03/26/1993 08:00 AM House RES

  HB 140:  FEES FOR NONRESIDENT KING SALMON TAG                                
                                                                               
  VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON, PRIME SPONSOR OF HB 140, referred the                  
  members of the committee to the sponsor statement and                        
  sectional analysis in their packets.  (A copy of the sponsor                 
  statement and sectional analysis may be found in the House                   
  Resources Committee Room, Capitol Room 124, and after the                    
  adjournment of the second session of the 18th Alaska State                   
  Legislature, in the Legislative Reference Library.)  Also                    
  contained in the packets were a series of amendments offered                 
  by the ADF&G.  Those amendments, he explained, had been                      
  incorporated into the bill in the Fisheries' CS.                             
                                                                               
  VICE CHAIR HUDSON said that in the fiscal note the increased                 
  cost to effect the bill is $10.9 thousand, while the                         
  revenues generated would be $81.6 thousand.  The revenues                    
  would come from fees to non-residents, he said, and would go                 
  toward enhancing sport fishing.                                              
                                                                               
  Number 338                                                                   
                                                                               
  VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON also referred to a predicted sales                      
  sheet in the members' packets.  (A copy of the predicted                     
  sales sheet may be found in the House Resources Committee                    
  Room, Capitol Room 124, and after the adjournment of the                     
  second session of the 18th Alaska State Legislature, in the                  
  Legislative Reference Library.)  That sheet, he explained,                   
  predicted how many non-residents in 1994 would have fishing                  
  licenses for the periods of one year, 6.8 thousand; 14-days,                 
  22.9 thousand; three-days; and one-day.  It also showed                      
  estimates for military fishing licenses and sport hunting                    
  licenses and tags.                                                           
                                                                               
  VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON commented on suggestions made by the                    
  guided charter fishing industry, in response to a $20 non-                   
  resident chinook tag fee initiated last year.  That fee did                  
  not take into account the length of time the non-resident                    
  would spend fishing, so that someone off a cruise ship                       
  spending an afternoon fishing a charter would be charged the                 
  same fee as someone spending two weeks fishing every day.                    
  This was on top of the non-resident fishing license and the                  
  amount the non-resident might spend on a chartered fishing                   
  trip.  It was seen as unreasonable and hence the graduated                   
  fee schedule proposed in HB 140, he explained.                               
                                                                               
  VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON told the committee that the ADF&G had                   
  worked closely on the legislation, and he stressed that HB
 carries a positive fiscal impact.  He suggested it would                 
  encourage more people to fish in Alaska and generate                         
  increased tourism revenues.                                                  
                                                                               
  Number 408                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES had no problem with the concept in HB
.  He asked why the word "anadromous" had been added to                   
  the language regarding king salmon.                                          
                                                                               
  VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON explained that in many places where                     
  there are planted king salmon, such as Twin Lakes in Juneau,                 
  he did not want to force people to pay the fee as they would                 
  for native salmon stocks.                                                    
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked whether the $70,000 in the                       
  fiscal note was predicated on the $5 or $10 fee.  He also                    
  asked why in the Fisheries' CS, the bottom-end fee had been                  
  changed from $5 to $10.                                                      
                                                                               
  VICE CHAIRMAN HUDSON explained the fiscal note was based on                  
  a $10 fee.  He said that projections showed that the $5 fee                  
  would be revenue-neutral, and so it was increased to $10 to                  
  generate revenues.                                                           
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES remarked that he was not comfortable                   
  with establishing the fees in statute.  He would prefer                      
  setting the graduated fee concept in statute and having the                  
  actual amount be set by the department.                                      
                                                                               
  Number 434                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE referred to his work with the tourism                   
  industry, and noted the concerns he had about adding a $20                   
  fee to the already high cost of a guide.  He supported the                   
  bill, and MOVED to adopt CSHB 140 (FSH) and the fiscal note.                 
  CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections to                      
  adopting CSHB 140 (FSH).  There were none and the MOTION                     
  PASSED.                                                                      
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN reiterated Representative Davies'                 
  concerns about setting the fees in statute.                                  
                                                                               
  Number 448                                                                   
                                                                               
  REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE MOVED to pass CSHB 140 (FSH) and                        
  accompanying fiscal note from committee with individual                      
  recommendations.  He asked unanimous consent.                                
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS asked if there were any objections.                        
  Hearing none, the MOTION PASSED.                                             
                                                                               
  CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS referred to the next item for the                          
  committee's consideration, HCR 9.