Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/19/2004 01:57 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 329-NUISANCE MOOSE CO-CHAIR MASEK announced that the next order of business would be CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 329(RES), "An Act relating to control of nuisance moose." Number 2449 SENATOR CON BUNDE, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor by request of the Alaska Moose Federation, informed the committee that some years ago 190 moose were killed in the Anchorage area. The aforementioned led him to hold public hearings regarding the notion of having a special hunt in order to reduce the number of moose. A substantial number of people came out and testified that they didn't want the moose hunted. Although the public seemed to have a high level of tolerance for the public being injured by moose, the public didn't address the moose being injured. SENATOR BUNDE explained that the Alaska Moose Federation proposes that if there is a problem/nuisance moose in one area, the moose could be transported to another area rather than be killed. The committee substitute (CS) before the committee is a compromise between the Alaska Moose Federation and the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G). This legislation would allow ADF&G to authorize a private group or individuals to relocate nuisance moose from urban to rural areas. He specified that a nuisance moose is defined as a moose located in area of human concentration that poses a significant risk to the health, safety, or economic well being of the people in the area. The group relocating the moose will cover the relocation costs and the state is protected against any liability arising from actions taken by the group. Senator Bunde pointed out that the committee packet includes information from the Alaska Moose Federation, which details the high number of moose-related trooper calls as well as wide support for the legislation. The packet also contains the opinions of three biologists regarding the relocation of moose. While all three biologists have vast experience with wildlife management, one must remember the following: adult moose relocation programs in the US and Alaska have been successful; ADF&G must approve any private group's plan; ADF&G has experience darting large animals; there is appropriate liability protection [for the state]; the program is conducted at no cost to the state; people are killed and injured by moose and the financial costs are great; and the legislature is responsible for protecting Alaskans and its wildlife. Senator Bunde reiterated that there is a wide variety of support [included in the committee packet]. Number 2760 REPRESENTATIVE WOLF surmised that under this program urban dwelling moose would be transferred to rural wilderness areas. Therefore, he inquired as to whether disease would be spread with these relocation efforts. SENATOR BUNDE deferred to ADF&G, but noted that to his knowledge there aren't any communicable diseases involving moose. REPRESENTATIVE WOLF maintained his concern with the possibility of transmission of disease through these relocation efforts. Number 2870 REPRESENTATIVE LYNN posed a situation in which a darted moose dies in transport to its new location. He asked if the meat would be edible and would be given to charity in such a circumstance. SENATOR BUNDE specified that meat from a moose that has been darted shouldn't be consumed by humans for 45 days. He acknowledged that some relocated moose will die during relocation, although he pointed out that currently all nuisance moose die and in this case the relocated moose could provide "brood stock." REPRESENTATIVE LYNN inquired as to how a hunter would know whether 45 days had passed since a moose he or she killed was darted. SENATOR BUNDE answered that darted animals are collared and tagged so that a hunter would know not to eat the meat. TAPE 04-22, SIDE B REPRESENTATIVE GATTO requested that Senator Bunde walk the committee through a scenario in which a nuisance moose is ultimately relocated. SENATOR BUNDE posed a scenario in which a moose is frequenting a schoolyard, or other location in which the moose could be a danger to human life and health. The ADF&G is called and the moose is labeled as a nuisance moose. Assuming that the Alaska Moose Federation is the entity that transports the moose, the moose is darted, tagged, and placed in wheeled transportation and transported to the release site if on the road system. If the release site isn't on the road system, helicopter transport would occur. REPRESENTATIVE GATTO related his understanding that there would be a holding facility so that the moose would have time to metabolize the darting chemical, and therefore would be able to recover prior to being relocated. SENATOR BUNDE said that the Alaska Zoo has offered its facilities to do what Representative Gatto described. However, he specified that he didn't view that as an extended holding area but rather an area for a two- or three-day stay. Number 2829 REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE said she finds it interesting that the Alaska State Constitution mandates moose management by sustained yield principles and moose are considered a natural resource owned by all Alaskans. She inquired as to why it took the pipeline being shot at for Alaska Moose Federation to be founded. SENATOR BUNDE answered that he didn't know. REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG related his understanding from ADF&G that when moose are relocated habitat sustainability is critical for the relocation area. Therefore, he inquired as to where the moose would be relocated. He also inquired as to whether it's a situation in which the [priority] is to remove the moose from the area in which it's causing a problem. SENATOR BUNDE responded that ADF&G will determine the area to which the moose will be relocated. He explained that there is the desire to relocate moose to areas where the habitat will sustain more animals and there is a low density of population. There is also the desire to move the moose from harm's way. REPRESENTATIVE WOLF restated his earlier question regarding the transportation of disease by moose. Number 2645 MATT ROBUS, Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), said that he didn't know of any commonly found diseases that would be of concern. However, ADF&G would take interest in any moose that didn't look healthy. He