Legislature(2011 - 2012)BUTROVICH 205
04/04/2012 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearings | |
| HB340 | |
| HCR25 | |
| HJR20 | |
| HJR32 | |
| HJR26 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 118 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 340 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HCR 25 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 20 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 26 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 32 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 4, 2012
3:34 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Joe Paskvan, Co-Chair
Senator Thomas Wagoner, Co-Chair
Senator Bill Wielechowski, Vice Chair
Senator Lesil McGuire
Senator Hollis French
Senator Gary Stevens
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Bert Stedman
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Senator Cathy Giessel
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARINGS
Fisherman's Fund Advisory and Appeals Council
Clay Bezenek, Ketchikan
James Herbert, Seward
- CONFIRMATIONS POSTPONED TO APRIL 6, 2012
HOUSE BILL NO. 340
"An Act relating to the reservation of certain mining claims
from all uses incompatible with the purposes for establishing
the Petersville Recreational Mining Area."
- MOVED HB 340 OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 25(FSH)
Celebrating the 75th anniversary of the Wildlife and Sport Fish
Restoration Program.
- MOVED CSHCR 25(FSH) OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 20(ENE)
Urging the President of the United States, the United States
Congress, and the Secretary of the United States Department of
Agriculture not to implement protection of inventoried roadless
areas under the "roadless rule" or otherwise restrict the
development of necessary hydroelectric projects in the Tongass
National Forest and the Chugach National Forest.
- MOVED SCS CSHJR 20(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 32(RES)
Urging the United States Congress to remove wood bison from
protection under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and to grant
control of wood bison in Alaska to the state.
- MOVED CSHJR 32(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 26(RES) AM
Urging federal agencies to work with the Alaska Department of
Fish and Game, Southeast Alaska Native leaders, and other
interested parties to establish strategies and plans for the
sustainable management of the reintroduced sea otter population
of Southeast Alaska.
- HEARD & HELD
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 118(FIN)
"An Act relating to a tax credit for qualified research and
development expenditures; and providing for an effective date."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 340
SHORT TITLE: PETERSVILLE RECREATIONAL MINING AREA
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) NEUMAN
02/22/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/22/12 (H) RES
03/02/12 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/02/12 (H) Moved Out of Committee
03/02/12 (H) MINUTE(RES)
03/14/12 (H) RES RPT 4DP 1DNP 1NR 1AM
03/14/12 (H) DP: DICK, FOSTER, SEATON, FEIGE
03/14/12 (H) DNP: GARDNER
03/14/12 (H) NR: MUNOZ
03/14/12 (H) AM: KAWASAKI
03/26/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
03/26/12 (H) VERSION: HB 340
03/28/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/28/12 (S) RES
04/04/12 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HCR 25
SHORT TITLE: WILDLIFE & SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) NEUMAN
02/22/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/22/12 (H) FSH
03/01/12 (H) FSH AT 5:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/01/12 (H) Moved CSHCR 25(FSH) Out of Committee
03/01/12 (H) MINUTE(FSH)
03/02/12 (H) FSH RPT CS(FSH) 5DP
03/02/12 (H) DP: AUSTERMAN, JOHNSON, PRUITT, MILLER,
THOMPSON
03/16/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
03/16/12 (H) VERSION: CSHCR 25(FSH)
03/19/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/19/12 (S) RES
04/04/12 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HJR 20
SHORT TITLE: ROADLESS RULE & CHUGACH AND TONGASS HYDRO
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) JOHANSEN
03/09/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/09/11 (H) ENE, RES
03/17/11 (H) ENE AT 3:00 PM BARNES 124
03/17/11 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/22/11 (H) ENE AT 3:00 PM BARNES 124
03/22/11 (H) Moved CSHJR 20(ENE) Out of Committee
03/22/11 (H) MINUTE(ENE)
03/23/11 (H) ENE RPT CS(ENE) 6DP
03/23/11 (H) DP: LYNN, TUCK, PETERSEN, SADDLER,
PRUITT, FOSTER
04/06/11 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/06/11 (H) Heard & Held
04/06/11 (H) MINUTE(RES)
04/08/11 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/08/11 (H) Moved CSHJR 20(ENE) Out of Committee
04/08/11 (H) MINUTE(RES)
04/09/11 (H) RES RPT CS(ENE) 6DP 2NR
04/09/11 (H) DP: MUNOZ, FOSTER, P.WILSON, DICK,
FEIGE, SEATON
04/09/11 (H) NR: GARDNER, KAWASAKI
04/12/11 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/12/11 (H) VERSION: CSHJR 20(ENE)
04/13/11 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/13/11 (S) RES
04/04/12 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HJR 26
SHORT TITLE: SEA OTTER MANAGEMENT
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) P.WILSON
03/31/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/31/11 (H) RES
