Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
03/11/2022 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 | |
| HB54 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 54 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
HB 54-INVASIVE SPECIES MANAGEMENT
3:35:40 PM
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE announced the consideration of CS FOR HOUSE
BILL NO. 54(FIN) "An Act establishing the Alaska Invasive
Species Council in the Department of Fish and Game; relating to
management of invasive species; relating to invasive species
management decals; and providing for an effective date."
3:36:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GERAN TARR, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau,
Alaska, presented CSHB 54(FIN) on behalf of the House Special
Committee on Fisheries. She stated that invasive species
management is a statewide issue. The committee began work on
this legislation in 2017 when it became apparent that there was
a need to mobilize a rapid response to control the explosive
growth of the invasive plant, elodea. She thanked the Department
of Environmental Conservation for implementing treatment
permits.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR stated that it became apparent that a
comprehensive, statewide, multi-year, forward-looking approach
was required to combat the growing threat of various invasive
species. The state of Washington's successful model to control
invasive species was referenced to develop an eradication
strategy for Alaska. Washington's success hinged, in large part,
on including an array of stakeholders and a multitude of
jurisdictions to control all vectors from ballast water from
shipping to the people coming to Alaska to the elodea that came
from fish tanks. The Alaska Invasive Species Council seeks to
include local government, state government, federal government,
tribal partners, the university, and private businesses. The
private sector includes float plane operators, people doing
excavation work, and mineral development workers. The Department
of Transportation and Public Facilities has switched to the use
of native seed produced in-state to repropagate disrupted areas.
This model works by bringing all the stakeholders together in an
official way to come up with a plan for the most effective and
efficient use of all the available resources.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR relayed that estimates in 2012 were that the
state was spending about $6 million per year to manage invasive
species. The intention is to keep that number from growing as it
has in other states where invasive species have burgeoned. In
some places in the Lower 48 invasive species such as zebra
mussels and Quagga Mussels have disrupted municipal water
systems to the point that they were closed. In the Columbia
River Basin spending to control those mussels is close to $30
million per year. These problems can get very large very quickly
and management becomes very costly.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said the fisheries committee has worked
closely with the many stakeholders to develop the list of
entities that would sit on the council. The committee also
explored the opportunities for funding to start the work on
invasive species control. Some of those opportunities may still
exist, but the only revenue stream in the current version of the
bill would come from the invasive species management decals that
ADF&G would produce and make available for the public to
purchase.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR advised that the fisheries committee added
the legislative intent language to clarify that the work on
invasive species management will be paid for without using any
unrestricted general fund (UGF) funds. She noted that ADF&G
previously testified in support of the legislation and confirmed
that the bill would not impact the general fund. She further
noted that the House Finance Committee added a seven year sunset
for the council, which the fisheries committee supported.
3:44:16 PM
SENATOR STEVENS asked who serves on the council and how often it
will meet.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR answered that the council has representation
from state government, ex officio participation from the federal
government, and private industry representation that includes:
• A person engaged in commercial agriculture, horticulture or
landscaping;
• A person engaged in commercial aquaculture or mariculture;
• A person engaged in the tourism industry
• A person who owns a seaplane, is employed as a seaplane
pilot, or is otherwise knowledgeable about seaplanes;
The council will also have:
• A representative from an Alaska tribal entity;
• A representative from an Alaska Native corporation;
• Representation from local governments; and
• Representation from research entities.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR stated that the people who are working on
this through the Alaska Invasive Species Partnership are very
dedicated and the testimony today will highlight the good work
that is underway. The motivation for the legislation is to
coordinate that work and provide an official avenue for making
recommendations to the legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR advised that appointing the council members
and the setting the number of meetings required in the initial
year was addressed in Section 5. The appointments have
staggered terms, the council is required to hold its initial
meeting within 90 days of the appointments, and it must meet at
least four times in the 12 months following the appointment of
the members. During this time the council will establish the
bylaws and the schedule for future meetings.
3:46:48 PM
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE asked Mr. Brower for an abbreviated
sectional analysis.
