02/18/2009 01:00 PM House RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview: Barley for Fuel | |
| HB12 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 12 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HCR 6 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 18, 2009
1:08 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Craig Johnson, Co-Chair
Representative Mark Neuman, Co-Chair
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Kurt Olson
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative David Guttenberg
Representative Scott Kawasaki
Representative Chris Tuck
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
OVERVIEW: BARLEY FOR FUEL
- HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 12
"An Act establishing the Alaska Council on Invasive Species in
the Department of Fish and Game."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 6
Recreating the Cook Inlet Salmon Task Force as a joint
legislative task force.
- HEARING POSTPONED PENDING REFERRAL
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 12
SHORT TITLE: ALASKA COUNCIL ON INVASIVE SPECIES
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) JOHNSON, BUCH
01/20/09 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/09
01/20/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/20/09 (H) RES, FIN
02/18/09 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
BRYCE WRIGLEY, President
Alaska Farm Bureau
Delta Junction, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented an overview regarding the
production and use of barley for fuel in Alaska.
FRANCI HAVEMEISTER, Director
Division of Agriculture
Department of Natural Resources
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding the production
and use of barley for fuel in Alaska.
JEANNE OSTNES, Staff
Representative Craig Johnson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented information in regard to HB 12 on
behalf of Representative Johnson, co-prime sponsor.
MICHELE HEBERT
Land Resources Agent
University of Alaska Fairbanks Cooperative Extension Service
Alaska Invasive Species Working Group
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 12 on behalf of the Alaska
Invasive Species Working Group.
LORI ZAUMSEIL, Co-founder
Citizens Against Noxious Weeds Invading the North;
Coordinator, Anchorage Cooperative Weed Management Area
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 12 on behalf of the Citizens
Against Noxious Weeds Invading the North (CANWIN).
DAN GILSON, Project Manager
Oil Spill Prevention & Response Operations
Prince William Sound Regional Citizens Advisory Council
Valdez, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 12.
SUE ELY, Legislative and Communications Manager
Alaska Conservation Alliance
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 12.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:08:26 PM
CO-CHAIR MARK NEUMAN called the House Resources Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:08 p.m. Representatives Neuman,
Seaton, Wilson, Johnson, and Kawasaki were present at the call
to order. Representatives Olson, Edgmon, Guttenberg, and Tuck
arrived as the meeting was in progress.
^OVERVIEW: BARLEY FOR FUEL
1:08:51 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN announced that the first order of business would
be an overview by Bryce Wrigley on barley for fuel in Alaska.
BRYCE WRIGLEY, President, Alaska Farm Bureau, stated that in
addition to representing the Alaska Farm Bureau, he is a barley
farmer in Delta Junction. He related that burning grain for
fuel has been done for years in Europe, but is a new idea in the
U.S. Barley can be easily grown in Alaska and developing its
use as a fuel is a smart idea at this time.
1:11:00 PM
MR. WRIGLEY began his PowerPoint presentation by pointing out
that one bushel of barley has the equivalent British Thermal
Unit (BTU) output as 2.8 gallons of fuel oil [slide 2]. The
price in Delta Junction for 2.8 gallons of fuel oil is currently
$8.29, he said. The highest price for one bushel of barley is
currently $5.52. One bushel of barley has 393,600 BTUs and one
gallon of fuel oil has 142,393 BTUs [slide 3]. A barley-burning
furnace and a fuel-oil furnace both have an 85 percent
efficiency rating, he continued. Thus, heating with fuel oil
costs about 50 percent more than heating with barley [$24.46
versus $16.50 per 1 million BTUs]. He translated these figures
into a monthly cost for heating a 1,500 square foot home in
Delta Junction [slide 4]: 100 gallons of fuel oil at a monthly
cost of $296 compared to 0.6 tons of barley at a monthly cost of
$138.
1:12:18 PM
MR. WRIGLEY said barley is probably the most renewable resource
that can be grown in Alaska for fuel [slide 5]. Barley has a
harvest/carbon cycle of one year as opposed to a harvest/carbon
cycle of 100 years for wood from Interior forests. Burning
barley produces much less particulates than burning wood so it
would help communities stay within federally mandated
particulate levels during inversions. Barley is a non-hazardous
material so it can be safely stored and safely shipped to
villages as a commodity, he continued. Another advantage of
barley is that agricultural receipts generally turn over about
seven times in a community as compared to oil which may turn
over only once or twice before it leaves the state. Lastly,
conserving oil within Alaska would make more of the state's oil
available to the Lower 48 and help reduce U.S. dependence on
foreign oil.
1:13:53 PM
MR. WRIGLEY explained that markets have always been the limiting
factor to grain production in Alaska [slide 6]. Farmers have
adjusted their production to those existing markets, he said,
and last year about 4,000 acres were planted in barley in Delta
Junction. If the existing markets were to increase, it would be
possible to plant up to 18,000 acres within two years because
barley is so easy to grow in Alaska. He said the capability is
there to plant 25,000 acres of barley within three years. By
2015 an additional 25,000 acres will have come out of the
conservation reserve program for a total of 50,000 acres
potentially available for planting barley. [Mr. Wrigley later
specified that he used Alaska Farm Service Agency numbers to
arrive at these acreage figures.]
1:14:48 PM
MR. WRIGLEY reported that Alaskan farmers have been working for
years to try to develop a sufficiency in the farm market [slide
7]. He pointed out that two million acres per year in the U.S.
are lost for agriculture to urban encroachment, and this loss
can never be reclaimed. However, Alaska is in the position of
being able to put vast resources back into production.
