03/01/2024 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES

        SB 171-RESIDENCY REQ: HUNTING, TRAPPING, FISHING                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:45:45 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR BISHOP  announced the consideration  of SB 171  SENATE BILL                                                               
NO. 171  "An Act  changing the  residency requirements  for sport                                                               
fishing, hunting,  and trapping privileges; and  providing for an                                                               
effective date."                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:45:55 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR BISHOP opened public testimony on SB 171.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
3:46:30 PM                                                                                                                    
STACEE KLEINSMITH, representing  self, Chugiak, Alaska, testified                                                               
in  opposition   to  SB  171.  She   expressed  appreciation  for                                                               
collective knowledge, experience, and  the ability to collaborate                                                               
on issues. However, emphasized concerns  about the way SB 171 was                                                               
written. She  said while she understands  the legislative intent,                                                               
there is an  absence of quantifiable evidence  regarding the harm                                                               
it aims to  address. As currently drafted,  the bill's unintended                                                               
consequences would personally affect her,  as she would no longer                                                               
qualify for  the Permanent  Fund Dividend  (PFD). She  shared her                                                               
family's health  challenges, which required  significant recovery                                                               
time, but  were not deemed  excusable under the PFD  criteria. SB
 would  classify her  as a non-resident,  leading to  real and                                                               
unintended consequences.  She stated that others  might also find                                                               
themselves in  similarly unfortunate circumstances and  urged the                                                               
committee to put brakes on the progression of SB 171.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
3:49:09 PM                                                                                                                    
DAVID EGELSTON, representing self,  Thorne Bay, Alaska, testified                                                               
in support of SB  171. He said he spent over  thirty years in law                                                               
enforcement,  primarily  enforcing  state and  federal  laws  and                                                               
regulations   surrounding  fish,   wildlife,  and   environmental                                                               
statutes. He opined that fish  and wildlife should be prioritized                                                               
for  feeding residents  before they  are  shared with  outsiders.                                                               
Non-residents are allowed to partake  and harvest resources, they                                                               
should follow regulations, respect  Alaska's ways when harvesting                                                               
resources, and pay for the privilege  as they do in other states.                                                               
This  bill would  not  change the  residency  status for  current                                                               
Alaskans,  who can  retire and  temporarily leave  the state  but                                                               
would remain  residents as long  as PFD requirements are  met. He                                                               
expressed  concerns   about  vacationing   residents  potentially                                                               
abusing  the  system  and   stealing  resources.  He  highlighted                                                               
examples  including the  potential for  non-residents to  falsify                                                               
residency  to obtain  more  salmon than  legally  allowed in  the                                                               
state. These individuals have an  advantage in obtaining big game                                                               
and often  take advantage of systems  harvesting those resources.                                                               
The financial cost  to Alaska Department of Fish  and Game (ADFG)                                                               
amounts  to hundreds  of thousands  of dollars  per year.  SB 171                                                               
would  impose  no  costs  on  the state  but  would  bring  in  a                                                               
significant amount  of revenue for state  resources. He suggested                                                               
that residency requirements should  be clear. While non-residents                                                               
cannot  be  forced  to  act   ethically,  those  who  unethically                                                               
navigate  the  system could  be  held  responsible through  legal                                                               
action.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:51:36 PM                                                                                                                    
ELLEN  HANNAN, representing  self,  Craig,  Alaska, testified  in                                                               
support of  SB 171.  She said  she has  been following  the House                                                               
version  of SB  171 and  noted that  the Senate  version includes                                                               
provisions for permanent licensing.  She referenced the potential                                                               
savings outlined under  SB 171, which would benefit  the state by                                                               
improving   law  enforcement   capabilities  and   assisting  new                                                               
residents  in  obtaining  federally  qualified  user  status  for                                                               
subsistence benefits.  Clarifying residency  requirements through                                                               
the PFD is long overdue.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:52:48 PM                                                                                                                    
KEN VORISEK,  representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska,  testified in                                                               
opposition  to SB  171. He  said residency  in Alaska  is clearly                                                               
defined  in  statute, which  requires  one's  intent to  maintain                                                               
residency in  the state, to attempt  to return, and to  not claim                                                               
residency  benefits  in any  other  state.  SB 171  recategorizes                                                               
residency in  a hierarchy format  by placing additional  terms on                                                               
the state residency  law and requires an individual  to remain in                                                               
the state for a certain amount  of days before accessing fish and                                                               
game resources. The bill only  adds additional terms to bona fide                                                               
residents  like himself,  whose  retirement plans  depend on  the                                                               
ability to access  these resources. He noted that  he spends time                                                               
hunting in other states. SB 171  is a commercial grab on Alaska's                                                               
resources and  implies that residents  do not have  equal access.                                                               
All  residents  should  be  treated  equally  as  long  as  legal                                                               
residency  requirements are  met.  He raised  concerns about  the                                                               
potential  for   enforcement  challenges  under  SB   171,  where                                                               
individuals  might qualify  for  the PFD  but  face obstacles  in                                                               
meeting hunting  license prerequisites,  or vice versa.  He urged                                                               
the committee to prevent this bill from progressing.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
3:56:27 PM                                                                                                                    
CO-CHAIR BISHOP closed public testimony.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CO-CHAIR BISHOP held SB 171 in committee.