Legislature(2003 - 2004)
02/25/2003 01:30 PM House TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
February 25, 2003
1:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jim Holm, Co-Chair
Representative Beverly Masek, Co-Chair
Representative Hugh Fate
Representative Vic Kohring
Representative Cheryll Heinze
Representative Mary Kapsner
Representative Albert Kookesh
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 93
"An Act relating to boating safety; repealing secs. 3, 5, 7, 9,
11, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26, 27, and 30, ch. 28, SLA 2000; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 96
"An Act naming the Sven Haakanson, Sr. Airport at Old Harbor."
- BILL HEARING POSTPONED
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 93
SHORT TITLE:REPEAL BOATING SAFETY SUNSET
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)WEYHRAUCH, Ogg
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/12/03 0186 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
02/12/03 0186 (H) TRA, STA
02/18/03 (H) TRA AT 1:30 PM CAPITOL 17
02/18/03 (H) <Bill Hearing Postponed to
2/25/03> -- Meeting Canceled
02/25/03 (H) TRA AT 1:30 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE BRUCE WEYHRAUCH
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke as the sponsor of HB 93.
BILL HUDSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: The former Representative who sponsored the
original Act that is amended by HB 93.
JOHN FRENCH
Seward, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in strong support of HB 93.
CRAIG FORREST
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 93.
JOHN LUCKING
Eagle River, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 93.
JEFF JOHNSON, Boating Law Administrator
Office of Boating Safety
Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation
Department of Natural Resources
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 93, answered
questions.
MICHAEL FOLKERTS, Recreational Boating Safety Specialist
Coast Guard Boating Safety
U.S. Coast Guard
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that the United States Coast
Guard supports HB 93.
CHARLES HOSACK, Deputy Director
Division of Motor Vehicles
Department of Administration
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 93, answered
questions.
CAROL KASGA
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 93.
MICHAEL NEUSSL, Chief
Search and Rescue - State of Alaska
U.S. Coast Guard
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed reasons to continue the boating
safety program addressed by HB 93.
JACK MOSBY
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of portions of HB 93,
but wasn't in support of registering canoes, kayaks, and rafts.
MATT NIEMETH
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 93.
MARK JOHNSON, Chief
Community Health & Emergency Medical Services
Division of Public Health
Department of Health & Social Services
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 93, providing information
on the "Kids Don't Float Loaner Program."
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 03-4, SIDE A
Number 0001
CO-CHAIR JIM HOLM called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. Representatives Holm
and Kohring were present at the call to order. Representatives
Masek, Fate, Heinze, Kapsner, and Kookesh arrived as the meeting
was in progress.
HB 93-REPEAL BOATING SAFETY SUNSET
CO-CHAIR HOLM announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 93, "An Act relating to boating safety; repealing
secs. 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 26, 27, and 30, ch.
28, SLA 2000; and providing for an effective date."
Number 0068
REPRESENTATIVE BRUCE WEYHRAUCH, Alaska State Legislature, spoke
as the sponsor of HB 93, a bill that repeals a number of
provisions from the boating safety legislation [HB 108 passed
during the Twenty-First Alaska State Legislature] which was
sponsored by then-Representative Bill Hudson. Representative
Weyhrauch stated that the intent of HB 93 is to continue the
registration of boats for boating safety and public safety and
to ensure that the state continues to receive federal funds
because of its boating safety measures.
Number 0237
BILL HUDSON, former Representative, Alaska State Legislature,
informed the committee that the Alaska Boating Safety Act was
the product of his imagination and hard work. He related his
belief that this Act saves lives. He noted that recently the
U.S. Coast Guard was transferred from the U.S. Department of
Treasury to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which he
interpreted as meaning that the boating safety program should be
conducted by the State of Alaska. For that reason, Mr. Hudson
urged the committee to forward HB 93.
Number 0360
JOHN FRENCH noted that he has lived in Alaska for 23 years, has
traveled extensively, and is both a power boater and kayaker.
