Legislature(2017 - 2018)BUTROVICH 205
02/27/2017 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB60 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 60 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 27, 2017
3:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Cathy Giessel, Chair
Senator Natasha von Imhof
Senator Bert Stedman
Senator Shelley Hughes
Senator Kevin Meyer
Senator Bill Wielechowski
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator John Coghill, Vice Chair
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 60
"An Act relating to sport fishing, hunting, or trapping
licenses, tags, or permits; relating to penalties for certain
sport fishing, hunting, and trapping license violations;
relating to restrictions on the issuance of sport fishing,
hunting, and trapping licenses; creating violations and amending
fines and restitution for certain fish and game offenses;
creating an exemption from payment of restitution for certain
unlawful takings of big game animals; relating to commercial
fishing violations; allowing lost federal matching funds from
the Pittman - Robertson, Dingell - Johnson/Wallop - Breaux
programs to be included in an order of restitution; adding a
definition of 'electronic form'; and providing for an effective
date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 60
SHORT TITLE: FISH & GAME: OFFENSES;LICENSES;PENALTIES
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
02/15/17 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/15/17 (S) RES, JUD, FIN
02/27/17 (S) RES AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
MAJOR BERNARD CHASTAIN, Deputy Director
Division of Alaska Wildlife Troopers (AWT)
Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported on SB 60.
BRUCE DALE, Director
Division of Wildlife Conservation
Department of Fish and Game
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on SB 60.
AARON PETERSON, Assistant Attorney General
Department of Law
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on SB 60.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:30:14 PM
CHAIR CATHY GIESSEL called the Senate Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Stedman, Meyer, Hughes, Von Imhof,
Wielechowski, and Chair Giessel.
SB 60-FISH & GAME: OFFENSES;LICENSES;PENALTIES
3:30:41 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced consideration of SB 60, sponsored by the
Rules Committee at the request of the Governor. Alaska's fish
and game laws are the focus of this bill. When a person is found
guilty of seriously violating the law of hunting or fishing in
addition to the criminal fine another amount of money can be
levied. That levy is the restitution the judge can impose on the
guilty person for depriving Alaska's people of a resource that
is held in common.
The principle is simple: other Alaskans in the present and
future will not get the opportunity to benefit from Alaska's
constitutionally protected game if it's illegally taken from us.
The restitution laws attempt to assign a monetary value and
capture that lost opportunity.
In addition, when a non-resident illegally claims a resident
fish or game license, they are not only depriving Alaskans of
the non-resident revenue they would have paid, Alaskans also do
not see the matching federal funds that those higher license
fees would have leveraged.
SB 50 was introduced last year as SB 164. It was during
deliberations with the administration and members of this
committee and the Judiciary Committee that several important
provisions were considered regarding proper restitution and due
process. That bill did not become law, which is why the
committee has SB 60 before it today.
CHAIR GIESSEL welcomed Major Chastain to the committee.
3:32:23 PM
MAJOR BERNARD CHASTAIN, Deputy Director, Division of Alaska
Wildlife Troopers (AWT), Department of Public Safety, Anchorage,
Alaska, commented on SB 60. He said AWT is the primary
enforcement agency for all fish and wildlife laws in the state.
Last year this bill moved through both houses and some well-
thought-out amendments were adopted, and it is being introduced
this year because it died in the last session.
3:34:11 PM
He said SB 60 has a couple of main concepts. It allows a person
who receives a citation for not having the appropriate sport
fishing, hunting, or trapping license in their actual possession
to correct that citation if they had a previously purchased
licensed by bringing into any Department of Public Safety (DPS)
office just like a correctable citation for a traffic ticket.
It also makes it unlawful for a person to obtain a sportfishing,
hunting or trapping license if the person has had their rights
to engage in those activities revoked or suspended in this or
another state.
It increases some restitution amounts for unlawfully taking big
game animals and increases strict liability commercial fishing
fines for first, second, and third offenses. It also creates an
option of charging with a violation or a misdemeanor offense for
most statutes contained in Title 16, 16.05 and 16.10 depending
on the culpability of the offender.
It also standardizes the penalties contained in these statutes.
3:36:20 PM
Sectional analysis:
Section 1 amends AS 16.05.330(a) to include "permit" in addition
to "license" and "tag" for purposes of clarifying the proper
types of documentation a person must have in their actual
possession when engaging in certain activities, and reorders the
activities of "trapping" and "fur dealing" to exclude the latter
from being a correctable citation.