02/03/12 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/03/12 (H) Heard & Held
02/03/12 (H) MINUTE(RES)
02/13/12 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/13/12 (H) Moved CSHJR 26(RES) Out of Committee
02/13/12 (H) MINUTE(RES)
02/15/12 (H) RES RPT CS(RES) 6DP 2NR 1AM
02/15/12 (H) DP: MUNOZ, FOSTER, P.WILSON, DICK,
SEATON, FEIGE
02/15/12 (H) NR: GARDNER, HERRON
02/15/12 (H) AM: KAWASAKI
03/19/12 (H) DIVIDE THE AMENDMENT UC
03/19/12 (H) DIVIDE AM NO 1A WITHDRAWN
03/19/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
03/19/12 (H) VERSION: CSHJR 26(RES) AM
03/21/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/21/12 (S) RES
04/04/12 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HJR 32
SHORT TITLE: REMOVE WOOD BISON FROM ENDANGERED LIST
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) DICK
02/01/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/01/12 (H) RES
02/29/12 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
02/29/12 (H) Moved CSHJR 32(RES) Out of Committee
02/29/12 (H) MINUTE(RES)
03/02/12 (H) RES RPT CS(RES) 8DP 1AM
03/02/12 (H) DP: MUNOZ, FOSTER, GARDNER, DICK,
HERRON, P.WILSON, SEATON, FEIGE
03/02/12 (H) AM: KAWASAKI
03/26/12 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
03/26/12 (H) VERSION: CSHJR 32(RES)
03/28/12 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/28/12 (S) RES
04/04/12 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
REX SHATTUCK, Staff
Representative Mark Neuman
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions related to HB 340 on
behalf of the sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE MARK NEUMAN
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 340 and HCR 25.
MICHELE STEVENS, representing herself
Petersburg, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 340 and presented a statement
on its issues.
ASHLEY BROWN, Assistant Attorney General
Civil Division
Oil, Gas, and Mining Section
Department of Law (DOL)
Representing the Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained legal issues regarding HB 340.
KERWIN KRAUSE, Geologist
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Division of Mining, Land and Water
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained mining issues regarding HB 340 and
said the department supported it.
REPRESENTATIVE KYLE JOHANSEN
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HJR 20.
KACI SCHROEDER, Staff
Representative Bill Thomas
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained the changes in Senate Committee
Substitute (SCS) for HJR 20.
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN DICK
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HJR 32.
PAUL VERHAGEN, Staff
Representative Alan Dick
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HJR 32 for the sponsor.
DOUG VINCENT LANGE, Director
Division of Wildlife Conservation
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Related how wood bison would be managed by
ADF&G with the Board of Game to setting harvest restrictions
with regards to HJR 32.
REPRESENTATIVE PEGGY WILSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HJR 26.
ARTHUR MARTIN, Intern
Representative Peggy Wilson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HJR 26 for the sponsor.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:34:29 PM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS WAGONER called the Senate Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:34 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Wielechowski, Stevens, Co-Chair Paskvan and
Co-Chair Wagoner.
^Confirmation Hearings
Confirmation Hearings
3:35:40 PM
CO-CHAIR WAGONER announced the confirmation hearings for the
Fisherman's Fund Advisory and Appeals Council. He said that
staff sent out emails asking if anyone had questions and they
didn't get any replies.
3:36:31 PM
SENATOR STEVENS said he didn't recall getting an email and he
would have like to have invited the appointees to the meeting.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER said he could move the hearing to Friday.
SENATOR STEVENS said he would prefer that.
HB 340-PETERSVILLE RECREATIONAL MINING AREA
3:39:16 PM
CO-CHAIR WAGONER announced HB 340 to be up for consideration.
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN moved to bring HB 340 before the committee for
purposes of discussion.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER objected for discussion purposes.
REX SHATTUCK, staff to Representative Mark Neuman, Alaska State
Legislature, sponsor of HB 340, put himself on the record.
REPRESENTATIVE MARK NEUMAN, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of
HB 340, explained that he was approached by a constituent named
Michelle Stevens who had 550 acres of federal mining claims in
the Petersville Mountain area and the director of the Division
of Mining, Land and Water had approached her because the state
wanted to acquire that land from the federal government and then
give her 220 acres back; they were then going to convey the
mining rights back to her after the land was conveyed to the
state so she could do some recreation mining. Some complications
came up during that process and to resolve those issues they
have worked with the current director and Steve Borrel with the
Alaska Mining Association to remove the following previous
federal mining claims from recreational mining areas as
described on page 2, lines 2-6, in the bill.