Mr. French announced his strong support of HB 93. He mentioned
that in his travels he has seen boaters in dire straits and that
since this Act has been in place there's been a marked
improvement in safety practices. He pointed out that this
legislation provides money for boater safety education, which
benefits many people. Although some kayakers are concerned that
this Act places constraints on operations, registration of
kayaks provides a much greater margin of safety and also for the
ability to recover stolen kayaks. Therefore, Mr. French
reiterated his strong support of HB 93.
Number 0503
CRAIG FORREST informed the committee that he has lived in Alaska
for almost 56 years and has been involved in boating that entire
time. Mr. Forrest expressed his support of the passage of HB
93. Since implementation of the Act, Mr. Forrest said that he
has observed a marked decrease in problems, especially in rural
areas. The manner in which boating education has been
implemented through the Office of Boating Safety, Department of
Natural Resources (DNR), has been outstanding, and he said he
wanted it to continue.
CO-CHAIR HOLM inquired as to how the Office of Boating Safety is
funded.
MR. FORREST related his understanding that the funds are from
Wallop-Breaux funds from the federal government and the grant
from the state's fuel taxes and other taxes. In further
response to Co-Chair Holm, Mr. Forrest confirmed that he didn't
know of any funds that had been derived from registering boats.
However, if there are any funds from boater registration that
are being utilized for boater education, then "all the better,"
he said.
Number 0606
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE requested further explanation with regard
to where the Wallop-Breaux funds originate.
MR. CRAIG related his understanding that [the Wallop-Breaux]
funds are derived from the taxes the state pays when purchasing
fuel and that the funds are placed in a federal government pot
of money and are returned to the state when there is safe-
boating legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE noted that Mr. Hudson indicated that Mr.
Craig was correct.
Number 0776
JOHN LUCKING informed the committee that he has lived in Alaska
for 45 years and has canoed and kayaked for at least 30 years.
He noted that he has been a member of the Knik Canoers and
Kayakers for the past 17 years. He also noted that he is a
retired state trooper who was involved with driver safety as
well as other safety issues. Since retirement he has worked for
the Federal Highway Safety Administration on the enhancement of
seatbelt and child-restraint use. Mr. Lucking said that he was
speaking on his own behalf in opposition to HB 93. He related
his belief that in order to correct a problem one must first
identify the problem. Although many people in Alaska are lost
in drownings, those in small paddleboats such as canoes and
kayaks are few in number. He suggested that one should review
the circumstances of each incident. Mr. Lucking related U.S.
Coast Guard statistics from 1995-1998, indicating that two to
nine fatalities per year occurred in canoes or kayaks. He
reviewed various newspaper articles in which Alaskans were
involved in boating fatalities; the common denominator in half
[of the instances] was the absence of a life jacket. Therefore,
Mr. Lucking said he felt that a requirement for a personal
floatation device would be the best and most enforceable means
of reducing fatalities. However, if the desire is to generate
revenues, the boating tax is one way of doing so. Furthermore,
he said that he hadn't personally seen any boater education
programs that have resulted from registration funds.
Number 1007
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING remarked that he believes Mr. Lucking is
on track with his concerns. He requested information with
regard to the effect of the original legislation. Are there any
statistics that point to the fact that the Act worked, he asked.
Number 1100
JEFF JOHNSON, Boating Law Administrator, Office of Boating
Safety, Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation, Department of
Natural Resources (DNR), responded to Co-Chair Holm's question
regarding where the funding comes from to support this program.
Mr. Johnson informed the committee that the amount of federal
funds varies from year to year based on a formula. For federal
fiscal year 2003, the state hopes to receive $490,000 in federal
funds for boating safety education. Furthermore, the
legislature may appropriate registration receipts to the
department to operate boating safety programs, although those
funds have not been received to date.
CO-CHAIR HOLM said he read HB 93 to say that [the boating safety
education program] is contingent upon obtaining the [federal]
funds. Therefore, without those funds the program would sunset.
MR. JOHNSON explained that the federal requirement for state
participation and state grant funding isn't dependent upon the
state's receiving registration receipts, although it is
dependent upon the state's registering of boats.