3:47:02 PM
THATCHER BROUWER, Staff, Representative Geran Tarr, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, presented an abbreviated sectional
analysis of HB 54, highlighting that Sec. 16.20.810 in bill
Section 2 was the most important part of the bill. The full
sectional read as follows:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Section One
Adds a new section to uncodified law that states it is
the intent of the legislature that the Department of
Fish and Game does not use money from the state's
general fund to support the Alaska Invasive Species
Council, and instead finds other sources of funding to
support the council.
Section Two
Section 16.20.800 establishes the invasive species
management decals. The decals will be produced by the
Department of Fish and Game annually and made
available for sale to the public for a $20 fee. The
department will work in conjunction with the Alaska
Invasive Species Council described in Sec. 16.20.810
to design and produce the decals. The legislature may
then appropriate the proceeds from the sale of the
decals to further produce the decals or to the
invasive species response fund described in Sec.
16.20.820, to carry out the work of invasive species
response.
Section 16.20.810 establishes the Alaska Invasive
Species Council in the Department of Fish and Game.
The council will be comprised of representatives from
the Departments of Fish and Game, Natural Resources,
Environmental Conservation and Transportation and
Public Facilities. Furthermore, the council will have
members from stakeholder organizations and industries
appointed by the governor to three-year terms, as well
as representatives from federal agencies that deal
with invasive species.
Additionally, Section 16.20.810 outlines the
responsibilities of the council. This section requires
that the council be responsible for facilitating
cooperation between state, federal, tribal, local
agencies, and nongovernmental organizations in the
management invasive species. The council will be
tasked with recommending coordinated interagency
strategies and policies related to the management of
invasive species. The council will also provide
guidance on how to prioritize the response to invasive
species and how to best use funds from the invasive
species response fund. Lastly, the council will be
responsible for selecting designers of the invasive
species control decals and approving and promoting the
designs.
Furthermore, Section 16.20.810 provides guidance on
council meetings and deliverables. The council will
meet at least once a year, and by January 15th of each
odd-numbered year, the council shall produce a plan
that addresses the economic impact of invasive species
and recommends legislation and funding to implement
the council's priorities.
Section 16.20.820 establishes an invasive species
response fund in the general fund and allows the
department to use the funds to prevent, control, or
eradicate invasive species.
Section 16.20.850 defines commissioner, council,
department, invasive species, management of invasive
species and non-native species.
Section Three
Section 37.05.146 adds the invasive species decal fee
to the list of separately accounted program receipts.
Section Four
Adds a July 1, 2029 sunset date all the sections in
the bill.
Section Five
Gives direction to the governor regarding the
appointment of the members, chair, as well as timing
and number of meetings in the initial year.
Section Six
Establishes an immediate effective date.
3:50:03 PM
SENATOR STEVENS asked if there had been any discussion about
having ex officio members from the legislature, appointed by the
Senate President and Speaker of the House, serve on the council.
3:50:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said she was amenable to that idea if it was
something the committee wanted to consider. She explained that
her reasoning to have the council work independent of the
legislature was because of the potential transition of
membership in the legislature.
SENATOR STEVENS offered his reasoning that seven years was a
long time for the legislature to not know what was happening,
other than the annual report.
3:51:09 PM
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE asked if purchase of a decal was voluntary.
MR. BROUWER answered yes; anybody who might want to show support
for better invasive species management would have the option of
purchasing a decal through the Alaska Department of Fish and
Game (ADF&G).
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said the thought is that the decals could be
added to the department's portal for fishing license purchases.
Several stakeholders also indicated interest in helping to sell
the decals.
3:52:12 PM
SENATOR STEVENS asked whether zebra mussels were edible.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR replied they arent eaten because they're
extremely small. They're problematic because they grow very
rapidly and will choke water lines.
