Legislature(1997 - 1998)
04/09/1997 05:02 PM House FSH
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 96 - BDS OF FISHERIES AND GAME QUALIFICATIONS Number 1276 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN called the meeting back to order at 6:24 and announced the next order of business to be HB 96, "An Act relating to appointments to the Board of Fisheries or the Board of Game." He asked Representative Al Vezey to introduce the bill. Number 1303 REPRESENTATIVE AL VEZEY stated that the bill is intended to do something positive on the issue of subsistence. The issue of subsistence is one of the biggest issues and problems facing Alaska. The bill recognizes that we are going to provide for the subsistence needs for all of Alaska's citizens and we have to manage our fish and game resources on a sustained yield basis, towards the needs of consumptive users. He stated that if we are not willing to manage our fish and game resources for consumptive users than we are saying that it is not our policy to recognize subsistence as one of our top priorities. The intent of the bill is to do something positive about subsistence at the state level. Number 1392 NICK SZABO, testified via teleconference from Kodiak, that he served on the Board of Fisheries for seven years. He stated that he supports the concept of the bill but some of the conflicts that arise with the present board is that sometimes members only have a limited experience in a relatively specific areas of interest. He stated that the best situation is not to have seven specialists but to have seven people with broad experience for many years in several area of interest to the board. He stated serving on the local advisory committee is an excellent way to achieve knowledge and experience in the issues which the board deals with, but using this as the only qualification may exclude some potential candidates that are otherwise just as qualified. He stated a point system may want to be considered with a minimum number of points necessary to qualify for a seat on the board. Points would be gained for each year on a local fish and game advisory committee, for residency in the state, for years as a sport fishing or commercial fishing license holder, for years in sport fish guiding, for sport fish area experience, for each commercial fishery involved in, for each commercial fishing area, for fish processing or tendering, for years in fish and game research and management and points for years as a fishing industry representative. He stated that he thinks the concept is great but there needs to be some qualifications in place to have a seat on the board. Number 1580 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN asked if he could send a copy of his testimony to him so he could forward it on the next committee of referral. Number 1600 MR. SZABO replied that he would. Number 1604 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY stated that he would research the category of a licensed fish processor because that is a category of experience in consumptive use that he had not thought of and would like to look into it. He also stated he would look into licensed charter boat operators. Number 1653 NANCY MICHAELSON, testified via teleconference from Matsu, strongly opposed to the bill. She stated that the requirement to have all members of the Board of Game and Board of Fisheries to have held hunting and trapping licenses and/or fishing licenses for five of the last seven years, will not provide good boards in the state. The job of the Board of Game, as stated in this bill, is to manage the wildlife and its use by hunters and trappers, it is important and good to have hunters on the board, but it is important and good to have knowledgeable people who are informed about the management of Alaska's game on the board. She stated that Section 2, paragraph b, states that the purposes are the conservation and the development of game resources. She stated that the new underlined text in line 13, that says "each member on the basis of interest in resource issues, support of the sustained yield principle, good judgement, knowledge of the game resources of the state". She stated that following this will provide a wise board. Number 1748 MS. MICHAELSON stated that Section 1, lines 13 through 14, the appointed members must have held an Alaska fishing license during each of the five years, could create the situation that just because someone could get a fishing license it does not mean that they would understand all the intricacies of the management that is needed for fisheries in Alaska. She questioned if a disability or growing old, eliminates knowledge and experiences. She felt that the bill is discriminatory toward women, the elderly and the disabled. She stated the bill is not fair legislation as written and urged the deletion of Section 1 lines 12 through 14 and Section 2, lines 17 through 18, or oppose the bill if it goes on as written. She would like the bill to be passed in a way that would constitute boards which will fulfill their duties to the utmost while more fairly representing all Alaskans, with members who are highly knowledgeable and informed about Alaskan wildlife, whether they have fishing, hunting, or trapping licenses or not. She stated that in order for the resources to remain healthy, having people who are knowledgeable about the management is just as important as having something in their wallet. Number 1903 MARTHA LEVENSALER, testified via teleconference from Anchorage, referred to Section (b) of the bill and stated that having a hunting or trapping license during each of the five years immediately proceeding appointment to the board is not the best requirement for a board member. Having people that are knowledgeable about wildlife and game management is a far broader and more important requirement and does not know if having a hunting and trapping license ensures that. She stated that she finds this section to be