Legislature(2015 - 2016)BUTROVICH 205
03/04/2016 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 | |
| SB164 | |
| SB172 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 164 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 172 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 164-FISH & GAME: OFFENSES; LICENSES; PENALTIES
3:31:49 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced the consideration of SB 164. She noted
that staff at the Alaska Departments of Fish and Game (ADF&G),
Public Safety (DPS), and Law (DOL) testified at a previous
hearing, and she opened up the hearing to public testimony,
limited to two minutes each.
3:33:32 PM
BYRON CHARLES, representing himself, Ketchikan, Alaska, said he
recently saw a dead sea lion with a triple-hook stuck in its
throat, which was likely the result of the sea lion's attempt to
grab a snagged salmon. These "fish wars" in Alaska need to be
better contained to prevent people from hurting each other, he
said. The new policies proposed in SB 164 need serious
amendments, he noted. "What kind of penalty can you put or
impose on somebody when a sea lion has a triple-hook stuck in
its throat?" He said he grew up snagging fish with halibut
hooks, but the triple-hooks need to be outlawed. Additionally,
section 1 of SB 164 "should be fly fishing only," he stated.
3:36:33 PM
MIKE TINKER, Alaska Wildlife Conservation Association,
Fairbanks, Alaska, said the public did not get to testify at the
first hearing, but the first sections of SB 164 are fine, "and
probably going to the class A [misdemeanor] just reflects the
modernization." He questioned the deletion of "upon conviction,"
as it seems a person would have to be convicted before getting
fines and restitutions. The new fines are good, he said, because
some of the current levels are archaic.
MR. TINKER expressed concern in trying to recoup federal
matching funds; "both from the fish side and on the wildlife
side, that's a reimbursement program." When a legislator asks
how much the state has to pay for the management of a caribou in
order to get a reimbursable figure to add into the fine is a
very difficult thing to do, he said, "one that would likely cost
many, many times what would come out of the fine." He said his
point is that if "you took the eligible Pittman-Robertson money
on caribou, for example, where we have hundreds of thousands of
them, and divided it by the hundreds of thousands of dollars we
spend on qualifying characteristics, we'd come up with a dollar
a caribou, and at three-to-one, you could recover three bucks."
He said he does not see how Alaska could do that without
"running the cost of the thing way out into the future." Mr.
Tinker gave the example of someone getting a fine for [taking] a
caribou, "and then the retribution for Pittman-Robertson ...
comes the following October when the state makes its
reimbursement charge." He said it is unclear and he would like
that clarified, but he does not see it "as a doable thing."
MR. TINKER said other amendments are needed, and one thing his
group has been on top of for several years is "geography getting
in the way, and that is the application of restitution" where it
is applied in some cases and not in others. He said first-time
unintentional, technical violators who turn themselves in should
be exempt, "otherwise we're not getting the bang for our buck to
try to get hunters in the field; the idea is not to scare every
single new or inexperienced hunter out of the field because [the
hunter] might get slapped down."
CHAIR GIESSEL suggested Mr. Tinker submit a letter with his
suggestions and questions.
3:40:55 PM
AL BARRETTE, representing himself, Fairbanks, Alaska, said he is
a member of the Fairbanks Advisory Committee and other outdoor
organizations. He stated that SB 164 is well thought out and
goes in the right direction, but he suggested a restitution
exemption for self-reporting violators who salvage all of their
game and surrender it to wildlife enforcement. [The change] will
not take anything away from public safety, he opined. The court
system uses this penalty arbitrarily, he said, and he gave the
examples of Judge David [Zwink] who adds restitution to plea
bargain deals on self-reported violations and Superior Court
Judge [Richard Erlich] who charged three Point Hope residents
who killed up to 37 caribou without salvaging the meat with
wanton waste and did not issue a fine, community service, or any
kind of education requirement. "He actually said it was a
nominal charge," and that is very disturbing that wanton waste
of Alaska's wildlife is just a nominal incident, he stated.
MR. BARRETTE suggested removing "sport" from resident fishing
licenses, because there are at least 20,000 to 40,000 Alaskans
who subsistence fish and do not contribute since they are not
required to have a license. "I think the second largest users of
our fish resources, which is subsistence, ought to pay a little
bit of something into our management of our fish resources," he
concluded.
3:44:03 PM
RICHARD DAVIS, Seafood Producers Cooperative (SPC), Sitka,
Alaska, explained that the SPC is a fishing business collective
and cold storage in Sitka, owned and operated by 600 fishers,
most of whom are Alaskans. He explained that SPC has been
operating since 1945 when the cooperative provided fish liver
oil for WWII, and it is the oldest and largest fishery
cooperative of its kind in North America. Mr. Davis noted that
section 6 of SB 164 doubles the maximum fines for first and
second convictions for fishery violations but does not double
the maximum fine for a third conviction. In view of Alaska's
demerit point system that fishers operate under, they can only
collect so many points of offenses against their licenses before
losing them for one to three years. "The third conviction could
be any number you wanted to put in there because under the
three-strikes-and-out and the strict liability risk that you
incur if you have violations of a strict liability nature, you
could lose your boat and your permits, and it's been done," he
said. He noted that the current bill version does not double the
maximum fine for any of the 12 listed game species. He said his
fishermen believe that if fines are doubled, it should be done
uniformly across all of the revenues collected through the penal
system. If there is a chronic fisheries compliance problem
somewhere in Alaska that can be pointed out to Mr. Davis, then
he would be willing to reconsider. Alaska's commercial salmon
fishers are earning less money for their products than they were
ten years ago, he stated.
3:46:41 PM
SENATOR COGHILL suggested that Mr. Davis write down specific
concerns about the fines for the committee.
