03/18/1998 04:22 PM House RLS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE RULES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 18, 1998
4:22 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Pete Kott, Chairman
Representative Gail Phillips
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Al Vezey
Representative William K.(Bill) Williams
Representative Kim Elton
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Irene Nicholia
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 168
"An Act relating to use of traditional means of access to assist in
taking game or fish and to traditional means of access for
traditional outdoor activities on land and water set aside for fish
and game purposes; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED HB 168(RLS) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 44
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska
relating to redistricting of the legislature.
- MOVED CSHJR 44(RLS) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 209
"An Act relating to the Task Force on Privatization; and providing
for an effective date."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 168
SHORT TITLE: TRADITIONAL ACCESS FOR TRADITIONAL ACTIVITIES
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) MASEK, Kohring
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
03/05/97 543 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
03/05/97 543 (H) RESOURCES, STATE AFFAIRS
02/05/98 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
02/05/98 (H) MINUTE(RES)
02/06/98 2232 (H) RES RPT CS(RES) 3DP 2DNP 2NR
02/06/98 2232 (H) DP: MASEK, OGAN, DYSON; DNP: JOULE
02/06/98 2232 (H) NICHOLIA; NR: HUDSON, GREEN
02/06/98 2233 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (F&G)
02/19/98 (H) STA AT 9:05 AM CAPITOL 102
02/19/98 MINUTE(STA)
02/24/98 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102
02/24/98 MINUTE(STA)
02/25/98 2420 (H) STA RPT CS(RES) 2DP 2DNP 3NR
02/25/98 2420 (H) DP: VEZEY, HODGINS; DNP: ELTON,
02/25/98 2421 (H) BERKOWITZ; NR: JAMES, IVAN, DYSON
02/25/98 2421 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (F&G) 2/6/98
02/25/98 2421 (H) REFERRED TO RLS
03/11/98 2605 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KOHRING
03/18/98 (H) RLS AT 4:00 PM CAPITOL 124
BILL: HJR 44
SHORT TITLE: REAPPORTIONMENT BOARD & REDISTRICTING
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) PORTER, MULDER, Dyson, Green
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/12/98 2020 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/98
01/12/98 2020 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/12/98 2020 (H) JUDICIARY, FINANCE
01/14/98 2048 (H) COSPONSOR(S): DYSON
01/23/98 2121 (H) COSPONSOR(S): GREEN
02/06/98 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
02/06/98 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/11/98 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/16/98 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
02/18/98 2342 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 4DP 2DNP
02/18/98 2343 (H) DP: ROKEBERG, PORTER, GREEN, BUNDE;
02/18/98 2343 (H) DNP: CROFT, BERKOWITZ
02/18/98 2343 (H) 2 FNS (LAW, GOV)
02/27/98 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/03/98 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/03/98 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/04/98 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/04/98 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/05/98 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/05/98 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/06/98 2534 (H) FIN RPT CS(FIN) NT 5DP 3DNP 2NR
03/06/98 2535 (H) DP: THERRIAULT, HANLEY, MULDER,
KELLY,
03/06/98 2535 (H) FOSTER; DNP: KOHRING, DAVIES,
03/06/98 2535 (H) GRUSSENDORF; NR: MARTIN, DAVIS
03/06/98 2535 (H) 2 FISCAL NOTES (LAW, GOV) 2/18/98
03/18/98 (H) RLS AT 4:00 PM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY MASEK
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 432
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-2679
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 168.
EDDIE GRASSER, Legislative Assistant
to Representative Beverly Masek
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 432
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-2679
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 168.
ED DERSHAM, Member
Board of Fisheries
Box 555
Anchor Point, Alaska 99556
Telephone: (907) 235-5555
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 168.
ROY BURKHART
P.O. Box 204
Willow, Alaska 99677
Telephone: (907) 495-6337
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 168.
CLIFF JUDKINS, President
Alaska Boating Association
P.O. Box 871310
Wasilla, Alaska 99687
Telephone: (907) 373-3591
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 168.
LEE STONER
940 Serrano Drive
Wasilla, Alaska 99654
Telephone: (907) 376-9488
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 168.
