Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/21/1999 01:11 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 116 - BOARD OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSERVATION CO-CHAIR OGAN announced that the committee would hear testimony on House Bill No. 116, "An Act relating to the Board of Agriculture and Conservation, to the agricultural revolving loan fund, to the disposal of state agricultural land, and to the Alaska Natural Resource Conservation and Development Board; and providing for an effective date." [Adopted as a work draft at the previous hearing had been version 1-LS0407\N, Cook, 4/8/99. However, members had been provided with a new proposed committee substitute, version 1-LS0407\S.] Number 2051 JIM ELLISON testified via teleconference from Fairbanks, noting that he farms, raises stock and fowl, and publishes the Alaska Farming Magazine. He has observed Alaska agriculture for more than 30 years, he said. Although it has had ups and downs, today it is a $53 million business. Although some say it holds the key to Alaska's future, it also can be damaged by political decisions. He finds that HB 116 helps to "plug that failure," and he fully supports it. "I cannot understand anybody that ever studied any of the history of agriculture in this state that would be against it," he concluded, suggesting that HB 116 will help the farmer, the consumer and Alaska's political future. Number 1974 CO-CHAIR OGAN turned over the gavel to Co-Chair Sanders and left briefly. Number 1947 ROBERT WELLS, Director, Division of Agriculture, Department of Natural Resources, spoke briefly via teleconference from the Mat-Su Legislative Information Office (LIO). Noting his availability to answer questions, he announced that he had committed to work on this bill during the interim with Representative James, sponsor, and Co-Chairman Ogan. Number 1903 DICK ZOBEL testified via teleconference from the Mat-Su LIO. He agreed somewhat with Mr. Ellison, in that much in HB 116 is beneficial to agriculture in Alaska. He himself has farmed in Alaska for 20 years, he said, and although he now works in the woods, he believes forestry to be an agricultural pursuit. Mr. Zobel reiterated his concern, voiced at the previous hearing, regarding inclusion of a soil and water conservation board in this bill. He said it is obvious, from the testimony of people in favor of HB 116, that this is a "production-agricultural bill," not a "soil and water conservation bill." He believes it totally ignores some founding principles "that most of us in the soil and water conservation movement are involved in." MR. ZOBEL referred to another's testimony about how the various board members would be from agriculture-producing areas of the state. He called to members' attention that the current statute, in particular, AS 41.10.65, "went out of its way to make sure that those areas of the state that are not primarily involved in agriculture do also have conservation issues." Thus, he said, there is membership from Southeast Alaska and Western Alaska, as well as from the prime agricultural areas. He told members: I think the statement that none of the local conservation districts would be affected by this bill further clarifies that somebody's missing the boat. The state natural resource conservation and development board is a local conservation district; it is the largest one in the state. And if you eliminate it, you eliminate a district from the state. And I think the authors of this bill, or the proponents of the bill, fail to recognize the unique relationship between the state board, the natural resource department, and the local districts. This unique relationship goes on and involves several federal agencies, through the districts and through that natural resource conservation board, which is also a district. ... The bottom line is that this board ignores that natural resource conservation board participation in being a local district. The state association of conservation districts [and] the natural resource conservation development board recommended that ... all the conservation references in this bill be deleted. We don't think this bill addresses those conservation issues, and, most certainly, two people from a conservation board could not do the ... current job that it is being done by five. ... An inclusion of 41.10 in this current bill - vague as it is, spotted as it is throughout the bill - simply does not address what the conservation districts have always done. Conservation districts have always strove to provide, through our relationship with several other federal and state agencies, a service to Alaska private land owners. We also provide those services to city, borough and state government. And this inclusion in this bill would not do a thing to either enhance -- and it is my personal opinion it would decrease the services that we would offer Alaskans. CO-CHAIR SANDERS turned the gavel back over to Co-Chair Ogan. Number 1616 BOB FRANKLIN, State President, Alaska Farm Bureau, testified via teleconference from Fairbanks, saying it seems there is some opposition from other areas of the state, outside of the agricultural community; however, those concerns cannot be addressed unless it is known what they are. He sees this legislation as an advancement to the agricultural community. MR. FRANKLIN stated, "Now, the soil/water conservation district, or the board, definitely has some valid points in their representation. I think it remains to be seen whether it's sufficient or insufficient, because I don't think there's any basic understanding ... of what that board really, actually, does, and how it's really financed ...." He suggested that HB 116 needs to be pushed through, as it can provide the industry continuity and stability. He referred to SB 136 [which Representative James later said she believed to be SB 132]; Mr. Franklin said that was introduced without any knowledge of the industry. He concluded, "I think we're in a dangerous situation and, realizing that, I think we need this board of agriculture even more so, to protect the assets of the ARLF [Agricultural Revolving Loan Fund], the agricultural lands and the industry." Number 1441 REPRESENTATIVE JEANNETTE JAMES, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, noted that HB 116 would be worked on intensively during the interim. She understands the concern of the conservation board, she told listeners, pointing out that this doesn't affect the soil and water districts at all. The only thing incorporated into this bill is the resource board that works within the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). She stated: And they talked about the large district, that is, the district of Alaska that's not covered by other soil and water conservation districts. That board, for the amount of money that they have been using to operate, has been coming from the [Agricultural] Revolving Loan Fund. So, this is an agriculture interest. And the comment that only two soil and water conservation district folks on this nine-member board is not going to give them the same coverage that a five-member board [would] is not true, because what we have is two representatives on a nine-member board from the soil and water conservation districts, to a nine-member board, who will do the same things that the existing resource board does now, that is five members. So, I think it's a matter of understanding the principle and the basics of it. The issue that I've heard also is that conservation has more to do with lots of different land issues than agriculture. And that's true that agriculture is a small part of that. I think it's in the best interest of agriculture to broaden its perspective in conservation issues, if they want to be successful in agriculture in this state, because I think it's important that they understand all of the conservation issues around the state, whether or not it directly affects any of their operations or not, because there's lots and lots of land, within this state, that is not currently being used for anything, and might make some good agricultural land. So, I think broadening the agriculture into agriculture and conservation is a good idea. We'll continue to work on this. I urge anyone that has any questions or comments or concerns to discuss it with me. And my mind is open, and we want to have something that works in the end. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said she believes Mr. Franklin was talking about SB 132, which transfers all of the examination from the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to the Division of Agriculture. Along with that comes some money, she said, but it is just another opportunity to use more of the ARLF without the permission of the Division of Agriculture. Although there has always been the desire to have farm issues, such as meat and milk, under the Division of Agriculture, they need to discuss whether to include fish and every other area, and to discuss how it would be paid for. Representative James said those are the kinds of concerns she has had since she has been in the legislature. It is her seventh year, and she has found no sympathy for any agriculture issues. This bill is to protect agriculture for its future. Number 1196 CO-CHAIR OGAN stated his intention to work on this over the interim. As a public comment had reminded him, this is the time when farmers are getting ready to plant. He suggested focusing on this after harvest, but perhaps meeting about it during the summer. [HB 116 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|