Legislature(1995 - 1996)
01/24/1996 03:35 PM Senate RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE RESOURCES COMMITTEE
January 24, 1996
3:35 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Loren Leman, Chairman
Senator Drue Pearce, Vice Chairman
Senator Steve Frank
Senator Rick Halford
Senator Robin Taylor
Senator Georgianna Lincoln
Senator Lyman Hoffman
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Alaska Mineral Commission Briefing
SENATE BILL NO. 190
"An Act establishing a residency requirement for auctions of state
land."
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 128
"An Act reducing certain resident sport fishing, hunting, and
trapping license fees, increasing certain nonresident sport
fishing, hunting, and trapping license fees, and relating to
nonresident sport fishing, hunting, and trapping licenses; and
providing for an effective date."
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
SB 190 - See Resources minutes dated 1/24/96.
SB 128 - See Resources minutes dated 1/17/96.
WITNESS REGISTER
Earl Beistline, Commissioner
Alaska Minerals Commission
P.O. Box 80148
Fairbanks, AK 99708
Irene Anderson, Commissioner
Alaska Minerals Commission
P.O. Box 905
Nome, AK 99762
Ron Sheardown, Commissioner
Alaska Minerals Commission
3512 Campbell Airstrip Rd.
Anchorage, AK 99504
Karl Hanneman, Commissioner
Alaska Minerals Commission
P.O. Box 10664
Fairbanks, AK 99710
Al Clough, Mining Specialist
Division of Trade and Development
Department of Commerce and Economic Development
P.O. Box 110804
Juneau, AK 99811-0804
Neil MacKinnon, Commissioner
Alaska Minerals Commission
1114 Glacier Ave.
Juneau, AK 99801
Ron Swanson, Deputy Director
Division of Lands
3601 C St., Ste. 1122
Anchorage, AK 99503-5947
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 190.
Charles Forck
Delta Junction, AK 99737
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 190.
Senator Donley
State Capital
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 128
Wayne Regelin, Director
Division of Wildlife
Department of Fish and Game
P.O. Box 25526
Juneau, AK 99801-5526
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 128.
Neil Webster
Alaska Professional Hunters Association
11044 Tsusena Circle
Eagle River, AK 99577
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SB 128.
Don Westlund
P.O. Box 7883
Ketchikan, AK 99901
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 128.
Wayne Kubat
P.O. Box 874867
Wasilla, AK 99687
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SB 128.
Rod Arno
P.O. Box 2790
Palmer, AK 99645
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 128.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 96-5, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIRMAN LEMAN called the Senate Resources Committee meeting to
order at 3:35 p.m. and announced a briefing by the Alaska Minerals
Commission (AMC).
EARL BEISTLINE, Chairman, gave a brief outline and introduced the
rest of the commissioners in attendance: IRENE ANDERSON, Co-
Chairman, RON SHEARDOWN, KARL HANNEMAN, AL CLOUGH of the DCED, and
NEIL MACKINNON.
MR. BEISTLINE said the purpose of the Commission is to determine
what should be done to stimulate the mining industry in the State.
He presented a copy of the Alaska Minerals Commission Report to
Chairman Leman.
Number 91
KARL HANNEMAN thanked the committee for passing the minerals
incentives bill last year, the diminutive discharge bill, and the
geophysical mapping program. He said it was heartening to see
action was taken to preclude more bureaucracy when it was
appropriate. He reviewed the Alaska Minerals Commission Report.
He said basically the graph on the back page shows if the
additional mines are permitted, the number of jobs in the mining
industry would double before the year 2000. They are high-paying,
year-round jobs and some of them would be in rural areas.
MR. HANNEMAN said the user fees and the way regulatory agencies
charge for their efforts was one of their priorities this year. He
asked, as a matter of policy, if the agencies could repeatedly and
continually charge for their services. The more times they review
the permit, the more they can charge. He said this delays
permitting, because it's more in the Department's interest to
continue the permit review.
MR. MACKINNON said there was a philosophical problem when an agency
says they have to have a certain permit, and then the industry has
to pay for it. If they were reasonable, there wouldn't be a
problem, he said.
