Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/16/2003 03:34 PM Senate RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 16, 2003
3:34 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Scott Ogan, Chair
Senator Thomas Wagoner, Vice Chair
Senator Fred Dyson
Senator Ralph Seekins
Senator Kim Elton
Senator Georgianna Lincoln
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Ben Stevens
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 31
"An Act relating to a railroad utility corridor for extension of
the Alaska Railroad to Canada and to extension of the Alaska
Railroad to connect with the North American railroad system."
SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
SENATE BILL NO. 50
"An Act amending the manner of determining the royalty received
by the state on gas production as it relates to the manufacture
of certain value-added products."
MOVED CSSB 50(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 147
"An Act relating to control of nuisance wild animals; and
providing for an effective date."
MOVED SB 147 OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 151
"An Act relating to the regulation of natural gas pipelines
under the Pipeline Act."
MOVED CSSB 151(RES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 90(FIN)
"An Act relating to a salmon product development tax credit and
a salmon utilization tax credit under the Alaska fisheries
business tax; and providing for an effective date."
MOVED CSHB 90(FIN) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS ACTION
SB 31 - See Transportation minutes dated 2/11/03 and 3/27/03.
SB 50 - See Resources minutes dated 3/26/03, 4/11/03 and
4/14/03.
SB 147 - No previous action to record.
SB 151 - See Labor and Commerce minutes dated 3/27/03 and 4/1/03
and Resources minutes dated 4/14/03.
HB 90 - No previous action to record.
WITNESS REGISTER
Mr. Mark Myers
Division of Oil and Gas
Department of Natural Resources
550 W 7th Ave.
Anchorage, AK 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: DNR supports SB 50 as amended
Ms. Lisa Parker
Agrium
Kenai, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports CSSB 50(RES)
Senator Gary Stevens
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 90
Ms. Jacqueline Tupou
Staff to Senator Green
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, AK 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified for the sponsor of SB 147
Mr. Gordy Williams
Department of Fish & Game
PO Box 25526
Juneau, AK 99802-5226
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 147
Mr. Doug Larsen
Assistant Director
Division of Wildlife Conservation
Department of Fish & Game
PO Box 25526
Juneau, AK 99802-5226
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions about SB 147
Mr. Robert Duran
Wasilla, AK 99687
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 147
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 03-30, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR SCOTT OGAN called the Senate Resources Standing Committee
meeting to order at 3:34 p.m. All members were present except
Senator Stevens. Chair Ogan announced the committee would not
hear SB 31 today at the sponsor's request. The issue of the
location of a gas line in relation to the railroad is still
under discussion. He informed members that Mat-Su Borough Mayor
Tim Anderson and Assembly member Kelly Ladeer (ph) were present.
The committee then took up SB 151 and Senator Stevens arrived.
SB 151-REGULATION OF NATURAL GAS PIPELINES
CHAIR OGAN informed members that he and Senator Wagoner met with
Jack Chenoweth, legal adviser on oil and gas issues, who pointed
out the trend in the Lower 48 is to use contract pipelines.
SENATOR TOM WAGONER, sponsor of SB 151, informed members that
Mr. Chenoweth differentiated between common carriers and
contract lines and said that during the last two years, contract
lines are becoming more common. He told members, regarding a
question that came up at the last hearing, the line is currently
at 63 percent capacity with gas that has already been discovered
and gas that is expected to be discovered prior to the start of
operation of the pipeline. The pipeline can be expanded to take
an equal amount of gas to provide capacity for contract with
other exploration companies.
SENATOR ELTON asked if the committee will be taking public
testimony on this legislation today.
CHAIR OGAN indicated that no one signed up to testify at this
time.
MR. BEN SCHOFFMANN, Marathon Oil Company, informed members that
he was available to answer questions.
CHAIR OGAN indicated there were no questions from committee
members.
SENATOR WAGONER moved CSSB 151(RES), Version D, from committee
with individual recommendations and its attached fiscal notes.
CHAIR OGAN announced that without objection, the motion carried.
SB 50-ROYALTY GAS CONTRACTS
CHAIR OGAN announced that Version Q of SB 50 was before the
committee and that an amendment was adopted at the last meeting.
A second amendment, labeled Q.1, has been proposed.