Under AS 16.05.330, a person engaged in the activities listed in
1-5 in section one, must have in their actual possession a
license, tag, or permit, to legally engage in that activity.
Section one re-orders the activities into two separate
categories; 1 and 2 are considered sport activities and 3, 4 and
5 are considered commercial activities. The purpose for this is
contained in section 3.
Section 2 amends AS 16.05.330(d) to make it unlawful for a
person to obtain a sport fishing, hunting, or trapping license
if the person's rights to engage in those activities is revoked
or suspended in this or another state.
Currently this statute directs that a person who applies for a
sport fishing, hunting, or trapping license or permit or tag
issued under this section shall sign a statement that their
right to obtain or exercise the privilege of this is not
suspended or revoked in another state. Surprisingly, this
statute does not include Alaska. This will change that and align
this statute with the intent of the law.
3:37:17 PM
Section 3 amends AS 16.05.330 by adding three subsections:
Subsection (f) provides that a person charged with failing to
have the appropriate sport fishing, hunting or trapping license
in their actual possession may not be convicted if the person
produces a license previously issued to the person that was
valid at the time of the offense not later than 30 days after
the issuance of the citation. He said trooper realized that
people sometimes forget their license at home in their car or
other locations and for many years have given unofficial
correctable citations to them. This section will give a trooper
the ability to cite a person for not having a license in
possession and give them a period of 30 days to bring it to any
office and it will be dismissed.
3:38:37 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN said over the last couple of years they have
talked about this electronic format so people could take a
picture of a license with a cell phone or iPad and he wanted to
know if any thought had been given to putting tags in electronic
format. In switching hunting clothes, he has personally found
challenges to always remember to have the tags.
MAJOR CHASTAIN replied the law requires tags to be validated and
one of the problems for enforcement is how a person can do that
electronically without being able to delete it.
3:40:07 PM
BRUCE DALE, Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation,
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), Palmer, Alaska, said they
have been looking at ways to provide applications for phones and
devices that can be used for validating licenses and reporting.
So, they have a survey to ask what kinds of things users want
and an IT project to explore what kinds of things can be done
with not having it in written form and having it be validated
some way.
3:41:28 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked what happens if fish or game is caught?
Does the hunter or fisherman get to take it during the 30-day
grace period and what happens right now if they don't have the
license on their person?
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered currently if a person doesn't have a
license the trooper asks a series of questions to determine
whether or not he does or does not have a license. Most of the
time it can be figured out. If the trooper determines the person
doesn't have a license he will issue a citation. The person also
will have the option to bring the license in and allowing those
citations to be corrected. If they have game or fish at the
time, if he determines the person is not telling the truth, the
trooper will seize it, but if he can prove having a license he
gets to keep it as long as it was legally taken.
SENATOR HUGHES said it sounds like it's going to be handled the
same way it is handled now: based on the officer's best
judgement at the time.
MAJOR CHASTAIN said that was correct.
3:43:10 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if a picture of the license or tag
can be taken on a phone and shown to the officer, of a dip
netting permit for example.
MAJOR CHASTAIN replied that this bill would make it lawful to
present a license in electronic form. The ADF&G is developing a
digital licensing program now, because currently there is no
mechanism to display an electronic license. So, if this passed
and ADF&G implemented an electronic license that would be
acceptable.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said you can't take a picture of it, in
other words.
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered no not right now. With his example of a
dip net permit, for instance, it has requirements to record on
it and there is no electronic mechanism for that right now.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if you're out hunting in the Bethel
area and don't have your license, do you have to return to
Bethel to show your license or can you show it the ADF&G office
in Anchorage where your home is.
3:44:56 PM
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered you can bring it to any office where it
can get emailed or scanned to the trooper in the location where
the citation was issued.
SENATOR VON IMHOF asked how much time this will save troopers
over the long run.
MAJOR CHASTAIN replied that he didn't know, but probably not
much. This just allows for an official way to correct a citation
and make it incumbent upon the person who doesn't have their
license to produce it. Often people say they have a license and
they really don't, although some truly have forgotten them and
this provides a way to deal with both of those situations.