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE noted that she discussed the cost to manage
invasive species, but not the less quantifiable cost associated
with the inconvenience. He relayed that many Lower 48 states
have set up roadblocks to screen for invasive species and if
anything is found the trip could be over.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR agreed that there was reason to be concerned
about the watercraft coming to Alaska. She relayed that the
committee was likely to hear testimony today about what is being
done on Alaska's borders.
3:53:58 PM
SENATOR STEVENS asked what methods are used to eradicate
invasives.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR answered that it depends on the species but
sometimes it is a matter of trial and error. She worked for
years in Anchorage to eradicate the European Bird Cherry, first
by digging the plant and now with a chemical treatment followed
by mechanical removal. The waterweed Elodea is treated
chemically but it was important to learn what chemical doesn't
kill other species. One method of eradicating invasive pike is
to catch the fish. Border check stations are also an important
control measure. For example, all watercraft entering Montana
must go through an inspection station. Several summers ago she
noticed what looked like an oversized Brillo pad at the
trailhead at Crow Creek with a sign asking everyone to clean the
soles of their shoes before they started on the trail.
3:56:29 PM
At ease.
3:57:27 PM
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE reconvened the meeting and turned to invited
testimony on HB 54.
3:58:00 PM
TIM STALLARD, Owner, Alien Species Control LLC, Anchorage,
Alaska, presented the PowerPoint "Alaskans Depend on our
Resources for Food, Culture, Fun, and Making a Living." He
advised that he also chairs the Anchorage Cooperative Invasive
Species Management Area. It is an informal group that gets a lot
done without any actual authority. (
MR. STALLARD began the presentation by reviewing the definition
of invasive species, which means an alien or non-native species
that if introduced is likely to cause economic or environmental
harm or harm to human or animal health. The hallmark of an
invasive species is that it arrives in a natural area and
quickly proliferates to the point that it displaces native
species. Because Alaska is so deeply tied to its natural
resources, the introduction of an invasive species quickly
impacts Alaskans and their economic values.
MR. STALLARD turned to the images on slide 4 of invasive
chokecherries that are also called invasive European bird cherry
trees or mayday trees. He relayed that they had been spreading
out of control in Anchorage along salmon streams and into the
riparian forests. In addition to Anchorage, this invasive is
spreading and causing concern in Fairbanks, Eielson Air Force
Base, Juneau, Homer and other areas on the peninsula, Talkeetna
and other parts of the MatSu Valley. Evidence that the state is
not doing very well to address invasive species is the fact that
the Department of Natural Resources' (DNR) list of plants that
cannot be sold in the state does not include these invasive
chokecherry trees. They can be sold anywhere in the state
outside the Municipality of Anchorage. Requests over the last
ten years for DNR to update its noxious weed list have gone
unanswered.
4:01:25 PM
MR. STALLARD said he likes the metaphor that Alaska is facing a
biological wildfire because Alaskans are familiar with the
damage cause by wildfires. Similar to wildfires, the invasive
species curve on slide 5 illustrates that the best control is
prevention. Quick detection and a coordinated response are the
next lines of defense. This will make management of the invasive
less expensive and have fewer impacts on the natural resources
4:02:16 PM.
MR. STALLARD turned to the infestation curve on slide 6 and
characterized the state's approach to address the biological
wildfire it is facing as a very good "bond to your bucket
brigade." There are sophisticated and successful management
plans in some places. For example, programs to manage Elodea
have been very successful on the Kenai Peninsula, Fairbanks, the
Interior region and Anchorage; efforts to manage Northern Pike
have also been successful. However, the state has yet to
organize in a well-structured format such as the incident
command system (ICS) that coordinates federal agencies, state
and local agencies, and private interests to effectively respond
to fire and other emergencies. The Invasive Species Council that
is outlined in HB 54 could provide the needed organization to
manage invasive species in the state.
MR. STALLARD moved to slide 7 that showcases a native
Salmonberry flower on the cover of Verna Pratt's Alaskan
Wildflower guide alongside an image of spotted knotweed and
sweet white clover that is proliferating along Turnagain Arm. He
said it's ironic that monocultures of invasive weeds are
spreading out from the population centers of Anchorage, MatSu,
and Fairbanks. The Kenai Peninsula Cooperative Invasive Species
Management (KS-CISMA) area is an exception that shows that these
plants can be monitored effectively. The problem is that this
isn't being done in other areas of the state.