SENATOR DYSON moved to adopt Amendment 2 (Q.1, Chenoweth,
4/15/03), which reads as follows:
23-LS0429\Q.1
Chenoweth
A M E N D M E N T 2
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR WAGONER
TO: CSSB 50( ), Draft Version "Q"
Page 2, line 23, following "acceptance of":
Delete "the use of the contract price"
Insert "an amount that is different than the amount due
under the lease [THE USE OF THE CONTRACT PRICE]"
Page 2, line 31, following "commissioner":
Delete "shall"
Insert "may"
Page 3, line 4, following "agreement":
Insert "if it is in the best interest of the state"
Page 3, line 17:
Delete "and"
Insert "or"
Page 3, line 19, following "state":
Delete ";"
Insert "."
Page 3, lines 20 - 22:
Delete all material.
CHAIR OGAN objected for the purpose of discussion.
SENATOR WAGONER explained that he, his chief of staff, Mary
Jackson, and Mark Myers discussed this amendment with Mr.
Chenoweth on Monday. Everyone concurred these amendments clean
up the bill and accomplish the intent. He noted Mr. Myers was
available via teleconference to answer any questions.
CHAIR OGAN asked Mr. Myers to discuss the overall effect these
amendments will have on SB 151.
MR. MARK MYERS, Director of the Division of Oil and Gas,
Department of Natural Resources (DNR), told members that the
amendments give the commissioner some discretion to decide on
the amount of royalty relief to grant. The commissioner can
choose one of three values: the higher of value; the market
value; or the contract price. The (aa) treatment says the
commissioner shall only use the contract price if certain
conditions are met so it gives the commissioner discretion to
use the contract price or something in between that and the
higher price associated with market value or the higher of
price. DNR supports that language. However, the amendments will
have a dramatic effect on the fiscal note, which is now
indeterminate. Because the commissioner has the discretion, in
the public interest, to adjust the royalty, DNR believes the
amendments will protect the state's interest.
MR. MYERS said the previous version of the bill gave the
commissioner discretion, but the amendments make the language
consistent by changing "shall" to "may" throughout. He noted
(aa) treatment for utilities originally meant that all of the
conditions had to be met. Changing "and" to "or" means that any
one of the conditions is sufficient to deny an application and
provides more protection for the state.
CHAIR OGAN asked if the Administration took a position on SB 50
previous to the amendments.
MR. MYERS said he was only speaking for DNR but he believes the
Administration will support the legislation.
CHAIR OGAN asked what these changes will do to the fiscal note.
MR. MYERS said the changes make the fiscal note indeterminate.
Prior to the amendments, DNR felt there was minimal discretion
in the amounts. In the particular case of Agrium, the division
could calculate the volume of gas it expected would fall under
this contract. The fiscal note was reasonable given the
uncertainty of the volumes that might potentially be used by the
plant. Now, the fiscal note says that number could be the higher
number if all of the conditions are met but it could be
significantly lower. He said because the commissioner can only
enter into a contract if it is in the best interest of the
state, there could be increased value in other areas.
SENATOR SEEKINS referred to the change from "shall" to "may" on
line 31, page 2, and asked if that will have any effect on the
90-day provision. He asked if the commissioner could, after the
written request, decide not to enter into an agreement.
MR. MYERS said if the commissioner determined it was not in the
public interest, he could deny it; the amendment just clarifies
the "or" conditions if the price is unreasonably low or if the
reduction is not balanced by employment or other opportunities.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if the 90-day provision is useless because
nothing compels the commissioner to say yes or no.
MR. MYERS said he believes the commissioner has 90 days to make
the decision.
SENATOR SEEKINS disagreed and said the bill says at the end of
90 days the commissioner may enter into an agreement.
MR. MYERS said if the commissioner determines it is not in the
best interest of the state and denies the application, he will
obviously not enter into the agreement.
SENATOR SEEKINS said he would prefer that provision be
clarified.
SENATOR BEN STEVENS said he shares Senator Seekins' concern but
pointed out the language on page 3, line 3, says the
commissioner may enter into the agreement if it is in the best
interest of the state. He agrees with that principle. He said
the language on page 2 says the commissioner shall enter into
the agreement so the commissioner must determine, within 90
days, whether the agreement is in the best interest of the
state.
