Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/19/1996 08:05 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 19, 1996
8:05 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jeannette James, Chair
Representative Scott Ogan, Vice Chair
Representative Joe Green
Representative Ivan Ivan
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Caren Robinson
Representative Ed Willis
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present.
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Confirmation of Greg Roczicka to the Board of Game.
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
Confirmation of Anne K. Ruggles to the Board of Game.
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
Confirmation of Victor Van Ballenberghe to the Board of Game.
- CONFIRMATION ADVANCED
HOUSE BILL NO. 383
"An Act relating to reimbursement by the state to municipalities
and certain established villages for services provided to
individuals incapacitated by alcohol; and providing for an
effective date."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 371
"An Act relating to the rights of terminally ill persons."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
No Previous Action.
WITNESS REGISTER
GREG ROCZICKA, Appointee
Board of Game
P.O. Box 513
Bethel, Alaska 99559
Telephone: (907) 543-2903
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding the confirmation.
ANNE K. RUGGLES, Appointee
Board of Game
P.O. Box 82950
Fairbanks, Alaska 99708
Telephone: (907) 474-3755
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding the confirmation.
VICTOR VAN BALLENBERGHE, Appointee
Board of Game
8941 Winchester Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
Telephone: (907) 344-1613
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding the confirmation.
LEO KEELER
3810 Crosson Circle
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Telephone: (907) 561-8796
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of Mr.
Ballenberghe, Mr. Roczicka, and Ms. Ruggles.
ROBERT NANCE
3005 Carroll Lane
Anchorage, Alaska 99517
Telephone: (907) 248-4619
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of Mr.
Ballenberghe.
JAY MASSEY
P.O. Box 429
Girdwood, Alaska 99587
Telephone: (907) 783-2129
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of Mr.
Ballenberghe.
WARREN OLSON
5961 Orth Circle
Anchorage, Alaska 99516
Telephone: (907) 346-1811
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Mr.
Ballenberghe and Ms. Ruggles.
MARVIN PARK, Legislative Vice President
Alaska Bow Hunters
HC67 Box 1222
Anchor Point, Alaska 99556
Telephone: (907) 235-8125
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Mr.
Ballenberghe and Ms. Ruggles.
DAN HASKINS
P.O. Box 157
Anchor Point, Alaska 99556
Telephone: (907) 235-2502
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Mr.
Ballenberghe.
TRISH WURTZ
P.O. Box 82864
Fairbanks, Alaska 99708
Telephone: (907) 479-5688
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of Mr.
Ballenberghe.
KATHERINE RICHARDSON
P.O. box 80766
Fairbanks, Alaska 99708
Telephone: (907) 479-2362
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of Ms. Ruggles.
JAMES DAVIS
2285 Truly Faire Lane
Fairbanks, Alaska 99709
Telephone: (907) 455-6780
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of Mr.
Ballenberghe.
NAT GOOD, Member
Delta Junction Fish and Game Advisory Committee
P.O. Box 867
Delta Junction, Alaska 99737
Telephone: (907) 895-6282
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Mr.
Ballenberghe.
JOHN ZABIELSKI
P.O. Box 453
Tok, Alaska 99780
Telephone: (907) 883-5506
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of Mr.
Ballenberghe.
ROBERT BROWN
P.O. Box 3448
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
Telephone: (907) 262-2227
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Ms.
Ruggles.
ROY BURKHART
P.O. Box 204
Willow, Alaska 99688
Telephone: (907) 495-6337
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Ms.
Ruggles and Mr. Ballenberghe.
ELIZABETH BURKHART
P.O. Box 204
Willow, Alaska 99688
Telephone: (907) 495-6337
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Ms.
Ruggles and Mr. Ballenberghe.
DAVID GRINDE
P.O. Box 3236
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Telephone: (907) 376-3275
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Mr.
Ballenberghe and Ms. Ruggles.
WAYNE WOODS
P.O. Box 3037
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Telephone: (907) 376-3892
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Mr.
Ballenberghe and Ms. Ruggles.
GARY PAHL
P.O. Box 878549
Wasilla, Alaska 99687
Telephone: (907) 376-7610
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Ms.
Ruggles and Mr. Ballenberghe.
KEN RIVARD
P.O. Box 871842
Wasilla, Alaska 99687
Telephone: (907) 376-2140
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Ms.
Ruggles and Mr. Ballenberghe.
LEONARD HAIRE
P.O. Box 1043
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Telephone: Not available.
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Ms.
Ruggles.
EDDIE GRASSER, Member
Alaska Outdoor Council
4506 Robbie Road
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 463-3830
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Ms.
Ruggles and Mr. Ballenberghe and support of Mr. Roczicka.
CARL ROSIER, Vice President
Territorial Sportsman Inc.
P.O. Box 20761
Juneau, Alaska 99802
Telephone: (907) 463-3830
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in opposition to Ms.
Ruggles and Mr. Ballenberghe and support of Mr. Roczicka.
JOEL BENNETT
Address not available.
Telephone: (907) 586-1255
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided testimony in support of Ms. Ruggles
and Mr. Ballenberghe.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 96-36, SIDE A
Number 0015
The House State Affairs Committee was called to order by Chair
Jeannette James at 8:05 a.m. Members present at the call to order
were Representatives Willis, Ogan, Green, Ivan, Porter, Robinson
and James. No members were absent.
The first order of business to come before the House State Affairs
Committee was the confirmation hearing of Greg Roczicka to the
Board of Game.
CHAIR JEANNETTE JAMES explained the three applicants were on-line
via teleconference. She asked for a brief statement from each
before opening up the floor to questions from the committee
members.
Number 0165
GREG ROCZICKA said he had lived in Bethel almost his entire life.
He had always wanted to be a game warden since a small child, and
had always been interested in resource issues. He turned his
interests into a career about 10 years ago, and started practicing
what he preached as part of the Association of Village Council
Presidents, Inc. During the last 10 years he had been a part of
many contentious issues in Bethel. He said when the seat became
open he submitted his name because there were not any
representatives on the board from his area.
CHAIR JAMES thanked Mr. Roczicka for his comments. She asked the
committee members if they had any questions.