MR. HANNEMAN said they thought the most basic way to do that was to
require legislative review of the fees.
Number 185
SENATOR TAYLOR said there was already a very close nexus between
the amount agencies are charging and whether or not they will be
able to save their secretary's job for the next year. He believed
the legislature made a major mistake in allowing agencies to start
basing their own funding on how much they could charge in fees for
the services they were allegedly providing.
MR. MACKINNON said there was a good example of that in Juneau with
the local mining ordinance where it's an open-ended fee structure
that the mining company pays. The A/J permit went on for 3 to 4
years and they studied everything.
MR. MACKINNON said they were looking for ways to help government
streamline itself. They thought it would be good if agencies
complied with last year's legislation that mandated DNR as the lead
agency.
MR. MACKINNON stated that he thought steps had been taken to change
industry's perception of how the State of Alaska is going to view
mineral development. He urged continued support for the
geophysical mapping program, especially in other parts of the
State.
SENATOR LEMAN asked if he had any comments on the Governor's
Executive Order that merges the Division of Oil and Gas with the
other Division of Oil, Gas, and Geology. MR. MACKINNON said that
in a State where so much of our revenue comes from oil and gas,
there is some merit to the idea. At the same time, the functions
that DGGS perform are necessary functions. He thought it would be
a close call.
Number 252
MR. MACKINNON also urged the Committee to support the access issue.
He said the State has a two-year opportunity to assert and prove
trails or the federal government will take them back.
SENATOR LEMAN noted that several members of the Committee are very
concerned about the lack of commitment in the Department of Law in
this administration to forge ahead with RS 2477 assertion.
MR. MACKINNON added that the navigability issue was also an issue
of access.
Number 310
MR. CLOUGH said there are two main themes the Commission is trying
to get across this year. There are a variety of issues that have
fiscal notes attached to them and there are also a variety of
issues that are more of fixing things that are broken, such as the
regulatory scheme. They both are needed to reach the end of more
jobs in Alaska. There needs to be some certainty in the minerals
business.
MR. BEISTLINE said the importance of the geophysical mapping has
been shown physically in the Fairbanks area. He then asked Ms.
Anderson to comment on activity in the Nome area.
Number 337
MS. ANDERSON explained there was geological/ geophysical mapping in
Nome in 1994. Since the Native Corporations owned the land and
were very interested in the data, they did cooperative agreements
with the State DNR for access and samples. They offered the use of
their older airborne geophysic maps. Cooperative agreements
between industry, private owners, and the State of Alaska are a
wave of the future. She said there are already a lot of claims
staked in the Nome area.
MR. BEISTLINE remarked that their suggestions are going to cost
money, but they figure the money will be returned many times by the
finding of discoveries. He said it was a claim-staking rush in the
Nome and Fairbanks areas.
Number 388
SENATOR LINCOLN said she appreciated their presentation and their
report, which was well-done. It was easy for the public to read
and to identify specific recommendations.
She said she supported the general idea of diversifying our
economic base and the $5 million per year recommendation, Mr.
Beistline said, would not in the long-run cost us, but would create
jobs and economic development throughout the whole State. She said
a weakness we have had is to not have the economic development in
all areas of the State. She asked what reaction the Governor had
when he presented the report. MR. BEISTLINE said it was very well
received.
MR. MACKINNON said that the geophysical data would also be a
capital investment, because we would always have that data. It
would be throughout the whole State.
Number 447
SENATOR TAYLOR said he heard about this mapping technique about
three years ago from Senator Halford who strongly fought for the
funding for it.
SRES 1/24/96
SB 190 RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT/STATE LAND AUCTION
SENATOR LEMAN announced an at-ease from 4:10 p.m. to 4:12 p.m. and
announced SB 190 .
SENATOR TAYLOR, Sponsor of SB 190, said the purpose of this bill is
to make certain that Alaskans have first option at purchasing our
State lands, those lands that are residential and recreational in
nature. He filed the bill as a response to what occurred this
summer when people were attempting to "sell the Alaskan mystique."