3:46:51 PM
MAJOR CHASTAIN said section 3 has two additional subsections:
(g) and (h). Section (g) allows that a license or permit may be
in actual possession in paper or electronic form (when it is
implemented). Section (h) states any peace officer presented
with an electronic device under this section shall be immune
from any liability resulting from damage to the device. He
explained that fishing and trapping licenses are often inspected
in adverse conditions, aboard boats in violent seas, while hands
are contaminated with fish or game parts, or in remote
locations. If this section is implemented these resource users
will have the ability to decide whether they want to present an
electronic copy or a paper copy.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he imagined that the paper documents
troopers get are not in the greatest shape and asked what they
do in that situation.
MAJOR CHASTAIN replied there is no fine. If they are able to
determine it is the right license in the right year they will go
with that.
3:49:28 PM
He continued explained that section 4 under AS 16.05.430 removes
a specific fine of $1000 and penalties associated with the
unclassified misdemeanor and replaces it with a class A
misdemeanor established under AS 12.55. The goal of this and
subsequent sections is to standardize penalties within Title 16
and create two separate options for charging. The first option
for serious offenses will be charged with a class A misdemeanor
and the second option for less serious offenses will be charged
with a violation offense. These penalties will be aligned
throughout AS 16 and follow the penalties outlined in AS 12.55.
This is important, because by regulation charges can be reduced
to violations, but in statute they currently can't. This gives
the Alaska Wildlife Troopers and the Department of Law (DOL) the
ability to decide what is most appropriate for this offense.
3:50:48 PM
Section 5 is related to section 4. This section adds a new
subsection and creates the ability to charge some offenses as
violations that are currently only allowed to be charged as
misdemeanors. It also addresses the Pittman-Robertson Act and
federal matching dollars lost by the State of Alaska when the
state is defrauded by a defendant who does not purchase the
proper license and/or tag as required by law to participate in a
given hunt or fishery.
Section 5 creates two new subsections within AS 16.05.430:
subsection (c) establishes that a person may be charged with a
violation offence if there is no culpable mental state
established. Subsection (d) provides the court with the ability
to impose additional restitution to the state of Alaska equal to
the amount of lost federal matching funds from the Pittman-
Robertson/Johnson/Wallop-Breaux programs when the state is
defrauded by a defendant who does not purchase the appropriate
license or tag or claims residency when they are not a resident.
If the court decides to implement the additional restitution for
the loss of federal funds, it will be instructed to deposit the
restitution into the Fish and Game Fund.
MAJOR CHASTAIN explained when someone is not a resident of
Alaska and purchases a resident hunting license and moose tag
across the counter when they should have purchased a non-
resident hunting license and a non-resident locking tag, that
money that is lost is not the only money that is lost, but it is
also a loss of federal matching funds to the state. So,
occasionally judges can impose that federal matching dollars to
the defendant and that money can be deposited into the Fish and
Game Fund, making the state whole.
3:52:58 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN asked him to explain the difference between the
classes of misdemeanors so folks can get an idea of the severity
going up from a citation to different classes of misdemeanors to
more expensive and serious violations.
MAJOR CHASTAIN explained that a violation offense is a maximum
$500 fine and doesn't have restrictions. A class A misdemeanor
is a maximum $10,000 fine and all kinds of restrictions can be
imposed like jail time, forfeitures, revocation of licenses,
probations, and other penalties.
AARON PETERSON, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law,
Anchorage, Alaska, added that the maximum fine under Title 12 is
$500 and no jail time or other restrictions because the court
refers to it as a "quasi-criminal offense." The bill has several
non-classified misdemeanors that have their own unique penalty
ranges and they will be changed to class A misdemeanors, which
have a maximum penalty in Title 12 (that was recently modified
under the Omnibus Crime Bill) of $25,000 and a year in jail.
He said some Title 16 offenses have their own violation
financial penalties in the next section.
3:56:18 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how these are handled now.
MR. PETERSON answered that many of these offenses that the bill
seeks to change into a class A misdemeanor are currently non-
classified misdemeanors. A section 4 offense is punishable by a
fine of not more than $1,000 and imprisonment for not more than
six months, which is a defined range in prison sentence range
that doesn't correspond to a class A or class B misdemeanor.
Currently, the DOL and the DPS don't have the ability to reduce
to a violation if there is no culpable mental state, which is
often certainly sometimes appropriate to do, and obviously this
bill would remedy that.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if SB 60 passes is "culpable mental"
state defined as "knowing."