Number 0291
REPRESENTATIVE ED WILLIS asked Mr. Roczicka if he had ever been
hunting, and what was his general philosophy towards hunting?
Number 0320
MR. ROCZICKA replied he had been hunting and fishing ever since he
was old enough to carry a rifle. He viewed hunting as a way to
obtain food.
Number 0379
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN explained the Board of Game was
controversial and a "heck of a lot of hard work." He further
explained a "hide thicker than a grizzly bear's" was needed to deal
with the pressure of the various interest groups. He asked Mr.
Roczicka why he would want to subject himself to that pressure?
Number 0425
MR. ROCZICKA replied he had been dealing with political controversy
for the past eight years. He did not view it as any different than
what he had already been doing, except at a higher and broader
level. He cited he worked on the United States - Canada Salmon
Treaty negotiations which was not an easy task. Furthermore, over
the past five years he had been a liaison between state and federal
managers on subsistence issues. He said he had callouses all over
his body now.
Number 0504
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN asked Mr. Roczicka if he had a strong
position on preferential hunting or hunting preferential for
individuals? He said he was skirting a very controversial issue.
He wondered, if he had a strong position on that issue, or was he
open to other positions.
Number 0544
MR. ROCZICKA replied the bottom line was to look at the harvest and
surplus of a population. However, a lot of that information was
not available. Furthermore, if there was enough to provide for
everybody and for all the desired uses, he did not have a problem.
However, if a person wanted to kill something, he believed it
needed to be put to use.
Number 0599
CHAIR JAMES asked Mr. Roczicka his basic philosophy of the
relationship between animals and humans?
Number 0618
MR. ROCZICKA replied as a result of growing up in the country side,
he had developed a deep respect for nature. He was thankful every
time he went out because he did not know if he would catch
something or not. He reiterated it was a relationship of deep
respect. He called it a religious experience or feeling, and it
was very difficult for him to explain in words.
Number 0658
CHAIR JAMES commented there was a growing population of people and
a natural declining population of animals. Some believed the
animals should be left alone, and some believed the animals should
be managed to prevent a further declining population. She asked
Mr. Roczicka, of the two approaches, which one did he prefer?
Number 0700
MR. ROCZICKA replied there must be a balance. He did not agree
with extreme views. A lot of it had to do with the lack of
understanding of either sides. He would suggest to someone to live
in the bush for any length of time to further understand both sides
of the issue.
Number 0782
REPRESENTATIVE CAREN ROBINSON asked Mr. Roczicka what special
qualifications would he bring to the Board of Game, above what was
already there?
Number 0802
MR. ROCZICKA replied he would bring a cooperative approach. He
cited due to his cooperative approach with the state, federal and
tribal entities, a dialogue existed now that was not there before.
He reiterated he would hope to bring that approach to the Board of
Game.
Number 0916
REPRESENTATIVE IVAN IVAN said "hello" to Mr. Roczicka. It had been
a while since he had talked to him. He commended him on his
survival through the controversial issues, and for his work in
Western Alaska.
Number 0938
CHAIR JAMES explained she had not heard anything negative about Mr.
Roczicka, only support. She appreciated his answers to the various
questions as well. She gave him a 100 percent rating.
Number 1125
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON wondered if today's public testimony was a
new policy. She was not aware of public testimony as part of a
confirmation hearing.
CHAIR JAMES replied that was her policy.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON replied she did not think it was wrong. It
had not been done in the past, however.
The next order of business to come before the House State Affairs
Committee was the confirmation hearing of Anne K. Ruggles to the
Board of Game.
Number 1168
ANNE K. RUGGLES said her primary interest in the Board of Game
peaked during her tenure on the Alaska Wolf Management Planning
Team. Prior to that she had only been an observer of the process.
She explained she was first appointed by Governor Hickel to the
board in 1993. She called her service a very challenging and
rewarding three years. She felt she knew the process well enough
to be an effective board member now. Furthermore, as a scientist
she also found it extremely rewarding. She explained scientists
sometimes tended to think they had all the answers and her service
on the board was a "wake up call." She explained there was a large
component of sociology, anthropology, values and cultural
experiences that needed to be added to the scientific process. She
reiterated she had to grow as a scientist as a result of her
service on the board.
Number 1274
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN commented her background was impressive and
her research was very commendable. He asked her, if she saw any
light at the end of the tunnel, regarding the management of
wildlife between federal requirements and the Alaska State
Constitution?
Number 1308
MS. RUGGLES replied she leaned towards the answer of "yes." She
believed there were people who wanted to make it work. The state
needed to talk more amongst itself, however. There were
definitions that needed to be agreed upon and cited there were
probably over 600,000 definitions of the word "subsistence" in the
state. She reiterated Alaska needed to continue to talk amongst
itself and to work at it.
Number 1372
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN commented, Ms. Ruggles voted against the
expansion of hunting opportunities for the Mulchatna caribou herd,
despite the fact that data indicated it was growing beyond its
range and the appropriate way to manage that herd would be to
liberalize some land and expand hunting opportunities. He asked
Ms. Ruggles to explain her vote.
Number 1402
MS. RUGGLES replied her vote did not have anything to do with the
expansion of hunting opportunities. She agreed there was plenty of
room to hunt the Mulchatna caribou herd. Her vote was a comment on
the negative hunting effect. She reiterated she did not have a
problem hunting the herd, she disagreed with the method, however.
Number 1445
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated it was essentially a meat hunt for the
locals. Furthermore, he asked her to confirm rumors that she was
seen promoting people to sign the wolf initiative petition.
Number 1476
MS. RUGGLES replied she could not comment on rumors because she did
not know the genesis of them. She stated she had nothing to do
with a wolf initiative petition. She explained she was asked by a
number of people about the petition, however. She was asked what
it contained and what it meant. In response she always suggested
to obtain a copy of the petition, study it, then decide if a
signature was appropriate.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked Ms. Ruggles if she supported the
petition?
MS. RUGGLES replied she did not like the petition process. It was
not a legitimate way to manage wildlife. She said it was a process
that people employed when they were frustrated with the system.