MR. STALLARD advanced to slide 8 that is an illustration of
Fairbanks drowning in bird vetch. He relayed that each time he
returns to Fairbanks he's dismayed to see that this invasive
weed is still spreading. He displayed slide 9 and noted the
earlier references to the invasive waterweed Elodea that
threatens salmon spawning habitat throughout the state. [The
caption above the pictures is taken from the Institute of Social
and Economic Research (ISER) report that says this plant could
cost the salmon industry $159 million a year.]
4:04:55 PM
MR. STALLARD displayed the picture on slide 10 that illustrates
the threat that Northern Pike represent to spawning salmon runs
in Southcentral Alaska. He highlighted that there had been very
successful control projects on the Kenai Peninsula, Anchorage,
and MatSu areas. Similarly, the Crayfish/Crawfish/Crawdad
"Wanted" poster depicted on slide 11 highlights the danger these
nonnative fresh water crustaceans present in the Kodiak area. In
Juneau the aggressive and hard to control knotweed is a huge
threat to waterways and infrastructure. The roots can crack
concrete and has destroyed home foundations.
4:05:51 PM
MR. STALLARD urged the committee and others to look at the
biological threats the state is facing and consider what can be
done to better protect natural resources going forward. He gave
credit to the successful management measures he had mentioned
and stressed the importance of a more organized management
approach such as the Alaska Invasive Species Council. He
acknowledged the need for commissioner-level authority to tie in
federal agencies and hopefully federal resources and support.
He noted that the House passed HB 54 33:2 and expressed hope
that it would pass the Senate this session.
4:07:18 PM
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE stated appreciation for the work that had
been done to manage invasive species and talked specifically
about the threat Northern Pike presents to salmon species on the
Kenai Peninsula. He agreed that early intervention was key.
4:08:19 PM
SENATOR STEVENS commented on the explosive expansion of crayfish
populations in Buskin Lake and River and surmised that someone
must have introduced them years ago thinking they'd be a good
food source. He noted that beaver were introduced the same way.
He asked if people who introduce invasive species could be
prosecuted.
MR. STALLARD said he understands those introductions are
illegal, but ADF&G could answer definitively.
4:09:35 PM
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE asked Daniella Verna to begin her
presentation.
4:09:53 PM
DANIELLE VERNA, Vice Chair Alaska Invasive Species Partnership
(AISP); and Project Manager, Prince William Sound Regional
Citizens' Advisory Council (RCAC), Anchorage, Alaska, stated
that today she would share what the Alaska Invasive Species
Partnership is, what it does, and why they believe an Invasive
Species Council will strengthen the ability to respond to
invasive species throughout the state.
MS. VERNA explained that the partnership is an informal group of
individuals from agencies and organizations statewide that
collectively recognize different ways Alaska is vulnerable to
invasive species. The partnership's goal is to foster statewide
coordination, cooperation, and action to prevent the
introduction of new invasive species and reduce the effects of
existing invasive species. To achieve its goal, the partnership
provides support to engaged stakeholders, including the public
and members of the partnership that are engaged in on-the-ground
management. It is a very collaborative effort across land
ownership and jurisdictions. She relayed that the AKISP board is
comprised of 11 volunteers that represent nonprofit, Native,
state and federal entities.
MS. VERNA said the board and partnership has gaps in its
representation. They recognize that one of the values of the
Invasive Species Council is that it would fill those gaps and
thereby improve collaboration and a coordinated response across
Alaska's dynamic landscape.
4:13:00 PM
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE asked about the decision process for
selecting the representation on the board versus representatives
who were working for on-the-ground solutions.