MR. PETERSON replied that the current culpable mental state of
Title 16 is a modified negligence standard set by the Court of
Appeals in State v. Rice and it is "knew or should have known."
That is the current mental state for a misdemeanor. This bill
would remedy that by giving the judge the discretion to reduce a
violation if circumstances warrant it.
3:59:26 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said it looks like he is just saying a
person who violates AS 16.05.330 (licenses) for example, is
guilty of a class A misdemeanor punishable as provided in AS
12.55, and asked if AS 12.55 provides the ability to treat it as
a jail time offense, as a violation, or is he just saying that
prosecutorial discretion allows you to do that.
MR. PETERSON answered currently an unclassified misdemeanor is
if the state can prove the person knew or should have known;
that would establish the mental state for a misdemeanor. It
would be a class A misdemeanor under this bill. The bill would
provide the ability to reduce it to a violation if the range of
offenses contemplated in the bill have no culpable mental state.
Obviously, that does lend itself somewhat to prosecutorial
discretion. Absent the discretion, every offense would have to
go trial with the highest possible charge and let a jury decide,
then let a judge sentence, and that is terribly inefficient. In
seeking out some efficiencies this bill would give the ability
to reduce a charge below that which it would currently be
charged.
MAJOR CHASTAIN added that Superior Court has created a bail
schedule, so it is a bail citation and not a misdemeanor.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI pointed out that section 4 says they are
creating a class A misdemeanor, but section 5 gives
prosecutorial discretion and he has always been reluctant to
give prosecutors that much leeway to decide the fate of a
person: whether they are going to jail for a year or pay a $50
fine. He was sure this would be taken up in the Judiciary
Committee, which he serves on.
4:02:36 PM
SENATOR VON IMHOF reviewed: right now if someone is caught
without a fishing license, it is an unclassified misdemeanor
with a current fine of up to $1000, imprisonment for no more
than six months, or both. She asked based on what criteria, this
bill will either lessen to a violation of no more than $500 or
elevate to class A misdemeanor that has all sorts of things
attached to it.
MAJOR CHASTAIN said the first answer to her question is that not
having your license in possession is a bail offense. Not having
a sport fishing license in possession is a $200 citation, found
in the court rules section. A series of bail violations have
been removed from statute so that they are not misdemeanors. The
court and the bail schedule committees have decided it's more
appropriate for these offenses to be listed as bail offenses
than to make them a misdemeanor offense. There are probably a
couple hundred of those bailable tickets throughout statute and
regulation.
4:04:39 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked for a range of matching federal dollars for
restitution the state has lost.
MAJOR CHASTAIN replied that lost amounts of money can be as
simple as somebody who decides they are going to come up to
Alaska and purchase a resident fishing license and get a dip net
permit that they don't qualify for. The difference could be the
cost of the resident license versus the non-resident license.
But annually, DPS investigates major residency cases where
people have been defrauding the state for many years. In
addition to dip net permits and King salmon stamps, and bag
limits for all kinds of stuff, they have shot sheep, brown bear,
and goats over time. Those tend to add up. In fact, several
cases people have defrauded just the state of $30,000-$40,000
dollars; the matching dollars would be three times that. "It is
very lucrative for people to cheat on residency." Residents are
able to get a lot of these tags and permits without cost or for
very low cost. On the contrary, non-residents pay quite a bit
more for them and are restricted in a lot of the hunting and
can't even participate in certain things like dipnetting. The
state loses a substantial amount of money on them claiming
residency.
SENATOR HUGHES asked how many people do a series of fraudulent
actions.
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered this may be one person doing it for
years. They look at whether this person has been claiming
residency and how many animals they have taken over a period of
time allowed by the statute of limitations. Typically, they find
that these people are not only violating residency laws, but
also getting PFDs and a lot of other stuff. These things tend to
get lumped together in larger cases and end up getting
prosecuted through various means.
SENATOR STEDMAN asked if the intent is to give troopers and
prosecutors more flexibility to deal with out-of-state violators
with multiple offenses for multiple years versus an Alaska
resident that maybe forgot to buy his fishing license or did a
very minor technical error.
4:08:11 PM
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered yes, that is exactly the intent.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked how often out-of-state folks dip net (since
they can't do that at all).