Number 1511
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked Ms. Ruggles if she supported same day
aerial hunting of wolves?
Number 1516
MS. RUGGLES replied she did not support it as a mechanism for
recreational or sport hunting. She said it was not an ethical
method of hunting. Many others, including hunters, believed it was
not ethical as well.
Number 1542
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked Ms. Ruggles if she supported same day
aerial hunting of wolves as a tool for tests of management mandated
by Alaska State Statute?
Number 1555
MS. RUGGLES replied, if it was a decision of the state to implement
a predator control program, she believed it was the most efficient
and effective way to kill the wolves.
Number 1570
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN responded that was a very carefully worded
answer. He asked her again if she supported it?
Number 1574
MS. RUGGLES replied, if it was used as a legitimate tool for a
given circumstance, she support it. The evidence indicated the
board was supporting that method.
Number 1587
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN commented Ms. Ruggles voted to close the
hunting opportunities at the Paint River bear hunt despite there
were other areas closed to bear hunting. He asked Ms. Ruggles why
she felt it was necessary to continue to restrict access and to
close areas to hunting?
Number 1605
MS. RUGGLES replied that was a special instance. The McNeil bear
area refuge was an area that many people, hunters, non-hunters, and
guides, felt was a high viewing area. Therefore, it was necessary
to protect the bear population and even individual bears. She did
not believe it should be done everywhere, however. She could not
recall another area that had such a high value for viewing as the
McNeil area. At the same time the board closed that area to bear
hunting, it also increased brown bear hunting for residents in
other areas.
Number 1660
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated there was not a biological reason to
close the McNeil area to bear hunting. There had been hunting for
20 years in that area without causing a detrimental impact on the
bear population. He asked Ms. Ruggles if her reasons were
scientific or emotional?
Number 1675
MS. RUGGLES replied the basis for her reasons were more complex
than that. She said she definitely had a philosophy when it came
to decision making on the board, and that philosophy derived from
her experiences as a human being and as a scientist. She explained
scientific information should not make the decision. Science could
only predict a particular action, and with some degree of
certainty, the reaction. Science was not designed to tell which
action to take, however. Her decision making process also included
legal, political and sociological considerations. She reiterated
science was a part of it, but it could not say which was the right
action to take. The other points needed to be considered as well.
Number 1762
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN commented Ms. Ruggles voted against black bear
bait hunting because it was unethical, according to a quote in the
Anchorage Daily News. He asked Ms. Ruggles to explain what she
meant by that comment.
Number 1793
MS. RUGGLES replied the decision to vote against black bear bait
hunting included all the components mentioned earlier. She cited
a work published by the Department of Fish and Game in February of
1994, found it was not an ethical way to hunt. The process favored
humans rather than a true hunt between humans and wildlife.
Number 1844
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN commented on Ms. Ruggles' statement regarding
the action and reaction of science. He wondered if she was
questioning science, or the position of her votes based on
scientific values.
Number 1875
MS. RUGGLES replied science could not say which action was the
right one to take. Furthermore, it could only predict with a
degree of certainty, the reaction. Therefore, there were any
number of actions that could be taken resulting in any number of
reactions. She reiterated, science could not tell which action to
take, it was a decision of society.
Number 1900
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered if she was questioning that science
was not the final answer.
MS. RUGGLES replied, "right." It was not the final answer.
Number 1905
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked how many years did Ms. Ruggles serve
on the Board of Game?
MS. RUGGLES replied, "three years."
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON further asked Ms. Ruggles for examples of
her actions that supported hunting.
Number 1921
MS. RUGGLES replied she had supported hunting many times. She
cited, as examples, increased goat hunting opportunities, increased
variety of weapons available for use on hunts, and increased
caribou hunting opportunities. She also worked on creating the
wild hunt on Round Island. She further cited increased dealer bag
limits in a number of places, wolf trapping seasons, and martin
seasons as examples where access and weapon creativity were looked
at.
Number 1984
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Ms. Ruggles if she was a hunter
herself?
Number 1989
MS. RUGGLES replied she and her husband did not hunt for themselves
because they did not eat enough meat to warrant the hunt. However,
they did go hunting with friends and shared a portion of the meat
with them.
Number 2007
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS asked Ms. Ruggles to respond to the letter
from Senator Bert Sharp dated March 13, 1996.
Number 2028
MS. RUGGLES replied she had not seen the letter so she could not
respond to it.
CHAIR JAMES announced it would be faxed to her.
Number 2052
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS read the following letter into the record.
"Date: March 13, 1996
"To: Representative Jeanette James
"From: Senator Bert Sharp
"RE: Ann Ruggles re-appointment to the Board of Game
"Ann Ruggles record as a Board of Game member is clear. She has
consistently been a dissenting vote against hunting activities and
proposals to increase depressed moose and caribou herd size by
active management.
"She has supported the elimination of hunting via closing areas,
eliminating or reducing open seasons, restricting methods and means
of taking and promoting bio-diversity which is keyed to removing
human harvest from the equation of beneficial uses of the game
resources.
"Her philosophy is clearly illustrated by her own words on her
resume. `My goal is to devise ways in which humans can exist in
the natural world with minimal impact on the natural systems.'
"She is not qualified to serve as an objective policymaker in the
management of game resources as required by the Constitution and
laws of Alaska.
"I strongly urge Ms. Ruggles NOT be confirmed by the Legislature."
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS asked Ms. Ruggles to respond to the letter.
Number 2152
MS. RUGGLES said according to her voting record, she voted in favor
of all instances that increased opportunities without harming the
wildlife in question. She could not respond to the specific
concerns of Senator Sharp because she could not recall any specific
long conversations with him. It appeared, however, he was
concerned about a hand full of votes that apparently colored her
entire voting record. Furthermore, the requirements of the Board
of Game were to reflect the diversity of values and experiences
held by Alaskans. There were many Alaskans that believed human
beings existed in the natural world. She called the statement in
her resume a general global statement. Her goal was to manage the
system so that in 100 years there was a continued need to have a
Board of Game, and the systems were still largely intact. That was
the best answer she could give without knowing what exactly were
his specific concerns.
