Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/16/2003 01:00 PM Senate JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 155-PREDATOR CONTROL PROGRAMS
CHAIR SEEKINS announced a proposed committee substitute (CS),
version S, to be before the committee.
SENATOR THERRIAULT moved to adopt version S (4/16/03) SB 155
as the working document.
SENATOR ELLIS objected for the purpose of an explanation of the
changes.
CHAIR SEEKINS said the changes in version S are primarily
semantic changes for the sake of efficiency. One paragraph is
added that says when the Board of Game authorizes a predator
control program it should establish predator reduction
objectives and limits, methods and means to be employed, who is
authorized to participate, and conditions for participation. He
noted he is still working with the Alaska Department of Fish and
Game (ADF&G) on how to properly delineate responsibilities. The
bill goes to the Senate Resources Committee so that issue will
probably be resolved there.
SENATOR ELLIS asked if the intent of Section 2 on page 2,
particularly the words "methods and means to be employed," is to
allow the Governor's ability to prohibit the use of helicopters
to be overridden.
CHAIR SEEKINS said it is not; methods and means are statutorily
assigned to the Board of Game. The language in Section 2 is a
reiteration of a truism that already exists in the statutes. The
Board of Game could do that now for private individuals or for
permittees. It cannot compel ADF&G to use helicopters, gun ships
and gunners. It does not change that separation of power.
Section (a) of the original statute says the Board of Game can
do these things; section (b) says ADF&G can do these things so
it does not touch any of the department's authority.
SENATOR ELLIS asked if the Governor had the authority to tell
the board that helicopters could not be used.
CHAIR SEEKINS said, as he understood the Governor's conversation
with the board, the Governor said no state helicopters and no
ADF&G gunners could be used. He asked a representative from
ADF&G to elaborate.
MR. MATT ROBUS, Division of Wildlife Conservation, ADF&G, told
members he attended the March Board of Game meeting and
participated in the process as the board came forward with its
findings and request to the commissioner. He asked for
clarification of the chair's question.
CHAIR SEEKINS asked, "Does this, in any way, trump the
Governor's statement that he is not going to use helicopters and
gunners?"
MR. ROBUS said his understanding, based on discussions with the
Department of Law (DOL) and the committee, is that the
commissioner still retains the authority to decide what ADF&G
will or will not implement.
CHAIR SEEKINS said he understands the Governor to mean that his
desire is that the methods and means employed by public people
to be at the authorization of the Board of Game, not ADF&G.
SENATOR ELLIS asked if by "public people," Chair Seekins means
members of the public.
CHAIR SEEKINS said he means private individuals, not public
officials. If someone was going to carry out an aerial shooting
in a predator control program, the Board of Game would authorize
those private individuals to do so, but it could not compel the
state to do so.
SENATOR ELLIS asked why Section 2 is necessary if it doesn't
change the status quo.
CHAIR SEEKINS said it is a reiteration of the existing statutes.
It is somewhat unnecessary, but is meant to clarify. He asked
Mr. Robus if he agrees.
MR. ROBUS said he only had a few minutes to review the working
document. He appreciates the change at the beginning of the bill
because that is a better way to state the committee's intent. He
said he also appreciates the re-inclusion of wolverine because
of their vulnerability to same-day airborne hunting.
In Section 2, he expressed concern that it still potentially
sets up a confrontational situation in that ADF&G believes the
board already has those powers. If the board develops a
particularly narrow program, it would give the administration
very little flexibility in determining whether ADF&G will
participate.
CHAIR SEEKINS said his intent is to work with the chair of the
Senate Resources Committee and members of the department to
define that there is no way the board can force the department
to participate. At the same time, there should be no way for the
department to make it more difficult for the board to carry out
its program.
SENATOR OGAN commented, "This is kind of like the secretary who
will disavow any of your actions if you're caught kind of
thing."
CHAIR SEEKINS said it is not the intent of this bill to force
the board to do anything. If ADF&G does not do it, the
Legislature can address the department's budget. However, there
is a separation of powers in the Administrative Code. He does
not want to cross that line. At the same time, he wants to make
sure the administration does not have the ability to negate the
efforts of the Board of Game to carry out its program.
SENATOR OGAN pointed out that with regard to the separation of
powers issue, the Board of Game is almost an extension of the
legislative branch because the Legislature delegates its
authority to the board.
CHAIR SEEKINS maintained that the Legislature, as trustee of the
resource, has delegated certain authority to the Board of Game.