Number 1206
MICHAEL FOLKERTS, Recreational Boating Safety Specialist, Coast
Guard Boating Safety, U.S. Coast Guard, provided the following
testimony:
The Coast Guard, through the Secretary of
Transportation, is directed to carry out a national
recreational boating safety program under Chapter 131
of Title 46, United States Code. The goal of the
program is to encourage the states to assume the major
role in carrying out the boating safety mission.
Federal financial assistance to the states is provided
through the Boating Safety Account of the Aquatic
Resources Trust Fund, also known as the Wallop-Breaux
Trust Fund. Part of the eligibility requirement to
receive the funding was achieved when Alaska passed
House Bill 108, an Act Relating to Boating Safety, in
2000.
House Bill 108 was passed with a sunset clause that
would allow the legislature to revisit the law,
primarily to ensure that consistent and adequate
funding was in place. House Bill 93 repeals that
sunset, allowing the law to become permanent and
helping build a long-term program that will continue
to reduce recreational boating fatalities.
The United States Coast Guard supports House Bill 93
and will maintain the relationship with the State of
Alaska as outlined in a memorandum of understanding
between the state and the Coast Guard.
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE pointed out that the sponsor statement
refers to federal motor fuel taxes and federal marine fuel funds
and asked if the two are the same.
MR. FOLKERTS answered that the Wallop-Breaux funding is complex.
Although he specified that he isn't an expert on the Wallop-
Breaux funding, he said he believes the federal motor fuel tax
and federal marine fuel fund refer to the same pot of money.
Number 1314
MR. FOLKERTS, in response to Representative Heinze, clarified
that the boating safety program is new for the State of Alaska.
In further response to Representative Heinze, Mr. Folkerts
related the belief that the program is working well. He
explained that the state has taken responsibility for
registering boats, which was previously done by the U.S. Coast
Guard. When the U.S. Coast Guard performed the boater
registration, the money went to the other states, not to Alaska.
Under the current situation, the state gets to keep its
registration money. He noted that the U.S. Coast Guard is
interested in the state's having the boating safety program
regardless of registration fees or lack thereof.
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE inquired as to the amount of funding this
involves.
MR. FOLKERTS deferred to Mr. Johnson.
Number 1367
MR. JOHNSON answered that nationally, as of this fiscal year,
the amount of money available through the Wallop-Breaux Trust
Fund is $59 million. Every state and territory in the United
States receives a portion of that funding. Alaska was the last
state to qualify when the legislation passed [during the Twenty-
First Alaska State Legislature]. Alaska's share is based on a
three-part formula in which the first third is shared equally
among all the states and territories. The second third is based
on the number of registered boats in the state, and the third
piece is based on the amount the state spends in state funds for
[the state's] boating safety programs. Alaska receives a
relatively low amount of federal funding because the state
spends no state money on boating safety and has a relatively low
number of registered boats.
REPRESENTATIVE FATE returned to the earlier comment that the
program has been quite successful and inquired as to the measure
used for determining the success.
MR. FOLKERTS answered that typically the number of fatalities is
counted, although that's not an accurate measure in terms of the
total success. For example, the number of total fatalities in
1998 was a high of 38, while last year the total number of
fatalities was 16. He pointed out that this gradual decrease in
the number of fatalities is occurring at the same time as there
has been a gradual increase in the number of boater days on the
water. He attributed the decrease in fatalities, in large part,
to education efforts. In response to Co-Chair Holm, Mr.
Folkerts specified that these statistics are recreational
boating safety statistics that the U.S. Coast Guard tracks on a
yearly basis. He noted that the statistics don't include
[fatalities] from commercial fishing.
CO-CHAIR HOLM inquired as to where people usually die.
MR. FOLKERTS estimated that about 40 percent of the fatalities
last year occurred in open boats such as skiffs, canoes, and
kayaks. He informed the committee that the fatality rates for
vessels 28 feet and over and for sailboats are comparatively
low.
Number 1517
CO-CHAIR HOLM inquired as to how registering a boat correlates
to the safety of the person using the boat.
MR. HUDSON noted that he has spent 20 years in the U.S. Coast
Guard Search and Rescue, and much of his time was involved with
lifesaving and boating safety. The U.S. Coast Guard registers
boats mainly to keep track of them. If a boat is missing,
others would be able to identify the boat. Registered boats
have a common place where the identification is located. Mr.