The Alaska Tourism Marketing Council had advertised on the Internet
for people to come up and buy land. Looking at the actual bids, he
found there was a resident of Fairbanks who submitted a bid on
State land, only to be outbid by a resident of Washington state by
$61.80. A couple from Wasilla lost their chance to own a piece of
Alaska to a Minnesota woman, because she outbid them by $442. An
Anchorage woman lost out to a man from Michigan for $214.
SENATOR TAYLOR said he didn't think the revenue was significant
enough to justify to him turning down Alaskans who might want a
chance of owning a piece of the State that they live in. He
thought they should be allowed first option. He thought
establishing sufficient residency for the Permanent Fund would be
good to use for this purpose.
SENATOR TAYLOR provided the Committee with an amendment saying that
this bill does not interfere with commercial sales, the development
of agriculture, or the development of industries. His "purpose is
to allow Alaskan individuals to own residential land and
recreational land, and not to impede the development of an
economy," he said.
Number 501
SENATOR TAYLOR moved to adopt the amendment. He explained that it
removed the restriction on commercial, industrial, or agricultural
land being available to only Alaskans. SENATOR HALFORD objected
for a question.
SENATOR HALFORD said he understood the industrial and commercial
exemption, but didn't understand the agricultural. He did not want
to see the agricultural opportunities advertised outside, in farm
journals particularly, with such a pattern of subsidy. SENATOR
TAYLOR said the concern comes from the agricultural community who
said SB 190 was very restrictive, because frequently in the history
of Alaska, farms have been developed by people from outside Alaska.
Many other enterprises, like barley, came in from outside the
State. His concern was for the fellow who lives here who wants to
buy the adjoining 40 acres to his already established parcel.
Should he have to compete against outside agricultural purposes.
Number 540
RON SWANSON, Deputy Director, Division of Lands, said there already
is a preference right. If you are an adjoining agricultural land
owner, you do have the preference to the adjacent parcel. You
would have to meet the high bid to get it, though.
MR. SWANSON said Alaskans should have the opportunity to obtain
lands first. Of the almost 500 parcels that were available for
disposal, 287 of them have been sold to date. The others are still
available over-the-counter about a week and a half ago. He said
the land in Southeast has particularly high interest.
SENATOR LINCOLN said she was also concerned about adding the
agricultural lands. She wanted to see any agricultural lands in
the future, whether it is an individual with adjacent land, she
would like to see it go to an Alaskan, first.
She was puzzled with the fiscal note of $5,000 for residency
verification. MR. SWANSON said to date the residency requirement
for homesteading is an affidavit for residency on the application
which has to be notarized by a postmaster. Unless there is a
question by someone, they do not verify the information. If the
intent of the bill is to find out if the individual is truly a
resident, they would have to take that extra step.
SENATOR LINCOLN said she couldn't see why it would cost so much
with today's technology to verify against a Permanent Fund
application.
Number 586
TAPE 96-5, SIDE B
Number 590
SENATOR FRANK asked for the logic behind exempting industrial and
commercial land. SENATOR TAYLOR explained that primarily there is
a market. That market is determined by the business you're in, not
necessarily by State boundaries. We have never excluded based on
residency before in those areas, nor have we on the residential or
recreational. He is beginning a process of providing some
exclusion.
SENATOR FRANK asked if we sell commercial land much. MR. SWANSON
answered that the State doesn't sell commercial land; that it is
leased. This is still considered "disposal."
Number 575
CHARLES FORCK, Delta Junction, supported SB 190 and the proposed
amendment. The residency requirement for agriculture is
counterproductive to agricultural development. "Agricultural
expertise is in short supply in Alaska, as are people who want to
do the work. Also, capital is in short supply for development."
SENATOR TAYLOR noted for the record that on line 11 the word
"proceeding" should be changed to "preceding."
Number 544
SENATOR HALFORD said he wanted to differentiate between the high
value, high popularity, small, agricultural parcels where there are
plenty of residents and a lot of people competing for them and the
big farms that require the outside expertise. He thought the
agricultural auction could be advertised across the country and the
reaction of the local people would be exactly the same thing in as
in Southeast, when people lost parcels to outsiders.