MS. VERNA answered that many of the organizations represented on
the board were engaged in on-the-ground management. A decision
about board membership is made during the annual workshop. The
full membership votes on the members that were selected to serve
on the board for that year. Selections are based on background,
organization, and experience. She described board membership as
very partnership driven.
4:14:14 PM
MS. VERNA advanced to slide 3 and reviewed AKISP's six standing
committees. They focus on issues that have been identified by
either the membership or the board of directors. She noted that
Elodea and northern pike were discussed in the previous
presentation.
AKISP STANDING COMMITTEES
• Elodea
• Northern Pike
• Marine that focuses on bringing together members from
coastal communities that monitor species such as European
green crab and invasive tunicates.
• Governmental Relations works on topics such as the annual
proclamation recognizing Alaska Invasive Species Awareness
Week each June and opportunities to engage with elected
officials in communities.
• Workshop Planning hosts an annual conference that is open
to the public.
• Outreach & Education has the mission to engage the public
in invasive species issues.
MS. VERNA relayed that the partnership's vision statement is for
Alaska's environmental, cultural, and economic resources to be
free from the impacts of invasive species. Prevention, early
detection, and rapid response is emphasized. Members work across
ecosystems to survey for new arrivals, manage current
infestations, and conduct research on the effects of invasive
species. The partnership currently is working on the issues of
northern pike, zebra mussels, and Elodea. Northern pike are
native north of the Alaska Range, but their introduction to the
MatSu and Kenai Peninsula is damaging salmon populations. Zebra
mussels were detected last year and elicited a strong response
from partnership members because they present a substantial
threat to fresh water systems. Elodea currently is the only
aquatic invasive plant and efforts to control it are widespread.
She noted that a lot of work was also being done to control
invasive plants, pests, and pathogens.
4:17:34 PM
MS. VERNA highlighted that the European green crab currently is
not in Alaska, but it is well established on the West Coast and
in British Columbia so it is within 100 miles of communities in
Southeast. The photos on slide 8 depict partners in Kachemak Bay
and Prince William Sound doing monitoring so these invasive
crabs are detected early if they do arrive.
4:18:11 PM
MS. VERNA advanced to slide 9 to discuss House Bill 54. It would
create an Alaska Invasive Species Council that would serve in an
advisory role for the management of invasive species. This will
provide consistent statewide priorities, efficient management
approaches, and common messaging, and encourage coordinated
interagency strategies. This will break the organizational silos
and provide a platform for organizations to unite and look at
the big picture, identify gaps, and share successful approaches.
HB 54 would also establish a fund through the sale of decals,
the purchase of which is optional. Importantly, HB 54 requires a
five-year strategic plan to address invasive species in Alaska.
It would identify the economic effects and establish priorities
for management. With the implementation of HB 54, the
partnership sees opportunities for advanced coordination to
address the active and evolving threat of invasive species. Much
like oil spills and catastrophic wildfires, she said an ounce of
prevention is worth a pound of cure. This is evidenced by the
experiences in other states where management is very costly.
4:20:21 PM
MS. VERNA advanced to slide 10 and conveyed that the partnership
provides platforms for sharing information through a number of
different venues, including monthly membership meetings, an
active Facebook page through the Outreach and Education
Committee, the website alaskainvasives.org, a designated email
address to reach board members, and the annual workshop that
rotates between Anchorage, Fairbanks, and an outlying community.
This year it will be held in Anchorage on November 1-3. She
welcomed anyone who was interested in invasive species in Alaska
to become a member of the partnership.
She thanked the committee for considering the bill.
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE thanked Ms. Verna for the presentation. He
asked Commissioner Vincent-Lang if he had any comments to offer
on HB 54.