ROD ARNO, President
Alaska Outdoor Council
P.O. Box 2790
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Telephone: (907) 376-2913
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 168.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 98-5, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN PETE KOTT called the House Rules Standing Committee
meeting to order at 4:22 p.m. Members present at the call to order
were Representatives Kott, Porter, Williams, and Elton.
Representatives Phillips and Vezey arrived at 4:27 p.m. and 4:47
p.m., respectively.
HB 168 - TRADITIONAL ACCESS FOR TRADITIONAL ACTIVITIES
Number 0065
CHAIRMAN KOTT said the first order of business would be HB 168, "An
Act relating to use of traditional means of access to assist in
taking game or fish and to traditional means of access for
traditional outdoor activities on land and water set aside for fish
and game purposes; and providing for an effective date," sponsored
by Representative Masek. He noted there is a proposed committee
substitute dated 3/12/98, Utermohle, Version H.
Number 0097
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER moved that the committee adopt the
proposed CSHB 168, Version H, dated 3/12/98. There being no
objection, CSHB 168, Version H, was before the committee.
Number 0122
REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY MASEK came before the committee to explain
HB 168. She read the following statement into the record:
"House Bill 168 follows up on the efforts of this legislature to
ensure the general public continues to have reasonable access to
the land and the resources they own. This legislation protects
public access from arbitrary closures by the Department of Fish and
Game and the Boards of Fish and Game.
"Last year, the House and Senate passed HB 23 and SB 35 by
overwhelming majorities. These two bills dealt with public lands
and state parks. Over the past few years, board actions have
restricted motorized access in areas where it has been traditional.
The rationale revolved around settling user conflicts. However, it
should be noted that little recognition is given to the amount of
land and water already restricted in Alaska.
"Approximately 60 percent of Alaska is in federal land ownership
with much of that being restricted through federal regulations.
There is an additional 44 million acres of land or roughly 12
percent tied up in private ownership where access restrictions are
in place. Add to that the many acres of state land that is already
restricted, one can see that further restrictions must be based
upon considerations other than conflicts between motorized and non-
motorized users.
"Last year, in November, the Board of Game took up proposals
involving access in game management unit 13. Although much of this
unit lies within the Nelchina public use area, which already has
statutory positions allowing motorized access, the board chose to
ignore that and pursue the question of whether that type of access
should come under some restrictions.
"Based on the continued actions of both the state and federal
agencies to continue to push for more and more restrictions on the
public's ability to access land and waters they own, the public's
fears are mounting though that the remaining lands open to access
will also be closed. House Bill 168. like House Bill 23 and Senate
Bill 35, will require legislative approval of any long term
closures that are made without sound evidence pertaining to public
safety or biological concerns.
"Mr. Chairman, I introduced House Bill 168 because I feel strongly
that we must balance the use of our public resources. Since public
agencies seem reluctant to recognize the large amounts of lands and
water in Alaska that are already closed to motorized access, I felt
that the legislature needed to set better guidelines for those
agencies when dealing with access issues. House Bill 23 was a step
in that direction last year and House Bill 168 will complete our
efforts in that area. I hope you and members of this committee
will help and join me in supporting public access."
Number 0432
CHAIRMAN KOTT referred to the term "biologically essential," and
asked if that is a term that is drawn from other sources.
EDDIE GRASSER, Legislative Assistant to Representative Beverly
Masek, Alaska State Legislature, said that "biologically essential"
is a new definition in statute, but it was presented to the
Department of Fish and Game. They have seen it and have approved
it.
CHAIRMAN KOTT referred to the new committee substitute, page 3, and
said there is some language that cleans up some concerns that the
Department of Fish and Game had about the over establishment of
refuges. He asked Mr. Grasser to comment on what the language does
or what the department's concern was before the language took care
of whatever their concern was.
Number 0520
MR. GRASSER said, "The (indisc.) draft that we told the drafter and
it was our concern that we did not impact standing refuges,
critical habitat areas or sanctuaries, or for that matter standing
controlled use areas. The bill in draft that we told the drafter,
and it was our concern that we did not impact standing refuges,
critical habitat areas or sanctuaries, or for that matter standing
controlled use areas. And the drafter, when they drafted the
language for the bill, put in number (4) on page 3 on line 15,
'expressly authorized under this chapter;'. The Department of Fish
and Game raised a concern that they didn't know if that would
really cover existing refuges, sanctuaries, et cetera. So after
that section, we added a new section like we did after the board
section in Section 1 that made it clear that any regulation
promulgated by the Board of Game, that took effect before January
1, 1998, would remain in effect. And the department has seen this
language also."
