Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/19/1998 01:15 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 364 - GUIDES FOR NONRESIDENT MOOSE HUNTERS CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN announced the first order of business was House Bill Number 364, "An Act requiring nonresident hunters to be accompanied when hunting moose; and providing for an effective date." CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN called on Representative Ivan M. Ivan, sponsor of the bill. Number 0085 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN M. IVAN, Alaska State Legislature, explained there is a proposed committee substitute, version 0-LS1455\B, Utermohle, 3/19/98. The proposal was brought forward because moose is considered a main food supply and a lot of his constituents are concerned with how it has been taken care of. There are three major changes in the proposed committee substitute. The first change requires transporters to contact their clients at least once every three days while the clients are in the field - Section 1. The transporter must take the game out of the field before waste or spoilage can occur. The second change adds the failure of a transporter to knowingly not comply with Section 1 as an unlawful act - Section 2. Sections 3 and 4 add the penalties. The third change requires a nonresident to complete a moose hunting orientation course offered by the Department of Fish and Game before obtaining a moose tag, unless the nonresident shows proof that the hunt will be conducted by a guide. The course is not mandatory for resident hunters. The proposed committee substitute deletes the earlier provisions requiring a nonresident to be accompanied by a guide. The proposed committee substitute is a step towards getting the wanton waste of moose meat under control. Number 0398 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked Representative Ivan whether he has contacted the transporter industry and are they aware of the changes. Number 0420 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN replied they have not been contacted. Number 0433 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked whether the bill was patterned after the guiding laws that require contact every three days. Number 0450 TOM WRIGHT, Legislative Assistant to Representative Ivan M. Ivan, Alaska State Legislature, stated after talking with George Utermohle, bill drafter; and Eddie Grasser, Legislative Assistant to Representative Beverly Masek, the big concern is transporters leaving clients in the field for a long period of time. If a moose is killed on the first day there is a chance of wanton waste. Three days, therefore, would give sufficient time to prevent the meat from going to waste. Number 0522 CO-CHAIRMAN BILL HUDSON noted that the fiscal note does not relate to the most recent version of the bill. MR. WRIGHT replied, "Correct." CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked Mr. Wright whether he has talked to the department in regards to the fiscal note. MR. WRIGHT replied yes, after talking with the department, the fiscal note will change substantially. MR. WRIGHT further stated, at the last hearing, there was discussion about the legality of requiring nonresidents to be guided on a moose hunt. According to Mr. Utermohle, there is a strong legal argument for conservation purposes. Wyoming is the only other western state that requires a guided hunt for certain species. Wyoming requires guides for nonresident hunters in specific areas of the state for the purposes of proper game management, protection of hunter welfare and safety, or better enforcement of fish and game laws. Number 0753 REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN made a motion to adopt the proposed committee substitute for HB 364, version 0-LS1455\B, Utermohle, 3/19/98. There being no objection, it was so adopted. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN announced he is concerned because the proposed committee substitute is a major departure from the original bill. Number 0810 ROD ARNO, President, Alaska Outdoor Council (AOC), testified in Juneau. He has also been a guide in Alaska for 33 years. It looks like the concerns of the AOC have been adequately addressed in the work draft. If there was adequate enforcement in the field, wanton waste would not be a problem. There are plenty of laws on the books. Adding transporters and making them responsible for wanton waste will help alleviate a lot of the problems. "As far as the lost revenue to the state, I would say that's something that in the long-term will be overcome because what we'll be doing with nonresident hunters is then the state of Alaska will be able to retail this wildlife resource instead of getting it to where we can just increase numbers of nonresident which causes allocation problems. And that in the foreseeable future with the fact that nonresident hunters haven't increased in the last 22 years, and today one-third of the nonresident hunters are guided, that if this helps out the guide outfitter industry, and if it does help out the air taxis to not loose any more ground to control use areas it will be in everyone's best interest." Number 0990 REPRESENTATIVE RAMONA BARNES asked whether the new language would exclude a cousin from taking her hunting as is allowed for the other guided species. Number 1049 MR. WRIGHT stated he does not believe so. He would look into it further. CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked Mr. Wright to explain the changes in the bill. Number 1167 MR. WRIGHT