The board should be working cooperatively with ADF&G. The
Legislature might anticipate that ADF&G would assist to some
degree and provide administrative support if the Board of Game
authorized an airborne hunting program. He expressed concern
that the board should not be able to issue an order that says
that those who are authorized to participate in this program are
members of ADF&G and they must use helicopters.
MR. ROBUS agreed that reflects one of ADF&G's major concerns.
CHAIR SEEKINS said, in effect, the board will still be allowed
to make that decision but ADF&G would not be forced to be part
of the program except for administrative participation.
SENATOR OGAN asked Mr. Robus if he envisions that ADF&G will
give biological advice to the board, but ADF&G employees would
not fly in planes and shoot.
MR. ROBUS said version S requires ADF&G to present the
information upon which this program is based, so ADF&G would be
involved there. As the board recognized in the finding for Unit
19D in March, predator management issues can be addressed in
different ways. Some involve department participation while some
do not. Version S seems to allow the board to come out with a
very narrow program, in terms of saying exactly how it could be
done, and there may be times when that conflicts with the
administration's desires. That's the conversation he had [with
the chair] about where the board's authority to direct ADF&G or
recommend to ADF&G intersects with the department's authority to
participate or not participate.
CHAIR SEEKINS added:
And the accompanying concern that the department
doesn't say, well, you have to get a permit to be able
to do this and the permits are in Barrow and the hunt
is in McGrath. There's some responsibility on all
parts there to be cooperative but yet not to cross the
lines of individual powers.
SENATOR OGAN asked if anything in current state law prevents a
predator control program that involves use of helicopters to
identify dens or areas where predators center. He said he has
spoken with a professional predator regulator for the federal
government who suggested using helicopters for such a purpose.
MR. ROBUS said the general answer is no and unless the person is
carrying a collection permit or some sort of authorization, the
person can not harass or even disturb an animal because that
would fit the definition of "taking." An ADF&G employee doing a
survey with a permit is legal. If a private person does that,
the person could cross the line from observation to disturbance,
which becomes a legal problem.
SENATOR OGAN asked if anything prevents ADF&G staff from getting
permits, locating dens, and then using helicopters to drop
people off to hunt the next day. He said he is looking for
alternatives.
MR. ROBUS said if hunting is involved, helicopters cannot be
used to transport hunters or their gear or game. If the activity
is something other than hunting, possibly an approved predation
control program, something like that could occur.
SENATOR THERRIAULT asked if under the existing statute,
individual Alaskans could participate in a predator control
program that includes same-day airborne or shooting from planes.
MR. ROBUS said that is correct according to his discussions with
the Department of Law.
CHAIR SEEKINS said version S says the board can use more than
just the prey population objective to be able to do that. The
board can also use harvest or population objectives for prey or
predator in an area determined to be an intensive management
area.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said the bill now contains language that says
the board will assert control over how that is to be done. He
maintains that this legislation will not undo the public
initiative.
CHAIR SEEKINS agreed and said it clarifies how it can be used.
He noted that, hopefully, Section 2 brings some portions of
existing statute into focus so that the state isn't turning
everybody with a Super Cub and a shotgun lose to kill wolves.
SENATOR ELLIS asked about the term "free ranging wolf."
CHAIR SEEKINS said that free ranging means it is not trapped or
confined somehow.
MR. ROBUS acknowledged that is correct.
SENATOR ELLIS asked Mr. Robus if he supports the inclusion of
wolves and wolverines on the list and whether they are included
because those two species are killing moose calves.
MR. ROBUS said he does not want to give the impression that
bears are not involved in some areas. He commented favorably
about including wolverines in version S because they were
removed from the previous committee substitute. Staff pointed
out to him that wolverine, being solitary, having a low
reproductive rate and using open country, could be very
vulnerable to same day airborne land and shoot practices.
Because the first sentence of this statute says certain species
may not be hunted, it makes sense to include wolverine. He said
the fact that wolves are included is due to the initiative that
originally established the statute. However, everything else in
the bill says in a predation control situation, wolves may be
taken in specific ways. He pointed out that lynx are not often
found in country where they would be susceptible to same day
airborne shooting and fox have a higher reproductive rate.
CHAIR SEEKINS said he would be hard pressed to find any
advantage in using same day airborne hunting to get a fox or
lynx. However, wolverines could be more susceptible.
SENATOR ELLIS asked, "And what's your take on the bears?"
CHAIR SEEKINS said they are covered under different statutes.
SENATOR ELLIS asked if he intends to address that statute.
