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 414 - MANAGEMENT OF GAME CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN announced the next order of business was House Bill Number 414, "An Act relating to management of game and to the duties of the commissioner of fish and game." CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN called on Bruce Campbell, staff to Representative Pete Kelly, sponsor of the bill. Number 1230 BRUCE CAMPBELL, Legislative Assistant to Representative Pete Kelly, Alaska State Legislature, read the following sponsor statement: "House Bill 414 provides guidance for management of game resources in Alaska. The bill requires the Board of Game to establish game population and harvest objectives to promote a high level of harvest by humans. "House bill 414 establishes the preferences among beneficial uses of game resources. Personal and family use for human consumption is the highest and best use of game, commercial use, including trapping and guiding are next, and the last preference is for nonconsumptive commercial or noncommercial use of game." MR. CAMPBELL urged the committee members to work with the original version of the bill (0-LS1437\F), not the proposed committee substitute. Number 1289 REPRESENTATIVE PETE KELLY, Alaska State Legislature, stated the Eighteen Alaska State Legislature enacted the intensive game management bill directing the department to manage game in much the same way as it manages fish - for abundance. Since that time, there has been difficulty getting the department and board to work together to achieve that end. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY stated Section 2 of the bill would set harvest levels. It reads as follows: "(h) The Board of Game shall establish population and harvest objectives and adopt other regulations to promote a high level of harvest by humans of big game prey populations." REPRESENTATIVE KELLY stated, to ensure cooperation between the department and the board to achieve the harvest objectives, the following language has been added on page 2, line 28: "(b) If a board delegates authority to the commissioner to act on its behalf, the commissioner shall cooperate with and assist the board by implementing regulations, management plans, and other management programs as requested by the board." REPRESENTATIVE KELLY stated the bill would also set preferences amongst beneficial uses, as referred to in the constitution. The language reads as follows on page 3, starting on line 7: "Sec. 16.05.911. Preferences among beneficial uses of game. The highest and best use of game is personal and family use for human consumption. The other beneficial uses of game, in order of preference, include "(1) commercial use, including trapping and guiding; and "(2) nonconsumptive use, for commercial and noncommercial purposes." REPRESENTATIVE KELLY stated in the past subsistence has been a priority amongst consumptive uses, but it has not be prioritized when it comes to nonconsumptive uses. Number 1488 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a motion and asked unanimous consent to adopt HB 414, version 0-LS1437\F. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN objected for discussion purposes. He asked Representative Kelly whether it is the intent to ultimately go to version "H." REPRESENTATIVE KELLY replied, "No." REPRESENTATIVE GREEN removed his objection. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked whether there is any further objection. There being no further objection, it was so adopted. Number 1551 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES made a motion and asked unanimous consent to adopt Amendment 1. It reads as follows: Offered in the House Resources Committee Page 2, line 22 After: "by humans of" Insert: "identified" Page 3, line 8 Delete: "human consumption" Insert: "food" CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN called for a brief at ease at 2:38 p.m. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN called the meeting back to order at 2:39 p.m. Number 1636 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN objected for discussion purposes. He asked Representative Kelly whether deleting the language "human consumption" and inserting the language "food" would open it up to dog food or other things. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY replied he hadn't thought about dog food. It is a more straight forward way of describing the purpose of the resource. Number 1673 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked Representative Kelly whether there is any other reason for changing the language. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY replied, "No." It is strictly for edification. Number 1712 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES stated she is a believer of putting words into statute that people can identify with. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN replied that's the problem. The word "food" invites misunderstanding because there are some places where Alaskans take resources like fish and turn it into dog food. He is concerned it will open it up to something else other than human consumption. Number 1786 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN agreed with Representative Green. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to divide the question. There being no objection, it was so divided. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked whether there is any objection to adopt the portion of the amendment to page 2, line 22. It reads as follows: Page 2, line 22 After: "by humans of" Insert: "identified" REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS asked Representative Kelly to explain the amendment. Number 1867 REPRESENTATIVE KELLY stated he doesn't want the department to worry about achieving objectives for populations that are not necessarily important to hunters. Number 1907 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked whether there is any objection to adopt the portion of the amendment to page 2, line 22. There being no objection, it was so adopted. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN asked whether there is any objection to adopt the portion of the amendment to page 3, line 8. It reads as follows: Page 3, line 8 Delete: "human consumption" Insert: "food" REPRESENTATIVE GREEN objected for discussion purposes. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN made a motion to amend the amendment to delete the word "consumption" and insert the word "food." Number 1948 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS stated he doesn't see anything wrong with the language, "The highest and best use of game is personal and family uses for food." There are areas that use it for dog food and use the dogs to get around. Number 2011 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stated the language could cause problems. He cited False Pass and the controversy of using chum salmon to feed dogs and its impact on commercial fishing while there are other places who use it for food. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER stated the bill doesn't talk about fish. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN removed his objection. REPRESENTATIVE KELLY stated there are regulations that specifically address the using of moose and caribou to feed dogs. Number 2093 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated that he is concerned about the loophole that the bill presents, unless it specifically says "human consumption." Number 2125 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES pointed out that the bill is only talking about game, not fish. A person who cooks some moose and wants to feed his dog the leftovers would get into trouble. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated he doesn't want to set a precedent to allow people to feed their dogs scraps. There are regulations pertaining to that. He suggested calling on Geron Bruce from the Department of Fish and Game for further clarification. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN withdrew his amendment to the amendment. Number 2194 REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY MASEK stated she has 45 dogs and gets calls from hunters who have leftover meat and bones to feed them. She would hate to see that stop because the dogs love it. Number 2235 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game, stated he can't cite the regulations off the top of his head, but he can get back to him on it. Number 2265 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stated he read the bill wrong. He removed his objection again. Number 2306 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON called for the question. A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Barnes, Green, Joule, Masek, Williams and Hudson voted in favor of the motion. Representatives Dyson and Ogan voted against the motion. The amendment to page 3, line 8 was adopted. Number 2435 ROD ARNO, President, Alaska Outdoor Council (AOC), testified in Juneau. The AOC supports HB 414. The AOC has been trying to give guidance to the Department of Fish and Game when it comes to abundance prior to SB 77. TAPE 98-36, SIDE A Number 0000 MR. ARNO continued. Section 2 will be an advantage for the state where there is a mandate for subsistence on federal public lands. There is nothing in the federal mandate to manage for an abundance, only healthy populations. In the long run, state lands maybe more advantageous to people as areas for consumptive uses. It is also important to recognize the commercial use of trapping and guiding and nonconsumptive uses found in Section 4. Number 0171 VIRGIL UMPHENOUR testified via teleconference in Fairbanks in support of HB 414. [THE REST OF HIS TESTIMONY IS INAUDIBLE] Number 0252 DAVE LACEY testified via teleconference in Fairbanks. He opposes the bill. It is a slap in the face for the visitor industry. He works with Yukon River Tours. The visitor industry is a resource industry and the second largest industry in the state. "We are being taken for granted here, while other resource industries are floundering because of resource prices. Are you going to damage the visitor industry also? One of our best industries that's hanging in here in Alaska right now." The bill is not needed. Wildlife viewing is the fastest growing segment of the visitor industry worldwide. Why are we ruling it out? he asked. This is wrong. Number 0355 SEAN McGUIRE testified via teleconference in Fairbanks. He agrees with the testimony of Mr. Lacey. The AOC and politicians continually say "let the Board of Game do its job without the influence of politics." It is a joke. The majority of Alaskans would be opposed to killing off wolves and bears in order to make more moose and caribou. It gives the animal rights groups gas-o- line to through on the fire. The bill is really ill-advised and we need to get away from telling the Board of Game how to do its job. Number 0499 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES stated the constitution gives the legislature the general authority to manage fish and game in the state. Some of that power has been delegated to the Boards of Fisheries and Game. They were established by the legislature and the only power that they have has been delegated to them. MR. McGUIRE replied: Why is there a Board of Game then? Why doesn't the legislature just make the policies? CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated he doesn't want to debate that issue now. Number 0553 KEVIN SAXBY, Assistant Attorney General, Natural Resources Section, Department of Law, testified via teleconference in Anchorage. He is the attorney assigned to the Board of Game. There is an advantage to list in statute a preference amongst beneficial uses of game. However, there are problems with the listings in the bill, especially if the first preference is limited to food. It isn't clear whether subsistence use of fur includes shelter and clothing. In addition, there would be major issues when areas that have been set aside for viewing were opened up for hunting. It would be difficult for the boards to keep those areas closed. The legislature would have to ratify them. In reference to Section 3, the boards do not have fiscal, administrative or management authority according to statute, only regulatory. The proposed language would blur the separation of powers between the board and department which by-en-large has worked well. Number 0736 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game, testified in Juneau. The department appreciates inserting the word "identified" with the amendment. There is a conflict between 16.05.241 and Section 3 of the bill, however. It is not only a separation of powers issue, but a practical one of trying to keep within budgets and fiscal restraints. There are some things proposed in the regulatory arena that would be impractical to implement. In addition, Section 4 would cause some confusion regarding subsistence. Subsistence is defined in terms of customary and traditional uses which includes more than food. It would also place nonconsumptive uses of wildlife at the bottom when it is important economically to the state and a lot of residents. If somebody wanted to brown bear hunt in the McNeil River State Game Sanctuary, the board would be hard pressed not to allow it. The regulation that sets up the sanctuary says the board "shall" determine whether hunting should be prohibited, and if there is a statute that says hunting is the highest and best use, it would be very difficult for the board to do otherwise. Number 0905 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN noted the bill says human consumption for food. Generally, the meat is not salvaged for brown bears so it would not be the highest and best use. Number 0919 MR. BRUCE stated it would be considered under the language "commercial use, including trapping and guiding." The process of the Boards of Fisheries and Game is not perfect, but it provides an arena for people to argue their positions. [DUE TO TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES TESTIMONY WAS LOST] Number 0984 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN announced the bill will be held over. Number 0991 REPRESENTATIVE BARNES stated she gives no credibility to what Mr. Saxby says. He cannot establish what a ceiling is to the laws. Number 1035 STEVE BEHNKE, Executive Director, Alaska Wilderness, Recreation and Tourism Association, testified in Juneau. The association represents about 300 businesses from around the state that provide nature-based tourist activities: guiding, sports fishing, wilderness rafting, kayaking and wildlife viewing. The association is quite concerned about the sub-preferences established. The legislature has had plenty of difficulties establishing preferences and implementing them, especially subsistence preferences. Setting a preference for commercial use, including trapping and guiding, over wildlife viewing is a mistake. It doesn't seem to accomplish much other than a bunch of new problems. The association is not asking for a priority for its uses, but the preferences established in the bill would eliminate options for its businesses and for the boards to accommodate local concerns. Number 1143 CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN stated if there are enough animals to hunt there are enough animals to view. He is always perplexed by the testimony from the visitor industry. MR. BEHNKE replied, in general, the association agrees with that. But, there are situations that require special attention, such as restricting access points to reduce noise and activity - tools that the boards have had available to them traditionally. The boards have made responsible use of the tools, and the association thinks there shouldn't be a statutory preference for one commercial use over another. CO-CHAIRMAN OGAN announced the bill will be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|