SENATOR SEEKINS agreed but said his concern is that the previous
language called for an action within a specified time period.
The new language does not call for any action within that
specified time period.
CHAIR OGAN said his interpretation is the same as Senator
Stevens'; that being there is a 90-day window during which the
commissioner may enter into an agreement if it is in the best
interest of the state. He noted the word "shall" cannot be used
since the commissioner has the leeway to decide whether it is in
the best interest of the state.
SENATOR SEEKINS said he would prefer the bill to say within 90
days, the commissioner will decide whether or not it is in the
best interest of the state and, if so, may enter into the
contract.
SENATOR STEVENS commented that Senator Seekins wants the bill to
say within 90 days the commissioner shall issue a written
decision.
CHAIR OGAN said he is not prepared to offer an amendment at this
time.
SENATOR SEEKINS said he is not either, but the intent that the
commissioner cannot delay the decision forever is on the record.
SENATOR WAGONER commented that no response in 90 days will
conclude the negotiation.
SENATOR LINCOLN said she agrees with Senator Seekins. She said
she believes the word "shall" should be used because three
conditions follow.
MR. MYERS said in order to deny, the commissioner must make a
written finding so positive action on the part of the
commissioner is required. Therefore, this language leans in
favor of approving the agreement.
CHAIR OGAN asked if the parties that drafted this amendment
discussed this matter with Mr. Chenoweth.
MR. MYERS said they didn't talk about the timing but the word
"shall" on page 2, line 31, was inconsistent with the word "may"
on the following page. He said he interpreted the language to
mean the commissioner must make a decision within 90 days. If
the commissioner denies the contract, he must make a written
finding within that time period.
SENATOR ELTON asked if a company that is asked for data to
support a decision might stall because after 90 days the
agreement would be valid if a written finding to deny could not
be done. He pointed out the burden of proof is on the
commissioner to deny.
MR. MYERS said without reasonable information, the commissioner
would have grounds to deny. He said DNR has had that experience
in the past. Although a lack of information can be problematic,
when it is essential to the decision, DNR stresses the need to
get it from the applicant and acquiring that information has
generally not been a problem. He said it is in the company's
interest to make a clear showing to DNR.
SENATOR ELTON said he understands the impulse behind this
legislation but the indeterminate fiscal note gives him
heartburn. The state treasury will be losing several millions of
dollars over time. He feels the legislature should be cognizant
of that as this bill moves forward, especially while it is
trying to "nickel and dime a whole bunch of people in the state
for additional revenues to cover the budget gap." He said it is
a bit disingenuous to say the fiscal note is indeterminate when
the impact could be millions of dollars per year.
CHAIR OGAN said this is the fourth or fifth hearing on this
piece of legislation, and the committee has had several
discussions on the fiscal note. He said he shares Senator
Elton's concerns. However, he has to trust the Administration to
bring forth an appropriate fiscal note. The bill has a referral
to the Senate Finance Committee where the fiscal note will again
be scrutinized.
SENATOR WAGONER said the Agrium plant is not likely to close
down, but the state receives a fair amount of revenue from the
sale of royalty gas to Agrium so, if it did close, that would be
a negative to the treasury. He said SB 50 has been reworked
several times. If a royalty reduction contract is not in the
best interest of the state, the commissioner does not have to
enter into a contract. He questioned how the fiscal note can be
very high if the commissioner has that authority.
SENATOR SEEKINS said he agrees with Senator Wagoner that this
legislation provides a way to support Alaskan workers through
value-added processing. He said in his business, he long ago
learned that half a loaf is better than none.
CHAIR OGAN noted that Senator Wagoner has worked with him on
this bill and appreciates the spirit of cooperation.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked Mr. Myers if he said DNR supports the bill
but he was not sure of the Administration's position and, if so,
why he does not know since this bill has been around awhile.
MR. MYERS said he asked the Administration for clarification of
its position. He noted the bill has changed over time, with the
most recent amendments being proposed as late as this week. He
said he has talked with his commissioner who supports the bill
with these changes. He said it is his belief that the
Administration is leaning toward supporting the legislation but
he has not heard a direct statement to support that belief.