3:41:55 PM
SENATOR MCGUIRE joined the committee.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER opened the public hearing.
3:42:37 PM
MICHELE STEVENS, representing herself* Petersburg, AK* said she
had also submitted her testimony in writing and was available
for questions.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER asked her for a three-minute summary.
MS. STEVENS explained that in 1994 she wanted to have a
recreational mining area and to do that, she and Jules Tileston,
Director, Division of Mining, Land and Water, Department of
Natural Resources (DNR), decided that she would relinquish
approximately 500 acres of what were previously federal mining
claims with an express commitment from the division that once
the federal land was conveyed to the State of Alaska,
approximately 220 acres located in US Mineral Survey 2384 would
be leased back to her for the establishment of a commercial
recreational mining concession that would become known as the
South Petersville Recreational Mining Area. They agreed to use
the federal monuments named as reference points in a recent $1
million survey as boundaries for the proposed site. She said the
concession would include a museum and other amenities like
several historic buildings that she owned and a marine steam
shovel that helped build the Panama Canal and the Alaska
Railroad.
MS. STEVENS said the agreement she had with the division was
necessary, because there was no legal mechanism at the time for
the division to allow recreational mining on state mining claims
and for her, therefore, to have a recreational mining business.
To ensure that the area could be managed in accordance with
their agreement and that other parties could not stake the state
mining claims in the affected area, Mineral Closing Order 674
was issued on June 2, 1994. And in December, 1996, Mr. Tileston
drafted a letter to introduce the new regulations for the use of
the Petersville Recreational Area and she wrote to her senator
and representatives asking them to sign the regulations into
legislation.
3:47:46 PM
On May 8, 1997, HB 46 was signed into law establishing two
portions of recreational mining areas: the North Petersville
Recreation Area that is currently active and the South
Petersville Recreation Mining area, both totaling approximately
500 acres.
The intent of the DNR was that approximately 220 acres in the
southern recreation area would be leased back to her when the
state received conveyance from the BLM. Subsequent to the claims
being gifted to the state and issuance of the mineral closing
order, the DNR determined that it could not establish a non-
competitive commercial lease to fulfill the agreement with her
under existing state law. However, in 2006, DNR determined a
legal way to allow a commercial business to be operated in
portions of a state mining claim by establishing a miscellaneous
land use lease provided that the state mining claim holder
concurred.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER interrupted her and said they pretty well got
the gist of it and asked her to send her statement to his staff.
She said she would do it as soon as possible.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER closed public testimony.
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN explained that a mistake was made and
everyone had agreed that this was the best way out.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked whether this legislation could have
impacts on others outside of this individual.
3:52:41 PM
ASHLEY BROWN, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, Oil,
Gas, and Mining Section, Department of Law (DOL) representing
the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), said that the bill
removes certain sections from the Petersville Recreational
Mining area.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if other miners could come in and
stake claims to this area.
MS. BROWN answered that currently a mineral closing order is
still covering that area, but once it is lifted it would be
possible for others to stake there.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI remarked if the deal is that she gets full
mineral rights to her claim, it will be a race.
MS. BROWN responded that he was correct in understanding that
there is a chance this area would not get staked by Michele
Stevens.
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN said it's not within the state's authority
to guarantee anything, but some people felt sorry for Ms.
Stevens and wanted to help her. So they are trying to work it
through the process the best and cleanest way they can.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there was anything in writing
detailing the agreement that was reached.
MR. SHATTUCH answered there is anecdotal evidence in their
packets, but no contractual agreement. The department has
supported it noting that either nothing will happen or they will
move forward and remove the claims and work with Ms. Stevens.
3:56:38 PM
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN asked if there was a better way to correct this
problem, assuming a mistake was made more than a decade ago.
MS. BROWN replied that Ms. Stevens could go through litigation,
but she couldn't advise her on that and the DNR had determined
there was no way they could assist her.
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN said he understood that the state couldn't
guarantee her anything and asked if the state made a mistake
would it rather respond in money damages or correct the mistake.
MS. BROWN explained that this legislation removes land from the
Petersville Recreational Area and at some point Ms. Stevens had
staked "at risk claims" on this land, but there is a legal
question as to whether or not those claims would be valid; and
if they were determined to be not invalid, then that land area
would be open to staking by anybody.
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN asked if the state could declare its own
conduct null and void based upon a mistaken fact going back to
1996.
MS. BROWN replied that she didn't understand what conduct would
invalid - the decision to make the claims part of the
Petersville Recreational Area?