MR. SWANSON agreed that there could be a problem and suggested that
a possible solution would be to leave the agricultural
resident/non-resident decision up to the commissioner who would
make a best-interest-finding of which way to do it. SENATOR LEMAN
asked if that's the way it is done now. MR. SWANSON replied, no,
that currently all land is available to residents and non-
residents. That is the purpose of this amendment. The
prequalification language for agricultural land currently in law is
for financial reasons, not inability to develop agricultural
parcels.
SENATOR TAYLOR said he would be willing to work with Senator
Halford and Mr. Swanson for a solution. If they can't find a
solution, he thought it better to leave the law as it's been for
the last 20 years.
MR. SWANSON said the bill they passed Monday, dealing with
agricultural lands, deleted the prequalification requirements. If
that passes, the Department would have no ability to screen out who
does not qualify. He said he would be happy to work with the two
Senators on a solution.
SENATOR LEMAN asked if there were any other objections to amendment
He noted the change of "proceeding" on line 11 to "preceding."
SENATOR PEARCE moved to pass SB 190 am from committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note. There
were no objections and it was so ordered.
SRES 1/24/96
SB 128 NONRESIDENT HUNT, SPORT FISH, TRAP FEES
SENATOR LEMAN announced SB 128 to be up for consideration.
SENATOR DONLEY, sponsor, said one of the first things he thought of
when he was elected were the out-of-state fishing interests coming
to Alaska and using our fish resources, but taking that money out-
of-state. Because of the commerce clause in the U.S. Constitution,
we are limited as to how much we can charge out-of-state commercial
fishing interests for licensing of not more than three to one. In
the private area the fees are much more liberal in allowing states
to discriminate between residents and non-residents.
Several people have complained about abuse by non-residents who buy
a sport-fish license and fish all summer on the beaches of Alaska,
and as they caught their fish day-by-day, they were processing,
canning, and shipping it home. This amounts to almost a commercial
license amount of fish.
SB 128 addresses the issue of what we charge residents vs. non-
residents for sport fishing licenses and also, what we charge for
sport hunting licenses. It also addresses the issue of what we
charge our residents for multiple use licenses.
As the law is now, there is no incentive for an individual Alaskan
to buy a combination license, but it costs the State more when they
buy three separate licenses, because we pay vendors $1 per
individual license issued. He thought some people would go ahead
and buy a combination, if there was any incentive at all to do so.
This bill would save them some money, $5, and save the State a lot
of paper work. The $5 negative impact would be offset by the
savings realized by not having to pay a vendor $1 for every
individual license they issue.
The way to fix the other problem of people fishing for a year on
one license and exporting their fish is to not let them buy a
license for a year. Have them buy a license for a shorter period
of time and have them repeatedly go back and buy them, if they want
to. This isn't a solution, but it limits the duration of the
license and the added fees adds a little to revenue.
SENATOR DONLEY said the hunting section is more complex. He looked
at what other states were charging and said that his fees were not
terribly out of line with what we would encounter going to another
state for hunting. He said he has heard from some people in the
guiding business that this would be cost-prohibitive for some folks
coming up here. The majority of the revenue generated for the
Department from fees comes from non-residents and this would reduce
the Department's income significantly.
One basis for this was a survey done by the ADF&G. He found that
the survey didn't really ask these questions in a manner that would
lead to the conclusions that they draw.
Number 364
SENATOR DONLEY said he found that Alaska is rather unique in that
most states don't have a separate alien non-resident classification
which he wanted to preserve.
SENATOR TAYLOR said in Canada, you only buy a trophy tag after
you've harvested an animal. He noted that Debra Lyons was not kept
on the Board of Fish, because she tried to correct the same problem
Senator Donley is trying to correct with this legislation.
Number 281
SENATOR TAYLOR applauded Senator Donley for introducing this
legislation and added that he would like to see the issue targeted
even more.