CHAIR OGAN noted this bill has morphed considerably since the
last hearing. He then asked if anyone else wished to testify.
MS. LISA PARKER, representing Agrium, stated support for the
committee substitute before the committee.
CHAIR OGAN removed his objection to adopting Amendment 2 and
announced the motion carried.
SENATOR BEN STEVENS moved CSSB 50(RES) from committee with its
forthcoming indeterminate fiscal note.
CHAIR OGAN announced without objection, the motion carried. The
committee then took a brief at-ease.
HB 90-TAX CREDIT: SALMON DEVELOPMENT/UTILIZATION
SENATOR GARY STEVENS, sponsor of HB 90, gave the following
explanation of the measure. HB 90 is the result of a
recommendation by the Salmon Industry Task Force to expand the
economy in the area of fisheries by encouraging new investment
to retool processing plants and raise the value of salmon
products. The Administration supports this measure.
HB 90 provides two investment tax credits: the first credit is
for salmon product development; the second is for utilization of
salmon. The purpose is to improve the marketability of new value
added products, to diversify salmon products, and to encourage
full utilization of salmon parts. Alaska salmon is a premiere
product in the food market but an enormous increase in the
supply of salmon over the last few years has caused a tremendous
decrease in its value, threatening the livelihood of thousands
of people who depend on the industry. HB 90 will help to improve
Alaska's position in the salmon market and to develop value-
added salmon.
SENATOR BEN STEVENS clarified that fiscal note number 1 applied
to CSHB 90(FSH), which was amended by the House Finance
Committee. Fiscal note number 2 applies to the House Finance
Committee version, which is before members.
CHAIR OGAN commented that the federal government's investment
tax credit was a factor in his decision to invest and expand his
business. He said, like a lot of fishermen, he was a sole
proprietor. He asked if this bill provides a $49,000 tax credit.
SENATOR BEN STEVENS explained the $49,000 in the fiscal note
relates to the increased cost of personnel anticipated by the
Department of Revenue. He pointed out the House debated the
fiscal note and the fact that it is indeterminate. No one knows
how many industry participants will use this investment tax
credit. The House concluded that the potential cost to the state
could be anywhere from zero to $2.8 million because in FY 03 the
fisheries business tax collected by the state will be $5.6
million. If the tax credit is fully utilized, it could cost $2.8
million. He added that the fisheries business tax is levied
against persons or businesses that buy fish for reprocessing or
resale but the tax credit will be limited to salmon fisheries
businesses. In the year 2000, that tax revenue amounted to $14.7
million; in 2001, it was $11.2 million; in 2002, it was $8.5
million; and the anticipated revenue for 2003 is $5.6 million.
He said the other question to ask is, under that rate of
decline, what will happen if the state does not provide an
incentive to invest in the salmon industry.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS told members half of the projected $5.6
million fisheries business tax will go to the communities; half
will go to the state.
4:20 p.m.
CHAIR OGAN informed members that he planned to hold CSHB 90(FIN)
in committee today and that Landa Baily from the Department of
Revenue was available to answer questions.
SENATOR ELTON commended the members of the Salmon Industry Task
Force who were behind this idea. He sees this as a keystone
issue because success in the marketplace depends on varied
product form. He pointed out that 25 years ago, whole turkeys
were the only turkey products on the market. Turkey is now on
the market year round because it is available in many different
product forms. The salmon industry needs to catch up and CSHB
90(FIN) will provide a way to get the technology to help the
salmon industry do that. He said he does not object to holding
the bill in committee, but he hopes this legislation can move
through the process quickly because businesses are making
decisions predicated on the next season right now.
CHAIR OGAN said he believes there is precious little investment
capital in the salmon industry right now. He said if the
committee is ready to move the legislation, he would be willing
to do so.
SENATOR WAGONER told members that about 14 years ago, a similar
program was available to shore based processors, which worked
very well. CSHB 90(FIN) goes a bit further. He said he would
support the legislation.
SENATOR SEEKINS said he is sure this legislation has been
[scrutinized] by Senator Gary Stevens and Senator Ben Stevens.
He trusts their lead and feels comfortable with the bill.
TAPE 03-30, SIDE B
SENATOR DYSON moved CSHB 90(FIN) from committee with its
indeterminate fiscal note.