4:21:53 PM
DOUG VINCENT-LANG, Commissioner, Alaska Department of Fish and
Game (ADF&G), Anchorage, Alaska, expressed appreciation that
Representative Tarr stepped away from the regulation-heavy
initial concept of the bill and worked with the department to
develop the idea of a task force to define the problem and reach
consensus on needed regulatory or information outreach
strategies to address invasive species. The task force would
bring invasive species experts together to have informed
discussions and develop recommendations on the next steps. He
said he agreed with everything that was said today about
invasive species being a significant issue facing fish and
wildlife management on lands and waters statewide. HB 54 is a
step in the right direction to look at the problem and develop
recommendations. He relayed that ADF&G submitted a fiscal note
that reflects additional staff time associated with staffing the
task force. He restated that ADF&G supports the idea of a task
force to evaluate the issue instead of starting by developing
regulations that may or may not have consensus moving forward.
4:24:43 PM
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE opened public testimony on HB 54.
4:25:01 PM
MATTHEW VAN DAELE, Natural Resources Director and Tribal
Biologist for the Sun'aq Tribe, Kodiak, Alaska, thanked the
committee for hearing the bill and Representative Tarr for
continuing to help the efforts to control invasive species and
raise public awareness about the threats they present to the
state. He agreed with the previous statements about the benefits
of having a collaborative and interagency council of experts to
protect Alaska's natural resources, and the need for a multi-
year strategic and team approach. HB 54 creates an opportunity
for stakeholders to work together and it empowers the public to
actively help protect the natural resources, subsistence
activities, and the land and waters of Alaska.
4:27:40 PM
PAUL SHADURA, Representing Self, Soldotna, Alaska, stated that
he had been a commercial fisherman for several years and did
understand the effects of a health environment and the positive
effect that has on renewable resources. He highlighted that the
Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association had spent a lot of time and
money to assess and extract invasive species and to educate the
public about the negative effects that invasive species have on
their lives. He noted that the invasive European Green Crab
could arrive in Alaska by hitching a ride on a boat. He
referenced the aquatic nuisance species section of the 2022
Coast Guard authorization bill and posited that federal funding
to control invasive species may be available. He concluded his
testimony by quoting from another state's invasive species
council.
By setting strategic goals and convening the state and
federal agencies and other partners, the council helps
ensure the investments made today are the right
investments and will prevent paying a steeper price in
the future.
MR. SHADURA urged the committee to pass HB 54.
4:29:57 PM
DAVID MARTIN, Representing Self, Clam Gulch, Alaska, stated that
it is imperative to pass this bill to prevent invasive species
from displacing or drastically reducing the natural species in
Alaska and changing the natural habitat. Managing invasive
species is a worldwide issue. Millions of dollars have been
spent worldwide to eradicate or manage invasive species and
billions of dollars have been lost in commerce through lost food
supplies and people's ways of life. Alaska has not been exposed
to a great number of invasive species, but vigilance is
necessary to prevent this from happening. He cited examples. One
was the introduction of the invasive waterweed elodea to the
Alexander Lake system in the Susitna drainage by a floatplane.
Five acres were initially affected and it would have cost
$15,000 to eradicate. It took several years to obtain the
necessary permits and raise funding and by then the elodea had
spread throughout the lake and into the Alexander River. The
cost of eradication increased hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Another example was the introduction of invasive pike in the
Susitna drainage. Those fish ate all the salmon and trout and
then started to feed on themselves.
MR. MARTIN described HB 54 as an important offensive measure
that complies with the state constitution to conserve all
natural resources. The bill is well thought out and should be
passed into law.
4:32:26 PM
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE closed public testimony on HB 54.
4:32:36 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked the sponsor what the reasoning was for
housing the council in the Alaska Department of Fish and Game
instead of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). He noted
that invasive species touch both departments and that one
comment in the packet suggested that DNR would be a better home.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said the bill initially was focused on rapid
response, which is more in the wheelhouse of ADF&G and the
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC).
4:34:20 PM
SENATOR STEVENS asked where the delays in permitting were
occurring and how the council would resolve that problem.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR answered that the rapid response permit
through DEC has been addressed for problem species that have
been identified. Part of the council's role will be to explore
potential threats and what regulatory structure is needed to
address those threats. The idea is for these conversations to
take place before a looming threat becomes a reality.
4:36:02 PM
VICE CHAIR MICCICHE held HB 54 in committee.