Hudson highlighted that boat registration is a federal
requirement that the state has taken over to enforce. By doing
so, the state is available to receive some of the Wallop-Breaux
monies. Boat registration is done through the Division of Motor
Vehicles and is user friendly. He noted that the registration
fee hasn't increased and there aren't safety requirements that
weren't required by the federal Boating Act. This bill requires
the use of life jackets.
MR. HUDSON said this program saves lives because some of the
money that is received from the federal government is used to
purchase life jackets that are placed at the docks for use.
That is probably the most important life-saving element of this
Act. Mr. Hudson emphasized that overall the program doesn't
cause [boaters] any more [difficulty than when it was
administered via the U.S. Coast Guard] and it's performed by
Alaskans in a user-friendly manner. Furthermore, since the
state is administering the program, it has expanded such that it
includes the coastal areas and many of the inland rivers, lakes,
and streams that weren't covered when the U.S. Coast Guard
administered the program. The program is self-supporting and
isn't overly offensive with regard to regulations. The program
was established as a life-saving, preventative measure, as
opposed to an enforcement measure.
Number 1759
CO-CHAIR HOLM inquired as to why this is being addressed now if
the sunset isn't until 2005.
MR. HUDSON said that he believes it's in order to be ahead of
the curve so that the state can continue to qualify for the
federal money.
CO-CHAIR HOLM related that [from e-mails he has received] the
program [is viewed] as somewhat onerous. Co-Chair Holm
highlighted that there is no fiscal note and questioned how
deeply this has been thought through with regard to its impact
on the citizens of the state. Co-Chair Holm said that he
believes the people living on the coast have a different issue
than those living in Interior Alaska or the North Slope. He
said that he has never seen life jackets on the docks in the
Fairbanks area. Therefore, he inquired as to the application of
this law on an areawide basis versus merely the coastal areas.
MR. HUDSON said he couldn't comment because his information is a
year old. Mr. Hudson related that it was felt that application
of this program on a statewide basis would save lives and the
record seems to illustrate that. Mr. Hudson reiterated that the
requirements are the same as those required by the U.S. Coast
Guard [under the federal Boating Safety Act]. He pointed out
that just because the U.S. Coast Guard wasn't there doesn't mean
that the requirements weren't there.
CO-CHAIR HOLM remarked that he is an individual who would rather
err on the side of personal freedom than on governmental
control.
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE inquired as to where one would register a
boat and the ease with which one could do so.
MR. FOLKERTS explained that boats are registered through the
Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and can be done online or at
one of the local offices.
Number 1905
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING said his thinking was much in line with
that of Co-Chair Holm. He informed the committee that he voted
against this legislation three years ago for the very reason
expressed by Co-Chair Holm. He related his belief that more
exploration should occur with regard to private associations'
providing training and safety-related programs. Before the
enactment of this Act, the Matanuska Susitna Valley had a
boating safety program that provided life jackets much in the
same way this program does. Furthermore, he said he believes
that parents should play an important role in providing guidance
and instruction to their children.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH informed the committee that he voted for
this legislation [three years ago]. Representative Kookesh said
that it seems that the legislation is being debated, although
the only matter before the committee is the sunset provision.
CO-CHAIR HOLM specified that the debate is in regard to whether
to allow the legislation to sunset. Therefore, Co-Chair Holm
said he didn't believe it was inappropriate to question how the
funding occurs and where the statistics are that illustrate
whether the program is useful or not.
Number 2011
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER informed the committee that she voted for
this legislation [three years ago]. She related her belief that
it provided additional money that is necessary for boater safety
and education. She inquired as to why there was a sunset in the
first place.
MR. FOLKERTS recalled that there was concern that it would be an
unfunded mandate. There was concern with regard to whether the
Wallop-Breaux funding would be reauthorized on an annual,
consistent basis, which did occur. This program has been funded
every year.