Number 2396
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked Ms. Ruggles which hunting method she
found offensive regarding the Mulchatna caribou herd?
Number 2306
MS. RUGGLES replied the method she found offense was same day
airborne hunting. She described the method as someone flying in,
shooting the caribou, then leaving right away. She explained it
had been abused in the past, and was viewed as unsportsmanlike by
many. The decision came down to an ethical decision on the part of
the board.
Number 2333
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN cited a scenario where a four-legged predator
preyed predominately on the young and the week, and a two-legged
predator preyed predominately on the upper-end of the species. He
wondered which of the predators would she curtail in a period of
reduced game?
Number 2365
MS. RUGGLES stated a four-legged predator was probably more apt to
take whatever was most easily available which could be the young,
the old, or the stupid, for example. She said everybody had to
take the heat in a declining population. A four-legged predator
would, however, step back somewhat in the long run as food became
less available. She further stated an increase in a hunting and
trapping season was also fine.
Number 2395
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if she meant an increase in hunting and
trapping for the four-legged predators?
MS. RUGGLES replied, "right."
Number 2400
CHAIR JAMES commented she was part of the House Resources Committee
when Ms. Ruggles was first appointed to the Board of Game. At that
time the wolf control issue was even more controversial than today.
At the confirmation hearing, Ms. Ruggles said, if there was a need
to reduce the population of wolves, the aerial method was the best
way to take out the whole pack. She asked Ms. Ruggles to comment.
Number 2438
MS. RUGGLES replied aerial hunting was probably the most efficient,
effective and humane way to remove an animal.
Number 2457
CHAIR JAMES wondered, however, if it was the best public policy
because it was an emotional issue.
TAPE 96-36, SIDE B
Number 0000
CHAIR JAMES stated the reason why people opposed wolf control was
because of the method of aerial hunting. Yet, Ms. Ruggles said it
was the most efficient, effective and human way to remove an
animal. She wondered if that was the attitude of the general
public.
Number 0026
MS. RUGGLES replied that was one component of the opposition. She
explained there were many that viewed aerial hunting as an
unethical method which was the reason why there was a federal
airborne hunting act. There was a distinction between hunting and
controlling, however. Many people viewed the control of a
population as unethical at the expense of another species, such as,
recreational activities of human beings. Many people also feared
Alaska would make the same mistakes that were made in the Lower
Forty-Eight regarding game management. The technology was more
advanced today, however, to help prevent that from happening.
Furthermore, she felt that outside influences were trying to
inhibit the state from participating in a predator control
activity. Alaskans were a diverse group of people compared to
anywhere else in the United States, therefore, we needed to start
talking amongst ourselves. She called for constructive dialogue
within the state. It had been done in a small way before. It
started with the wolf management planning team and continued with
the forty mile caribou planning team. She called it a long, slow
and tedious process, the benefit of a democratic society.
Number 0151
CHAIR JAMES explained legislation had been passed to mandate
intensive game management decision making for the future of the
state. Intensive game management did not mean, however, cutting
off the ability to recreate. The word "recreate" had two meanings
according to Chair James - to recreate for fun and to recreate for
food. She commented Ms. Ruggles was a deep thinker and weighed all
of the considerations. However, it appeared that her personal
choice was with those that did not want to kill animals and cited
her choice to hunt with her friends.
Number 0227
MS. RUGGLES replied she lived as a farmer and rancher for most of
her life in Texas. Therefore, as a farmer and rancher she killed
and butchered most of what she ate. She said she had no problem
killing animals. Moreover, she worked as a biochemical geneticist
where she killed hundreds of animals in a laboratory setting for
research. She reiterated her family did not hunt because they did
not eat enough meat so it would be a waste to take a moose, for
example. She was sorry if Chair James felt that was wrong. The
hunting relationship between her family and her friends was very
amicable.
Number 0259
CHAIR JAMES replied she did not say it was wrong. It just
indicated that Ms. Ruggles was on one side of the fence as opposed
to the other side, and not in the middle.
Number 0276
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN commented Article VIII of the Alaska State
Constitution said the state should manage its resources on a
sustained yield basis. The legislature passed a statute to further
that philosophy to intensively manage the resources. He asked Ms.
Ruggles, if she would be willing to take the oath seriously, to
defend the Alaska State Constitution? He further asked Ms. Ruggles
if she would be willing to recognize that the legislature was the
policy setter and vote in favor to intensively manage game, even if
it included issues that were a problem for her personally, such as
aerial wolf hunting, if it was the most efficient?
Number 0311
MS. RUGGLES replied when presented with a proposal, she would
consider the law, the data, and the public input to make a
decision.
Number 0335
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said it was a "yes" or "no" answer.
MS. RUGGLES replied if everything else fell into line and it was a
good proposal with sufficient support, then she would vote "yes."
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN replied, "that's what I thought you'd say."
CHAIR JAMES announced the House State Affairs Committee would not
be hearing HB 383 and HB 371 today due to time constraints.
The next order of business to come before the House State Affairs
Committee was the confirmation hearing of Victor Van Ballenberghe
for the Board of Game.
Number 0449
VICTOR VAN BALLENBERGHE thanked the committee members for their
interest in the process. He explained if it were not for hunting
he would not be here before the committee members today. He grew
up on a farm with guns, traps and fishing poles. He had not missed
a single year of hunting or fishing either in Alaska or outside.
He called himself an avid hunter with a personal interest.
Moreover, he explained he was a wildlife biologist with 30 years of
experience. He had graduate degrees from the University of
Minnesota in Wildlife Management. He was also a certified wildlife
biologist. He explained he came to Alaska in 1974 to work for the
Department of Fish and Game as a research biologist. He lived in
Fairbanks from 1977-1987 and worked for the Department of Fish and
Game as a statewide fur bear biologist. He lived in Anchorage from
1980 to the present as a researcher for the USDA Forest Service.
In 1985 Governor Sheffield appointed him to the Board of Game of
which he served one term. At the time the board was dealing with
many of the same contentious issues today such as, subsistence,
wolf management, rural and non-rural community uses, and land and
shot hunting. Furthermore, there were rich wildlife resources in
Alaska and many people had a stake in the wildlife either as a
hunter or as a tourist. He said he was looking forward to
participating as a board member to balance the various uses. He
announced he would provide written material on several of the
volatile issues that had faced the board recently. He wanted to
put his position in writing so that there was no doubt where he
stood.
