Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
04/18/2005 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing: || Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (aogcc) - Cathy Forester | |
| SB96 | |
| SB113 | |
| HB197 | |
| SB170 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 96 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 113 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 170 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 197 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 170-BD/DEPT OF FISH & GAME POWERS & DUTIES
CHAIR WAGONER announced SB 170 to be up for consideration.
SENATOR SEEKINS, sponsor, said SB 170 addresses some
housekeeping issues and then some substantive ones. It provides
for sale of legally taken trophy mounts and certain parts of
legally taken game animals and solves the current situation
where a person cannot buy a trophy mount in Alaska, but the
seller can take the mount to Seattle and conduct the transaction
with the buyer there. He said there is no real good reason to
prohibit their sale here and allowing it would raise revenues
for the fish and game fund.
It also provides for a small game-hunting license as
differentiated from a general hunting license, which would be
sold for $25. Some people don't want to hunt big game, but would
like small game - particularly non-residents. It provides for
some uniform application fees ($7.50 across the board) for
certain hunting permits, drawings and stamps. Right now there
are different fees for a musk ox than there are for a caribou.
The fees are meant to defer 100 percent of the cost of
processing the fees. If the department needed additional fees to
do that, he would be willing to look at that number.
SENATOR SEEKINS said that SB 170 also establishes a higher
degree of accountability for the use of monies within the fish
and game fund. This fund is dedicated to uses that directly
benefit those who purchase hunting and fishing licenses. The
fund currently has only loose internal guidelines as to how it
is spent. SB 170 provides for new fees for hunting and trapping
licenses and tags and requires that the increases in those fees
be used to maximize management for an abundance of animals for
human consumption. Hunters have said they are not willing to pay
more to harvest less.
It provides for certain predator control for bears in areas
under intensive management where the Board of Game has
determined first that bear predation is a cause of the problem
and a reduction in bears would reasonably help cure that
problem.
5:24:38 PM
SENATOR SEEKINS said the next provision is a brand new concept.
It provides for a new deferral fee that is limited to certain
areas that are adjacent to or very near state wildlife
sanctuaries or national parks. When the board authorizes permits
to hunt bear or wolf in these areas, a person could take a
permit off the table by paying into the fish and game fund the
maximum market value the hunt would otherwise have contributed
to the state economy. As an example, he used the McNeil River
Sanctuary that has the McNeil River preserve next to it. Part of
the reason for the preserve has always been to allow hunting.
Because it is next to the McNeil River Sanctuary, people always
try to make the preserve part of the sanctuary. This will allow
people who don't want bears to be hunted to be able to
contribute to the management of the sanctuaries, which are all
managed from the fish and game fund, by buying a permit and
taking it off the table for the year.
5:27:12 PM
CHAIR WAGONER asked how many areas are similar to McNeil River.
MATT ROBUS, Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), answered Pack Creek on
Admiralty Island, the Katmai National Park and Denali National
Park.
SENATOR SEEKINS said this provision would apply to areas where
the bears have been habituated.
5:28:29 PM
SENATOR ELTON asked what the definition of animal parts is as
used in section 52.
SENATOR SEEKINS replied that its not meant for sale of meat and
he wanted to put an amendment in the bill saying that. But he
has no objection to saying that a person could sell a gall
bladder of a legally taken bear. An affirmative defense would be
to show that a bear had been consumed by the same person who
took it and sold the gall bladder.
CHAIR WAGONER said that he read that the bottom has fallen out
of the bear gall bladder market because of Viagra and drugs like
it.
MR. ROBUS replied that sale of bear gall bladders is legal in
some states, but not most. He did not think there was a direct
link between sale of Viagra and bear gall bladders, because the
bladders have medicinal uses in addition to that.
5:31:11 PM
SENATOR ELTON said it is a common practice to trade King salmon,
for instance, for a roast of moose. It would be a barter.
5:31:43 PM
SENATOR SEEKINS said there is nothing that he knows of that
would preclude a barter of that sort.
5:31:48 PM
MR. ROBUS responded that he wanted to read the regulations, but
he knows that it is a common practice.
SENATOR SEEKINS explained that he understands the title to the
fish or game animal transfers to the owner at the time of
harvest and he would have the right to share it with anyone he
wanted to. The law could preclude its sale.
5:32:22 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN asked him to talk about the proposed fees.
5:32:41 PM
SENATOR SEEKINS responded that the fees were proposed to him by
the department, although he may have increased a couple.
5:33:45 PM
MR. ROBUS replied that is correct.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked him to explain why the amounts were
requested.
MR. ROBUS explained that his division relies on the one source
of non-federal funding that it gets to do all of its work - the
fish and game fund, which is pretty much composed of hunting and
trapping license fees and hunter tag fees. It has had no
increase in the last 13 years. The division's expenses are going
up and revenues are static or slightly declining. He can still
get federal matching funds, but has run short to be able to do
the additional wildlife management work to the extent that the
division is running $2 million less this year. He has the
increased demands of predator control and intensive management
programs.