Number 2039
CHARLES HOSACK, Deputy Director, Division of Motor Vehicles
(DMV), Department of Administration, informed the committee that
boat registration is available at all DMV offices. Once the
boat is registered, renewal can be done via the Internet, by
mail, or in person. Mr. Hosack also informed the committee that
by the end of calendar year 2002 there were 56,911 boats
registered in Alaska.
Number 2078
CO-CHAIR HOLM inquired as to how much money has been brought in
from these registrations.
MR. HOSACK replied that for fiscal year 2002, boat registration
revenue for both powered and unpowered boats amounted to
$456,600.
CO-CHAIR HOLM asked if any of the registration revenue was
applied to any safety programs.
MR. HOSACK answered that he didn't know, but pointed out that
all of the money generated by DMV is placed in the general fund.
However, the boat registration revenue is identified separately.
"The first part of it falls in with all of our other program
receipts to go to pay for DMV's registration program," he said,
which totals about $370,000 and was included in the fiscal note
for the original legislation. In further response to Co-Chair
Holm, Mr. Hosack explained that the operating costs for the year
are taken from the funds generated from the boat registrations.
The division's operating costs are $370,000, although $456,600
is collected. He noted that DMV informs the Division of Parks
[and Outdoor Recreation] how much money has been collected and
that money can be used for boat funding. However, it's not an
automatic appropriation and thus must go through the budget
process.
CO-CHAIR HOLM inquired as to the cost of enforcement.
MR. HOSACK explained that the enforcement is done through the
law enforcement officers in the state, mainly through the
Department of Public Safety or the Division of Parks [and
Outdoor Recreation]. He said that he didn't have any
information on the enforcement aspect.
CO-CHAIR HOLM inquired, then, as to why there would be a zero
fiscal note for HB 93.
MR. HOSACK answered that the division is already funded through
the original legislation for doing the registration. Therefore,
if the program is continued as it is, there would be no change.
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE posed a situation in which the federal
funding was lost. In such a situation, would the registration
return to the U.S. Coast Guard, she asked.
MR. HOSACK related his understanding that without the passage of
HB 93, DMV's authority to register boats will be returned to the
U.S. Coast Guard.
Number 2220
CAROL KASGA informed the committee that she and her husband own
a wilderness guiding business in the Brooks Range. Ms. Kasga
related her strong opposition to HB 93. Although she
appreciated the intent of this legislation, she didn't believe
it to be the best approach to achieve safety, saying that a one-
size-fits-all approach for the state is the wrong way to go.
Ms. Kasga informed the committee that she owns 12 boats that are
used for rafting trips. Safety is addressed via the experienced
guides in each raft and the requirement for clients to wear life
jackets. Ms. Kasga characterized HB 93 as an unnecessary
imposition of regulations. She surmised that HB 93 is a way in
which a bureaucratic system is established to obtain funds that
may come [from the federal government] and said she didn't know
where the funds would go.
Number 2352
MR. HOSACK, in response to Representative Fate, confirmed that
without the passage of HB 93, DMV wouldn't register boats, and
the assumption is that the U.S. Coast Guard would take it over,
although the legislation doesn't specify that as such.
REPRESENTATIVE FATE turned to the situation in which the U.S.
Coast Guard takes over registration again. In such a situation,
would the same regulations that apply in this legislation
continue to be applicable under the U.S. Coast Guard, he asked.
MR. HOSACK answered that the U.S. Coast Guard has its own
regulations that were in place before DMV took over boat
registration. He pointed out that state regulations mirror [the
regulations] that were in existence when the U.S. Coast Guard
previously administered boat registrations.
TAPE 03-4, SIDE B
MR. HOSACK explained that without passage of HB 93, the
statutory authority [of the state] to make regulations would not
exist and thus he assumed that the [state's] regulations would
be repealed.
REPRESENTATIVE FATE surmised, then, that the regulations levied
by the U.S. Coast Guard, the federal government, would be
imposed on state citizens relative to their boating activities.
MR. HOSACK agreed. He informed the committee that the U.S.
Coast Guard's regulations have to do with which boats need
numbers, their size, and the requirement to have a certificate.
The [current] state regulations mirror the U.S. Coast Guard's
regulations exactly.