Depending on which survey is considered, 8.9-18.5 million acres
in Alaska have been determined suitable for some sort of
agricultural production. The state's original agriculture plan
called for 500,000 acres to be in production by 1990. Failure
to reach that goal was because markets did not develop as
quickly as production did. Barley yields about 1 ton or 40
bushels per acre, he continued. Therefore 25,000 acres would
produce about 1 million bushels which would heat about 5,000
homes.
1:16:18 PM
MR. WRIGLEY related that canola production has a tremendous
following and last year a farmer in Delta Junction used canola
oil as a biofuel to operate his farm equipment [slide 8]. The
potential for thousands of acres exists if a processing facility
can be built. A small canola processing plant is being planned
for Delta Junction, he related. There is now a certain variety
of canola that can be grown in Alaska that would meet the
requirements for food grade canola oil that could then be used
in-state.
1:17:07 PM
MR. WRIGLEY specified that farmers have spent years working to
create a sustainable agriculture industry in Alaska [slide 9].
The original goals of the state's agriculture project are as
valid and important today as they were 30 years ago, he
maintained. "Alaska farmers are stepping up to the plate to
help feed and fuel Alaska," he said. "The state can assist us
to do this by including barley and other farm bioproducts in the
state energy plan." He suggested making barley eligible under
the Heating Assistance Program so program recipients could have
the option of purchasing barley in those instances when it would
be the most cost effective fuel. The state could also establish
a program to assist villages in transitioning from inefficient,
polluting furnaces to cleaner-burning barley furnaces. To reach
Alaska's 2025 goal of 50 percent renewable fuels, he urged that
research be funded to look at other biofuels that could be
produced, such as straw, grass, and canola.
1:18:37 PM
MR. WRIGLEY addressed the frequently asked question of whether
using feed for fuel is ethical [slide 10]. He pointed out that
the in-state demand for livestock feed can be met by production
on 3,000 acres per year; further, it is seldom economically
viable to ship grain outside the state. Thus, any increase in
production becomes surplus and too much surplus discourages
future production. Additional markets are needed to promote
more cultivation which in turn would stabilize supply for
increased livestock production. "Asking if burning barley is
ethical is like asking if we should burn firewood when there is
lumber," he said.
1:19:19 PM
MR. WRIGLEY spoke to another commonly asked question of whether
there is enough barley to meet feeding needs and also burn. He
said there is a current production and current demand, but the
goal is to increase the demand for barley by expanding those
markets and at the same time expand production to meet those
expanding markets. The more appropriate question is whether
there will be enough feed if additional markets are not
developed, he continued. A certain level of production in
excess of demand is required to assure any potential livestock
operators that their feed needs would be met once they invest.
"The more markets that can be developed for a commodity, the
more security there is for producers to ... increase production
of that commodity," he said.
1:20:07 PM
MR. WRIGLEY played a video of the 120,000 acre Delta Junction
Agricultural Project. He narrated the film as it played. Most
of the farms average 2,700 acres, he said. Barley production
begins in the spring with fertilization and preparation of the
land. The grain is seeded by either the no-till method or a
grain drill. The barley grows, ripens, and is ready to combine
by mid-August. The combine separates the straw from the grain
kernels, and then the grain is augured into trucks and taken to
storage. Whether for feed or fuel, the grain is used as-is
without any sort of processing, he pointed out, and the straw
by-product could itself be potentially used as a biomass fuel.
The video included footage of Mr. Wrigley's own barley burning
stove in Delta Junction. He said he burns 40-45 pounds of
barley a day. The key to burning barley efficiently is getting
enough air into the firebox, so there is an auger that stirs the
burning grain. Analysis of the barley ash shows it has the same
basic components as the fertilizer that is used to raise the
barley itself. There are no chemical components so the ash is
safe to use on gardens and lawns.
1:23:37 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in response to several questions from
Representative Wilson, explained that a pellet stove is used to
burn barley. Some pellet stoves are designed to also burn grain
such as corn, and most pellet stoves that burn corn will burn
barley. He clarified that barley ash contains the same
components as the fertilizer used to grow the barley, but that
those components are not in the same ratio as the fertilizer.
He specified that most of the land he talked about [in slide 6]
has already been cleared, although some of it has re-grown
timber and would need to be re-cleared. According to the Alaska
Farm Service Agency (FSA), he related, there are 72,000 acres
that are considered cropland. Of that, 25,000 acres are in
conservation reserve. Trees have been prevented from growing on
some of that land in order to hold the producing potential; the
land is therefore available and could be producing within three
years if the market justified the extra production.
1:25:57 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in further response to Representative Wilson, said
barley produces a higher volume of ash than pellets, but he does
not know how barley compares to firewood.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN interjected that he purchased a pellet stove
with his energy rebate and a ton of pellets produces one milk
can of ashes. He said a ton of pellets takes up an area of
about 4 feet X 4 feet X 4 feet, so a pellet stove is very
efficient.
1:27:01 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in response to Representative Tuck, stated that
Alaska farmers have not supplied barley to local breweries.
Breweries require a malting barley which is a two-row barley and
the barley grown in Alaska is a six-row barley, he explained.
However, a request for [malting] barley was recently received
from an Interior brewery and the Farm Bureau will be checking
with the university to see if there is a variety suitable for
brewing that could be grown in Alaska. One of the benefits of
raising barley in Alaska is that it is high in protein, he
continued, but this is not a good thing for malting barley. The
extra protein is from the long hours of sunlight, so a short-
season variety needs to be found that would remain low in
protein.
1:28:31 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in further response to Representative Tuck, said he
does not know how many jobs result state-wide from growing
barley. In further response, he guessed that barley farming in
the Delta region provides 100-200 seasonal jobs that are
suitable for students and younger family members. However,
expansion of the market would create jobs beyond the market for
farm labor. For example, there are less than 2 million farmers
in the Lower 48, yet the number of jobs related to agriculture
is about 20 million because of the transportation, processing,
packaging, shipping, and secondary product, and these types of
jobs would come along with this barley expansion.