discriminatory against women in that more than 85 percent of Alaskans do not hold hunting and trapping licenses and women hold 6 percent of the licenses and make up 48 percent of the population. She stated that women have strong interest and management experience in game issues. She felt that this bill goes against the constitution which states that fish, wildlife, and waters are reserved for the people for common use and that the laws and regulations governing the use or disposal of natural resources shall apply equally to all persons. She stated that by restricting membership to both of these boards by people who hold licenses goes against what is written in the constitution. Number 2065 NANCY HILLSTRAND, testified via teleconference from Homer, that she really liked Mr. Szabo's idea of a point system. She stated that she has been very active in both fishing and wildlife issues. She owns three fishing vessels, her husband has fished for 40 years, her five sons are all in the fishing industry, and have all trapped and hunted. She has been the secretary of the Homer Advisory Committee for nine years but yet she does not have a hunting or fishing license so this would eliminate her. She stated that they own a seafood processing plant and have a mail order retail seafood business, but with all this experience she still not would be able to be on the boards. She stated that the bill does not notice people who have devoted their lives to fishing and hunting issues. She felt that a point system that emphasizes information that people have gathered throughout their life time, will give a broader and more diverse board than just one that is directed towards one idealogy. She stated that being on the Homer Advisory Board, the men on it knew how to pull a trigger but when it came to habitat issues, genetics, or any of the important issues providing for the sustained yield principle, they did not have a good enough background to be on the board. She hoped that the committee would rethink and amend the bill and would like to see a point system. Number 2293 MS. HILLSTRAND stated that she has worked on legislation in the last eight years to try and form a conservation tag and hoped that maybe some legislation would be introduced so that people that do not use the resource consumptively could have a place to put their money. Number 2380 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN asked how long did she say she served on the advisory board. MS. HILLSTRAND replied that she had been on the board as secretary for nine years. Number 2398 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN thanked her for her service to the state and stated that a secretary of anything is a big service to people. TAPE 97-18, SIDE A Number 006 SUZANNE PESCHIER, Volunteer, Alaska Environmental Lobby, stated that the resource provides exceptional opportunities for hunting, trapping, photography, research and recreation as well as income to businesses that are related to these activities. She stated that since Alaska's wildlife is so important to all these diverse interest groups both economically and aesthetically. All these interests should be allowed representation on the Board of Game, the bill would prevent this from happening because it discriminates against a large segment of Alaska's population. The intent of the bill is to have a board that only represents consumptive users. She stated that more than 80 percent of all Alaskans do not have hunting or trapping licenses and would not qualify to serve on the board. She stated only 5 percent of Alaskan women have licenses even though they make up 48 percent of the population. She stated that the bill contradicts the original wording of the statute, which states that "Board members shall be appointed with the view to providing diversity of interest and points of view in the membership." It also ignores Article 8, Section 3 of the constitution, which states "Wildlife shall be managed for the common use of all Alaskans." She stated that if the intent of the bill is to put the authority to manage Alaska's wildlife in the hands of hunters and trappers because they contribute the most money to the budget of the Division of Wildlife Conservation, it would be more constructive to seek common ground between different interests rather than passing such a devisive bill. She stated that the Division reserves all its funds from two sources, dedicated funds from hunting and trapping licenses and the other source, which contributes over 50 percent of the money, is the federal excise tax on ammunition and firearms. She stated that under the Federal Aid and Wildlife Restoration Act, all firearms and ammunition are taxed, not just those for hunting purposes, therefor there is money that comes from sources other than hunters. For instance, a kayaker, a musher or a photographer who carries a weapon for protection would be contributing. She stated it does seem plausible to increase the funds that other interest groups pay into wildlife management and give them the voice that they seem so eager to have. There is a history of conservation groups seeking to create such a program but has not had the support of the legislature. She stated that there is a federal proposal that is being drafted called teaming with wildlife, which has the endorsement of the Governor and a variety of hunting, fishing and recreational organizations in Alaska. This program would raise a substantial amount money which would be contributed to wildlife management. She stated that by allowing the consumptive and non- consumptive users to sit at the management table, would give the Board of Game the balance that the public is seeking. Number 368 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game, stated that the department does not support the bill. He referred to the history of Alaska, particularly the relationship between the citizens of Alaska and the federal government during territorial days. Alaskans