MAJOR CHASTAIN replied that it's pretty frequent. Troopers come
in contact with that during dip net season and often they don't
catch up to non-residents until winter when they have more time
to start investigating these cases. Sometimes they lead to
bigger things. They have no reason to believe someone is not a
resident when talking to them on the river bank while they are
dip netting. So, it's pretty rare to catch them at that point,
but often it's after the fact.
4:10:06 PM
MAJOR CHASTAIN said section 6 addresses strict liability
commercial fishing violations; they are not criminal offenses.
This statute establishes a monetary value for first, second, and
third time strict liability commercial fishing offenses within a
10-year period. These amounts are maximum amounts that a judge
may impose; they are not the fine. Often the fines are well
below those maximums.
This section raises the strict liability commercial fishing
violation fines from amounts established in 1988 when this
section was enacted to the same amount adjusted for inflation in
2016 dollars. For instance, number one goes from $3,000 to
$6,050. The only one that is different is section 3 that went
from $9,000 to $15,000, because section 3 was added at a later
date.
4:11:24 PM
Section 7 amends AS 16.05 and requires the court system to
transmit notice of all convictions under this section to the
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC). Commercial fishers
are applied points similar to driver's licenses when a person is
convicted of certain commercial fishing offenses. It is
important that points applied to commercial fishing convictions
be conveyed to the agency that is responsible for keeping track
of the points that are applied to that individual.
SENATOR STEDMAN asked why section 6 needs to escalate the fines
so much. Do they have a range of first conviction fines?
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered that the fines vary depending on how
competitive the fisheries are. In certain areas of the state a
typical fine might be $3,000 with $1,500 suspended for the first
offense. If that person is convicted, any fish that they have
caught illegally belongs to the State of Alaska, so it is
forfeited to the state. In other areas of the state where a
fishery is more competitive, the fines have stayed pretty close
to $3,000 and goes up with each subsequent offense. In addition,
since these are not criminal offenses, they have the ability of
charging a class A misdemeanor for serious commercial fishing
violations and those can be applied as needed. It's pretty rare
to charge a class A misdemeanor for a commercial fishing
offense. Most of the time it is because they have done something
pretty wrong.
SENATOR STEDMAN said he doubted that changing the fine from
$3,000 to $6,000 would change anybody's behavior, because of all
the other issues they face - loss of fish, potential other
violations adding to their points, which hit them pretty hard.
It's a different situation when someone intentionally goes into
Red Bay on the south end of Baranof Island into a closed fishery
and actually hinders the fishery, because they aggressively
fished it when it was closed and closed for a reason. In those
cases, he wasn't so sure that raising the fine by a few thousand
dollars would prevent that. Not only that, all the other
penalties and costs imposed on the person are such a severe
deterrent that they have a good chance of even losing their
boat. In many years of being around the commercial fishing
industry he never got the impression that fishermen thought the
penalties were light or so light that they could be ignored. He
asked if getting the rings up late in seining would fall under
this category.
4:15:53 PM
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered that this is another complicated
question and has a complicated answer. There is a variety and
unlimited number of violations that can occur out there, with
commercial fishing specifically. In the Sitka area, there is the
herring fishery that is a substantial commercial fishing
opportunity. In that setting, they typically cite people for
seconds early or seconds late, because it is a significant
economic advantage to drop a net early by a couple seconds.
Those fisheries are highly economic and highly competitive.
Other fisheries are not that competitive.
SENATOR STEDMAN agreed that seconds in the sac roe fishery is a
substantial economic advantage. But getting the rings up late on
deck can be complicated by a hang up, a tide, or a slow crew.
The timing is watched very closely not only by the officers
involved but also by the other fishermen - to say nothing of the
Coast Guard. He recognizes the dollar increase to the treasury,
but he didn't think raising the fine would deter the activity.
He said one fellow's boat even went up to auction for fishing
illegally in Red Bay on South Baranof Island. That impacted the
fishing there for multiple seasons.
4:20:13 PM
MAJOR CHASTAIN said section 8 amends AS 16.05.782 and removes
the penalty section from (a) which cleans up the subsection and
makes it clearer. This section makes it clear that a person may
not take a brown or grizzly bear within one-half mile of a solid
waste disposal facility. The penalties for this section will now
be contained within sections 9 and 10.
Section 9 relates to section 8. This section removes the
unnecessary reference to section (a) and maintains the
additional penalties of an additional fine for failing to
salvage the hide and skull of a brown bear taken within a half
mile of a solid waste disposal facility.