CHAIR OGAN announced that without objection, the motion carried.
SB 147-CONTROL OF NUISANCE WILD ANIMALS
MS. JACQUELINE TUPOU, staff to Senator Lyda Green, sponsor of SB
147, gave the following testimony.
This legislation before you provides authority to the
Alaska Board of Game to adopt regulations that will
allow the issuance of permits and licenses to
sanctioned designees to control nuisance wild birds
and nuisance wild small mammals. Currently, there is
no statutory authority for nuisance wildlife control
and the means by which ADF&G can sell a license or
issue a permit... The first thing this bill does is it
creates a new professional license that can be issued
by the Department of Fish and Game, and that doesn't
go into effect, if you'll notice, until July '04. It
gives the department sufficient time to write the
[regulations].
MS. TUPOU said the bill also gives the department the authority
to work with persons and families who need assistance in getting
rid of nuisance wild animals. The department can provide the
names of people who are licensed to deal with these problems.
CHAIR OGAN asked who this bill attempts to help and what kind of
animals fall into this category.
MS. TUPOU said she is not completely familiar with the history
of this legislation but Senator Green has heard from
constituents who have had wild animals in their yards that cause
problems with their children and livestock. She pointed out the
department has knowledge of the behavior of these animals and
can advise a proper course of action.
CHAIR OGAN noted that beavers can be very destructive. He asked
if SB 147 gives ADF&G the discretion to decide whether to issue
a permit for a specific animal.
MS. TUPOU deferred to a representative from ADF&G for
information on specific animals but said the department will
have ample time to write regulations.
CHAIR OGAN asked if this legislation will allow someone to set
up a business to control nuisance animals.
MS. TUPOU said that could well be a financial by-product of this
legislation. The department will issue licenses to businesses to
perform these services.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if this bill would create two classes of
permittees - one for the homeowner for non-commercial control,
the other for a professional who is compensated and that person
would be regulated by ADF&G.
MS. TUPOU said that is correct but it is up to the department as
to whether it wants to issue permits. She said if she called
ADF&G about a wild animal in her yard, ADF&G could confer with
her about her plan of action and grant her authority to carry it
out. Otherwise, ADF&G could choose to refer her to a list of
licensed professionals.
SENATOR SEEKINS commented that anyone making money must have a
license.
SENATOR WAGONER asked whether this legislation has been reviewed
to ensure compliance with federal law.
MS. TUPOU said that ADF&G will have to address compliance with
federal laws.
MR. GORDY WILLIAMS, legislative liaison to ADF&G, informed
committee members that SB 147 is identical, with the exception
of the effective date, to SB 205, which passed the Senate last
year but did not make it through the House prior to adjournment.
ADF&G worked with Senator Green last year; its concerns were
addressed in that bill and are contained in SB 147. The
effective date of July 1, 2004 in SB 147 will provide ample time
to allow the Board of Game to adopt regulations. ADF&G also
requested the language on page 2, paragraph B, [Sec. 4] that
pertains to permitting be included. He stated the bill provides
two routes to address problems: the licensing of commercial
entities and permits to individuals issued by ADF&G. He stated
support for SB 147.
MR. DOUG LARSEN, Assistant Director of the Division of Wildlife
Conservation, ADF&G, said when this legislation was discussed
last year, ADF&G and the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities had differing opinions on how beaver would be
addressed. He asked if that issue was resolved.
MR. WILLIAMS said it was resolved. Currently, DOTPF deals with
beaver problems on a case-by-case basis. It wanted blanket
authority to get an annual permit for a specific area. ADF&G and
DOTPF have addressed that concern.
CHAIR OGAN asked what animals will come under the purview of
this bill.
MR. DOUG LARSEN, Assistant Director of the Division of Wildlife
Conservation, ADF&G, said that hunting seasons are open for
several species of small animals, however people cannot
discharge a firearm within city limits. In addition, some people
are unable to, or might not want to, deal with an animal
themselves.
CHAIR OGAN asked if the Board of Game could write regulations to
encourage humane capture rather than killing.
MR. LARSEN said he envisions the board setting up guidelines for
these permits so that every effort would be made to rid the
animal with non-lethal actions; lethal actions would be used as
a last resort.