explained Section 1 would require transporters to contact clients at least once every three days while the clients are in the field and would have to take the meat out of the field before waste or spoilage could occur. MR. WRIGHT explained Section 2 would add the failure of a transporter to knowingly not comply with Section 1 as an unlawful act under AS 08.54.720. MR. WRIGHT explained Sections 3 and 4 would incorporate penalties for the failure to comply. MR. WRIGHT explained Section 5 would add a new paragraph to AS 16.05.050, "Power and duties of commissioner." MR. WRIGHT explained Section 6 would require a nonresident to complete a moose hunting orientation course offered by the Department of Fish and Game before obtaining a moose tag, unless the nonresident shows proof that the hunt will be conducted by a guide. MR. WRIGHT stated, in reference to Representative Barnes' question, it would require all kindred to go through the course. MR. WRIGHT explained the next change would delete the provisions to require a nonresident to be accompanied by a guide for a moose hunt. "There were numerous objections by the department as you can read in the fiscal note, and that we're trying to come up with something that's more fiscally conservative. Something that will hopefully be a step in the direction to reduce wanton waste in the field albeit put some responsibility on those who are doing the transporting to make them somewhat responsible for actions, for failure to comply, for failure to get meat out, so on and so forth." Number 1300 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES stated she would not have voted the bill out of the committee the way it was. She wondered whether it would affect the section in statute that allows a resident to take a nonresident relative up to the second degree of kindred hunting. REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE JOULE wondered whether he could take his nephew from Oklahoma hunting, or would he be required to take the course. Number 1382 MR. WRIGHT replied it his understanding that Representative Joule's cousin would be required to take the course. He would concur with Legislative Legal Services to make sure, however. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN called on Geron Bruce from the Department of Fish and Game to answer the questions. Number 1400 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game, stated the section in statute that Representative Barnes is referring to allows a nonresident relative to hunt for species that would normally require a big game guide. The bill would change a separate part of the statute, but it is confusing and ambiguous so he cannot answer the question definitely. It is something that should be cleaned up. Number 1435 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated it seems the way it is written that a nonresident cannot hunt for moose unless accompanied by a guide. The same latitude should be given to nonresident hunters that is given to nonresidents who hunt for the other species. Number 1466 REPRESENTATIVE JOULE stated he does a lot of hunting just like everybody else in the room. He chooses not to get a guiding license, but that does not make him any less capable of being able to take a close relative hunting. MR. WRIGHT stated he would be glad to address the issue. Number 1497 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered, if his brother-n-law's friend came to hunt, would the friend have to take the course. What if he lived in a remote area and the plan was to go hunting immediately upon his arrival? he asked. Number 1525 MR. WRIGHT stated everybody who comes to the state normally goes through Anchorage or Fairbanks. He might have to plan his trip a day earlier to take the course. Another day is not going to make that much difference. Number 1544 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated, if nonresidents are required to be accompanied by a guide, why make them go through a course. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN replied a nonresident doesn't have to go through the course if accompanied by a guide. Number 1560 MR. WRIGHT stated the guide is responsible for a client's actions out in the field. If a client shoots a sub-legal animal, the guide is apt to lose his license and not be able to participate as a guide for a number of years. Number 1604 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated a friend can't go hunting unaccompanied for sheep, bear or goat now. Number 1630 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES wondered about a friend coming from the Lower Forty-Eight and trying to catch a tight connection to Kotzebue, for example. It would mean that he would have to stay over night in a hotel to take the orientation course and catch the plane the next day. It seems like it would be a hardship for people coming to the state to hunt. Number 1675 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated it is a good point. Number 1680 MR. ARNO stated, in reference to Representative Barnes' question, the language on page 5, line 23, "or", would not change the nonresident hunting big game section in statute. The second degree of kindred remains in place. Number 1710 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES replied she understands that it remains in place, but the bill does not reference second degree of kindred. Number 1744 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated there are some technical problems with the bill. Number 1772 MR. WRIGHT wondered, for clarification, whether the provision on second degree of kindred for brown bear, sheep, and goat needs to be put in place. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN replied, "Correct." MR. WRIGHT stated that is not a problem. Number 1808 GILBERT HUNTINGTON testified via teleconference in Galena. It is right to add moose to the big game regulations on brown bear, sheep and goat. It will put more meat on the table for folks in rural Alaska and clean up a lot of the headaches. The state might lose some money in the short run, but money will be made in the guiding industry. More than anything else, this bill will help the subsistence issue because everybody eats moose as their main meat for the whole year. It will be easier for rural residents, and better for the state in general. Number 1918 TED KRIEG, Bristol Bay Native Association (BBNA), testified via teleconference in Dillingham. The main thing the bill will help accomplish is the wanton waste issue, something the villages have been talking about for many, many years. The BBNA supports the bill 100 percent. The meat doesn't seem to be a concern of hunters in King Salmon and Dillingham. He has seen bags of meat dropped off at the airport expecting somebody to pick them up. It is not right. He is seeing more and more unguided hunters dropped off by air taxis. It seems almost unregulated. It doesn't seem unreasonable at all to have a guide be responsible and to make sure that these people aren't getting an animal too big to handle. In addition, a lot of times commercial air taxis drop people off in customary and traditional hunting areas and squeeze out the local subsistence hunters. The main point is to stop wanton waste. Number 2045 VIRGIL UMPHENOUR testified via teleconference in Fairbanks. He is a registered hunting guide and a member of the Board of Fisheries. As a member of the board, he hears concerns in the rural areas of unregulated competition with the subsistence users in their backyards for both fish and game. The bill is taking a step in the right direction. It makes the transporters, air taxis, and sport fish lodge owners, which act as air taxis and transporters, responsible for the actions of their clients. He also owns a fish and meat processing plant in Fairbanks, and has seen bags of meat brought to him full of maggots, but no law was violated. As a registered guide, he hunts in game management units 21D and 24. Last year, there were 108 nonresident hunters in unit 21D and only 2 were his clients yet there were 75 moose taken. There is a lot of illegal guiding. If a guide is smart, the majority of his assistant guides would be from villages, in order that the meat is distributed for subsistence purposes. The Board of Fisheries closed sport fishing for rainbow trout on the Kanektok River - what used to be the premium rainbow trout fishing river in the world - in November because of the unregulated amount of people being dropped off. The state needs a board to regulate all guides that affect the wildlife - fishing, hunting, and photography. Number 2216 PETER SHEPHERD testified via teleconference in Fairbanks. He is a graduate wildlife biologist, big game guide, and trapper with nearly 47 years of experience. The bill should address several symptoms of a resource conservation problem resulting from political, social and management actions over several decades - a subsistence priority, the deregulation of the air taxi industry, and a hands-off wildlife management philosophy. The solutions to the problems are difficult and may antagonize many interest groups, but in order to maximize economic, recreational, and subsistence values they need immediate attention. Many guides are genuinely concerned about wildlife conservation, resource-use conflicts, impacts on land use, meat salvage, and regulatory double standards. Conversely, the Department of Fish and Game's position paper downplays the waste issue, threatens revenue loss, fears a legal challenge of the entire resident guide requirement law, and ignores the growing possibility of a conservation problem. Wanton waste to any degree should not be acceptable. The department's point that wanton waste is not specific to nonresident hunters is accurate, but fails to recognize that most - 75 percent - are unaccompanied, drop-off clients with no experience in packing, handling, or preserving large amounts of game meat. The department is also patently incorrect when it says the nonresident guide requirement for brown bear, grizzly bear, Dall sheep, and mountain goats is based on safety. Title 16 mandates that the legislature must determine the requirement is for conservation first then safety. Under the department's viewpoint, it may not be long before someone challenges the guide requirement law. The department may not consider a 50-inch-moose-antler requirement difficult to judge for nonresidents when the areas where the antler requirement affects residents, there seems to be a problem with undersize and illegal moose kills. One area is the Kenai Peninsula. Hunters are overly concentrated in game management units where moose are still relatively abundant - Units 19, 21, and 17. Nonresident moose hunters are being dropped off in the few areas accessible to village hunters directly competing with local residents. Bull moose populations and the lack of hunting opportunities facing urban areas has led to increased expansion of game management units which eventually will not be capable of sustaining the increased hunting pressure without active game management. The greatest change in the big game hunting industry has