REPRESENTATIVE FATE related his understanding that no matter
what occurs, [boat owners] will fall under some sort of
regulatory regime.
Number 2318
CO-CHAIR HOLM asked if the U.S. Coast Guard registers unpowered
boats.
MR. HOSACK replied no, indicating that was unique in the state's
program - that it registers powered and unpowered boats
measuring over 10 feet in length.
CO-CHAIR HOLM inquired as to why the state registers unpowered
boats.
MR. HOSACK explained that the original legislation proposed
[registration] for powered boats. However, the focus of the
legislation was boater safety and the need to reduce drownings.
Part of the testimony heard during the original legislation was
that those with unpowered boats should have a safety program as
well as those powered boats. Therefore, an amendment to that
effect was added during the process.
REPRESENTATIVE WEYHRAUCH, speaking as the sponsor of HB 93,
suggested that it would be informative for the U.S. Coast Guard
representative to speak.
Number 2260
MICHAEL NEUSSL, Chief, Search and Rescue - State of Alaska, U.S.
Coast Guard, related his belief that registration of boats is a
safety feature because registration provides the search and
rescue forces the ability to quickly determine the nature of
distress. With the registration, the owner/operator of the boat
can be tracked down and the situation assessed. Regarding
unknown cases, resources are launched to determine whether
people are in distress, and those resources are very expensive
to operate. For instance, a search aircraft costs $8,000 an
hour. Therefore, he reiterated that the registration of vessels
does have a direct impact on safety.
MR. NEUSSL turned to the issue of "loaner" life jackets and
informed the committee that there are approximately 400 sites
throughout the state that have developed since the program
started. He explained that these sites require a local sponsor.
Mr. Neussl said these sites save lives. For example, in Sitka a
boat overturned and the loaner life jackets saved three lives.
He emphasized the need, from a safety perspective, for the
loaner life jacket program to stay in place. Furthermore, the
boating safety legislation keeps Alaska "on parity" with the
other states with regard to the distribution of the federal
funding. Mr. Neussl recalled testimony that 56,000 boats were
registered through DMV and said he didn't believe that under the
U.S. Coast Guard there were that many boats registered in Alaska
because the U.S. Coast Guard's office was a one-person office.
Number 2125
REPRESENTATIVE FATE expressed interest in the percentage of
inland recreational boat registrations versus blue-water-type
recreational boat registrations.
MR. HOSACK said that the registration doesn't indicate whether
the boat is used in salt water or fresh water.
CO-CHAIR HOLM recalled Mr. Neussl's testimony that registration
allows access to a database to make appropriate decisions
regarding possible search and rescue situations. He asked if
the [search and rescue] service is performed throughout the
state or merely on the coast.
MR. NEUSSL answered that the [search and rescue] service is
performed throughout the state when the U.S. Coast Guard
receives notification and he assumed the same would be the case
in the Rescue Coordination Center in Anchorage that the U.S. Air
Force runs for the inland portion of the state. If information
is received regarding an unattended boat that appears to have
been recently used, the registration information is available to
the search and rescue controllers in order to track down who
might have been in the boat and to determine whether there was
an accident.
Number 2027
JACK MOSBY informed the committee that he has been a resident of
Alaska since the late 1970s and was a guide for almost 10 years
during the 1980s. He noted that he is a member of the Knik
Canoers in Anchorage as well as the Fairbanks chapter. For the
past 20 years, Mr. Mosby taught classes with the Knik Canoers in
which safety was always stressed. Mr. Mosby said that he
supported portions of HB 93, specifically the boater education
portion and the mandatory wearing of life jackets. However, Mr.
Mosby said that he didn't support the registration of canoes,
kayaks, and rafts because he hasn't found registration to be a
benefit to him when he has lost equipment. He noted that he
spent time on over 1,000 stream miles throughout the state and
at no time did he see any government entity enforcing this law
or providing boater safety education. Therefore, he questioned
why everything is being registered. Furthermore, it's unclear
as to how many unpowered vessels are being registered and how
much of those funds will be returned to the state to be targeted
for unpowered vessels.