SENATOR HALFORD agreed that there was definitely a problem. He
said that Sections 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, and 12 all deal with the
duration of license in one way or another. He suggested that the
change in resident licenses in sections 1,2, and 3 is
insignificant. The changes in the tag fees are probably so
progressive that they would result in a reduction of over-all
income, so he suggested dropping that portion. He would make all
resident and non-resident hunting and fishing consistently 30-day
licenses, with the exception of the king salmon tag which he has at
14-days. He thought that would work logically and
administratively.
SENATOR HALFORD also thought that the possession limit shouldn't be
defined the way it is with regards to fish, because that means
there is no limit to what you can catch, if you have a freezer on-
board. He thought there should be an ultimate limit for sports
fishing.
SENATOR TAYLOR added that he didn't want "fish in possession" to
include the captain of charter boat and the captain's helper.
Number 281
WAYNE REGELIN, Director, Division of Wildlife, said the increases
in the fees could significantly reduce their income. About half of
their income is from license fees and tags. Doubling those would
make us non-competitive with British Columbia and the Yukon which
are our primary competitors for non-resident hunters. About 10% of
hunters in Alaska take about 10% of game each year, but they pay
for 75% of the bill. Most of them don't compete with resident
hunters. They have to be careful to maintain a reasonable ratio
between the cost for a resident and non-resident to hunt. Courts
have never said what that ratio needs to be. A recent appeals
court ruled that 1:7 was reasonable, but they didn't go on to say
where that became unreasonable. Right now, current fees are $25
for a resident moose license, and $485 for a non-resident (a ratio
of 1:19). The proposed change would make it 1:34. He thought that
might get us in trouble.
The final concern was with helping out people who move to Alaska,
who can't buy a resident hunting or fishing license until they've
been here a full year. They have to buy a series of licenses until
they become official residents.
Number 236
SENATOR TAYLOR said it's probably appropriate that a wealthy
European pays for the privilege of hunting over here, but he had a
problem with relatives of residents coming to visit for just three
weeks and being charged $80 a piece just so they can fish. He also
said that it was prohibitive for his son to come home for a week
and hunt deer on Wrangell Island.
NEIL WEBSTER, Alaska Professional Hunters Association, applauded
Senator Donley's bill. The only problem he has is with the fee
structure for non-residents and non-resident aliens. He thought we
have to be competitive with B.C. where they have tag fees after the
animal has been harvested. In Alaska, we sell hunts, not the
killing of animals, but increased fees will have a negative impact
on our tourism industry, he said.
Number 157
DON WESTLUND said he was concerned with having to be in the State
for 365 days consecutively to get a resident license. He was
concerned that this looked like a revenue-generating bill. If you
compare what commercial people take out of Alaska to what sport
people take out, the commercial take far more resource for far less
money. He wanted a higher fee for commercial fishing, because they
take more resource. He also commented that enough people would
still come to the State with the higher fees.
WAYNE KUBAT said he was a registered hunting guide for the past 11-
years. He said he grossed $130,000 last year and netted $30,000.
He thought it would be a lot tougher to book hunts, if fees are
raised. He said we have world-wide competition, like in Russia
where there aren't many regulations.
Number 61
ROD ARNO said he had been a wilderness hunting and fishing guide in
Alaska for the last 20 years. He supported Senator Donley's idea
of increasing revenues to the State through the non-resident sport
fishermen. They make up 50% of sport fishermen. They are marketed
by the Alaska Tourism Marketing Council. He opposed an increase in
the non-resident hunting tags and fees. Non-resident hunters
harvest less than 10% of the annual harvest of wild game. Yet the
non-resident fees pay for over 75% of the $150 million spent by the
Division of Wildlife since 1980. The Alaska State game hunting
industry continues to have no representation on the Alaska Tourism
Marketing Council.
SENATOR TAYLOR asked what percentage of these fees are dedicated as
program receipts by the Department. MR. REGELIN replied, 100%; it
first goes into a dedicated fish and game fund and then
it goes back to either the Division of Sport Fish or Division of
Wildlife Conservation.
TAPE 96-6, SIDE A
SENATOR LEMAN thanked everyone for their testimony and adjourned
the meeting at 5:10 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|