04/01/1996 03:38 PM Senate RES

                                                                               
        CSHJR 58(RES) REFORM THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT                       
                                                                              
  CHAIRMAN LEMAN  brought CSHJR 58(RES) before the committee as the            
 final order of business.                                                      
                                                                               
  ANTHONY KRUPPE , representing the Alaska Environmental Lobby (AEL),          
 stated they have several concerns with the legislation, but they              
 have narrowed it down to the two most important things that they              
 believe will strengthen the resolution.                                       
                                                                               
 The first suggested change is to delete the resolve clause on page            
 2, lines 7-9, which requests the Congress to proceed with                     
 reauthorization of the Endangered Species Act, using HR 2275 as the           
 basis for the reauthorization legislation.  He said he believes               
 that by deleting those lines, it will make the resolution a bit               
 stronger because AEL does not believe that HR 2275 is a piece of              
 legislation that the Alaska Legislature should support.                       
                                                                               
 The second suggested change is to delete lines 22 and 23 on page 2            
 which eliminates the concept of "distinct population segment" from            
 the definition of "species."  He said the concern with distinct               
 population segments in the definition of species could be resolved            
 by establishing an interpretation of the definition similar to the            
 policy supported by the National Marine Fisheries Service.  Their             
 specification designates that species must satisfy particular                 
 criteria distinguishing the segment of species as reproductively              
 isolated and significant in the evolution of the species.                     
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN LEMAN  commented that if HR 2275 is used as the basis, it           
 does not necessarily mean that the bill as originally introduced              
 will become law.  It is a starting point, and as Congress works to            
 get a consensus, the bill will probably be crafted along the way to           
 accommodate concerns, so he thinks using it as the mark-up vehicle            
 is fine, at least from the Alaska perspective, because it probably            
 comes the closest to accommodating some of the concerns we have as            
 a state to the implementation of ESA.                                         
                                                                               
 Number 400                                                                    
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN LEMAN  asked if it was correct that the "distinct                   
 population segment" is causing problems with the management of our            
 fisheries in Alaska.   JAY NELSON , Department of Fish & Game,                
 confirmed that the listed population of Snake River fall chinook              
 that is causing problems for the fisheries in Alaska is listed                
 under the "distinct population segment" provision of the law.  He             
 added that the problem with the "distinct population segment" is it           
 benefits the state with regard  to land vertebrates, in general,              
 but with fish it is a different situation.  He said while the                 
 administration is not satisfied with a blanket removal of the                 
 "distinct population segment" provision, it agrees there probably             
 needs to be a more surgical solution to it.   CHAIRMAN LEMAN  asked           
 if inserting the words "for anadromous fish" after the word                   
 "species" would help.   MR. NELSON  responded that would definitely           
 be more surgical.                                                             
                                                                               
 Number 455                                                                    
                                                                               
  SENATOR TAYLOR  asked if the Governor agrees with the position that          
 the Queen Charlotte  goshawk and the Alexander Archipelago wolf are           
 distinct population segments deserving attention under ESA.   MR.             
 NELSON  responded that the Alexander Archipelago wolf and the Queen           
 Charlotte goshawk were both requested to be listed by a private               
 group based in the Lower 48 with two Alaskan citizens involved.               
 The proposal to list it as an endangered species was opposed by the           
 department, as well as opposed by the federal government, and now             
 there are pending lawsuits by that same private party to list them.           
 He added that the Queen Charlotte goshawk and the Alexander                   
 Archipelago wolf are classified as subspecies.  He said changing              
 that from a subspecies is a complicated thing, and the department             
 has not taken a position on that.  Even if they were eliminated as            
 a subspecies, they still might under the Fish & Wildlife Service              
 decision fall under "distinct population segment."  He also said              
 the Governor does not view HR 2477 as the best vehicle for                    
 reauthorization of the Act.                                                   
                                                                               
  TAPE 96-44, SIDE A                                                           
 Number 015                                                                    
                                                                               
  SENATOR TAYLOR  asked if the Governor is doing what he can to make           
 certain that this legislation doesn't pass.   MR. NELSON  answered            
 that with the exception of one letter from the Governor, they have            
 done nothing in the way of working on this legislation in                     
 Washington, D.C.   SENATOR TAYLOR  asked if the Governor's letter was         
 supportive, and  MR. NELSON  answered that it wasn't.   CHAIRMAN LEMAN        
 commented that if the Governor had a positive approach and told Mr.           
 Katz that we want to work this really hard and help our delegation,           
 then we might have a little bit different resolution.                         
                                                                               
 There being no further testimony on CSHB 58(RES),  CHAIRMAN LEMAN             
 asked for the pleasure of the committee.                                      
                                                                               
  SENATOR TAYLOR  moved CSHJR 58(RES) be passed out of committee with          
 individual recommendations.   SENATOR HOFFMAN  objected.  A vote of           
 the committee was taken with the following result:  Senators Frank,           
 Pearce, Taylor and Leman voted "Yea" and Senator Hoffman voted                
 "Nay."  The Chairman stated the motion carried.