Number 1959
MATT NIEMETH informed the committee that he is a fisheries
research biologist who works all over the state. The vast
majority of the projects on which he works require the use of a
motorized vessel. He said that he is always looking for ways in
which to increase safety and he appreciates efforts to that end.
Mr. Niemeth related his background as a professional river guide
and a white-water kayaker and thus he said he could see many
shades of gray. Mr. Niemeth said he opposes HB 93 because he
thinks there are elements in the original legislation [HB 108]
that need amending before this Act becomes a permanent law. He
echoed earlier comments that this [HB 108] isn't a good way to
address boater education for the white-water community,
specifically for the unpowered white-water paddling community.
The safety issues and effective training for [unpowered white-
water paddling] are very different from those for motorized
boats. Therefore, he didn't believe the boats should be lumped
into the same category. Recreational white-water boaters are a
specialized group that develops its training and safety measures
in response to a very specialized, fairly esoteric structure.
There is a steep learning curve for white-water boaters.
MR. NIEMETH pointed out that the training for white-water
boaters usually comes through local organizations and volunteer
groups and is usually very effective. Mr. Niemeth said that he
didn't see how government could replace that [local training].
This is a group for which small government is better government,
which is borne out in the low rate of accidents and fatalities
within [this white water boating] community, he suggested. Mr.
Niemeth related that there are white-water rivers in the U.S.
that have had 500,000 recreational white-water user-dates per
year and have not had a fatality since 1988. Mr. Niemeth also
related that he hasn't seen anyone on a white-water river
without a life jacket since perhaps 1984. Therefore, this
legislation misses the mark. Furthermore, the fee charged would
better be spent within the specific user group to support the
existing training and safety measures.
MR. NIEMETH concluded by saying that it's important to discuss
this now because HB 93 would make [HB 108] permanent, although
there are still flaws. For instance, there is no knowledge as
to whether registration has caused a decrease in the number of
white-water accidents or white-water-related fatalities. There
is no knowledge as to the proportion of Wallop-Breaux funds this
registration brings in because there is no knowledge as to what
proportion of the 56,000 registered boats is made up of white-
water kayaks. Mr. Niemeth related that the perception of HB 93
[HB 108] is that it's a money grab similar to taxing bicycles
for automobile safety [programs] and it's an attempt to increase
the numbers in order to increase eligibility for Wallop-Breaux
funds, both of which are bad policy. Removing the sunset clause
before there is adequate assessment is premature public policy,
he said.
Number 1673
MARK JOHNSON, Chief, Community Health & Emergency Medical
Services, Division of Public Health, Department of Health &
Social Services (DHSS), informed the committee that the
[department] has studied drowning over the years. He referred
to a chart entitled, "10 Leading Causes of Injury Deaths in
Alaska by Age Group - 1994-1998," which is included in the
committee packet. He pointed out that for children aged 1-4,
the third leading cause of injury death is drowning. For
children aged 5-9, the first leading cause of injury death is
drowning and for those aged 10-14 drowning was the second
leading cause of injury death. Therefore, drowning is a
significant cause of death for children in Alaska. Mr. Johnson
directed attention to the summary of the "Kids Don't Float
Loaner Program" included in the committee packet. He also
provided examples of six "saves" that can be attributed to the
Kids Don't Float Loaner Program. Much of the funding for the
aforementioned program comes from the federal boating safety
funds that are a result of this legislation.
MR. JOHNSON noted that for about 10 years prior to the passage
of the Boating Safety Act in Alaska, there was an average of 29
boating-related deaths. Since passage of the Act, the average
has dropped to 22 boating-related deaths, and this past year
there were 16 boating-related deaths. Therefore, there seems to
be a relationship between the passage of the Act and a reduction
in boating-related fatalities in the state. Mr. Johnson said
[the department] would like to see that continue and this seems
to provide the necessary funding. He mentioned that there are
other examples of some boating safety activities, but the Kids
Don't Float Loaner Program is the most popular. The Kids Don't
Float Loaner Program is in many locations in the Interior and
virtually every region in the state.
CO-CHAIR HOLM, upon determining no one else wished to testify,
announced that HB 93 would be held over.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Transportation Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:45
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|