1:30:09 PM
MR. WRIGLEY pointed out that using barley for fuel is just part
of the equation. "What we are doing here is creating an
additional market that will justify the expansion of an industry
that will then justify development of a larger livestock
industry," he said. Alaska suffers right now from being on the
very tail end of a long transportation chain, so food security
in Alaska is abysmal. Why not use some of the resources that
the state already has? The state has already invested in this
land to clear it and put in infrastructure. This would begin to
strengthen Alaska's food and energy security. A large portion
of the 8.9-18.5 million acres identified as suitable for
agriculture lies along river valleys where the villages are.
Villagers are looking at coming to the city because they cannot
get food out there, he continued. The laws are already in place
for developing agriculture and agriculture would give rural kids
a job, something to do, and the ability to stay in their
communities.
1:32:29 PM
MR. WRIGLEY urged lawmakers and agencies to pull together. It
is time to stop shipping out raw materials as if Alaska was a
colony and instead start processing and using those materials in
the state, he opined. Fertilizer prices for urea doubled last
year when Agrium closed, yet plans are underway to build a
pipeline that will ship the gas out of the state without using
any of it. The state can create industry and jobs; this is just
the beginning of something. Land along river banks is some of
the most fertile ground in the state and Native corporations and
others could get together to raise their own vegetables, fuel,
and animals.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK offered his support for an agriculture
project and said he does not want to rely on other countries for
a food source.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN added that the agriculture industry's economic
multiplier of seven is one of the largest for industries in the
nation.
1:35:47 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in response to Representative Seaton, said there
are no diseases or pests in the state with respect to barley.
Most products raised in Alaska are relatively disease and pest
free as compared to the Lower 48. However, Delta Junction, like
the rest of the state, has some invasive weeds and there is a
potential for those seeds to get into the barley in the course
of combining, storing, and transporting. But, he pointed out,
the state is not currently authorized to conduct weed control on
public lands such as road right-of-ways.
1:38:07 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in response to Representative Seaton, explained
that barley varieties are brought into Alaska from outside
primarily because there are no plant breeders in either the
university or Agriculture Research Service (ARS) systems.
Therefore, there is no capacity to develop new varieties. There
used to be research in the state, and varieties were developed
in Alaska for Alaska, but the federal funding was cut about 15
years ago, he said. Although the ARS is back in Alaska now,
there is still no seed breeder. Seed is generally brought in
from Canada, Finland, and other similar latitudes. In further
response, he agreed that some of the barley grown in Alaska
would be used as seed for the next crop. Ideally, he added,
Alaska would have enough production to justify a seed breeder to
develop seeds specific to Alaska's needs.
1:40:39 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in response to Representative Seaton, stated that
the current barley price of $235 a ton includes the price of
fertilizer last year. There will be some minor adjustments this
year as far as fertilizer price, he said, but he does not think
this will result in an increase in the cost of product. Urea is
the largest single component of fertilizer and can be produced
from natural gas. The fertilizer blend typically used in the
Delta Junction is 65-40-20-10, which is nitrogen/urea,
phosphate, potash, and sulfur, respectively. While urea is the
largest component of the fertilizer blend and a critical factor,
some of the other components are more expensive than the urea.
1:42:38 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN, in response to Representative Seaton, reported
that industry is selling pellet stoves as fast as they can be
made, even with two shifts per day. In addition, a gentleman in
Tok is building pellet stoves and cannot keep up with the demand
either. Transporting barley is easy because it is not hazardous
like fuel. He related that last year it cost him over $5400 to
heat his 2,400 square foot home with fuel, but this year with
his new pellet stove he is expecting the cost to be $1200-$1500.
He said he thinks the availability of this type of heating will
be increasing because a lot of industries are expanding to wood
pellets, barley, corncobs, and sunflower seeds.
1:44:38 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN, in response to Representative Wilson, said his
total cost of installation for the stove, stove pipe, and 4,000
pounds of pellets was $2,300.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON remarked that the state would be better
off to buy each family a pellet stove than to do all of the
other things it is doing.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN agreed that this is a question that needs to be
looked at. It would reduce the cost of energy, expand
agriculture, and create jobs, he added. Moreover, there would
be the spin-off industries, the economies of scale, and the plus
of being an Alaska product and a way to support Alaska farmers.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON interjected that making low cost capital
loan programs available for purposes like this was a big part of
his discussion today with the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation
(AHFC). He pointed out that the Division of Investments is
currently providing engine efficiency loans for 2 percent over
15 years. Many of these energy solutions will not come down
from government, they will come bottom up from individual
consumers, he opined.
1:47:05 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in response to Co-Chair Neuman, said he understands
why feed should not be used for fuel when there is a shortage of
the product. However, it is not cost effective to ship out
surplus barley, so any surplus stays in the state. If there is
a surplus, why not use it for both livestock feed and fuel?
Both can be done in Alaska because barley is so easy to produce
and it is so easy to expand production.
MR. WRIGLEY, in response to Representative Tuck, clarified that
the prices shown on slide 2 are based on what he paid this
winter in Delta Junction. In further response, he said the
$5.52 price for barley is at the farm and is for a 50 pound bag
which is the most expensive packaging for barley. In some
places barley is a viable alternative and in other places it may
not be, he continued. For example, fuel will likely be cheaper
for people living near a refinery. But for people living near a
refinery or who live in the Bush and have to ship in their fuel,
barley may be more cost effective.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN added that due to economy of scale, he thinks it
would be likely that semi-truck loads would be used to ship the
barley to communities.
