Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/28/1994 03:36 PM Senate RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATOR MILLER announced SB 339 (MANAGEMENT OF STATE LAND AND RESOURCES) to be up for consideration. He said they would take testimony only. CLIFF EAMES, Alaska Center for the Environment, supported SB 339 and most of the proposed amendments. They appear to be housekeeping amendments. He said the catastrophic nature of the insect infestation has been grossly overstated in Alaska. TAPE 94-31, SIDE B Number 580 The idea that these trees are wasted if they are not logged is not the case, if you talk to an ecologist, MR. EAMES said. These trees are recycled into the ecosystem which has been the case for hundreds of thousands of years. In conclusion, he opposed sections 20 and 21 of SB 339. Number 568 LARRY SMITH, Kachemak Resource Institute, said he has spent 20 years chasing bark bugs one way or the other. Professionally he is a lumber user. He said that bad logging caused more beetles. We need to have consistency within the forestry division which is headed by a good person this year. Our recent experience with salvage sales in Cook Inlet should be closely examined. The big bark beetle scare led to a 223,000 acre long term sale to a big international company in which we lost a lot of money, damaged habitat, and caused more bark beetles. MR. SMITH said he believed we need enforcement of the provisions enacted by the legislature in 1990 to control bark beetles. DNR needs to do what they were told by the legislature before the rules are changed again. STEVE GIBSON, Homer, said he was a local sawmiller for the last 15 years. He said section 20 is unnecessary for a responsible planning agency. Under current 5 year planning requirements, the sale can be executed within 14 months of conception. Most of the timber on the Kenai Peninsula is of marginal or submarginal value when not infested. It requires a subsidy even to sell it. SB 339 is a law designed to circumvent intelligent public opinion and not solicit it. He strongly urged them to abandon sections 20 and 21 of SB 339. Number 512 GLENN JUDAY, Fairbanks, said he is a professional forester and was concerned with sections 20 and 21, because they look like an avenue to avoid conforming with the land use plan in place for the affected area. He was also concerned that it requires the Commissioner to see into the future regarding insect epidemic. Rather than lose substantial economic value, there should be some requirement to provide for a net return to the state on its resources. Number 483 JAN DAWE, Fairbanks, was concerned with sections 20 and 21 of SB 339. She said it does in a backdoor manner what SB 310 does in the open. She is concerned the last leg of the 5 year timber harvest schedule is being taken away from public oversight. She asked for the rationale behind section 21 and how they get a best interest finding out of it. MR. BOUTIN said the Division has run into this issue quite regularly particularly when the Department of Transportation is going to use barrow pits and where there has been an intended conversion to agricultural use. Sometimes those conversions need to take place more quickly than 38.05.113 would allow. MS. DAWE said the public should have advanced notice and strongly urged they to remand sections 20 and 21. LANE THOMPSON, Fairbanks civil engineer, opposed sections 20 and 21 of SB 339 which seems to be designed to circumvent the public comment that is possible under existing law. With the University lands and Mental Health lands coming up, there is a much bigger opportunity for clear cutting than would be available under existing law. He opposed sections 20 and 21, because they are designed to keep the public out. We need to get on with rational planning of the long-term logging industry in the Tanana Valley, he said, and drop SB 310 and SB 339. SILVIA WARD, Norther Alaska Environmental Center, commented that in sections 20 and 21 with salvage sales there is no requirement for reforestation which is not good forestry practice. Number 380 DOUG YATES, Fairbanks, objected to sections 20 and 21. Salvage sales are negotiated sales of forest resources and response the insect infestation is unwarranted at this time. These sections will not improve forest health, appear to be designed to create a false rational for timber harvest. Please tighten the existing regulations within the Division of Forestry, he urged. Follow the public process and provide regulatory continuity for Alaska's forest resources. Economic values of unutilized wood fiber is not the only measurement you should be considering. MARTHA REYNOLDS, Fairbanks, said section 20 sets no limits on size of salvage sales and shows no provision for public input, even if the sales are very large. She is concerned that sections 20 and 21 make no mention of net income flow and have no requirements for the state getting fair value for their timber resources. WILLIAM DUNNE, Alaska Environmental Lobby, has little or no objections to the majority of proposed changes to SB 339 which have been updated. Other provisions, sections 20 and 21, will cause great harm to the environment and should be addressed separately. His objections were to the conditions of salvage sales in section 20. They do support the salvage of timber on land that would be converted to nonforest uses. They oppose exempting salvage timber sales for existing size limits, public involvement, and restoration provisions of state law. Many biologists and forest ecologists feel that forest epidemics are self regulating and actually improve habitat for many types of wildlife. Records indicate that bark beetle outbreaks have occurred regularly over the past 70 years without negative impacts to overall forest health. Forest health problems are associated with fire suppression, poor logging practices, seismic trail power line, and road building activities. Salvage sale provisions in sections 20 and 21 would create a loophole allowing large scale negotiated long term timber sales in areas where DNR claims health problems exist. The U.S. Forest Service has abused their salvage sale provisions extensively on national forests for years. These sections would give the Commissioner of DNR extraordinary latitude in determining and even predicting forest health, employment levels, and timber values.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|