Number 0586
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked if the department is now comfortable with the
language.
MR. GRASSER responded in the affirmative.
Number 0599
REPRESENTATIVE GAIL PHILLIPS said she did receive a telephone call
from a board member who had a concern that the language in the
original proposal have affected the board's ability set regulations
dealing with the length and type of boats in different areas. She
asked if the new language takes care the department's concern.
Number 0737
MR. GRASSER stated that he had discussed that point with Lance
Nelson of the Attorney General's Office. It was never the intent
of Representative Masek to attach commercial fishing with this
bill. He said Mr. Nelson pointed out that there was a definition
of "traditional access" and that it includes commercial fishing.
Mr. Nelson agreed that probably excluded the board of the problem
of having to deal with commercial fishing and the problem
Representative Phillips raised about the board not being able to
deal with vessel length sizes, et cetera.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS asked if the committee substitute removes
the concern that the Board of Fish had.
MR. GRASSER said that is correct.
Number 0704
REPRESENTATIVE KIM ELTON referred to commercial fishing and the
definitions and asked if the ability of the Board of Fish would be
constrained to limit the length or size of outboards in some of the
sport fisheries like along the Kenai River.
MR. GRASSER responded that the Kenai River falls under the Division
of Parks regulations. He said the bill would not affect them as
far as the size of outboard motors.
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON said, "If the Board of Fish decides that
they're going to limit uses in the Mat-Su area or in different
systems based on size of motor or size of boat, would this
constrain their ability to manage those river fisheries by using
that tool?"
MR. GRASSER explained that the constraint would be that they could
only do it for a certain length of time if they wanted to do a
control use area. If they wanted to impact the number of people
using 240 horsepower motors for king salmon fishing, they would set
up a control use area or a restriction on those motors. They could
still do that under the legislation.
Number 0811
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON explained one of the things that bothers him
is the controlled use areas seem to be one of the tools in the tool
belt that either the Board of Game or the Board of Fish has. It is
not necessarily the only one that they could use, but it is one of
the tools that they have to separate different kinds of users. He
asked Mr. Grasser to address the constraints on the Board of Fish
or the Board of Game when you take that tool out the belt. He
asked if they would still have that tool. He asked if they would
have to use it on a yearly basis because of the time constraints.
MR. GRASSER stated, "Perhaps the best way to answer that question
would be to read a couple of the controlled use areas that are
currently in effect. Even though they would be protected under the
language of this bill as a standing control use area, I think that
would be good example of what could happen in a closed or in the
creation of a new controlled use area addressing your question."
He explained in the Tok area there is a controlled use that was
created while he was on the Board of Game called the Ladue control
use area. It closes motorized access in that particular area for
the moose season every fall, late August through late September.
He stated if that was not a control use area today, if the bill
became law and the board was to meet after it became effective,
they would still be able to meet and create some Ladue control use
area. It would be a standing control use area that (indisc.)
restriction on motorized access.
Number 0944
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS asked what traditional
outdoor activities mean.
MR. GRASSER said they tried to be specific about that in the bill.
He said each section relates what they can do. He said, "Section
1, the Board of Game may not control access or restrict access or
restriction access in assisting in taking game. The Board of
Fish (indisc.). In the third section it deals with refuges and
sanctuaries. On page 3, it says for the purpose of hunting,
fishing or trapping. So it's only -- and that's all the Board of
Fish or the Board of Game has control over in creating regulations
for access."
MR. GRASSER referred to the Nelchina public use area, which was
under consideration by the Board of Game this fall in Anchorage,
and said the board was considering putting restrictions on the use
of ORVs for the purpose of hunting and taking game. It was pointed
out by the Department of Law and the Department of Fish and Game to
the board that they could do that. However, they could not keep
other people that were not hunters from going in and out of there
on their ORVs which, according to the information the department
gathered, a fairly sizable portion of the ORV access in some areas
of the state, like unit 13, is strictly nonhunting and access that
shuts people out - recreating, berry picking or riding. The board
has no authority to restrict that under the current statute.