1:49:53 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in response to Representative Tuck, stated that
crop rotation is definitely a plus when growing barley. Finding
a rotational crop is a problem in Alaska and one of the
advantages of canola is that it could be used as a rotational
crop, he explained. Another alternative is one-year rest
periods to give soil micro-organisms a chance to break things
down and rejuvenate the ground. Farmers in Delta Junction are
currently rotating one year of rest with a couple of years of
production because raising barley crops without a rest would
result in declining yields.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN added that the no-plow planting method used in
Delta Junction, and shown in the video, protects the land from
soil loss when high winds blow in that area.
1:51:43 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in response to Representative Tuck, said he did not
take crop rotation into consideration [when he developed the
acreage figures for production capability shown on slide 6]. He
said he was just pointing out that these increases could be made
based on the acreage that is available at this time. There are
120,000 acres in Delta Junction alone and 155,000 in the Nenana
area, he continued. Nenana's growing season is 10 days longer
than Delta Junction's and allows crop varieties that cannot be
grown in Delta Junction. Alaska truly has a great opportunity
in having the ability to put so much acreage into production, he
opined. Two million acres a year are being drawn out of
production in the Lower 48 to build cities. Returning the land
to farming cannot be done by removing the city because to build
a city the top soil is taken off down to the gravel.
1:53:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG said a railroad is another advantage
that Nenana has besides its longer growing season. He noted
that the first crop before barley is planted is black spruce or
willow because they are fuel sources as well. He related that
several years ago a university researcher told him the supply
chain is broken for getting the crops to market regardless of
whether it is an in-state or out-of-state market.
1:55:23 PM
MR. WRIGLEY acknowledged that the infrastructure could be
improved. The proposed rail spur that would go to Delta
Junction would certainly help, he said. Fertilizer is currently
brought by rail to Moose Creek [near Eielson Air Force Base],
then it takes two weeks of constant trucking to bring the
fertilizer to Delta Junction. The issue is the same for hauling
the grain or other commodity back, he continued. The grain must
be trucked the entire way to Anchorage, Kenai, Homer, or other
destination because there is no loading facility at the
railroad. He agreed that the railroad in Nenana is an ideal
situation.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN offered his opinion that more wildlife species
use the barley fields and edges of the fields than use the black
spruce forests.
1:58:37 PM
FRANCI HAVEMEISTER, Director, Division of Agriculture,
Department of Natural Resources, said she agrees with Mr.
Wrigley. The division has a good working relationship with the
Alaska Farm Bureau and the bureau was involved in coming up with
the division's long-term plan. In regard to the lack of
infrastructure, she said it is amazing that the state could have
a barley project but no way to transport it. As far as
biofuels, she said anything that would cut her heating bill by
one-fourth to one-half is something worth looking into. Today's
discussions are appreciated, she continued, as would be any
input from the legislature in regard to promoting agriculture.
It is important to recognize the willingness of farmers to do
things that the majority of people are unwilling to do.
MS. HAVEMEISTER, in response to Representative Guttenberg, said
that [moving the barley-for-fuel project along] is addressed in
the division's plan, although there is no fiscal note attached.
She said she has been in her position only 17 months and it is
her understanding that this is the first time the division has
had industry buy into a plan that everyone can agree on. The
division realizes there is a need, but has not done anything to
address it, she allowed. In further response, she agreed to
provide copies of the plan to the committee.
2:01:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON commented that it seems an agricultural
supply is being pushed for which there is not yet any users.
The legislature could assist in promoting utilization of the
product through energy rebates on stoves, getting supplies of
stoves and fuel into an area, or setting up a demonstration
project in a village, and then the agricultural industry can
step up to supply the product. It may not be fair to put the
push for utilization on the Division of Agriculture, he said,
the legislature must do this and then the division can work on
the supply.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN remarked that people could afford barley for
fuel because it costs a lot less [than oil or gas].
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON agreed.
2:04:36 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in response to Representative Wilson, explained
that some of the farms do not have power or houses on them
because when the farms were laid out in the barley project, home
sites were laid out in the surrounding area. So, while many
farmers do not live on the farm, they do live in the vicinity.
Most farming activities do not require anything but the farming
equipment, but generators are used for those times when
electricity is needed. The farmers' co-op in Delta Junction was
established to store fertilizer and grain and to dry grain, and
many of the larger farms have storage and drying facilities or
buildings. The farms are still owned, they just are not in
production, and these are the acreages that would take 2-3 years
to bring back into production.
2:07:35 PM
MR. WRIGLEY, in response to Representative Seaton, said the
particulate matter from barley is so much smaller than wood that
he does not think the barley particulates would show up as even
a blip in the air quality in areas like Fairbanks that have
inversions. He said when his barley stove is running he cannot
see any smoke coming out. What happened in Fairbanks, he
explained, was that there were more people wanting to convert to
pellet stoves than there were stoves, so these people turned to
outdoor wood burning boilers which are very inefficient and
create a lot of particulates. People were forced to take what
was available and barley stoves were not an option available at
that time. In further response, Mr. Wrigley said barley stoves
are available now from the Harman Stove Company.
HB 12-ALASKA COUNCIL ON INVASIVE SPECIES
2:10:33 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 12, "An Act establishing the Alaska Council on
Invasive Species in the Department of Fish and Game."
2:10:51 PM
JEANNE OSTNES, Staff, Representative Craig Johnson, Alaska State
Legislature, spoke on behalf of Representative Johnson, co-prime
sponsor of HB 12. She related the 2007 story of invasive
species arriving in Alaska in a plane full of Christmas trees.