felt that their natural resources were dominated by certain special interest groups especially the out of state canners which propelled statehood. As a result in the state constitution and in the statutes that establish the board system, the people of Alaska provided for the most open, most participatory fish and game decision making process possible, so that all citizens could participate in this process. Mr. Bruce stated that although he understood Representative Vezey's thinking it is a departure from the historic philosophy that has guided Alaska up to this point. He stated that the present system has served the state well, there is abundant fish and wildlife, as well as abundant opportunities to hunt and fish with strong economies based around wildlife guided hunting, viewing, sport fishing and commercial fishing. He stated that the subsistence issue is a dilemma facing the state but it is his understanding that the boards can not solve the subsistence problem, it is a basic conflict between federal law, state constitution and state law. He stated that changing the representation on the board to solely consumptive users will not result in any change in the subsistence dilemma. Number 666 MR. BRUCE stated that even if consumptive use is the priority use of the state, it would be a leap to say that the only people that should be able to make decisions about these resources are consumptive users. Other users need to be respective and be allowed to participate in the process. He stated that they should not be excluded from the process. Number 725 MR. BRUCE stated that catch and release fisherman even though they do not consume the resource should have a seat at the table. He stated that anybody can get a hunting or fishing license and it does not give a measure of qualification. He stated that participation in the local advisory committees is a good measure of commitment to being involved in the issues and does give a good indication but there are other ways to get the experience. He stated that a lot of people would be excluded from the board if they had to participate on an advisory committee, because although they may attend the meetings most of them are not on the board. He stated that it would be equivalent to saying that in order to serve on the legislature one would have had to serve on a city council or borough assembly. Number 914 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY stated that he agreed with a lot that was said but he disagrees with the fact that he does think the subsistence problem in Alaska can be addressed. He stated that he does not see how the subsistence issue can be addressed with out recognizing that consumptive uses are the highest priority. He stated that if consumptive uses are not the highest priority for Alaska's fish and game resources than subsistence isn't the highest priority in the state either. Number 972 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS stated that on line 13, page 1, if they must be a resident and have held fishing license for five years that would indicate that would had to lived in the state for five years. He wondered if there was a better way of portraying that and felt that he wouldn't hold the bill in this committee if he was assured that there would be some changes made in the next committee. Number 1032 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY replied that he would be very interested in hearing from one of the testifiers in Kodiak who made some interesting comments. He stated that they may have been some licenses that they have inadvertently not included. He stated that he is not sure about the point system but would be willing to look at it. He stated that the bill recognizes the existing standard that the governor appoints and the legislature confirms. He stated that the bill states that "The appointed members must be residents of the state." He believed that would require one year residency. He stated that it probably could be argued legally that it was only 30 days but his interpretation would be that it would require one year of residency. He stated that in the case of Section 1, they would have to have five years of holding an Alaskan fishing license. He stated that nonresident licenses are not excluded from that category. He found it difficult to believe that the Governor would appoint a nonresident or that the Legislature would confirm a non resident but there may be a case where they would. Number 1117 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS made a motion to move HB 96, 0-LS0398, Version E, with individual recommendations and the attached fiscal note. Number 1135 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN objected to make a statement. He stated that while there is some credibility to the bill, he shares some of the concerns that were expressed. He stated that by moving the bill forward to the House Resources Standing Committee, some of the issues can be discussed, and he would be looking at the amendments that result. He stated that he is not sold that he would vote for this bill on the Floor but it should move forward in the system and have more discussions at other committees. Number 1181 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN withdrew his objection. Number 1187 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY stated that he would have no objection to the committee working on the bill. Number 1216 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN replied that although it has a direct impact on the fisheries and the Board of Fish, it also has the impact on the game and Board of Game, and it would be natural for the House Resources Standing Committee to spend some time on this bill. Number 1245 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN asked if there were any further objections. Hearing none HB 96, 0-LS0398 was moved out of the House Special Committee on Fisheries.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|