Number 1037
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS said if there is a shortage and everybody
wants to hunt or fish, and if there was a way that could be
controlled a little bit by saying, "There won't be any motorized
vehicles in this area, but you can go in and hunt anyway." He
asked if that scenario would be covered under the bill.
MR. GRASSER responded that it would be covered by the bill. He
pointed out that while he was on the Board of Game, they created
the Noatak control use area at the request of local people in
(indisc.), Noatak and the villages along the Noatak River because
they felt that their opportunity of being confined to the Noatak
River corridor - boats were being impacted by people flying into
the area from other parts of the state. The Noatak control use
area closes the Noatak River to the use of airplanes during the
fall moose season. He pointed out that the bill would still allow
the board to create a new control use area in another part of the
(indisc.). Mr. Grasser explained that he has met with some leaders
of the Native community to explain the bill. He pointed out that in
a lot of portions of rural Alaska, like Noatak, the Koyoukuk, and
several others in unit 19, there are restrictions in place that are
basically targeted at the peak hunting season. He referred to the
villagers and said because of the extended caribou season that
lasts most of the year in those areas, they still have the option
of using their snow machines or their ORVs at other times of the
year, other than the peak traffic time, to access wildlife
resources. Mr. Grasser stated that the bill does allow the board
to take care of the problem area of a peak use period which is
usually August and September as a standing control use area that
does not have to be revisited every year and does not have to come
before the legislature. It also allows some access further along
in the year. For example, in January when people from Sleetmute
want to get on their snow machine and access that (indisc.).
Number 1184
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS referred to a recent problem on the Kenai
Peninsula which has to do with restriction of access by the
Division of Parks. It is specifically for float planes and ski
planes in specific areas in of the state parks. She said the bill
doesn't address that, but she believes that is the next step.
Number 1232
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON said Mr. Grasser mentioned that the department
didn't have any strong reaction to the phrase "biologically
essential." He said he is assuming that the department is still
not in favor the bill.
MR. GRASSER responded in the affirmative.
Number 1292
ED DERSHAM, Member, Board of Fisheries, testified via
teleconference from Homer. He referred to a resolution passed by
the Board of Fisheries which was passed on March 5, 1998, and noted
copies have been sent to members of the legislature. Mr. Dersham
said they have a couple of concerns regarding the bill. The first
concern has been mentioned about the ability to restrict vessel
size in commercial fisheries. He said he has tried to get in touch
with Lance Nelson, but he wasn't available. Mr. Dersham said the
last time he spoke to him on March 5, he still wasn't comfortable
that the bill was clear enough to alleviate that concern. He said
he has noticed in the most recent version of the bill compared to
the last version, the definition of "traditional outdoor
activities" has been removed. That definition specifically did not
mention commercial fishing. He said his observation is that it
seems less clear in the most recent version that the intent is not
to include commercial fisheries. Mr. Dersham said the board's
position is that it is still not stated clearly enough.
Number 1384
ROY BURKHART testified via teleconference form the Mat-Su
Legislative Information Office (LIO). He informed the committee
that he is a 38-year resident of Alaska and is a member of the
Disabled American Veterans, but isn't speaking for that
organization. He thanked Representative Masek for introducing the
bill. Mr. Burkhart stated that he believes it is essential that we
have access to our land and to our waterways. He said, "Whether
this bill passes or not, the existing legislation governing the
Board of Game in item 3, it states that the Board of Game can
establish the means and methods employed in the pursuit, capture,
taking and transport of game. It goes on to say 'establish the
means and methods that may be employed by persons with physical
disabilities.'" Mr. Burkhart said a number of concerns have been
raised, but nobody talked about what adverse effects these
restrictions have on people with disabilities. He said, "For an
example, between Homer and Talkeetna there is 70 percent of our
state's population that live in these areas. There is one
exception for handicapped people in a whole area and this is what
it says, 'a person with physical disabilities may shoot game from
a motorized vehicle in portions of units 7 and 15 within the Kenai
National Wildlife Refuge. This person must require a wheel chair
for mobility, obtain a permit from the department and be in
compliance with the Kenai National Wildlife regulations.' Now this
same state will take the Northway Mall, which is a private
enterprise, require them to have so many handicapped parking places
by the door and also will issue the people a handicapped sticker
and it is a level paved parking lot. And this applies to people
that are not wheelchair bound. And so I would assume that if it's
a problem to walk on a paved parking lot, it would be a problem to
walk outdoors and try to hunt in things other than a wheelchair.