The plane's original destination was Hawaii, but when several
species of non-native wasps and soil microbes were discovered in
the cargo, Hawaii refused to let the plane be unloaded. The
flight was then diverted to Anchorage where the trees were
unloaded, warehoused, and then sold for $40 each. Within one
week the Cooperative Extension Service was receiving calls from
people reporting that wasps were in their homes.
MS. OSTNES said this incident brought to light that Alaska does
not have a policy. Subsequently, over 30 state and federal
agencies, and private and non-government organizations, signed a
memorandum of understanding (MOU) to establish the Alaska
Invasive Species Working Group (AISWG). This group has been
working for two years, but it cannot make policy, she pointed
out. Under HB 12, the Alaska Council on Invasive Species would
be established to provide a policy forum to keep Alaska from
becoming like the rest of the U.S. Council membership would
consist of five state commissioners [along with nine other
representatives listed in Section 03.22.110].
2:15:09 PM
MS. OSTNES, on behalf of Michele Hebert, gave a PowerPoint
presentation prepared by the Alaska Invasive Species Working
Group. She first pointed out that slide 2 lists the MOU
signatories, then she read slides 3 and 4 of the presentation:
On a national level, invasive species are estimated to
cause over 1 billion dollars a year in environmental
and economic damages.
Almost half of the states in the US have some sort of
group addressing all-taxa of invasive species. These
groups vary in their composition, level of state
support, structure, and activity level. State based
organizations can react more efficiently and
effectively to areas of local concern.
UAF-CES was initially funded by the EPA (Environmental
Protection Agency) to coordinate the development of an
invasive species council. In 2007 it has also
received funds form ADF&G, NMFS/NOAA, and
USFWS/PWSRCAC.
2:16:39 PM
Alaska experiences fewer invaders than many of the
other states. The goal of the AISWG is to help
preserve Alaska's natural environment and economic
resources.
Alaska is lucky to be at the beginning of what could
become very expensive and deleterious effects from
invasive species. Groups have already formed to
address plant invaders, marine invasives, and other
concerns.
The Alaska Invasive Species Working Group aims to
coordinate existing efforts, and to protect Alaska
from invasives species of all taxonomic groups.
MS. OSTNES pointed out that "all taxonomic groups" includes more
than just plants - it includes invertebrates, birds, insects,
microbes, and so forth.
2:17:38 PM
MS. OSTNES read slide 5 of the presentation:
The goal of the Alaska Invasive Species Working Group
is to help preserve Alaska's natural environment and
economic resources.
AISWG's aim is to coordinate existing efforts, and to
protect Alaska from all taxonomic groups.
Increasing effort through coordination!
MS. OSTNES noted that committee packets include a two-page
briefing paper and the MOU, both of which were written for
legislators as well as the general public. Also included in the
committee packets are outlines of AISWG's goals and objectives.
She explained that AISWG's monthly teleconference meetings
address a variety of different subjects. Marine, green crab,
and tunicate monitoring groups are in full swing, she reported.
There is a listserv [[email protected]] that provides
information to people as it happens and AISWG's website,
www.alaskainvasives.org, provides information and links.
2:19:30 PM
MS. OSTNES read slide 7 of the presentation:
AISWG Marine Subcommittee. Monitoring coordination
teleconferences have been held for Green Crab and
Tunicates. Sampling efforts are on track for this
summer in several locations (Valdez, Homer, Sitka,
Juneau, Ketchikan, Gustavus, etc.).
Smithsonian Environmental Research Center has been
working with both groups, and AK DOT has been very
helpful in working toward getting tunicate monitoring
at selected ferry terminals. The green crab poster has
been printed, laminated, and is on its way out to
coastal communities.
MS. OSTNES listed the invasive marine species that are already
in Alaska [slide 8]: Atlantic salmon, boring sponge, dead man's
fingers, golden star, rockweed, and violet tunicate. Marine
species that are not yet found in Alaska, but could be close,
are: Atlantic cord grass, colonial tunicate, green crab, and
New Zealand mud snail.
MS. OSTNES noted that Arctic and red foxes are invasive mammals
that were introduced to 400 islands by fur merchants during the
Russian and territorial days [slide 9]. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service began eradication on uninhabited islands in
1949 and now over 40 islands are fox free. Removal of fox
allowed the Aleutian Cackling Goose to increase numbers on fox-
free islands and be removed from the endangered species list.
Norway rats, an invasive mammal that preys on bird eggs, were
first introduced by ship wrecks and ports in 1780.
2:20:47 PM
MS. OSTNES said handouts have been prepared and distributed to
communities that show the difference between Alaska's crabs and
the European green crab, an invader that has now reached as far
as Vancouver Island [slide 10]. The green crab is transported
via ballast water and hull fouling. It is a voracious hunter
that could compete with Dungeness crab and other native species.
She related that the Alaska Department of Fish & Game estimates
that up to 3,000 Atlantic salmon are present in Alaska waters
each year. This salmon species is farmed in British Columbia
and escapees have spawned in at least one British Columbia
river. Ms. Ostnes understood that the Atlantic salmon escapees
have sea lice, a problem that could affect Alaska's native
salmon.
MS. OSTNES spoke about the birch leaf miner and the defoliation
of trees by insects [slide 11]. She said the animal pathogen
that causes chronic wasting disease has not yet been reported in
Alaska but may be here soon [slide 12]. The plant pathogen that
causes late blight disease has been reported in the Matanuska
Valley.
2:22:38 PM
MS. OSTNES read the opportunities listed on slide 13 for an
Alaska Invasive Species Council:
Coordinating the state resources to maximize
opportunities to prevent and control invasives.
Organize and streamline the interagency process for
exclusion, early detection and control.
To provide policy level direction and planning for
managing invasive species and preventing the
introduction of others.
Foster coordination, streamline approaches that
support initiative for management.