Number 0705
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked Mr. Ballenberghe to comment on his
publication on wolf predation of the Nelchina caribou herd.
Number 0735
MR. BALLENBERGHE stated there was also a more recent article
published in 1985. He explained the two articles were an attempt
to summarize the data on predation of the Nelchina caribou herd
from the 1950's to the 1980's. He called it a technical article.
The article concluded wolf predation played a minor role during the
periods of ups and downs of the herd. Furthermore, from the 1980's
to the present, the article concluded, wolf predation played an
even lesser role. He cited there were about 50,000 caribou in the
herd now and around 20,000 moose in the area and approximately 300
wolves. The number of wolves was insufficient to impact the
caribou herd.
Number 0795
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN explained he had a copy of a letter by
defenders of wildlife action dated December 10, 1987 calling for
support to help Mr. Ballenberghe's confirmation. He was not
confirmed, however. Representative Ogan asked if Mr. Ballenberghe
was aware of any organizations now acting on his behalf?
Number 0848
MR. BALLENBERGHE replied clearly he did not sympathize with animal
rights. He hunted, ate meat, wore leather and fur, and did not
believe in liberating laboratory animals. He reiterated he did not
share in their agenda. He did recognize, however, that the people
who did acknowledge their agenda supported him because his views
were the closest to theirs. Most members on the board did not have
views that were towards the middle ground. He explained he had not
solicited support from animal rights groups, and if they choose to
support him, he suggested looking at the proper context.
Number 0908
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS asked Mr. Ballenberghe if he saw any
conflicts or potential ethical problems with his service because he
was a federal employee? The question was based on a concern of a
constituent. He further asked if his responsibilities were
centered around research activities or policies?
Number 0940
MR. BALLENBERGHE replied his effort was entirely in research.
There was a division between research and management. He did not
work for or under the management branch of the USDA Forest Service.
He did not feel there would be a conflict and would mitigate any
appearance of a conflict. He cited he would abstain from specific
issues such as the Tongass National Forest to prevent the
appearance of a potential conflict of interest.
Number 0987
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS asked Mr. Ballenberghe if there was a
connection between his employment with the USDA Forest Service and
the Federal Subsistence Board?
Number 1001
MR. BALLENBERGHE replied, "none whatever." There was no
relationship or connection. There was a member on the Federal
Subsistence Board who worked for the management branch of the USDA
Forest Service, however. He reiterated the management branch was
separate from the research branch.
Number 1028
CHAIR JAMES asked Mr. Ballenberghe under what biological
circumstances would he vote to support wolf control?
Number 1038
MR. BALLENBERGHE said it was an issue that he had grappled with in
the past. In the past he voted for wolf control measures, and over
the years he had maintained the same standards. There must be firm
biological data to support the method, however. Furthermore, the
cost-to-benefit ratio needed to be favorable along with broad
public support. He cited the tourism industry indicated there was
a potential for an $85 million loss to the state if it went ahead
with an aerial wolf control program a few years ago. He reiterated
public support needed to be considered. Finally, the methods
needed to be sufficient and humane. Considering all those factors,
he would vote in favor of it.
Number 1142
CHAIR JAMES commented it appeared Mr. Ballenberghe succumbed to the
threats from outsiders rather than to the Alaskan way. She was
referring to the potential tourist boycott he mentioned.
Number 1193
MR. BALLENBERGHE said he did not claim to be a politician. He
agreed with the general idea that the locals should have the
predominant voice in resource management. However, when the
Governor received 20,000 letters opposing aerial wolf control in
1990, something had to give. To believe that the international
protest did not have an affect on the board, was to ignore reality.
Number 1259
CHAIR JAMES replied the reason board members were confirmed was to
protect the state of Alaska. The Alaskan public needed to be
satisfied as well as outside interests.
Number 1291
MR. BALLENBERGHE responded he was prepared as a biologist to
evaluate the programs and defend the decisions as a board member.
Number 1316
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated there had not been cost effective
programs in the past. He cited flying around in a helicopter was
expensive. The most efficient methods were to include the private
sector to liberalize hunting seasons, and to liberalize methods and
means, at the direction of the board, to intensively manage wolves.
There was broad public support for the most part in the state of
Alaska. The last program failed because the board gave into the
public outcry. He called a tourism boycott a smoke screen. He
said, "if someone doesn't want to come to our state because we
control wolves, I'd just assume they stay home." Furthermore, the
battle cry of the Alaskan hunter was, "save the baby moose and
caribou."
Number 1399
CHAIR JAMES stated there was a problem in Alaska with the competing
forces between the timber operators, fishing operators, mining
operators, and agriculture operators to maintain a livelihood, as
opposed to relying on federal and oil revenue. She wondered what
considerations Mr. Ballenberghe would give to those issues and to
their importance.
Number 1463
MR. BALLENBERGHE replied he agreed with Chair James. They were
important issues. He realized during his last tenure on the board,
that many of the decisions significantly affected people's lives
and livelihood. He said subsistence was the cash economy of rural
areas. He learned that lesson the last time he was on the board
and was willing to consider those issues as part of the decisions
again.
Number 1525
CHAIR JAMES agreed that subsistence was just another industry. It
was the way many people served their basic needs of food, clothing
and shelter. It was as much of an industry as timer, mining,
fishing and agriculture that create a cash crop.
Number 1556
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON commented as a member of the Board of Game
it took a lot of time and energy. She asked Mr. Ballenberghe if he
had the time and energy to expend? She also asked what special
qualifications did he bring to the board?
Number 1582
MR. BALLENBERGHE replied he had the time, interest and energy to be
a member of the Board of Game. Furthermore, he had a thick hide to
handle the controversial issues as well. He felt his record as a
wildlife biologist would be the special qualification he would
bring to the board. Moreover, many of the issues were volatile and
controversial so a balanced board was needed. He was prepared to
help contribute to the balance.