Even though the legislature specifically gave the Game Board that
authority, it's never been done except for one time." He said the
law exists and it tells them that that's what they're supposed to
do. He urged the committee to pass the legislation.
Number 1557
CLIFF JUDKINS, President, Alaska Boating Association, was next to
testify via teleconference from the Mat-Su LIO. He said the reason
he is testifying in favor of the bill is that the actions by
regulatory authorities to restrict access to traditional means of
taking game and fish when there is no biological reason to do so.
He referred to a 1996 spring closure of more than 2,000 acres in
the Tanana River for the use of air boats for the taking of moose,
including transportation of hunters' equipment and meat. There was
no reason for this other than someone did not like air boats or the
competition of the other hunters. Air boats are still allowed,
during the same period, in the area to hunt ducks, bear, small game
and for sightseeing. He pointed out that at the same time the
board took that action, they approved a cow season a (indisc.)
season and lengthened the general season for moose which indicated
the moose population in the area was healthy. When questioned, the
board member said noise was their reason, yet they allowed air
boats in the same area at the same time for other hunting and
fishing purposes.
MR. JUDKINS explained that HB 168 does not restrict the regulatory
authority of the departments to manage fish and game resources.
There are many methods of maintaining sustained yield populations
and you can find it extensively in the fish and game regulations.
He said his organization feels that all Alaskans should have access
to all of their game and fish resources by all traditional means as
long as maximum sustained yield goals are maintained. He thanked
the committee for allowing him to testify.
Number 1644
LEE STONER testified via teleconference from the Mat-Su LIO. He
explained there was a lot of deliberation during the Board of Game
hearings about ORVs, et cetera. There has been a tremendous
variety of vehicles used to access these areas as far back as he
can remember - back in the early 1950s. Even though there is a
considerably larger number of those vehicles in the field now, the
ones that are in the field considerable reduces (indisc.). He
spoke of military vehicles that were also used. Mr. Stoner
informed the committee that he is a handicapped hunter. He stated
he is strictly opposed to any further reduction in the use of
motorized vehicles for hunting and fishing. Mr. Stoner stated he
thinks it is important to introduce young people to the field and
when he introduced his children to the field, they were too young
to walk very far. He took them out in the field on a four-wheeler.
He urged the committee to pass the legislation.
Number 1777
ROD ARNO, President, Alaska Outdoor Council, came before the
committee to testify in support of HB 168. He said should the bill
become law, it would be advantageous to both the Board of Game and
the Board of Fisheries. He thanked Representative Masek for
introducing the bill. Mr. Arno said, "What it does and what we've
seen is we are seeing at the board process level people who are not
participating in hunting and fishing, but want only to stop it.
And by means of controlling hunting access, OR-vehicles, for
example. They can come to a public hearing and give testimony that
they are opposed to traditional access use where their intent is
just to stop all motorized vehicles on public lands." He stated
that he thinks that board members would be relieved to have a piece
of legislation like this that would allow them to create the same
control use areas that they could in the past and still open them
when it's not peak time for the season. He thanked the committee
for listening.
Number 1872
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS said she would like to propose an amendment
for the purpose of clarifying that the bill does not apply to
commercial fisheries. On page 2, line 5, after the word "fish"
insert "for sport or personal use". On page 3, line 4, after
"fishing" insert "for sport or personal use". She stated that
would clarify the concern. She then moved that the amendment be
adopted.
Number 1908
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated it would then read, "After January 1, 1998,
the Board of Fisheries may not adopt a regulation prohibiting the
use of a traditional means of access to assist in taking fish for
sport or personal use unless the prohibition is..."
Number 1922
REPRESENTATIVE AL VEZEY stated he is confused as to why we would
want to limit this to sport and personal use fish. There is still
a tremendous amount of authority by the department.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS stated that the concern did come from the
Board of Fisheries as far as the commercial fishing regulations in
that the language was very clear that this didn't apply to the
commercial fishing regulations dealing with size of boat and type
of gear. By adding the wording in, it is clarified and it makes
the law very clear that it doesn't apply to commercial fishing
(indisc.).
Number 1969
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS asked how the amendment would affect
subsistence.