SENATOR LINCOLN said when she lived in Fairbanks, her neighbor
loved pigeons and encouraged their presence by feeding them. At
first, a few pigeons perched on the neighbor's house but, within
a short period of time, the number multiplied and many perched
on her home. She asked how ADF&G would address that situation.
MR. LARSEN said that is a good question. He felt any time a
person attracts an animal, there will have to be [special]
provisions. He said as an example, ADF&G does all it can to
discourage people from doing certain things that attract bears,
such as putting out birdseed. He said he believes ADF&G would
want to approach the nuisance wildlife animal issue similarly.
He pointed out that pigeons are classified as deleterious exotic
wildlife so there is no limit and no season.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked for a definition of "small mammal" and
whether it includes coyotes.
MR. LARSEN said ADF&G does not have a definition in its
regulations. The Board of Game will have to figure out what
species fall in that category. ADF&G would consider coyotes to
be a small mammal but it is up to the board to decide whether to
include them.
MS. TUPOU noted that members' packets contain a list of small
mammals suggested by constituents that should be included.
SENATOR ELTON asked if there is a reason that invasive species,
such as Northern Pike, were not included.
MR. LARSEN replied, "...I believe that they are. When we talk
about deleterious exotic wildlife, we're talking strictly on the
wildlife side and not the fish side but there are exotic
examples on the fish side, as well as plant communities that are
classified so I think that those are covered but they're just
not covered in the wildlife side."
SENATOR ELTON asked if those species could be included under the
business permit from ADF&G.
MR. LARSEN said he hadn't thought about fish related resources
and does not know how that would be handled. He said the bill is
specific to nuisance wild birds and nuisance wild animals so he
assumes fish and plant species would not be included for the
purposes of this bill.
MR. WILLIAMS added that ADF&G is developing an invasive species
policy and that he would get back to members with more
information.
CHAIR OGAN took public testimony.
MR. ROBERT DURAN, a resident of Wasilla, told members he has a
vested interest in this legislation as he started a business
last year named Nuisance Wildlife Management. He has been in
constant contact with ADF&G, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Protection Agency, the Alaska State Troopers, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and local animal control shelters about this
issue. He supports this legislation.
MR. DURAN said with more and more development in the
Southcentral area, there is more impact from wildlife. He is not
always able to respond to the phone calls he gets about nuisance
wildlife because a particular species might be outside of the
regular hunting or trapping season. Alaska law contains a
provision for defense of life and property, but the individual
homeowner would have to deal with the animal him or herself.
Oftentimes, that is not possible because the person may not have
the equipment to do so or is physically incapable of doing so.
He believes his business will be able to assist government
agencies with nuisance wildlife complaints, as they do not have
the time to deal with them. He has received a positive response
from those agencies. He told members that nuisance wildlife
businesses are operating in the Lower 48; they relieve a great
deal of pressure from wildlife management agencies. He said,
regarding endangered or other species that come under federal
jurisdiction, his business would be accountable to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. He pointed out that nuisance mammals can
be taken live.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked Mr. Duran to respond to the pigeon
scenario she described earlier.
MR. DURAN said he would set a live trap for those birds, remove
them from the premises and try to relocate them. He said that
pigeon droppings near ventilation systems can cause illness. He
would not want to cause strife between neighbors so he would
have to address both parties and then act in the best interest
of all of the people involved.
CHAIR OGAN said that geese are very messy and considered to be a
nuisance by many people. He asked how one would relocate a goose
and whether Mr. Duran anticipates having to deal with wild
geese.
MR. DURAN said he does and has already received one call from a
local golf course owner. He said it is not feasible to relocate
a bird that is capable of flying hundreds of miles at a time.
However, effigies could be put up on properties to discourage
them from stopping on that property. He said by effigies, he is
referring to predator decoys or loud noisemakers.
5:00 p.m.
CHAIR OGAN noted that this legislation already made it through
the Senate last year and is not terribly controversial so he is
willing to move it from committee.
SENATOR WAGONER moved SB 147 from committee with individual
recommendations and its attached fiscal notes.
CHAIR OGAN announced that without objection, the motion carried.
There being no further business to come before the committee, he
adjourned the meeting at 5:02 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|