Number 1672
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked Mr. Ballenberghe, if faced with a
situation where there was a conflict between the law, biological
theory, and his personal preference which one would he error in
favor of?
Number 1691
MR. BALLENBERGHE replied clearly the Board of Game must follow the
law. It was easy to lose sight that the board had a narrow
opportunity to address issues. The legislature, the courts, and
the federal government set the broad policy guidelines and the job
of the board was to try to operate within those guidelines. He
said he was inclined to say the law must be followed first.
CHAIR JAMES called on the first witness via teleconference in
Anchorage, Leo Keeler.
Number 1806
LEO KEELER called himself an avid hunter. He supported the
confirmation of Mr. Ballenberghe. He said Mr. Ballenberghe had
helped many hunters and cited his participation in the Sportsman
Show in Anchorage. Furthermore, his scientific background would
lend credibility to the board as well as his past experience on the
board. He asked Mr. Ballenberghe his position on archery hunting
surrounding black bear baiting? He further asked his position on
boycotting other industries as well as hunters?
Number 1887
MR. BALLENBERGHE replied black bear baiting was a controversial
issue that had been before the board in the past. He explained he
was contacted by one of the proponents to repeal the bear banning
regulations. He declined to support it, however. Ten years ago
the board began its efforts to reform the practice of bear baiting.
Consequently, the hunters had to register their bait stations and
limit the number of stations. The current situation was a comprise
as a result of many years of efforts. The board addressed the
issue again recently, and he would have voted to maintain the
current regulations, had he been a member. Moreover, he said he
did not understand the boycott question asked by Mr. Keeler.
Blackmail was not a good way to conduct business. Generally, it
was ineffective.
MR. KEELER further stated his support for Mr. Roczicka and Ms.
Ruggles.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in
Anchorage, Robert Nance.
Number 2032
ROBERT NANCE said he had been a resident of Alaska since 1962. He
came to Alaska because of the hunting cooperative laws. He was
also interested in wildlife management. He expressed his support
for Mr. Ballenberghe because of his strong interest in hunting and
other hunters. He would be a valuable addition to the Board of
Game as both a biologist and a hunter, and he would look at the
issues from both sides. He asked Mr. Ballenberghe his position on
the land and shot wolf hunting issue?
Number 2086
MR. BALLENBERGHE replied the board had addressed this issue
previously. He explained there was now a provision that called for
the hunter to move a certain distance from the airplane before
shooting the animal. The present regulation was a compromise as a
result of a lot of effort and time. He said he supported the
current regulations and did not have any intention to oppose them.
Number 2149
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated land and shot for deer had been and
continued to be an accepted practice in many areas of the state.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in
Anchorage, Jay Massey.
Number 2184
JAY MASSEY said he had been a resident of Alaska for the past 28
years. He was a former employee of the Department of Fish and
Game, a registered guide outfitter, an author of four books on
archery and bow hunting, and had served for one term on the Board
of Game. He expressed his support for Mr. Ballenberghe both as a
wildlife professional researcher and as a man of charter and
integrity. He had known him for 20 year. He further said he had
the perfect temperament to serve on the board - fair, open and
willing to listen. He did not understand the opposition to his
appointment. The narrow issue of predator control seemed to cause
conflict. He explained Mr. Ballenberghe was not against predator
control when presented with a good reason. He reiterated his
support for Mr. Ballenberghe.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in
Anchorage, Warren Olson.
Number 2370
WARREN OLSON said Mr. Ballenberghe had an excellent background,
experience and interest to serve on the Board of Game. However,
there was a serious problem within Alaska regarding the
relationship between a state agency and a federal agency.
Therefore, Mr. Ballenberghe presented a conflict of interest. He
cited the issues of adjacent lands, public lands and parks. He
expressed he did not support either Mr. Ballenberghe or Ms.
Ruggles.
CHAIR JAMES announced HB 383 would not be heard today due to time
constraints. She explained it would be scheduled for the next
House State Affairs Committee meeting date.
TAPE 96-37, SIDE A
Number 0000
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Homer,
Marvin Park.
Number 0038
MARVIN PARK, Legislative Vice President, Alaska Bow Hunters, echoed
Mr. Olson's concerns regarding Mr. Ballenberghe. He was not
against him personally, but in today's climate of the federal
government trying to take over, he questioned the appropriateness
of his appointment. He also explained the voting record of Ms.
Ruggles favored restricting hunting and trapping. He cited the
board voted in support of personal values regarding ethics and fair
chase. However, Ms. Ruggles did not vote in support of personal
values. He called it a huge vote. She voted in favor of her
personal values and not the values of the people she was suppose to
be representing. He reiterated the Alaska Bow Hunters did not
support either Ms. Ruggles or Mr. Ballenberghe.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Homer,
Dan Haskins.
Number 0170
DAN HASKINS said he supported the testimony of Mr. Park. He stated
there was a conflict of interest between a federal agency and a
state appointed position to the board.
CHAIR JAMES announced she had received 18 Public Opinion Messages
regarding the appointments. She explained all but one were opposed
to the appointment of Ms. Ruggles and Mr. Ballenberghe.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in
Fairbanks, Trish Wurtz.
Number 0262
TRISH WURTZ stated she supported the appointment of Mr.
Ballenberghe to the Board of Game. She knew him personally when he
lived in Fairbanks. He would support the views of hunters well.
In addition, his resume indicated he was a very accomplished
scientist. The people of Alaska should recognize his willingness
to serve on the board and support his confirmation.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in
Fairbanks, Katherine Richardson.
Number 0347
KATHERINE RICHARDSON expressed her strong support for the
reappointment of Ms. Ruggles. Ms. Ruggles attended the meetings
regularly, participated actively, and gave thoughtful consideration
of the issues. She also kept in touch with people and attended
meetings between boards. Furthermore, she was able to combine
science and policy. She had great scientific knowledge and was
also able to work with people. She did not represent any agency or
organization, therefore, she did not have a political agenda. She
also believed Ms. Ruggles spoke for many Alaskans. She reiterated
her support for her.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in
Fairbanks, James Davis.