MR. GRASSER stated that subsistence also needs to be added.
Number 2003
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS moved an amendment to the amendment to
include subsistence.
REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIPS stated the amendment would then read, "for
sport, subsistence or personal use."
Number 2028
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY said he is really confused. He asked how it
would apply if commercial fishing was under the subsistence
definition of the federal courts. He stated that his personal
analysis would be that personal use fits most subsistence that the
committee is talking about. Personal use wouldn't fit the
definition of commercial fishing under subsistence (indisc.).
MR. GRASSER stated that he doesn't believe that rules or
regulations promulgated under the federal system or the Federal
Subsistence Board would be impacted by a state regulation. They
supersede state regulations on the use of their land.
Number 2118
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY said that there has been litigation in the
Interior over the commercial sale of subsistence-caught roe. He
stated, "That is a state administered program, but they have to
comply with federal requirements like the rest of the state laws
do."
MR. GRASSER stated that is correct, however, he believes most of
those (indisc.) caught. He said he doesn't think there is an
access question involved because most of those fisheries are either
bank fisheries or fish wheel fisheries that are located on land
adjacent to the river system that belongs to the village in most
cases. It is not a situation where someone is trying to go across
state land to access the river which is what the bill addresses.
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY stated that the bill addresses the methods and
means of taking (and what we're talking about right now) fish. He
said he is curious why for sport and personal use it wouldn't
satisfy all of our definitions of what we're thinking of
subsistence. By including subsistence as a separate word, we could
be opening up the area of commercial subsistence fishing.
MR. GRASSER stated he thinks that is a separate issue as the bill
only addresses access and not whether people can catch fish under
subsistence regulations and sell them commercially. It strictly
deals with what the guidelines are before the board on access. It
doesn't provide any direction to the board about how they're
supposed to manage their fishery or whether they're supposed to
provide regulations or rules on the sale of fish.
Number 2211
REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY said he thought that the size of the boats is
why they want subsistence in the bill. He said he assumes that
access meant that you were going to approach the fishery in a 100-
foot boat or a 53-foot boat.
Number 2238
CHAIRMAN KOTT indicated that there is an amendment as amended. He
asked if there was an objection to the amended amendment. There
were no objections. Chairman Kott said the amendment is before the
committee. He asked if there was an objection to Amendment 1.
There being none, Amendment 1 was adopted.
Number 2264
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS stated it is his understanding that they
are not trying to set up definitions in the bill to go onto the
subsistence issue of traditional, cultural, or whatever. This
relates to traditional outdoor activities and doesn't pertain to
any traditional uses in the subsistence issue that the legislature
is trying to deal with.
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated that is his understanding as well. The
sponsor also has indicated that is her intent.
Number 2292
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON explained the thing that bothers him the most
about the approach is he thinks it is being sold on a notion that
we have a conflict between nonconsumptive users and consumptive
users. He said earlier hearing records reflect that most of the
conflicts of the Board of Fisheries and the Board of Game deals
with are conflicts between different kinds of consumptive users,
whether those conflicts are defined between different regions or
different means of access that consumptive users (indisc.). He
stated that he is concerned that the management regimes of both the
fisheries and game resources have become much more complex in
Alaska over 20 years. Representative Elton said he expects that
they're going to continue to become even more complex in the
future. That's what happens when there are new types of access and
more types of users.
Number 2363
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS made a motion to move CSHB 168, as amended,
out of committee with individual recommendations and with the
attached fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON objected.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Vezey, Phillips,
Porter, Williams and Kott voted in favor of the motion.
Representative Elton voted against the motion. So CSHB 168(RLS)
moved out of the House Rules Standing Committee.
HJR 44 - REAPPORTIONMENT BOARD & REDISTRICTING
Number 2445
CHAIRMAN KOTT announced the next order of business would be HJR 44,
"Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska
relating to redistricting of the legislature." The committee took
up HJR 44, Version 0-LS0528\N.
Number 2445
CHAIRMAN KOTT stated the sponsor, Representative Brian Porter, has
three housekeeping amendments.
TAPE 98-5, SIDE B
Number 0006
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated there are two main provisions in the
election laws in the bill - changing the appointment of the
reapportionment and redistricting panel by the governor to the
chief justice of the Alaska Supreme Court, and establishing single-
member districts for both the House of Representatives and Senate.