Avoiding program duplication by building a strong
collaborative approach.
Form an advisory and subcommittee with top level
support.
MS. OSTNES concluded the presentation by reading slide 14:
With the passage of HB 12 we will be able to continue
the work of the AISWG and strengthen efforts already
underway.
2:23:17 PM
MICHELE HEBERT, Land Resources Agent, University of Alaska
Fairbanks Cooperative Extension Service; Member, Alaska Invasive
Species Working Group, testified on behalf of the Alaska
Invasive Species Working Group. Seventeen states are using
invasive species councils, she reported. Resources are pooled
when decision makers come together in these councils, so a lot
more gets accomplished at less cost. That is the beauty of HB
12, she continued. This legislation would get Alaska's
commissioners sitting together in a forum where suggestions can
be made to them on policy changes and decisions can be made on
how to share resources to make better use of money and make
things happen more quickly in the state.
MS. HEBERT said the working group has worked hard and
accomplished a lot over the past three years. However, the
working group has put establishment of this council as a top
priority because the group is limited in what it can do without
policy decisions. The councils in other states have allowed for
quicker responses in preventing and managing invasive species.
2:25:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked what AISWG's intentions are in
regard to non-native timothy and alfalfa planted by farmers for
farm animals.
MS. HEBERT replied that the real beauty is the work already done
by the Alaska Invasive Species Working Group and the Committee
for Noxious and Invasive Plants Management (CNIPM). From the
beginning, everyone, including farmers, has been brought to the
table so that everyone's concerns are heard. The group has met
for the past seven or eight years to develop strategic planning
for invasive plants. In addition, annual meetings have been
held for six years. Therefore, concerns about certain crops or
certain plants are heard. Farmers are at the table and being
heard, and no one is threatening to take any crops away such as
timothy, rye grass, or brome. The target is not exotic plants,
the target is invasive species, such as purple loosestrife, that
threaten to harm Alaska's wild lands, wetlands, and wildlife.
MS. OSTNES interjected that Alaska is a right-to-farm state.
MS. HEBERT further explained that Alaska's invasive species
movement was started by farmers coming to her office to tell her
that weeds from federal lands were blowing onto their farms and
they were having to use extra herbicides to get the weeds out.
The farmers wanted to know what she was going to do to help them
tell the federal agencies to control those weeds. Ms. Hebert
noted that although she is testifying as a representative of the
Alaska Invasive Species Working Group, she has been the
agriculture and horticulture agent for the Alaska Fairbanks
Cooperative Extension Service for 18 years. Thus, her main
concern is with agriculture.
2:28:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON inquired whether the state has anyone at
its ports to check for invasive species.
MS. HEBERT responded, "We are not adequately staffed; but it
also may be that we don't have the regulations to keep that
particular insect out of the state of Alaska."
2:29:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said she is appalled and thinks this
should be an automatic part of government. She asked whether
there is any way to take care of this by using private industry.
MS. HEBERT said her suggestion is to bring all the players
together because the accomplishments to date are from everyone
coming together. This is the only way the state will be able to
keep invasives out, she continued. There are so many different
land managers and unless they come together to talk about the
issues they cannot help each other out. If the people from
agriculture talked to people from the U.S. Coast Guard the state
would be more likely to catch these things; otherwise the Coast
Guard may not know what it is looking at. Sitting down together
and addressing the issues in a common voice would provide early
detection, rapid response, and preventative measures.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN noted that the State of Alaska does have a plant
materials center that looks at the different seeds coming into
the state, as well as an inspector that checks logs to ensure
they are clean for export. So, the state has the people there,
the agencies just need to be funded adequately.
2:31:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI asked whether creating another council
would dilute the message since there are already groups dealing
with this.
MS. HEBERT explained that the working group has been held back
by policy and has been unable to impact having policy changed.
This is the key, she said. Both CNIPM and AISWG are
recommending that decision makers come together once a year with
the ability to make recommendations to the legislature. The
working group, CNIPM, and others will be the technical part of
this process. Establishing this council will not take away what
these groups are already doing, it will just put in place the
step that is missing in the process.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN added that this will be discussed during the
committee process.
MS. HEBERT, in further response to Representative Kawasaki, said
the proposed council would be for making policy change
recommendations and the sharing of resources. The bill also has
additional provisions for subcommittees and technical groups as
needed to accomplish what needs to be accomplished.
2:34:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK noted that the Municipality of Anchorage is
very strict in its rat prevention policy. He said he thinks
Anchorage is the only port in the U.S. that is rat free. He
inquired as to whether the council would coordinate with or take
over other programs, or would the council establish policies
that local government and communities would then implement.
MS. HEBERT answered that the council would not be controlling
any government entity or city. It would utilize AISWG and CNIPM
for guidance. For example, the working group has been
addressing rat control and as a result there have been multi-
agency projects to control rats in the Aleutian Islands.
Because everyone is coming together in meetings, identifying
which agencies need to get involved and how resources can be
shared, a much better job has been done in controlling rats. On
the same hand, this group is not telling each agency what to do,
it is just sharing ideas. The frustration is that the people in
the group are regular people, not decision makers, so the
council is being seen as an opportunity to share resources with
the decision makers.
2:37:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked whether HB 12 creates any
enforcement authority to actually do anything such as inspecting
imported agricultural products or trees.
MS. HEBERT replied, "I think the council is the powers to be,
but the work horses who identify and send things up to the
council would be the working group." For example, the birch
leaf miner is a new invasive from Europe. It arrived in
landscape materials delivered to the Fairbanks military base and
now it is a problem in the Interior. She continued, "We have a
lot of people who are work horses, like myself, who know there
is a problem, but we are not decision makers, we are not higher
level people, and our hands are totally tied." The working
group would bring these issues to the council so the five
commissioners - the decision makers - could act on it. "Unless
we have the different departments talking to each other, we
can't really work together," she said.