been the proliferation of transporter operators with virtually no regulatory restraints. In particular, drop-camp operators are not required to count for salvage of meat, camping fees, and field mileage for nonresident hunters. Personally, he has all the moose and other hunts that he can handle. He has to turn away clients every year. Many of his clients first hunted in Alaska with a drop-camp experience and found it unsatisfactory. He spends up to $25,000 per year on air charters, seat fares, freight haul, super cub time, and meat dispersement to two different villages. His clients contribute another $20,000 on seat fares, charters, meat hauls, and antler transports. Combined expenditures paid to air taxi services amount to about what a drop-hunt costs. A conversion to guided hunts would, therefore, not cost too many undue losses to the transporters. In conclusion, moose are a highly valued resource... TAPE 98-35, SIDE B Number 0000 MR. SHEPHERD continued. Moose are a highly valued resource with virtually no active management. This leads only a small segment of many remote moose populations available for harvest. Under these conditions, nonresident participation should be cautiously limited and even more so as urban and rural residents' demands increase for game. Number 0032 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES stated most people know that she has been here a long-time. She has sat through more guide and air taxi discussions than she can remember. "But I do know that when it was stated that the department's position on moose was their position that...that is absolutely not correct. It is the position of this legislature and has been for the last 20 years. And the reason being, is because of just exactly the reason why we have classified certain animals under the big game guide statute. We had to be very careful when we did that because of the Interstate Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution allowing people to go between the states and to be able to access game between the states and not to require a guide for those species that were not dangerous to take. And it has always been stated that moose did not fall within that category. Now, don't think that it is a position of the department rather than it has been the position of this legislature ever since I have been here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman." Number 0110 JOE WANT testified via teleconference in Fairbanks. He has been working in guide camps since 1958. He got his assistant guide license in 1962 and has been a registered guide since 1964. In reference to requiring a guide for hunting moose, he had serious concerns even though he is in the industry. He strongly supports the amended version of the bill, especially if second degree of kindred is included. The bottom-issue is the use of the resource - the value of the animal for its meat. In general, the meat from these animals is not being used to the level that is should be. He suggested a mechanism to make it more profitable to salvage the meat than to leave it in the field. Under the current system and given the cost of transportation, it is cheaper to leave the meat than it is to pay for the extra charter. He suggested charging $1,400 for a nonresident moose tag, and once the individual has demonstrated that the meat has been salvaged, he receives a refund of $1,000. The $1,000 would make it more feasible to spend $500 on the extra cost of a charter than to leave it in the field. Number 0276 GABE SAM, Director of Wildlife and Parks, Tanana Chiefs Conference, Incorporated (TCC), testified via teleconference in Fairbanks. The TCC supports HB 364 for subsistence purposes. There are too many hunters out there and the nonresident hunters don't know where they are and shoot anything they see, especially near the Koyukuk River. They also don't know how to take care of the meat so there is a lot of wanton waste. There are a lot of subsistence fish camps on the Koyukuk River and the nonresident hunters take things from the camps without asking. They vandalize and trash them as well. There are hunters being dropped off in control use areas. There is no proof right now, but there are plans to place video cameras in certain areas to take pictures of these events. Number 0414 HERMAN MORGAN testified via teleconference in Stoney River. The purpose of the bill is being gutted by taking out the guide requirement. The guides advertize on the Internet so it will be even worse next year. He is surprised that the animal rights activists are not involved. Rural Alaska is not trying to stop moose hunting, but asking the legislature to do something about the problem of wanton waste. "You guys say listen to us, but you know, I hope, by leaving the guided thing on there you are listening to us." Number 0506 MR. BRUCE stated Wayne Regelin and Ken Taylor are unavailable right now, but they have been talking with the sponsor, and the changes made are responsive to the concerns of the department. In reference to the issue of the inconvenience of the hunting orientation course, the department thinks that modern technology such as the Internet can be used to try to minimize the inconvenience. Number 0550 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated the department currently has a video that it produced on judging an illegal animal. He asked Mr. Bruce whether there could be something like that on the Internet to brief people before coming to the state. He asked Mr. Bruce how the department visualizes the problem of a hunter coming to the state and