The bill has gone through a number of reiterations and once the
dust finally settled there were three amendments that were needed
to clean it up.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated Amendment 1 (0-LS0528\N.1, Glover,
3/9/98) reads as follows:
Page 3, lines 23-25:
Delete "[THE BOARD SHALL ELECT ONE OF ITS MEMBERS
CHAIRMAN AND MAY EMPLOY TEMPORARY ASSISTANTS.]"
Insert "The board shall elect one of its members
chairman and may employ temporary assistants."
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER explained Amendment 1 merely reinstates
language in the constitution that was taken out under a different
reiteration that called for the chairman to be appointed in a
different way. Now that it has returned to a single-appointment
authority, the language needs to reflect it.
Number 0053
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked the committee members whether everybody
understands Amendment 1. It reinserts language that was taken out.
Number 0057
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER made a motion to adopt Amendment 1. There
being no objection, it was so adopted.
Number 0067
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated Amendment 2 (0-LS0528\N.2, Glover
3/9/98) reads as follows:
Page 5, following line 13:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"*Sec. 11. Article XV, Constitution of the State of
Alaska, is amended by adding a new section to read:
Section 29. Applicability of Amendments Providing
for Redistricting of the Legislature. The 1998
amendments relating to redistricting of the
legislature (art. VI and art. XIV) apply only to
plans for redistricting and proclamations of
redistricting adopted on or after January 1, 2001."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER explained Amendment 2 deals with language
suggested by the Legislative Legal Counsel Division. It inserts
Section 11, a provision that indicates the amendments relating to
redistricting would only apply to plans for redistricting adopted
on or after January 1, 2001. "We do not want to set up a situation
where because of the effective date of the bill we would perhaps
have a plan that was not in conformance with the constitution, and
consequently--or the law, and consequently could be challenged
prior to this becoming effective with the new adoption of the new
plan." It is language to merely reduce litigation.
Number 0109
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER made a motion to adopt Amendment 2. There
being no objection, it was so adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated Amendment 3 (0-LS0528\N.5, Glover,
3/10/98) reads as follows:
Page 1, line 10:
Delete "after"
Insert "following the official reporting of"
Page 2, line 1:
Delete "after"
Insert "following the official reporting of"
Page 2, line 9:
Following "the":
Insert "official decennial"
Following "census":
Insert "of the United States"
Page 3, line 13:
Delete "a"
Insert "an official"
Following "census":
Insert "of the United States"
Page 3, line 31:
Delete "release"
Insert "official reporting"
Delete "population data"
Insert "of the United States"
Page 4, line 5:
Following "and the":
Insert "official reporting of the"
Delete "population data has been released"
Insert "of the United States"
Page 4, line 16:
Following "census":
Insert "of the United States"
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER explained Amendment 3 makes changes
throughout the bill. The effect is to describe the census as the
official United States decennial census so that there would not be
confusion, and to prevent somebody else from doing a census thereby
creating litigation.
Number 0161
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER made a motion to adopt Amendment 3.
Number 0165
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON stated he thought it was done to prevent
redistricting in the period of time when a census was taken and
before it was officially complied by the United States Census
Bureau. It means that the redistricting process would not begin
until after the official reporting of the bureau. He asked
Representative Porter how long a period of time would that be.
Number 0195
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER replied the appointment of the
reapportionment board should happen a month or so before the
official United States census report (early January). The bill
provides that when both of those two things have happened the work
begins. The only effect of the amendment is to make sure that any
reference to a census is the official United States decennial
census.
CHAIRMAN KOTT asked the committee members whether there is any
objection to the motion to adopt Amendment 3. There being no
objection, it was so adopted.
Number 0246
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS made a motion to move the proposed CSHJR
44(FIN), as amended, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the attached fiscal note(s).
REPRESENTATIVE ELTON objected. A roll call vote was taken.
Representatives Williams, Phillips, Porter and Kott voted in favor
of moving the bill. Representatives Elton and Vezey voted against
moving the bill. So CSHJR 44(RLS) was moved from the House Rules
Standing Committee.
Number 0284
CHAIRMAN KOTT recessed the House Rules Standing Committee to the
call of the chair at 5:16 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|