4:20:51 PM
Section 10 amends AS 16.05.782 and adds two new subsections that
establish the penalties as a class A misdemeanor for a criminal
offense and also provide the additional option of charging a
person with a violation offense when appropriate.
4:21:17 PM
Section 11, under AS 16.05.783, "Same day airborne hunting"
statutes, this section removes the specific fines and penalties
associated with an unclassified misdemeanor and replaces it with
a class A misdemeanor for consistency in penalties.
4:21:24 PM
Section 12, under the "Prohibition of hunting adjacent to
highway between Yukon River and Arctic ocean" statute, this
section amends (b) and adds that the penalty for violation of
this section is a class A misdemeanor punishable as provided in
AS 12.55.
Section 13, related to section 12, adds a new subsection under
AS 16.05.789 (c). This section provides the additional option of
charging a person with a violation offense when appropriate.
4:21:48 PM
Section 14, under AS 16.05.790 "Obstruction or hindrance of
lawful fishing, hunting or trapping" statutes, adds a new
subsection to allow for charging some offenses of this section
as a violation offence when there is no culpable mental state.
Section 15, under AS 16.05.831(c) "Waste of salmon" statute,
removes the specific fines and penalties associated with an
unclassified misdemeanor and replaces it with a class A
misdemeanor.
4:22:13 PM
Section 16, under AS 16.05.901, adds a new subsection to provide
for charging offenses committed under AS 16.05.871-AS 16.05.896
as a violation offence punishable as provided in AS 12.55.
4:22:28 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN asked if using salmon to bait halibut is
considered wanton waste under section 15.
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered that waste of salmon could be charged as
that, but most of the time it's charged when large amounts of
fish are wasted like stripping roe from fish and when processors
let fish rot on the docks. Usually they find a lesser offense to
charge for that type of thing making it a bailable offense.
4:23:35 PM
Section 17, under AS 16.05.925 "Penalty for violations", amends
subsection (a) to provide consistency in the penalties as
provided under AS 12.55 and provides an exemption for a new
subsection added under (c).
Under AS 16.05.925 (b), this subsection provides for restitution
amounts that the court may impose for illegally taken big game
animals in Alaska. This section increases the restitution
amounts by at least 50 percent that a person convicted of
unlawfully taking big game may have to pay to the state if the
court choses to implement restitution.
Alaska's game belongs to all of us collectively, Major Chastain
explained and when a big game animal is unlawfully taken, it
defrauds the state of the value of that animal to its citizens.
This value varies greatly depending on the species of animal,
the location of the take, the social value of the animal, the
economic value of the animal and the food source value to the
people of the state. These restitution values may be imposed by
the court if the case warrants applying restitution. In most
cases, it does not make the state "whole" for the loss of the
animal, but helps pay the state back for the illegal take.
Current restitution amounts were enacted in 1984 and have gone
untouched since then.
He said the original bill submitted in the 2016 legislature
increased restitution amounts by 50 percent from the base
amounts in statute. Some of these amounts where changed as the
bill moved through committees last year and this version of the
bill reflects those changes. Some animals, like moose, went up
by 150 percent.
4:25:26 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if someone takes a moose and then
realizes it's three inches short from a legal moose, do they
pack it out 50 miles and turn it over to the ADF&G and still
have to pay a fine under subsection (c).
MAJOR CHASTAIN replied that the court would not be able to
charge the restitution amount under (c). Currently, if someone
turns himself in voluntarily and brings everything in in good
condition he is charged with a violation offense with a typical
fine of $300 and loss of the animal.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if that is what is done under current
law since it is a new section.
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered that occasionally magistrates impose
restitution in those cases. In fact, last year magistrates
imposed restitution in four cases. If SB 60 passes, it tells
magistrates and judges they can't impose restitution for people
who voluntarily turn themselves in.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said language says "the defendant 'may' not
be ordered" and asked if that is discretionary.
4:27:45 PM
MR. PETERSON answered that would not be read as a permissive
"may." The "may" in this case is tantamount to the legislature
telling the court they shall not do it. He added that the Court
of Appeals recently reversed a judge's interpretation of similar
language to mean that since it said "may" it can also mean "may
not." It should probably read "shall not be ordered."
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he thought that language could save a
court challenge.
SENATOR VON IMHOF asked if someone volunteers to return their
animal because they realize they did it illegally, is there a
way to evaluate whether it was an honest mistake. Section 11 on
same day airborne hunting came to her mind here.