3:47:17 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if there were any witnesses wanting to
testify, and, hearing none, closed public testimony.
3:48:13 PM
BERNARD CHASTAIN, Deputy Director, Alaska Wildlife Troopers,
Department of Public Safety (DPS), Anchorage, noted that a
witness asked why the term "upon conviction" was removed, and he
pointed out that section 16 on page 5 of SB 164 refers to a
person "who is convicted."
CHAIR GIESSEL asked about the reference on page 5, line 26.
3:49:07 PM
AARON PETERSON, Attorney, Criminal Division, Department of Law,
Anchorage, said "upon conviction" was superfluous since
misdemeanor fines are not imposed without convictions.
CHAIR GIESSEL referred to the question about doubling fines for
a second conviction but not for more convictions.
3:50:25 PM
MR. PETERSON said that fines for first and second convictions
were set in 1988, but fines for subsequent convictions were set
later and do not need inflation adjustments.
CHAIR GIESSEL suggested that the fines were not increased so
much as they were adjusted for justification.
MR. PETERSON said he was not involved in setting the fines;
however, the increase does mirror inflation rates.
3:52:12 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE said he would like to know when big game fines
were set to see if the adjustments are fair. Adjusting for
inflation is a good way to raise fines, he said. He asked about
a 50 percent reduction in fines for self-reporting violations,
"so we don't have the waste that's associated without that self-
reporting."
3:53:40 PM
MR. CHASTAIN said the legislature set the current restitution
amounts in 1996. He stated that DPS is not concerned so much
with the amount of the fine; however, it supports the concept of
reducing or eliminating restitution for a "self-turn-in" to
encourage people to bring in carcasses. "In fact, that is a
policy of our department to not apply restitution to people who
turn themselves in ... and we have an established history of
doing that," he added. Troopers make such recommendations to
district attorneys, but there have been a few times where judges
have decided it would be more appropriate to apply restitution.
He said having flexibility is important, and not applying
restitution would encourage people to bring in animals that were
illegally taken.
3:55:27 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE said it makes people less likely to cut their
gear loose if they "wouldn't be fined by harvesting all the
fish." He said it is something to think about for the next
committee. He said he remains concerned about the tags or
permits in [subsections] (f) and (g) of section 3 that must be
validated upon harvest, because "it clearly doesn't work in
electronic form for something that has to be validated."
3:56:53 PM
SENATOR COGHILL asked if it is true that subsistence harvesters
do not have to be licensed.
3:57:59 PM
SETH BEAUSANG, Attorney, Alaska Department of Law, Anchorage,
Alaska, said some subsistence fisheries require permits, but not
all.
3:58:22 PM
SENATOR COGHILL asked if there are 20,000 to 40,000 subsistence
users as stated by the previous witness.
MR. BEAUSANG said he does not know.
SENATOR COGHILL requested the number of subsistence users and
the number of issued sport fishing licenses. It is a legitimate
point if the state does not know how many fish are being taken,
he stated.
3:59:39 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE suggested that the witness was referring to the
difference between subsistence and personal use, where one
requires a license and one does not.
SENATOR COGHILL said the confusion is not surprising, "because
it divides Alaskans pretty well ... between the personal use and
subsistence use; however, it would be nice to know how many
subsistence usage permits are there, if any."
SENATOR GIESSEL asked Senator Coghill to pose his question to
the next witness.
4:01:16 PM
BRUCE DALE, Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), Palmer, asked him if he is
asking only about personal use fisheries.
SENATOR COGHILL said it is fisheries; how does a person
distinguish between personal use and subsistence fisheries, and
do they both require permits or licenses?
MR. DALE replied that he would get back to Senator Coghill.
4:02:02 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE asked why [AS 16.05.782(d)] was not in section
8 of the bill.
4:02:45 PM
MR. PETERSON clarified that subsection (d) is not being amended.
SENATOR MICCICHE spoke of a situation where a person who never
breaks laws is hunting bears and stumbles within a half mile of
a solid waste disposal facility and "drops a bear and a brown-
shirt comes." Will there be any leniency if the hunter did not
intend to use the waste facility as bait?
4:04:22 PM
MR. CHASTAIN said that section deals with taking brown bears
near solid waste disposal sites. "What is attempting to be done
here is that it makes it a violation if we cannot prove that
negligence was part of it," he added.
4:05:13 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE interpreted Mr. Chastain's reply to mean that
the DPS would be reasonable in its approach.
4:05:58 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL noted that many concerns with SB 164 are related
to judicial matters, so she advocated moving it on to the Senate
Judiciary Committee.
4:06:25 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO moved to report SB 164, version 29-GS2958\A,
from committee with individual recommendations and attached
fiscal note(s).
4:06:39 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced that without objection, SB 164 is
reported from committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB164 ver A.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 164 |
| SB164 - Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 164 |
| SB164 Sponsor Statement - Governor's Transmittal letter.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 164 |
| SB164-F&G-CO-2-2-16.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 164 |
| SB164-Fiscal Note-DPS-1-29-2016.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 164 |
| SB172 ver A.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 172 |
| SB172 Sponsor Statement - Governor's Transmittal letter.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 172 |
| SB172- Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 172 |
| SB172-DFG-CF-2-5-16.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 172 |
| SB172-Supporting Document-UFA Support.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 172 |
| SB172-Supporting Document-AKCRRAB Support.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 172 |
| SB172-Supporting Document-AFDF Support.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 172 |
| SB172-Supporting Document-PVOA Support.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 172 |
| SB172-Comment-Nancy Hillstrand.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 172 |
| SB172-Supporting Document-SEAFA.pdf |
SRES 3/4/2016 3:30:00 PM |
SB 172 |