow share program has seemed to work for
the individuals who want to obtain raw milk. If it needs to be
revisited, the division can be part of those discussions.
2:05:04 PM
ARTHUR KEYES, director, Division of Agriculture, DNR, pointed
out that 74 percent of the departments or divisions of
agriculture throughout the U.S. are organized with the state
veterinarian under the purview of those departments of
agriculture. If given the opportunity to be like those other
departments of agriculture, a state veterinarian in his division
would be focused on agriculture, including animal imports,
certifications, licenses, and problems and issues with meat,
fiber, and dairy production. He said the greatest opportunity
would be education and outreach, specifically to farmers,
because the opportunities for the farmers to learn are
tremendous. There would also be work with consumers and other
issues would be opportunities with getting animals to market and
quarantine authority. A recent issue, he noted, is wild sheep,
which is an odd issue in that the farmers are looking to the
Division of Agriculture for help. However, he explained, the
Division of Agriculture is the odd man out in that it doesn't
have a voice in the conversation because it doesn't have the
authority since the state veterinarian is housed in DEC.
MR. KEYES stated that the industries of animal care, nutrition,
poultry, and livestock have been growing and many younger people
are coming in. For example, he continued, the Matanuska-Susitna
Coop is a dynamic organization that is putting locally produced
eggs on the grocery shelves. That tells him that the industry
is growing and there is tremendous opportunity, and if his
division had a state veterinarian like other departments of
agriculture his division would be there helping this industry
grow. A state veterinarian housed within the Division of
Agriculture, he said, would focus on strengthening the
agriculture businesses in Alaska and increasing Alaska's food
security. Agriculture is growing, he reiterated, animal import
numbers are up, and the opportunity for the industry to continue
growing is there.
2:08:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER requested Mr. Keyes to expound on the
sheep and goat issue that was mentioned.
MR. KEYES qualified that he is not an expert on this issue and
the issue is outside the purview of his division. He explained
that the Wild Sheep Foundation has put Proposition 90 before the
[Board of Game]. This proposition would have the Board of Game
remove sheep and goats from the "clean list," a de facto way of
making it so sheep and goats cannot be imported and would
require fencing of these animals that is not economical from a
production standpoint. The agriculture community views this
proposition as very unpalatable, he said, because it would
damage the producers that have sheep and goats in Alaska. The
state veterinarian is the one who makes the decision as to
whether sheep and goats are still a livestock animal and a clean
animal that can still be raised in Alaska. The agriculture
community is looking at the Division of Agriculture because they
are viewing this as an agriculture issue, he continued, but the
division is in the very strange situation of not having the
voice to make a decision in this regard.
2:11:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked what the clean issue is about.
MR. KEYES responded that domesticated sheep and goats could
carry disease that wild sheep and goats don't have and don't
have immunity to. When a wild sheep or goat comes in contact
with a domesticated animal carrying the disease, the disease can
be transmitted to the wild animal. He offered his understanding
that the prevalence of the disease of concern is suspected to be
incredibly low, especially in Alaska. The argument he has heard
is that the concern is being blown out of proportion. He said
he further understands that the Wild Sheep Foundation is an
outside group that is developing chapters within Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER inquired whether there have been any
cases in Alaska of the disease that is being talked about.
MR. KEYES deferred to the state veterinarian for an answer, but
said his understanding is that there have been no cases that
warrant this kind of concern.
2:13:20 PM
CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON recalled that between 1815 and the 1820's
there were problems throughout the Midwest with people becoming
sick and sometimes dying from consumption of bad milk. He asked
whether Mr. Keyes knows what that was about and whether it is no
longer a concern.
MR. KEYES replied he cannot speak to that.