Number 0446
JAMES DAVIS expressed his support for Mr. Ballenberghe. He
explained his entire life was oriented around wildlife as a retired
wildlife biologist himself. He knew Mr. Ballenberghe personally
and professionally, and respected him as a fellow wildlife
biologist. It would serve Alaska well to have a wildlife biologist
on the board for his special views and contributions.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Delta
Junction, Nat Good.
Number 0573
NAT GOOD, Member, Delta Junction Fish and Game Advisory Committee,
read the following position statement into the record.
"The Delta Junction Fish and Game Advisory Committee opposes the
confirmation of Vic Van Ballenberghe to the State of Alaska Game
Board. With the removal of Sue Entsminger of Tok from the Game
Board, Governor Knowles has left the Eastern Interior and rural
Alaska with diminished representation. Sue Entsminger was the only
State Game Board member to actually send questionnaires Statewide
to poll committees about State game issues. Sue recognized the
importance of local knowledge and experience!
"It appears to us that Governor Knowles wishes to appoint a
`global' urban biologist who is more interested in being
politically correct than biologically sound. We doubt that he
recognizes the importance of understanding that we have ecosystems
within each of our game management area, and that each must be
dealt with individually. Intensive Management actually is the
maintaining of all species, predator and prey alike, and of their
environments, in each given area to provide an optimum growth rate,
which should automatically provide for optimum harvest, as well as
optimum viewing for Alaska residents.
"We believe that local game advisory committees know and understand
the game and predator populations of their local area better than
State Game Board members and biologists who are unfamiliar with
local areas. The Alaska Board of Game needs representation from
all areas of the state, including our area, and members who are
sensitive to what advisory committees have to say.
"Please do not disenfranchise us!"
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Tok,
John Zabielski.
Number 0675
JOHN ZABIELSKI said he had lived in Tok for 20 years. He was a
full-time trapper and guide outfitter. His lifestyle was directly
related to the quantity and quality of the state's resources.
Therefore, he was deeply concerned about its management. He
strongly supported the appointment of Mr. Ballenberghe. His
qualifications, experience, and knowledge of the state's resources
were well documented as well as his integrity. He said the
"country" of Alaska would be well served by his appointment.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Kenai,
Robert E. Brown.
Number 0739
ROBERT E. BROWN read the following position statement into the
record.
"I adamantly object to the appointment of Anne Ruggles to the State
Game Board. Her anti-hunting position will continually harm the
current make-up of the board. I personally do not see where a
balance can be agreed upon in the rules and regulations with anti-
hunting opinions so prominent on the board.
"I came to Alaska twenty years ago with the concept of having
freedom to enjoy the wondrous outdoors this state has to offer.
Conservation, hunting and fishing are parts of this freedom that go
hand in hand with accountability to future generations. Now that
I have children, I have been able to pass along the same fondness
and rights to them. I have taught them the importance and have
given them an understanding about the balance of nature and the
role man has in harvesting game as a healthy and proper management
tool.
"This balance will be greatly disrupted with the addition of Ms.
Ruggles to the Board. I also feel strongly that her anti-hunting
cynicism will and has had a drastic effect on the rules and
regulations responsible hunters and conservationists abide by.
"It scares me to think what the future of hunting in this great
state will have in store with the inclusion of Ms. Ruggles to the
board. I see my rights as a hunter and the freedom to provide for
my family being taken away little by little. The right of passage
to my children of a tradition I hold dear will be uprooted if I
remain quiet. With this in mind, I must sound out loudly in
protest and hope that you as lawmakers hear me and my children."
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Mat-
Su, Roy Burkhart.
Number 0851
ROY BURKHART said he had been a resident of Alaska for 36 years.
He opposed the appointment of Ms. Ruggles to the Board of Game. He
cited a hearing in Anchorage where he drove 75 miles to attend the
hearing to testify. At the completion of the testimony, the board
voted 6 to 1 in favor of continuing bear baiting. Ms. Ruggles
voted against it and the reasons stated were that she believed it
was unethical. He noted during her testimony today she used the
words "ethical" and "unethical" at least a dozen times. He wanted
to know why her opinion on ethics was any better than his?
Furthermore, he opposed the appointment of Mr. Ballenberghe also.
He said two biologists were not needed on the board. The purpose
of the board was to sit and listen to input from other sources and
the public. He wondered if he would cave in on issues related to
the federal government because he caved in on the issue of wolf
control when faced with a potential tourist boycott.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Mat-
Su, Elizabeth Burkhart.
Number 0971
ELIZABETH BURKHART said Ms. Ruggles was the only one to vote
against bear baiting even after numerous people testified in favor
of the issue because it was unethical and went against her personal
conviction. She voted for her personal convictions rather than
listening to the testimony. The key words were "listening" and
"hearing." Ms. Ruggles had demonstrated that she did not do either
one very well. Please do not approve her nomination. Appoint
someone who will listen and vote accordingly. Furthermore, she did
not support the appointment of Mr. Ballenberghe. She echoed the
previous testifiers regarding the conflict of interest issue.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Mat-
Su, David Grinde.
Number 1042
DAVID GRINDE said he supported the testimony of Mr. and Mrs.
Burkhart. He did not support the appointment of Ms. Ruggles or Mr.
Ballenberghe. He commended their dedication and thoughtfulness,
but neither could function objectively in the framework of
intensive management. They carried too much personal bias towards
issues like sportsmanship, and ethics in wolf control, for example.
He said ethics should not be in the equation under a management
program. Sportsmanship was not an issue in intensive management to
get the job done either. He reiterated they both emphasized
sportsmanship and ethics too much.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Mat-
Su, Wayne Woods.
Number 1109
WAYNE WOODS said there were huge areas of Alaska that were
currently closed to hunting by the federal government and left to
natural cycles. This left a much reduced area for Alaskans to hunt
and recreate in. The Board of Game was mandated to manage federal
wildlife resources for a sustained yield for the people of Alaska.
He said the consumptive users of wildlife provided the funding for
its management. He felt that Ms. Ruggles and Mr. Ballenberghe
represented a hard turn away from human consumptive use priorities.
Their appointment represented a danger to the heritage that he
wanted to pass on to his children.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Mat-
Su, Gary Pahl.