CHAIR SEEKINS said he intends to look at it at some point and is
currently talking to members of the trapping, hunting and
guiding industries and ADF&G about how to control bears.
SENATOR ELLIS asked if bears are on the list.
CHAIR SEEKINS said he thinks they should be, but not in all
areas.
SENATOR FRENCH said most of his constituents think that any
airborne wolf hunting is banned. The tenor of their comments is
that they want this to be as tightly regulated as possible. They
do not want one inch of leeway to make it easier to do predator
control from the air or using same day land and shoot. He said
from a political perspective, he sees the Governor saying that
he will not allow department staff to participate in predator
control using helicopters, but what he sees coming is the least
attractive alternative to his constituents.
TAPE 03-25, SIDE A
2:43 p.m.
CHAIR SEEKINS said Senator French's comment shows a widening of
the rural-urban split. He said that people from downtown
Anchorage and those from a rural community will be at odds on
this issue. If Senator French's constituents want to widen the
rural-urban split, this issue provides an opportunity to do so.
He said that members of Senator French's party are supportive of
this legislation because they are unable to put moose on their
tables because of predators. If people in downtown Anchorage do
not believe that is a real problem, they should talk to some of
those folks in the rural areas. He said the rural populations of
moose have declined and, because of ineffective predator control
in some areas close to urban populations, urban hunters are
hunting in the rural areas. He pointed out that the moose
population in Unit 13 has dropped from 27,000 to less than
8,000. The wolf populations are huge in that area. As a result,
urban hunters who used to hunt in Unit 13 are now going to the
rural areas. That is exacerbating the urban rural tension. They
would not travel to rural areas if they had a reasonable
opportunity to harvest close to home. The Governor said he wants
the local people to take care of predator control rather than
ADF&G employees. This bill will authorize local people to do
what the Governor wants to have done; it does not set up an
adverse position to the Governor's. It allows the Board of Game
to make that decision in concert with the Governor's desired
methods.
SENATOR THERRIAULT told Senator French this bill is a step in
the direction that his constituents want to go. They think
airborne hunting is absolutely outlawed: it is not. They believe
this legislation undoes the initiative: it does not. Legislators
have to educate them. He directed the woman he corresponded with
to the sections of statute to show her that this will put some
controls on a process she says she does not like. He questioned
whether she would rather have no controls. Constituents need to
understand this is a step in the right direction.
SENATOR FRENCH said it strikes him that if the issue is the
declining moose population criteria already exists in the
current statute. The first go around on this issue centered on
increasing the number of variables the board could contemplate
when considering airborne predator control. He said the real
issue is that the Board of Game did not set the population
figures appropriately. It was suggested that the moose
population could be maintained at a low level but, because of
the rise in the predator population, it would crash. He said he
was not convinced of that because he believes the game
population must be set with a large enough buffer to take
predation into account. He questioned how this bill would change
that.
CHAIR SEEKINS replied:
...you may have a population objective in a particular
area and you're maintaining that population objective
but, because of predation, you have no harvest
objective that you can look for in being able to
maintain that population objective. So you're cutting
back on the size that can be taken. You're removing
non-resident hunters from the equation. You're doing
other things that can help you maintain the population
objective but you now are not able to meet a harvest
objective. So this would give you the opportunity to
eliminate the competition to be able to meet a harvest
objective. Am I correct there?
MR. ROBUS said another way to say it is that, under the current
system, the board has only one trip wire that enables it to set
up a predation control program - that is if an ungulate
population identified for intensive management descends through
its population objective. If an ungulate population is above its
population objective, but for various reasons is in a downward
trajectory, this flexibility to choose several objectives from
which to work should allow the board to take some corrective
measure to try to recover the population to the lower limit. He
said it is important that this is only tied to intensive
management populations of ungulates that have been identified as
very important for high levels of human use. He said the March
meeting of the board demonstrated that, when decisions must be
based on a single objective, wildlife management gets very
complicated. Giving the board flexibility to look at other
objectives makes sense because other factors affect those
ungulate populations.
SENATOR OGAN commented that he hunted moose in Unit 13 for a
number of years, but he quit 10 years ago because the herd he
was hunting had 20 to 30 cows and not one calf. He could tell
back then that the population was in trouble.
SENATOR THERRIAULT moved CSSB 155(JUD) from committee with
individual recommendations and the attached zero fiscal note.
SENATOR ELLIS objected.
CHAIR SEEKINS called for a roll call vote. The motion to move
the bill from committee passed with Senators Therriault, Ogan
and Seekins voting in favor, and Senators French and Ellis
opposed.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|