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN said yes; that was done by the state - only
with a waiver of a mining interest. So, if you go back before
the declaration of the recreational mining area to the mining
claims that were in existence, wouldn't that get back to where
there was any harm done to anyone?
MS. BROWN said she didn't understand the question.
MR. SHATTUCK said one of the issues that would have to be
overcome in any court would probably be the fact that she
voluntarily relinquished her federal claims, and consequently
the standing would be difficult because she was party to that.
After the fact, she went back and staked claims on state-
selected land which the state can either allow or have a mineral
closure. There is no guarantee those claims will ever come to
fruition in terms of giving the right to the individual.
4:02:20 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said Ms. Stevens had the right to get an
attorney and file whatever lawsuit and go through whatever
judicial means she could, but she chose not to. But they as
lawmakers should analyze whether opening this area up for
recreational mining was good public policy, and he wanted to
hear from DNR about that.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER said before they go there, he wanted to chip in
his two cents. It's up to her to reclaim the land the best way
she can if this bill passes, but the state is basically neutral.
His experience was that mining claims are not a lot of fun.
4:03:39 PM
KERWIN KRAUSE, Geologist, Division of Mining, Land and Water,
Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Anchorage, AK, explained
that federal claims that existed (referenced in 1997
legislation) were actually closed by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM). Because the state had a selection on that area
at the time, the former owner (before Ms. Stevens) had arranged
for state selected claims to be located there. Portions of those
state selected claims are the ones she relinquished. The only
reason the legislation referenced the federal claims is because
a mineral survey had been conducted and they were on the plat
records that the state and BLM had. Once the mineral closure is
lifted, she or anyone can stake claims on it, he said, and Ms.
Stevens could pursue litigation if she wanted to.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER asked if the department supported this bill.
MR. KRAUSE answered yes.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked what the rationale was for closing
this to mineral leases in the past.
MR. KRAUSE answered to eliminate the risk that someone could
inadvertently acquire exclusive rights to the minerals by
creating a recreational mining area there.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if anyone uses this land now for
anything.
MR. KRAUSE answered they do not use the southern area because
the BLM hadn't conveyed it to the state yet; therefore, it's
still federal land and they don't have any provision for
recreational mining on it. But the northern area has been open
for a number of years and it is used by recreational miners and
construction dredgers, panners and such.
SENATOR FRENCH joined the meeting.
4:07:23 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how many people use that northern
area and if they would be precluded from using it in the future
by passing this.
MR. KRAUSE responded that all of the use has been in the
northern area since the recreational area was created and with
the price of gold going up in the last few years, usage has
increased. Because Peters Creek is a fish stream, dredging is
allowed only from mid-May to mid-July and on average, several
dozen dredgers are in there during that period.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if this law passes, will it affect
their ability to continuing using it.
MR. KRAUSE answered no, because the northern area is not part of
the area that would be removed.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if it would have an impact on anyone.
MR. KRAUSE answered no.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER asked the sponsor how many hearings this had in
the other body and what their reaction was.
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN replied that the House had two hearings,
and members of both bodies contacted Mr. Tileston to ask him
what happened. He explained that Ms. Stevens wants to open up a
business operation up there - a museum - and allow people with
families to go up there and she would assist them with supplies
and equipment to do some recreational mining. But it can't move
forward until the state gets claim rights. Removing federal
claims allows the state to actually get lands and move forward
with the recreational mining areas.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER asked what the vote in the other body was.
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN replied 39 to 1. Representative Tuck found
some information about some contaminated areas, but a memo from
the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) stated there
was no contamination. A 55-gallon drum could have been
overfilled at one time, but the area had been cleaned up and
certified as such by the department.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER asked the pleasure of the committee.
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN said he was trying to figure out a better
solution.
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN said that everybody worked on this looking
for the best solution, but moving this forward was the "simple
solution" they came up with.
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN moved to report HB 340 from committee to next
committee of referral with individual recommendations and
attached fiscal note(s).
CO-CHAIR WAGONER removed his objection.
SENATOR FRENCH apologized for being late and said he assumed the
committee went over the letter from Mr. Tileston and Marty
Rutherford, because they were his constituents and had a lot of
creditability. It looked like the committee was conforming with
their wishes in the letter.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER indicated that was the case and finding no
further objections, he announced that HB 340 moved from the
Senate Resources Standing Committee.
4:13:34 PM
At ease from 4:13 to 4:14 p.m.
HCR 25-WILDLIFE & SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM
4:14:36 PM
CO-CHAIR WAGONER announced consideration of HCR 25 [CSHCR
25(FSH) was before the committee].