CO-CHAIR TARR interjected that some problems with milk are
attributed to problems with cleanliness. Even with provisions
[in legislation], there would still be a need for someone to do
inspections, she said. The farmers must be relied upon to not
milk from a cow that has any kind of sickness. While Alaska
doesn't yet have a huge dairy industry, she continued, it is an
industry that people want to see expanded for the production of
milk and cheeses. People were very disappointed when the
Matanuska creamery went out of business because it was a
reduction in the industry rather than an expansion. She posited
that the bill might be something that would improve things.
2:15:24 PM
MR. KEYES stated that DEC is currently doing a lot of work that
wouldn't be appropriate to agriculture. He said DEC is doing a
tremendous amount of important work for the state, but DEC's
mission is different than that of the Division of Agriculture.
CO-CHAIR TARR responded that if things were to be re-organized
then there would need to be a sorting out of who has what
responsibilities.
2:16:32 PM
JOHANNA HERRON, development specialist, Division of Agriculture,
DNR, in response to Co-Chair Tarr, said the farmers markets open
at various time throughout the state, but some start toward the
end of May. She said the division would make a schedule
available as soon as the information is received from the market
managers.
[HB 218 was held over.]
2:20:12 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:20 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 197 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HRES 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/19/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/26/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/28/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/1/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 197 |
| HB197 Version J 4.5.2017.pdf |
HRES 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/19/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/26/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/28/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/1/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 197 |
| HB197 Sectional Analysis ver J 4.6.2017.pdf |
HRES 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/19/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/26/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/28/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/1/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 197 |
| HB197 Fiscal Note - DNR-PMC 4.7.17.pdf |
HRES 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/19/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/26/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/28/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/1/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 197 |
| HB197 Supporting Document - Article. Seed Bill 4.9.17.pdf |
HRES 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/19/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/26/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 4/28/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/1/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 197 |
| HB 201 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HCRA 4/11/2017 8:00:00 AM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 201 |
| HB 201 vers A 3.30.17.PDF |
HCRA 4/11/2017 8:00:00 AM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 201 |
| HB 201 1982 AG Opinion.pdf |
HCRA 4/11/2017 8:00:00 AM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 201 |
| HB 201 Case law.pdf |
HCRA 4/11/2017 8:00:00 AM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 201 |
| HB 201 Matsu Ordinance 3.21.2017.pdf |
HCRA 4/11/2017 8:00:00 AM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 201 |
| HB 201 Muni Trapping Codes.pdf |
HCRA 4/11/2017 8:00:00 AM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 201 |
| HB 201 News Articles.pdf |
HCRA 4/11/2017 8:00:00 AM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 201 |
| HB201-DFG-DWC-04-07-17.pdf |
HCRA 4/11/2017 8:00:00 AM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 201 |
| HB 201 LAA Legal Memos.pdf |
HCRA 4/11/2017 8:00:00 AM HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 201 |
| HB217 Version A 4.16.17.PDF |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/7/2018 1:00:00 PM HRES 2/14/2018 1:00:00 PM |
HB 217 |
| HB217 Supporting Document - Wyoming Expands Food Freedom Act 4.16.17.PDF |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 217 |
| HB217 Supporting Document - USDA Wrongly Targets Wyoming's Food Freedom Act 4.16.17.PDF |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 217 |
| HB217 Supporting Document - Colorado Cottage Foods Act Fact Sheet 4.16.17.PDF |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 217 |
| HB217 Supporting Document - Article Natural News 4.16.17.PDF |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 217 |
| HB217 Supporting Document - Article Mother Earth Jones 4.16.17.PDF |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 217 |
| HB217 Supporting Document - Colorado Cottage Foods Act.pdf |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 217 |
| HB217 Fiscal Note - DEC-EHL 04-07-17.pdf |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 217 |
| HB217 Fiscal Note - DEC-FSS 4.7.17.pdf |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 217 |
| HB218 Sponsor Statement 4.11.17.pdf |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/1/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 218 |
| HB218 Version A 4.16.17.PDF |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM HRES 5/1/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 218 |
| HB217 Sponsor Statement 4.17.17.pdf |
HRES 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 217 |