immediately flying to Kotzebue on short notice. Number 0604 MR. BRUCE replied ideally with an advance notice the test could be administered over the Internet or in written form. The details will have to be worked out. The department is willing to work to try to minimize the issue of inconvenience. "Yes, there are lots of things you can do with technology, but there still are going to be some people who probably are going to fall through the cracks and it is going to be inconvenient for them." The department would do its best to minimize that, however. Number 0647 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES wondered about accessing a pay-per-view video in the airport or something along those lines. MR. BRUCE replied technology like a kiosk is available, but there would be costs associated with it. Number 0684 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES stated there almost needs to be a delayed effective date to allow the department to put something like that into place in the airports. "You know most--even all the rural airports, for example, have a place where you can go in and use whatever technology is available to you and usually pay a small fee for it. That ought to be someway to cover your costs." MR. BRUCE replied it could be worked out. "It's possible that when this started up there might be a little rougher beginning than as we got more experienced with it and...and improved our ability to deliver the kind of services your talking about." Number 0727 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated just about everyone that comes to Alaska goes through Seattle. Of course, there would be a capital request to put a kiosk in place. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated, currently, to qualify for bow hunting in certain areas the private sector provides courses. It is turning into a regular cottage industry in some areas. There are one or two archery businesses in the Mat-Su Valley. His biggest reservation about the bill is the problem of how to accommodate out-of-state hunters. MR. BRUCE replied the department is willing to try and make it work. There will be some rough spots in the beginning, but there are benefits to be gained by it. The Internet is a rapidly expanding tool and the department's web page gets a lot of hits. Number 0864 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN called on Representative Ivan and stated there has been quite a bit of discussion on relatives hunting with residents. Number 0911 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN stated, if further work needs to be done on the bill, he can work with Legislative Legal Services. MR. WRIGHT stated Representative Ivan has not had a chance to look over the conceptual amendment that has been written. It reads as follows: Page 5, line 25, after "under As 08.54." Insert "or personally accompanied by a resident over 19 years of age who is (A) the spouse of the nonresident; or (B) related to the nonresident, within and including the second degree of kindred, by marriage or blood." CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked if there is any discussion on the conceptual amendment. It looks like it will do what the committee members have been discussing. Number 0951 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a motion to adopt the conceptual amendment with the caveat that the rest of the bill is cleaned up by the drafter. There being no objection, it was so adopted. Number 0987 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES asked Co-Chairman Ogan whether the issue of how people view the movie will be addressed in the bill, or will it just pass out of the committee like it is. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated the department has indicated it is willing to work on it. REPRESENTATIVE BARNES stated she is concerned about someone coming to the state to hunt before it has been worked on. Number 1049 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked Representative Barnes whether she is suggesting language to achieve that. Number 1056 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES replied she really doesn't know how to achieve that. She will not object to moving the bill out as it is, but will trot along behind it to see that it gets fixed somewhere along the way. Number 1077 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON stated it is an important area, but not important enough to slow the bill down. It is a new concept and nobody really knows how it will work, including the department. He suggested getting something in writing from the department to get an idea and understanding of how it will be implemented. Number 1112 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES stated she would like something to delay the effective date to give the department a chance to work it through and for a fail-safe. Number 1134 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON made a motion and asked unanimous consent to move the proposed committee substitute for HB 364, as amended, version 0-LS1455\B, Utermohle, 3/19/98, from the committee with individual recommendations and the attached fiscal note(s). There being no objection, CSHB 364(RES) was so moved from the House Resources Standing Committee. CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON noted for the record that the attached fiscal note is for the original version of the bill. A new one should be requested from the department as it is transmitted to the next committee of referral.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|