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered that typically an average of 130 cases
are self-turn-in animals each year. It's almost always moose and
sheep. They do the right thing: salvage the animal and bring it
from the field and make the very difficult phone call to
enforcement to tell them what they did. It's their belief they
are rewarded in that scenario for calling up. Same day airborne
is a whole separate crime.
4:30:58 PM
He said section 18 was an amendment that Senator Coghill helped
craft last year and they fully support it.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he thought section 18 was a good
section and asked if he ever has issues with a person shooting
the wrong size moose multiple times.
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered yes, occasionally, and they discuss how
to handle it with the DOL, but that self-turn-in will cease
because they can't continue to do it each year.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said as he reads the statute there is no
limitation.
MAJOR CHASTAIN responded that the way this section reads is that
someone who does this and turns in the animal would not be
charged restitution. They still have the ability to charge them
as a violation or as a misdemeanor. So, if a person accidentally
took a small moose three years in a row he could be charged with
a misdemeanor.
4:33:24 PM
Section 19, under AS 16.05.940 (38), adds a new definition
defining "electronic form" as it pertains to section 3 under AS
16.05.330(g). It provides for display of license images on an
electronic device such as a mobile telephone, tablet or computer
that will satisfy the display of fishing and hunting licenses.
4:34:01 PM
MAJOR CHASTAIN said sections 20-27 are in one block and are all
standardized penalties; they create the ability to charge either
a misdemeanor or a violation.
4:34:08 PM
Section 28 amends the uncodified law of Alaska to make it clear
that the act applies to offenses that occur on or after the
effective date of the act.
Section 29 provides an effective date of July 1, 2017.
SENATOR HUGHES asked if there were particular problems with not
getting this issue through last year.
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered that it was a combination of not having
enough time to make all the amendments before time ran out.
SENATOR HUGHES asked if sportsmen's groups had expressed
concerns or opposition.
MAJOR CHASTAIN explained that last year a few people called in
that had some concerns but those were taken care of.
4:35:35 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN asked him to provide a feeling for some of the
field challenges hunters face in identification of moose in the
Thomas Bay area outside of Petersburg.
MAJOR CHASTAIN said his background included being stationed in
Ketchikan as a Sergeant in charge of the Petersburg, Wrangell,
Petersburg area and each year they get a wide range of moose
that are shot with different antler configurations that don't
comply with the rest of the state, because they are a different
subspecies of moose. These antlers are a lot different than the
typical moose antlers and have strange projections and different
configurations that make it tough to determine sometimes what is
legal and what is not.
SENATOR STEDMAN asked if he found that hunters are pretty
responsive to working with troopers in identifying and trying to
comply with the regulations.
MAJOR CHASTAIN answered that hunters in that area are pretty
responsive to helping out. At one point a lot of illegal animals
were being taken by breaking a spike or a fork. After the
regulations were created about broken antlered moose, cases went
from 30 to 1.
SENATOR STEDMAN said the vast majority of hunters he knows get
teased and ridiculed by their buddies when they inadvertently
shoot a moose that is out of compliance, particularly if they do
it more than once. They are not proud of it and it's a lot of
work to get a game animal out of the woods and deliver it to the
community.
CHAIR GIESSEL finding no other questions thanked everyone for
their participation and Major Chastain for his service.
4:40:53 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL adjourned the Senate Resources Committee meeting
at 4:40 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 60- 1. Transmittal Letter to Sen President.pdf |
SRES 2/27/2017 3:30:00 PM |
SB 60 |
| SB 60- 2. Version A.PDF |
SRES 2/27/2017 3:30:00 PM |
SB 60 |
| SB 60- 3. Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SRES 2/27/2017 3:30:00 PM |
SB 60 |
| SB 60- 4. Fiscal Note-1-2-021517-DFG-N.PDF |
SRES 2/27/2017 3:30:00 PM |
SB 60 |
| SB 60- 5. Fiscal Note-2-2-021517-DPS-N.PDF |
SRES 2/27/2017 3:30:00 PM |
SB 60 |
| SB 60- 6. Hearing Request to SRES.pdf |
SRES 2/27/2017 3:30:00 PM |
SB 60 |
| SB 60- 7. UPDATED Fiscal Note-1-2-022417-DFG-N.PDF |
SRES 2/27/2017 3:30:00 PM |
SB 60 |