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN moved to bring CSHCR 25(FSH), version\B, before
the committee.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER objected for discussion purposes.
4:15:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MARK NEUMAN, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of
HCR 25, explained that it is an act celebrating the 75th
anniversary of a wildlife and sport fish restoration program. It
recognizes sportsmen, industry, state and federal agencies who
have acted to preserve our outdoor heritage. It is sometimes
overlooked that hunters and anglers were our earliest
conservationists. They saw the rapid decline of many species due
to unregulated markets and commercial activities involving
wildlife and habitat loss as early as the 1800s.
Seventy-five years ago the Wildlife Restoration Act established
funding to restore wildlife and the acquisition and development
of management of habitats. It was amended in 1970 to provide for
funding for hunter training programs and the development,
operation and maintenance of public shooting ranges. In 1950,
the Dingle Johnson Act was passed creating a sport fish
restoration program and a funding source by using a federal
excise tax on fishing gear and motor boat fuels to provide grant
money to fisheries conservation, boating access and aquatic
education.
4:17:07 PM
Acts like these were instrumental in establishing the user
pay/user benefit system, so much so that since 1939
contributions to state fish and wildlife agencies by wildlife
and sport fish restoration programs have exceeded $13 billion.
This represents the greatest single conservation effort in the
history of the US and is the nation's primary means of funding
conservation.
4:18:44 PM
CO-CHAIR WAGONER removed his objection.
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN moved to report CSHCR 25(FSH), version \B, from
committee to the next committee of referral with individual
recommendations and attached zero fiscal note. There were no
objections and it was so ordered.
HJR 20-ROADLESS RULE & CHUGACH AND TONGASS HYDRO
4:20:16 PM
CO-CHAIR WAGONER announced HJR 20 to be up for consideration
[CSHJR 20(ENE) was before the committee].
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN moved to bring SCS CSHJR 20( ), version 27-
LS0554\B, before the committee for purposes of discussion.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER objected.
4:20:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KYLE JOHANSEN, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor
of HJR 20, explained that 14 out of 15 hydro projects in the
Tongass and the Chugach are subject to protection from the
roadless rule in the Tongass and Chugach National Forests as a
general blanket. This resolution asks to exempt hydroelectric
projects from the roadless rule. The bottom line is without this
exemption their stated goal of 50 percent of energy from
renewables by 2025 as well as the President's goal of 25 percent
of energy generated in the US coming from renewable resources by
2025 might not happen.
He asked that Representative Thomas and his staff broaden the
scope of the resolution by explaining the changes in the new
Senate committee substitute (SCS).
4:22:16 PM
KACI SCHROEDER, staff to Representative Bill Thomas, Alaska
State Legislature, Juneau, AK, explained that most of the
changes in SCS CSHJR 20( ) occur on pages 2 and 3. On page 2,
line 6, a "whereas" is inserted that points out that Southeast
Alaska has large mineral deposits and asks for leniency in
building roads towards them.
4:23:08 PM
SENATOR FRENCH said the first of two "whereas" clauses
referenced "roadless areas", the definition of which is in
federal regulations, and the next "whereas" clause speaks about
"wilderness" and asked the relationship, overlap and the degree
of similarity between "roadless areas" and "wilderness".
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he would get that information to
him by the end of the day, but that only the Secretary of the
Department of Agriculture can say "yes" or "no" to roads in
roadless areas. In Senator Stedman's district, a hydroproject
would have to appeal specifically to the Secretary of the
Department of Interior to simply open a road that is already
constructed in order to get trucks and equipment up to the dam.
That project alone would offset a large amount of diesel fuel
usage in the forest.
SENATOR FRENCH said he asked because the first "whereas" says
that 57 percent of the acreage in the Tongass is roadless and
the second "whereas" says an additional 35 percent is
wilderness; and he guessed he was being asked to add 35 percent
onto 57 percent to come up with 92 percent and he was curious
about the overlap. His second question was whether the "seven
projects" on page 2 were since May 28, 2010.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN replied that was his understanding; he
had checked with the Forest Service and the Southeast Alaska
Power Agency this morning who said those facts were still
accurate.
SENATOR FRENCH said he needed some context to know if it's a
punitive or reasonable request.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN replied that he didn't bring people to
testify per the request of the chair, so he couldn't answer
that, but their real fear is that 14 out of the 15 projects are
"absolutely crucial" to getting communities connected and off of
diesel.