We do have some serious fiscal issues in the division
and we put forward a straw man proposal containing a
fee increase that we've taken around to advisory
committees, the Board of Game, various public groups,
individual legislators - tried to put together a
package that would once again bring back enough of
that state license money to properly fund the wildlife
management activities we need to do. That straw man
package was the beginning of the evolution for the
structure that you see in that portion of this bill
today.
5:35:46 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN said sheep are highly prized for hunters and
Alaska shouldn't be the low-cost producer for out-of-state
hunters. He wanted an explanation of why the fees mostly
doubled.
MR. ROBUS explained that the fees were based on the need to make
up at least the $2 million annual shortfall at present plus the
desired capability to be able to do more active wildlife
management related to the intensive management law and the
predator management programs he has going. In terms of the value
of their dollars, state residents pay one half of what they paid
for a hunting license at statehood. The sustained yield programs
must be continued for multiple years to be effective and the
department needs to be able to measure the situation before,
during and after those predator programs in order to sustain
them. The fees were structured to bring in $3.5 million that
would restore the division's capabilities to manage wildlife.
SENATOR STEDMAN said that some people don't buy licenses anyhow
and doubling the fee doesn't encourage them. He asked how the
department planned to handle enforcement.
MR. ROBUS agreed with his comment, but said adamantly that he
needs money for his programs. He explained that enforcement is a
split effort between his division and the Department of Public
Safety with DPS being the primary enforcers.
SENATOR STEDMAN wanted a breakdown of who purchases licenses
around the state.
5:42:00 PM
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if other areas have asked for increased
predator control.
MR. ROBUS replied yes; the division has implemented five
programs and it's challenging to keep them going. There are
numerous desires for intensive management programs elsewhere.
SENATOR SEEKINS asked if he agreed that certain predators have
been allowed to over-harvest in many areas of the state and
needs significant attention paid to it if they want to put moose
and caribou on the tables of people in the State of Alaska.
MR. ROBUS responded:
I might state it slightly differently. I'm not sure
that predators over harvest, but the situation we have
now is that predators in many places are taking enough
prey animals to prevent those prey populations from
increasing to levels that can be supported by the
habitat, which would provide more animals, more
hunting opportunity, more meat in the freezer around
the state.
SENATOR SEEKINS noted that the section requiring a conservation
tag from people who hunt waterfowl on page 14 will be deleted.
It will require anyone who fishes who is of legal age or of
capability to have a fishing license for the first time. Right
now only a hunting license is required.
5:45:12 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN asked if this changes the age requirement for
having a license from anyone who is over 16 years of age.
SENATOR SEEKINS replied that it doesn't change that.
SENATOR STEDMAN asked if that isn't the law of the land today.
SENATOR SEEKINS replied, "Not for subsistence purposes for
fishing."
5:46:06 PM
SENATOR ELTON asked if the first section, which is legislative
intent, and the last couple of sections plus the sections that
change 60 substantive operations in the Department of Fish and
Game, could be taken out until they can get the department's
take on what it really needs.
5:47:14 PM
MR. ROBUS said that would lead into what he has to say. The
department has identified the fee increase as a big need. He has
talked to advisory committees and the Board of
Game about it. "The license fee is a tremendously important
aspect of this bill from the perspective of my division and the
department."
The size and complexity of the bill means that the department is
still doing the analysis to figure out what the parts mean.
It's clear that it had concerns over two-dozen significant
changes to fish and game statutes. The relationship between the
Board of Game, the Board of Fisheries and the department has
been changed markedly in terms of who has the authority to do
what. There is a change in the way wild animals are defined and
some animals would not even be under his management jurisdiction
until or unless the Board of Game took action to make them part
of his business.
The fiscal responsibility part of the bill would impose some
pretty stringent constraints on both the division and the
department and those need to be worked through, although he
understands that accountability is something the public and the
legislature want and deserve.
KEVIN SAXBY, Department of Law (DOL), echoed Mr. Robus' comments
saying he hadn't had that much time to look at the bill, but has
identified a number of constitutional and statutory concerns
that would have to be thought through.
SENATOR SEEKINS said he appreciates the fact that the
departments have not had a lot of time to look at this, but he
wants an accounting of money the Department has spent. When the
ADF&G budget was looked at in Finance Committee, the question
was asked where the money goes. A statute says that the
legislature is to receive a project-by-project analysis of how
it was spent. But they were told "project" is not defined in
statute. Alaska's Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy
was put together with $600,000 or $800,000 worth of matching
funds from the state to obtain $3 million worth of federal money
to put into implementing a conservation plan.
In this whole plan, there is not a single plan on how
to develop a conservation plan for prey animals. There
are conservation plans for voles and birds and even
eel grass invertebrates.
None of the 74 species were nominated by a single consumptive
user group; they were nominated by the Audubon Society, Cook
Inlet Keeper and other groups across the state. His folks would
go along with some increase in fees, but they want some
accountability there. "We don't want somebody to establish a
conservation strategy for the State of Alaska that hasn't gone
through the public hearing process that the Board of Game does."
CHAIR WAGONER said he would hold the bill for further work and
adjourned the meeting at 5:58:37 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|