2:40:50 PM
LORI ZAUMSEIL, Co-founder, Citizens Against Noxious Weeds
Invading the North (CANWIN); Coordinator, Anchorage Cooperative
Weed Management Area, testified on behalf of CANWIN. In regard
to whether the council that would be established by HB 12 is
really needed, she offered her view that the council would be a
state supported, sanctioned, and recognized entity, whereas the
other groups are citizens with no state recognition. Alaska
really needs a formal program, she stressed. For example, when
AISWG was formalized by House Bill 330, a huge window was opened
to receive federal funding. In regard to non-natives like
timothy and alfalfa, Ms. Zaumseil clarified that neither the
invasive weeds group nor the invasive species group is talking
about targeting non-natives; they are talking about invasive,
noxious species - one is not necessarily the other. Being non-
native does not make something invasive.
MS. ZAUMSEIL paraphrased from her prepared statement [original
punctuation provided]:
Last year, the first vital steps were taken to protect
Alaska's economy, ecology and environment from the
devastation of noxious weeds. Troy and I had no
experience with the political process, but were very
gratified by the unanimous response to [House Bill]
330. When Representative Johnson proposed that
legislation, we vowed to dedicate our time and effort
to making people understand the importance of
developing this statewide response and why it was the
fiscally responsible thing for their senators and
representatives to do. We have spoken to many local,
state and national audiences about Alaska's fight with
invasives and met experts fighting the same problems
in other states that threaten Alaska. Without
exception, we hear the same message--that Alaska is
America's last chance to do it right and not suffer
the tens of millions of dollars in expense and losses
due to invasive species, but that is only possible if
we act quickly and aggressively while the advantage is
still ours to take. HB12 is the next important step
in the process. This legislation needs your vote
today and as it moves forward, but in addition, Alaska
and her citizens need your continued support as the
agencies and people on the ground work to prevent and
control invasive species from impacting our Great
Land.
2:45:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG said his concern is whether this
council will have enough muscle when a problem is identified to
do what needs to be done.
MS. ZAUMSEIL responded that the council would bring together all
of the agency people who have the ability to make the
regulations - those regulations would provide the muscle. Plus,
all of these decision makers sitting at the table with all of
the interest groups is muscle in itself, she added. The council
would make recommendations and give power to agencies like the
Division of Agriculture and the Alaska Department of Fish & Game
to explain why a certain regulation is needed so that when it
goes out for public comment the public will understand and
support the regulation.
2:47:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG presented an example of northern pike
being collected in one place in Alaska and released in another
location where it is an invasive. Will Alaska State Troopers or
other agency have the authority to stop that action, he asked.
MS. ZAUMSEIL said she is not really the person to answer this
question. However, she understood that the Alaska Department of
Fish & Game recently passed a regulation that makes this a
fineable action.
SENATOR OLSON offered his belief that this was addressed several
years ago in legislation that gave the Alaska Department of Fish
& Game enforcement power in matters like this.
CO-CHAIR JOHNSON explained that the commissioners will write the
regulations. He pointed out that when a regulation is needed
that requires legislation, Alaska's commissioners have a history
of not being bashful about coming to the legislature to ask for
the needed legislation. It is much better to have things bubble
up from the community than to have things bubble down from the
legislature and this is what HB 12 addresses, he said.
2:49:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON, in regard to council membership [page 2,
line 9, Section 03.22.110], asked whether there is a need to
have federal land and water managers on the council, such as the
U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and National
Park Service. In addition, he suggested that it be researched
as to whether a tribal council should be included on page 6,
line 8.
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN urged Representative Edgmon to work with the
sponsor in regard to his suggestions.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON said he wanted to make these comments
while everyone is on line.
2:50:51 PM
DAN GILSON, Project Manager, Oil Spill Prevention & Response
Operations, Prince William Sound Regional Citizens Advisory
Council, spoke from the following written statement [original
punctuation provided]:
The [Prince William Sound Regional Citizens Advisory]
Council is a non-profit whose mission is promoting the
environmentally safe operation of the Alyeska terminal
and associated tankers. The Council's 18 member
organizations are communities in the Exxon Valdez oil
spill impact region, as well as business, recreation,
tourism, commercial fishing, Native and aquaculture
groups.
Because of our concerns regarding invasive species
arriving in the ballast water attached to the hulls of
tankers, we are here today to support HB 12, the bill
to create an invasive species council.
This legislation is vital in helping to help protect
Alaska environments and economies from the threat of
invasion by harmful non-indigenous organisms. We must
act now in order to avoid a potential catastrophe.
The purpose of the council would be to provide a
coordinated, multi-stakeholder approach for addressing
the potential risks of harmful invasive organisms and
agents throughout the state and to work toward
preventing the future introduction of other new
invasive organisms and agents to the state.
The minor amount of money spent annually on a council
could save us billions of dollars in lost economies,
environments and industries in addition to costs
associated with controlling invasions. Just look at
the situation with the zebra mussels in the Great
Lakes. The government estimates that economic losses
and control efforts cost the United States about $5
billion each year.
A more immediate threat to Alaska Coastlines is the
European Green Crab. Green crabs eat clams, oysters,
mussels, marine worms and small crustaceans that are
important foods for native species. This invasive
crab has marched its way up the west coast of the
United States and has invaded Vancouver Island most
recently. It is not a matter of "if" we get green
crabs, but "where and when." To give you an idea of
the economic devastation posed by the green crab,
which is also invasive to the East Coast of the United
States, the estimated total losses due to the green
crab on the East Coast during 1975-2005 range from
$719 to $806 million. Although economic impacts to
the West Coast are negligible under current
conditions, the West Coast impacts could increase to
almost a million dollars per year if the green crab
were to spread up to Alaska. And we do expect this
spread to makes it way to Alaska. We know the crabs
can survive and establish themselves in our waters.