4:26:45 PM
SENATOR FRENCH asked if those 14 projects can't be developed
without relief from this rule.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN replied that they would like these
projects to be exempt from that rule, because they are
important.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER said the exemptions would have to be for the
life of the projects as long as they are operational for
maintenance purposes as well as construction and remarked that
Cooper Lake behind Kenai Lake is the same type of small hydro
project.
SENATOR FRENCH noted that the resolution was unanimous in the
other body.
4:28:29 PM
At ease from 4:28 to 4:29 p.m.
4:29:21 PM
CO-CHAIR WAGONER removed his objection.
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN moved to report SCS CSHJR 20( ), version \B,
from committee to the next committee of referral with individual
recommendations and attached fiscal note(s). There were no
objections and SCS CSHJR 20 (RES) moved from the Senate
Resources Standing Committee.
4:30:33 PM
At ease from 4:30 to 4:32 p.m.
HJR 32-REMOVE WOOD BISON FROM ENDANGERED LIST
4:32:10 PM
CO-CHAIR WAGONER announced HJR 32 to be up for consideration
[CSHJR 32(RES) was before the committee].
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN moved to bring CSHJR 32(RES), version 27-
LS1234\X before the committee for purposes of discussion.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER objected for discussion purposes.
4:33:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ALAN DICK, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of
HJR 32, explained that until their extinction over 100 years
ago, wood bison inhabited a greater portion of Interior Alaska,
particularly in the heart of District 6, but recent efforts to
bring them back to Alaska have met with strategic and political
questions. Only 104 wood bison are in Turnagain Arm waiting to
be released and these are the only wood bison in the whole
United States. He explained that wood bison are similar to but
genetically different from and much larger than the plains bison
that exist in Delta, Kodiak and other places in Alaska and the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has managed them
quite well for the last 70 years.
REPRESENTATIVE DICK said there are two concerns. One is that
wood bison is on the Endangered Species list and two, well over
$70 billion worth of resources lie within 50 miles of where they
are being proposed to be relocated. The state has negotiated in
good faith with the federal government on wood bison for years,
but has yet to reach a satisfactory agreement.
The federal 10J exemption of the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
would declare them non-essential and experimental and the
federal 4D exemption would allow them to be hunted once the herd
attained a healthy population. The huge question is whether they
can trust the 10J and 4D exemptions to withstand court
challenges. In the distant and recent past, gavels in
Washington, D.C. have beaten a rhythm that is often unfavorable
to Alaska's efforts to develop its resources. The paradox is
that the listing of the wood bison as an Endangered Species is
the element that most endangers them after years of trying to
get agreements to protect the state's concerns about delaying
their relocation into the wild. HJR 32 calls for Congress to
exempt the wood bison from the Endangered Species Act an
exemption used by Idaho and Montana to solve a long standing
problem with restoring the Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf to their
states.
REPRESENTATIVE DICK said he wanted to introduce wood bison back
into the habitat where they once lived, but without risking the
problems that Beluga whales, sea otters and Polar bears face.
HJR 32 gives our Congressional delegation the support necessary
to create a win/win situation by exempting the wood bison from
the Endangered Species Act. The State of Alaska wins when it
gets to work with this fascinating resource, the people of the
Innoko River drainage win by eventually being able to hunt these
bison, the Native corporation that wants to develop the nearby
valuable resource can breathe a sigh of relief and fourthly, the
wood bison themselves would like to get out from behind those
bars. They looked really bored.
4:36:10 PM
He said this resolution had one hearing in the House Resources
Committee; it received 8 do passes and 1 amend; it went across
the House floor by a vote of 38 to 0 and was supported by Doug
Vincent Lange, Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation,
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G).
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there was any opposition to the
resolution.
REPRESENTATIVE DICK replied no. It was controversial at first,
but the conversation was elevated to the point of coming up with
this solution, which seems to make everybody happy. There wasn't
any opposition from the environmental community.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER asked what the game is like where these bison
will be released and if there will be enough for subsistence
purposes.
REPRESENTATIVE DICK said the problem they face now is a shortage
of moose. Because predator control is not allowed on the Innoko
Wildlife Refuge, the feeling is that the wood bison could stand
in the deeper snow far better against predators than moose and
the smaller plains bison.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER removed his objection.
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN asked if this resolution helps Congressman
Young become successful.
4:39:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DICK replied the bison can be released as soon as
there are no consequences of long-term litigation.
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN asked if determining whether the bison could be
hunted or not would come under the sole jurisdiction of the
state.
REPRESENTATIVE DICK replied yes.
4:40:25 PM
PAUL VERHAGEN, staff for Representative Dick, Alaska State
Legislature, agreed that was correct.
4:40:54 PM
CO-CHAIR WAGONER asked how the bison would be managed.
