04/28/1995 03:38 PM Senate RES

            SB 171 EXTEND CURRENT SUBSISTENCE LAW                            
                                                                               
 Number 570                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR LEMAN introduced  SB 171 , which will extend the sunset date          
 for the subsistence law for one year, as the next order of                    
 business.  He said it is his understanding that the agreement to              
 extend the date by one year is an agreement reached between the               
 administration, our committee and corresponding committees on the             
 House side.                                                                   
                                                                               
 COMMISSIONER-DESIGNEE RUE stated the administration is in agreement           
 with the one-year extension, and they will be working with the                
 legislature and various interest groups to try to come up with a              
 resolution of this issue that Alaskans can support.                           
                                                                               
 GEORGE IRVIN, representing the Alaska Federation of Natives,                  
 testified from Anchorage in support of legislative action to extend           
 the sunset of the 1992 state subsistence statute for one year.  He            
 said AFN is convinced that the Knowles Administration fully intends           
 to conduct the public process of evaluating the 1992 statutes                 
 implementation and to make recommendations to the legislature,                
 which is something the previous administration failed to do.                  
                                                                               
  TAPE 95-50, SIDE B                                                           
 Number 001                                                                    
                                                                               
 Mr. Irvin said AFN has concluded that no administration could                 
 complete the process in the next five months, and in order to bring           
 justice to the critical issues and to coordinate the formulation of           
 future state subsistence policy with its effort to resolve the                
 ANILCA impact, the Knowles Administration must be given sufficient            
 time to get the work done.                                                    
                                                                               
 Mr. Irvin stated the AFN supports the governor's twin goals of a              
 rural preference and the return of state management, and the entire           
 Native community will help in any way it can and in any appropriate           
 manner to assist the administration to fulfill the original                   
 commitments of the 1992 law and its review.                                   
                                                                               
 Number 030                                                                    
                                                                               
 DALE BONDURANT, testifying from Soldotna, stated his opposition to            
 extending the sunset date for one year.  He said there was a lot of           
 effort put in during the Hickel Administration to try to come up              
 with some kind of a conclusion.  He added that the McDowell                   
 decision said that all Alaskans would be treated equal as far as              
 subsistence so he does not see the need for these laws.  He                   
 suggested everybody get together and consider that we are all                 
 Alaskans and we all have the same equal right to take fish and                
 game.                                                                         
                                                                               
 Number 062                                                                    
                                                                               
 TOM LAKOSH, testifying from Anchorage, said one thing that has not            
 been identified in the law which makes it unconstitutional and a              
 violation of his rights is that the Supreme Court found that                  
 subsistence is inherently a local use of the resources.  He said he           
 would very much like to use his local subsistence resources and it            
 is a violation of his rights to consider his area a non-subsistence           
 use area.                                                                     
                                                                               
 There being no further witnesses wishing to testify on SB 171,                
 SENATOR LEMAN directed attention to an amendment being offered by             
 Senator Lincoln.                                                              
                                                                               
 Number 100                                                                    
                                                                               
 SENATOR LINCOLN moved the adoption of the following amendment                 
 to SB 171:                                                                    
                                                                               
 Amendment No. 1                                                             
                                                                               
 Page 1, line 1:  After "Act" insert "extending the date for a                 
 review of and a report on the current law regarding subsistence use           
 of fish and game and"                                                         
                                                                               
 Page 3, after line 3:  Insert new bill sections to read:                      
                                                                               
    "*Section 1.  Section 9(a), ch 1, SSSLA 1992, is amended to                
 read:                                                                         
   (a)  The legislature acknowledges and recognizes that                       
 this Act deals with a subject of vital concern and that the subject           
 merits review.  Therefore, it is the intent of the legislature that           
 the operation of this Act and the regulations adopted under this              
 Act be fully reviewed by the governor no later than December 31,             
 1995 [JUNE 1, 1994].                                                         
                                                                               
  *Sec. 2.  Section 9(d), ch 1, SSSLA 1192, is amended to read:                
   (d)  No later than February 1, 1996 [SEPTEMBER 1, 1994],                  
 the governor shall provide a report to the legislature on the                 
 results of the review and proposed recommendations for statutory              
 amendments."                                                                  
                                                                               
 Page 1, line 4:  Delete "Section 1." and insert "Sec. 3."                     
                                                                               
 Renumber the following bill section accordingly.                              
                                                                               
 Hearing no objection to the amendment, SENATOR LEMAN said it was              
 adopted and would be incorporated into a Resources CS.                        
                                                                               
 SENATOR TAYLOR moved that CSSB 171(RES) be passed out of committee            
 with individual recommendations.  Hearing no objection, it was so             
 ordered.