Number 1165
GARY PAHL said he was a 25 year resident of Alaska. He strongly
opposed the appointment of Ms. Ruggles and Mr. Ballenberghe. He
said Ms. Ruggles' past record spoke for itself including her anti-
hunting record. He further said Mr. Ballenberghe presented a
conflict of interest between the federal and state government. He
said a state biologist or law enforcement officer could not hold a
board position. Therefore, he wondered why a federal biologist
could hold a position on a state board.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Mat-
Su, Ken Rivard.
Number 1224
KEN RIVARD said he opposed the appointments of Ms. Ruggles and Mr.
Ballenberghe. He supported previous testimony regarding the
conflict of interest for Mr. Ballenberghe and the track record of
anti-hunting sentiments of Ms. Ruggles. Furthermore, current game
provisions allowed a caribou to be hunted while swimming across a
river in game management units 23 and 26. He wondered why that had
not been addressed. Furthermore, in units 13 and 14 a permit
system existed for wolf control. The wolves were hunted at no cost
to the state. He said the system should be investigated further
and re-instituted. The Canadians did not let ethics and morality
of the public interfere with their wolf control. He cited "The
Come Back Trail" film as a good example of predator control
management.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness via teleconference in Mat-
Su, Leonard Haire.
Number 1309
LEONARD HAIRE said he was a 25 year resident of Alaska. He did not
support the confirmation of Ms. Ruggles.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness in Juneau, Eddie Grasser.
Number 1339
EDDIE GRASSER, Member, Alaska Outdoor Council, said the Council was
the largest pro-trapping and hunting conservation group in the
state. The present membership was 12,000. The Council opposed the
confirmation of Ms. Ruggles and Mr. Ballenberghe, and supported the
confirmation of Mr. Roczicka. The Council did not have any
problems with the credential of Ms. Ruggles and Mr. Ballenberghe,
however, the members of the Council did not support the
philosophical bent of the two appointees. The Council believed
that wildlife management should include practices that were
beneficial to the human uses of the wildlife and not necessarily
restricting its use to viewing, for example. He said there were no
areas in the state that were closed to viewing, however, there were
large areas closed to hunting. A balance was needed, and Ms.
Ruggles failed to recognize that based on her past voting record on
the board. The portion of the public that continued to cry for
closure was philosophically opposed to hunting. Moreover, the
Council viewed that personal ethics should not play a role in the
decision making process of wildlife management. The Council
believed it was constitutionally inappropriate. The right to hunt
was an inherent right.
Number 1507
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Mr. Grasser if the Council supported
Ms. Ruggles the first time around?
MR. GRASSER replied, "yes, we did."
CHAIR JAMES called on the first witness in Juneau, Carl Rosier.
Number 1523
CARL ROSIER, Vice President, Territorial Sportsman Inc., said the
Sportsman represented around 2,000 hunters and fishermen. He said
the means by which the state managed wildlife was really at stake
with the appointments. The Sportsman stated it supported Mr.
Roczicka as an expert in the area of subsistence. He would be a
first class addition to the board. The Sportsman further stated it
did not support the confirmation of Ms. Ruggles. He said he pushed
for her confirmation during Governor Hickel's tenure. The push was
based on the objectivity she showed during the wolf planning
process. However, the Sportsman organization had seen her
objectivity slip in the last year into the non-intensive crowd.
Furthermore, the Sportsman organization opposed the confirmation of
Mr. Ballenberghe, not as an individual or because of his
credential, but because of the potential conflict of interest as a
federal employee. He found it hard to believe that a federal
employee could find the time and priority to do the necessary job.
It was hard to believe that the state would put forth a federal
employee as a nominee when the state was trying to prevent the
federal government from taking over the wildlife management of the
state.
CHAIR JAMES called on the next witness in Juneau, Joel Bennett.
Number 1697
JOEL BENNETT commented on the philosophical hunting issue of each
candidate. He served on the Board of Game for 13 years of which
time was spent with Mr. Ballenberghe and Ms. Ruggles during their
appointments. He knew them both personally and both were committed
to protecting the rights of the hunters in the state. They both
supported responsible hunting in every way. He said they did not
have a bias towards hunting.
Number 1800
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Mr. Ballenberghe if he was working
for the federal government before when he was a member of the Board
of Game and were there any problems?
Number 1819
MR. BALLENBERGHE replied he was in the exact same position then as
he was now. He served on the board for three years and the issue
never came up. He reiterated in-order-to avoid the appearance of
a conflict he abstained from certain discussions on the Tongass
National Forest, for example. He said he did not even know what
the federal agenda was and if he did he would not be interested in
pushing it. He firmly believed that the state was the proper
managing authority.
Number 1870
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated the federal agenda was to take over the
management of fish and wildlife in the state of Alaska.
CHAIR JAMES stated that people could change their ideas as thing
progressed. Compared to 10 years ago, there was a public
dissention towards the federal government. Furthermore, the wolf
issue 10 years ago was also a different issue than today. The
board needed to include members that could tune-in to the issues of
today.
CHAIR JAMES thanked the three appointees for their time today. She
reiterated the bills that were not heard today, HB 383 and HB 371,
would be scheduled for the next state affairs meeting on Thursday,
March 21, 1996.
The record further reflected that the House State Affairs Committee
received numerous opinion positions regarding the confirmation of
Greg Roczicka, Anne K. Ruggles, and Victor Van Ballenberghe. Forty
were sent in opposition to the confirmation of Ms. Ruggles, Forty-
one were sent in opposition to Mr. Ballenberghe, and six were sent
in opposition to Mr. Roczicka. Three were sent in support of Mr.
Ballenberghe. Opinion positions were also sent from the President
of the Alaska Trappers Association, the Executive Director of the
Alaska Wildlife Conservation Association, the President of the
Alaska Wildland Adventures, and La Bau Forest Resource Consultant
Company. A statement sent by Mr. Ballenberghe was also recognized.
Please refer to the Legislative Reference Library after adjournment
of the second session of the Alaska State Legislature for further
information.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 1950
CHAIR JAMES adjourned the House State Affairs Committee meeting at
10:13 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|