Legislature(2013 - 2014)
02/24/2014 02:06 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB161 | |
| HB79 | |
| HB246 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 161-AUCTIONS FOR BIG GAME HARVEST PERMITS
2:07:38 PM
CO-CHAIR SADDLER announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 161. "An Act relating to auctions or
raffles for big game harvest permits and to the selection of
nonprofit organizations to conduct auctions and raffles for the
Department of Fish and Game." [Before the committee was the
proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 161, Version 28-
LS0530\Y, Bullard, 2/17/14, adopted as the working document on
2/19/14.]
CO-CHAIR SADDLER noted the committee previously heard this bill
last year and again on February 19, 2014.
2:08:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN GATTIS, Alaska State Legislature, testifying
as prime sponsor of HB 161, said she would focus her testimony
on concerns previously raised on page 2, lines 17-21 of Version
Y. The original version, existing statutes, allowed funds to be
used for anything but lobbying for political purposes. This
allowed the organization to use funds for any purpose except for
political gain. The new language [Section 3, page 3, lines 9-
16] restricts funds to organizations that promote education in
outdoor traditions and that conduct conservation and wildlife
protection programs and allows them to conduct auctions or
raffles approved by the department. This language creates a
limited scope of what the nonprofit can do with the proceeds.
She clarified that the language previously allowed proceeds to
be used for any purpose except for lobbying or political
purposes. She indicated that lobbying is disallowed under
Version Y since it doesn't fall into one of the allowable
expenditure categories.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS said the expanded game list adds one Dall
sheep. She reminded members that substantial testimony
suggested taking this valuable hunt away from Alaskan hunters.
She pointed out that of the 126 Dall sheep permits to be issued
this year, Alaska hunters foregoing one animal for the sake of
game management seems like an appreciated sacrifice of the small
percentage of the total allowable take. According to the
figures supplied by Representative Tarr, only 46 percent of the
permits allotted in the past 18 years were actually used. She
would like to see this figure increased and thinks a good way to
"drum up" interest by sporting groups is to increase their
incentive to auction a permit.
2:10:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON noted 46 percent of the tags allotted were
utilized. He asked whether the remaining tags were returned for
issuance or if those tags were unused.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS deferred to the Alaska Department of Fish
& Game (ADF&G).
DOUG VINCENT-LANG, Acting Director, Division of Wildlife
Conservation, Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G),
understood the question was what happens to tags that are not
distributed to this program. He answered that typically they
are either added back to the draw permit pool or are given out
"over the counter" as unallocated permits.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON understood the bill would expand the
number of permits from 19 to 42 per year. He wanted to ensure
that if the permits were used timely that they would be
available for the drawing permit program. He asked whether that
would occur or if the permits would be issued "over the counter"
circumventing the drawing.
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied it would be his intent to issue these
permits according to HB 161; however, if the permits were not
used, that the ADF&G would issue them "over the counter" through
the department's registration permit system. He did not think
animals would not be harvested that otherwise would be available
for harvest.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked whether the department will know
sufficiently ahead of time whether unallocated permits will be
available for the drawing pool or if the process would
circumvent the drawing pool.
MR. VINCENT-LANG answered that the department typically will
make decisions in the fall prior before the drawings. He
anticipated that if the permits were not issued [to
organizations] that the permits would be placed in the drawing
permit.
2:14:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked how many people who apply for the
drawing permits actually do not claim the permits.
MR. VINCENT-LANG responded he would have to get that information
by species and area of the state, but he generally thought that
in many instances the permits are not used for a variety of
reasons, for example, people could get sick, and travel plans
can change.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON said he did not need the specifics. He
asked what happens to those permits that are unused.
MR. VINCENT-LANG said that if the department has time, those
permits are issued "over the counter" through registration hunts
for harvestable surpluses.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON understood that the permits that are
drawn through the regular process will not be treated
differently than those that are sold via the raffle or auction
process. He clarified he understood that these are treated
similarly.
MR. VINCENT-LANG answered that that is his understanding.
2:15:37 PM
CO-CHAIR FEIGE understood that if the nonprofit has not
requested the permit, that it would be placed in the pool with
the rest of the permits. These permits would be applied for and
drawn. However, in terms of a regular draw permit, he asked
whether the department knows if it is not claimed prior to the
end of the hunt or if the department must wait to learn it is
unused. Second, if a person draws a permit and knows in advance
they will not use it, if the person can transfer the permit to
someone else.
MR. VINCENT-LANG responded that if ADF&G knows that someone is
not going to use the permit, there is a wait list the department
can use to reissue the permit. Typically, the ADF&G does not
know since reporting happens after the season closes. The ADF&G
anticipates the success rate in the hunts and typically offers
more permits than the number of animals the department
anticipates being taken. At the end of the year, if the ADF&G
has surpluses, with low production, the department would award
them "over the counter" in the area offices. However, he said
that is rare for high-profile species such as Dall sheep, but is
used more for moose or other species.
CO-CHAIR FEIGE requested further clarification on the
transferability of permits.
MR. VINCENT-LANG replied that the department does not allow
transferability of permits.
2:17:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said that her concern has been addressed,
that in terms of the unused permits she wanted to know whether
Alaskans have a way to access them. She related that often
these areas are pretty desirable areas to hunt species such as
moose. She didn't want Alaskan residents to have missed
opportunities to hunt. Thus, she supports the bill and will
want to track this going forward in terms of the numbers of
permits for nonprofit organizations under the bill.
CO-CHAIR SADDLER indicated the bill would double the number of
permits available for auction and increase the percentage to
nongovernmental agencies (NGOs). The bill doesn't have a
referral to the finance committee. He asked for further
clarification on whether the bill has a fiscal impact.
MR. VINCENT-LANG responded that it would be hard to predict, but
he does not expect a fiscal impact. He suspected that the
overall value of the permits will increase the return to the
state. In some respects, he thought it will actually be more,
since the activities the nonprofits will conduct will benefit
the department and conservation.
2:19:50 PM
CO-CHAIR SADDLER referred to page 2, Version Y, to the specific
language being deleted that has restricted use of the proceeds
from being used for political activities for candidates or for
lobbying the legislature. He asked whether the department
concurs that it is okay to delete this language.
MR. VINCENT-LANG answered that he does not believe anyone in the
department would ever approve a project that would be used as a
contribution to a candidate for political office or any
organization supporting or opposing a ballot proposition or to
pay for expenses associated with lobbying the legislature or the
administration given the language used to replace it that
indicates proceeds can only be used to support education in
outdoor traditions projects and conservation and wildlife
protection programs. He said he did not think anyone would use
the proceeds for activities outlined in the deleted language.
2:20:48 PM
CO-CHAIR SADDLER said it is his intention in voting for this
bill to not allow proceeds to be used for contribution to any
political office or to support or oppose any ballot
propositions.
2:21:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to report the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 161, Version Y, labeled 28-LS0530\Y,
Bullard, 2/17/14, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note. There being
no objection, the CSHB 161(RES) was reported from the House
Resources Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|