predicted that once such a moose is identified, he didn't believe that moose would be relocated. In further response to Representative Wolf, he explained that CSSB 329(RES) is the result of meetings with the Alaska Moose Federation and the sponsor because ADF&G was concerned with regard to how such a program would draw off staff and fiscal resources. The current legislation illustrates one of the agreements reached, which is the third-party organization will have to agree to pay the state's costs and illustrate that it can pay those costs prior to entering the project. However, how this will actually work between the third party and the department is yet to be determined. He related that one scenario could be a third-party organization with qualified individuals, and therefore the third-party organization would have the program on its own and the department would merely help identify which moose are to be considered nuisances and where those moose should be relocated. Another scenario could be one in which ADF&G could possibly have some personnel involved, but the third-party organization would reimburse the department for it's staff time. This all depends upon the nature of the agreement, the size of the project, and things yet to be determined. REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked if the moose would be darted when picked up and again when relocated from the zoo. MR. ROBUS said that he hasn't been involved with moving moose or any other animal that size without immobilizing it. Although there may be mechanical techniques that could be utilized to get the moose in the trailers, he indicated that there could be two immobilization periods. Number 2482 REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked if performing this relocation effort and staging the moose at the zoo during the rut would be problematic. MR. ROBUS answered that during the rut one would need to take care if placing multiple moose of different sex in the same holding area. There would have to be some careful big game management considerations during that time of the year. REPRESENTATIVE GATTO commented that the goal is to ensure that the state doesn't end up spending a lot of money for a nuisance moose when the animal could easily be dispatched in place and the meat distributed to the charities. MR. ROBUS related that when animals move into the Anchorage area and become nuisances, it is typically during the winter season and probably post-rut. Mr. Robus related ADF&G's concern that [relocation efforts] done in late winter when the animals are in the worst condition of the year mean that the moose will probably do the worst in terms of capture mortality. Number 2378 REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH inquired as to the qualifications necessary to move moose. MR. ROBUS answered that he didn't believe there to be hard and fast qualifications, except in the area of handling the drugs involved. Due to the types of drugs used, a veterinarian will have to be in charge of the drugs. The aforementioned could be performed under the department's authority and third-party individuals work under that umbrella or a third-party organization could have a separate operation with veterinarian help that qualifies to possess and dispense the necessary drugs. In terms of laws, rules, and safety, the handling of the drugs is the most critical part of this whereas much of the handling of the animals is merely good practical sense. In further response to Representative Stepovich, Mr. Robus pointed out that the legislation specifies that there will be a written application and proposal. He confirmed that there could be more than one third-party organization and it could take on different forms. With regard to a moose returning to the spot from which it was taken, he suggested that there would be relatively little problem with it returning. CO-CHAIR DAHLSTROM declared a conflict of interest because she is a member of the advisory board for the Alaska Moose Federation. With regard to moose meat going to charities, Co- Chair Dahlstrom said that the Alaska State Troopers have a list of charities that are interested in moose meat. She related that many of those involved with the Alaska Moose Federation and promoting this program are individuals with a genuine love for the animals. She highlighted that the legislation specifies on page 1, lines 13-15, that the group(s) or individuals will reimburse the state for all costs incurred for relocating nuisance moose. She further related that the folks she knows who are involved in this all have professional veterinarians and equipment. Furthermore, folks who raise these animals on an ongoing basis undergo inspections and must comply with state and federal regulations. Number 2076 REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked if there are regulations in place for this process. MR. ROBUS replied yes, and explained that ADF&G has collecting permits which allow the department to take and handle animals and there is a staff veterinarian who can hold and dispense the necessary drugs. Mr. Robus noted that ADF&G staff go to training. He said that it's a matter of regulations as well as training, practice, and expertise. REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked if this is going to be a statewide effort or merely an Anchorage basin effort. MR. ROBUS explained that in the negotiations that resulted in CSSB 329(RES), everyone agreed that the legislation will be a pilot effort for the Municipality of Anchorage. Number 1931 REPRESENTATIVE WOLF related his understanding that are approximately 190 moose in the Anchorage area. MR. ROBUS stated that in a winter such as this, there are probably nearly 1,000 moose in the Anchorage bowl. REPRESENTATIVE WOLF questioned how one organization can take on a task that size. MR. ROBUS answered that he wasn't sure, but opined that's part of why it's a pilot project. The question regarding whether the nuisance moose problem can be whittled down over time with this approach has yet to be seen. Given the compromise encompassed in CSSB 329(RES), ADF&G is willing to give this proposal a try and possibly even help some moose populations. REPRESENTATIVE WOLF remarked that the idea has merit, although he felt that it would be more economical to provide moose meat to [charitable organizations]. Number 1845 CO-CHAIR MASEK announced that SB 329 would be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|