DOUG VINCENT LANGE, Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation,
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), Anchorage, AK,
explained if these animals are exempted from the ESA they would
fall under the jurisdiction of the ADF&G and the Alaska Board of
Game to set harvest restrictions. He said they would be managed
just like they are managing the plains bison, but initially the
population would have to grow large enough to have a harvestable
surplus. They could probably harvest some animals, like the
older bulls, before reaching a number based on maximum sustained
yield and that.
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN asked where the herd will be released.
MR. LANG replied in three areas without having to deal with the
ESA: one near the Innoko Drainage, the Fort Yukon area and the
Minto Flat area. The habitat in all three areas is suitable for
wood bison release.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER removed his objection.
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN moved to report CSHJR 32(RES) from committee to
the next committee of referral with individual recommendations
and attached fiscal note(s). There were no objections and it was
so ordered.
4:43:26 PM
At ease from 4:43 to 4:44 p.m.
HJR 26-SEA OTTER MANAGEMENT
4:44:51 PM
CO-CHAIR WAGONER announced consideration of HJR 26 [CSHJR
26(RES)am was before the committee].
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN moved to bring CSHJR 26(RES), \D.A, before the
committee for purposes of discussion.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER objected.
4:45:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PEGGY WILSON, sponsor of HJR 26, Alaska State
Legislature, said she could answer questions but her intern
would explain the resolution.
ARTHUR MARTIN, intern for Representative Peggy Wilson, Alaska
State Legislature, Juneau, AK, explained that during the 18th
and 19th century because of the fur trade, sea otters were
almost completely wiped out on the North American continent. In
the years between 1965 and 1969 efforts were made to reintroduce
sea otters back to their historic regions and the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) reintroduced approximately
400 sea otters into Southeast Alaska. In 1972 the management
responsibility for them was transferred from the state to the
federal government under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of
1972.
The issue Alaska has struggled with is that the federal
government has no viable long term management plan for them. The
US Fish and Wildlife Service created a management plan in 1994,
but it hasn't been revised since then. In the meantime, sea
otters in Southeast are flourishing and their population has
grown to such a level that they are actually threatening the
balance of the eco system, which is hurting the Southeast Alaska
economy.
MR. MARTIN said that Southeast Alaska has a population of some
20,000 sea otters and their number grows by about 12 percent a
year. They eat approximately 23 percent of their body weight
each day in crabs, abalone and clams. Together with the dive
fisheries, they consume about 253,000 pounds of food in a single
day. According to a McDowell Report, dated November 2011, sea
otter predation on the red sea cucumber, geoduck clam, red sea
urchin and Dungeness crab fisheries have already caused the
Southeast Alaska economy $28.3 million directly and indirectly
since 1995. To put this in perspective, last year sea otters ate
an estimated 7 million pounds of commercial species whereas the
entire 2010 Southeast Alaska harvest in dive and Dungeness crab
fisheries was about 6 million pounds. If this trend continues,
Southeast Alaska will no longer have a viable dive fish economy.
The McDowell Report said that commercial dive fisheries and
large populations of sea otters cannot co-exist in the same
waters.
4:48:07 PM
He explained that related to the sea otter population is the
issue that although Alaska Native peoples may harvest sea
otters, they are limited only to selling authentic and
traditional Native handicrafts under the Marine Mammal
Protection Act. This resolution is asking that while discussing
the sea otter management issue the terms "authentic and
traditional" be replaced with "Alaska Native articles of
handicraft" to expand a cottage or niche industry and to clear
up any legal gray area.
He said with the Marine Mammal Protection Act being 40 years
old, things have honestly changed. Sea otter populations have
grown at an impressive rate and it's time to consider a long
term management plan as well as broadening the scope of
allowable uses for sea otters in Alaska Native handicrafts.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how sea otters, crabs, sea urchins,
cucumbers and abalones co-existed ecologically before humans
were around to manage them.
MR. MARTIN replied that he didn't know if research had been done
on that issue, but theory suggests that while the sea otter
populations were relative large before the fur trade, the
populations of dive fisheries - sea urchins and sea cucumbers -
were relatively small. After the fur harvest of the 19th century
the sea otter populations decreased and so the dive fisheries
began to flourish, which created an economy here. Now that the
sea otters are beginning to rebound, they clash with the
Southeast economy and current ecology.
SENATOR FRENCH asked where the 23 percent of their body weight
each day came from. Is that the upper limit or the average
number?
MR. MARTIN replied that it came from the McDowell Report as well
as other reports. Male sea otters can grow up to 100 pounds and
females can grow up to 80 pounds, so they took a statistical
average and came up with 23 percent.