There are numerous threats to Alaska in terms of
invasive species and just as many horror stories of
these species taking over environments in other
states. Another real threat to Alaska is Purple
[Loosestrife] which has been found in the Westchester
Lagoon area in Anchorage. This plant can produce up
to 2.7 million seeds per plant yearly and spreads
across approximately 1 million additional acres of
wetlands each year, with an economic impact of
millions of dollars. A coordinated local effort in
Anchorage has been on top of that infestation, but one
can easily see how a broader coordinated effort is
needed to proactively deal with these issues.
At this moment in time, Alaska is relatively free from
invasive species. Contrary to a popular myth, Alaska
is not isolated as it receives significant amounts of
air, water, and land traffic. Also, climate change is
making conditions in Alaska more favorable for harmful
invasive species.
Unless Alaska takes a proactive stance, Alaska will
suffer the same fate as other states dealing with the
management of harmful invasive species. Formation of
a council to develop a strategic plan, coordinate
efforts, and share information is essential to be able
to take advantage of funding opportunities only
available to such coordinated entities. The minor
amount of money spent on a council annual will pay
dividends in the significant amount of money not spent
on managing weeds, pests and other critters.
I urge you to support this bill.
2:54:51 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN interjected that Tom Lawson, Director, Division
of Administrative Services, Alaska Department of Fish & Game, is
available to speak to the fiscal note.
2:55:11 PM
SUE ELY, Legislative and Communications Manager, Alaska
Conservation Alliance, said her group is a coalition of 40
Alaska conservation organizations. She testified from the
following written statement [original punctuation provided]:
I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak
in support of HB12, establishing the Alaska Council on
Invasive Species in the Department of Fish and Game.
Alaska is home to an amazing abundance of plant and
animal life. Whether valued as charismatic Alaskan
icons, or as the source of our continued economic and
subsistence prosperity, Alaska's flora and fauna are
vital to our economic well being [and Alaska's] way of
life. However, these resources could be threatened by
the spread of invasive species.
Already Alaska has suffered the effects of invasive
Atlantic Salmon, pike and Reed Canary grass, to name a
few. Plants, animals, fish and crustaceans,
introduced into an environment devoid of their natural
predators and limitations can irreversibly destroy an
ecosystem and that destruction can translate into
direct monetary, cultural and lifestyle impacts.
Invasive species have cost lower 48 economies billions
of dollars in revenue. In order for Alaska to avoid a
similar fate, it is prudent to address this issue now.
I believe the 14-member Council will provide the broad
stakeholder cooperation and oversight needed to
prevent new invasive species from taking root in
Alaska and to mitigate the damage of invasives already
introduced. At risk are Alaska's biological
treasures; its harvest resources and subsistence
plants and animals; the beauty and diversity that make
Alaska a world-class tourist destination. It is our
understanding and our hope that the least amount of
the least toxic management tools would be used to
control marine invasive species and that pesticides be
used only as a last resort.
The Alaska Conservation Alliance would like to thank
you for this opportunity to voice our support for HB
12 and encourage you to pass this bill out of the
[House Resources Standing Committee].
2:57:46 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN introduced several state and federal agency
personnel in attendance, including Gino Graziano, Natural
Resources Specialist II, Department of Natural Resources, who
was hired last year as a result of House Bill 330 that created a
state coordinator position for noxious weed, invasive plant, and
agricultural pest management and education.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed out that the House Resources
Standing Committee passed [House Bill 330] last year, which
demonstrates that the committee shares the public's concern
about invasive species. He therefore requested that people help
the committee by keeping their comments to the context of HB 12
and the process of using the proposed council as written in the
bill.
3:00:21 PM
CO-CHAIR NEUMAN held HB 12. He urged people to talk to the
director of the Division of Agriculture and the director of
invasive species to learn what has already been done and how HB
12 would compliment the actions taken to date.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Resources Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 00 HB0012A.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 00 Sectional HB12.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 00 Sponsor Stmt ACIS.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 02 R10 IS Assessment.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 03 2008-12 NIS Mgmt Plan.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 04 Facts IS-AK.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 04 XmasTrees/insects.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 05 UOCS re AK.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 06 UOCS re AK large.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 07 Fed Leg Sen Levin.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 01 Presentation AIS Working Group .ppt |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 02 Presentation Other States IS .ppt |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 08 AK IS MOU-2-2007.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 08 flyer aiswg 2pg.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 08 Obama support Fed Leg .pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 09 Cost Federal.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 09 Cost Maine.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 09 Cost Programs WA & OR.PDF |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 10 NISC in AK.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 11 Species Identified.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 12 LOS AISC.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 12 LOS AK C A.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 12 LOS AKCANWIN .pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 12 LOS CNIPM Board.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 12 LOS NOAA .pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 12 LOS NRCDB.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 12 LOS PWSRCAC.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 12 LOS Sen Begich.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| 13 Climate Change.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| Fiscal Note.HB 12.DEC.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| Fiscal Note.HB 12.DFG.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| Fiscal Note.HB 12.DNR.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| Fiscal Note.HB 12.HSS.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| HB 12 docs 2.18.09.jpg |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| Fiscal Note.HB 12.UA.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| Presentation on Barley biomass .ppt |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| Testify-Ely.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| Testify-Gilson gr.crab.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |
| Testify-Zaumseil.pdf |
HRES 2/18/2009 1:00:00 PM |
HB 12 |