SENATOR FRENCH asked if there is an average number given in the
report.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said one of the reasons sea otters eat
so much is because they don't retain body fat. They have to
constantly eat to stay warm and keep from losing weight.
MR. MARTIN noted that page 8 of the McDowell Report said that
the animals have a high metabolism and require large amounts of
food, and in captivity will consume up to 25 percent of their
body weight per day (from the US Fish and Wildlife Service).
CO-CHAIR WAGONER said he had seen them eat just about everything
in the salt water; 90 percent of the time when you see a sea
otter it'll be on its back with something on its chest to eat.
4:54:02 PM
CO-CHAIR PASKVAN said to a certain extent they are calling on
the federal government to do certain things and asked what the
state is doing currently with respect to cooperative agreements
and working with Alaskans to establish strategies and plans for
sustainable management.
MR. MARTIN replied that the US Fish and Wildlife Service is
trying to do some things in that Alaska Native peoples are the
only group allowed to harvest sea otters. One of the issues is
that a legal gray area exists in defining "traditional and
authentic" under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and they are
working on getting more public comment to rewrite their
definitions. But beyond that, the federal government hasn't done
anything. They just let sea otters grow and the 1994 management
plan hopes sea otters will reach an optimal sustainable
population range and at some point they will just start shooting
them, but there is no other plan.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER said they need to remember that the state and
private investors are spending millions of dollars trying to
establish a shellfish industry and there has to be a balance
some place.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said it's always a little bit dangerous
when mankind plays around with ecological balances and asked if
there are any studies about the ramifications of possible over-
managing the sea otter population - to sea kelp, for instance.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON replied that they didn't have a way to
know except when they were becoming extinct and there wasn't a
sea kelp crisis during that time. Nothing crashed at that time.
She said the third paragraph of the sponsor statement said the
1994 conservation plan for the sea otter in Alaska stated that
although an optimum sustainable population had not been defined,
the stock was believed to be within that range. That was 18
years ago and the plan was to be reviewed annually and revised
at least every three to five years, and that hasn't happened.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER remarked that Southeast is not the only place
being affected by sea otters. They decimated the prolific
steamer calm beds in Kachemak Bay that were always very rich.
SENATOR FRENCH referenced a "Wikipedia" page talking about the
economic impact of sea otters that said:
Some of their preferred prey species - abalone, crab,
clam - are also food sources for humans in some areas.
Massive declines in shellfish harvests have been
blamed on the sea otter, and intense public debate has
taken place over how to manage the competitive between
humans and sea otters for seafood. But it is
complicated by the fact that sea otters have often
been held responsible for clam and shellfish stocks
that were more likely caused by overfishing by humans,
disease, pollution and seismic activity. Shellfish
declines have also occurred in many parts of the North
American Pacific Coast, but do not have sea otters and
conservationists sometimes note that the existence of
large concentrations of shellfish on the coast is a
recent development resulting from the fur trades' near
extirpation of the sea otter. Although many factors
affect shellfish stocks, sea otter predation can
deplete a fishery to the point that it's no longer
commercially viable. There is a consensus among
scientists that sea otters and abalone fisheries
cannot co-exist in the same area and the same is
likely true of for other types of shellfish, as well.
CO-CHAIR WAGONER said he would hold HJR 26 until Friday.
5:01:24 PM
CO-CHAIR WAGONER adjourned the Senate Resources Standing
Committee meeting at 5:01 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 1 HCR 25 Documents.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HCR 25 |
| 2 HCR 25 10yr Re Cap of Sales.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HCR 25 |
| 3 HCR 25 Sport Fish Strategic Plan 2010.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HCR 25 |
| 1 HJR 26 Documents.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HJR 26 |
| 2 HJR 26 MCDOWELL GROUP.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HJR 26 |
| HJR 20 Documents.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HJR 20 |
| HB 340 Documents.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HB 340 |
| 1 HJR 32 Documents.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HJR 32 |
| 2 HJR032 Supporting Documents - Index.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HJR 32 |
| 3 HJR032 Supporting Docs 1-9.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HJR 32 |
| 4 HJR032 Supporting Documents - 10 Wood Bison News 6.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HJR 32 |
| Fish Fund Adv & App Council.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
Fisherman's Fund Confirmation Hearing |
| 1 HB 118 Sp St, SA, FN & Bill.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HB 118 |
| 2 HB118 DCCED-DOR Presentation 040412.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HB 118 |
| 3 HB 118 Sponsor Docs.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HB 118 |
| 4 HB 118 Letters of Support.pdf |
SRES 4/4/2012 3:30:00 PM |
HB 118 |