Legislature(2005 - 2006)BUTROVICH 205
02/13/2006 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB213 | |
| HB37 | |
| SB203 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 166 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 37 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 203 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 213 | TELECONFERENCED | |
CSHB 37(FIN)am -PUBLIC ACCESS TO FISHING STREAMS
4:14:23 PM
CHAIR THOMAS WAGONER announced CSHB 37(FIN)am to be up for
consideration. He said that his main concern is exactly what
type of access it provides. Certain groups, not necessarily the
State of Alaska, have spent a lot of money repairing stream
banks damaged by individual fishermen wanting access. He knew of
two or three places on the Kenai River that were closed to
access because they are very important to smolt habitat.
REPRESENTATIVE LES GARA, sponsor of HB 37, said that it
addresses two separate issues. He explained that both the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) and Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) have the right to deny public access if damage
is being caused and nothing in this bill would change that -
that could even be emphasized in this bill. He did not intend to
say the public always has to have access regardless of whether
they are causing damage to a riverbank.
SARAH GILBERTSON, Special Assistant, Alaska Department of Fish
and Game (ADF&G), said she couldn't find anything in statute on
that issue, but she learned that in maintaining access, ADF&G
tries to do so in a habitat-friendly manner and the Kenai River
is under the Upper Cook Inlet management plan.
4:19:54 PM
SENATOR KIM ELTON said he assumed, with the permissions of this
bill, that the ADF&G would be identifying areas to seek to find
common ground on providing access. He assumed that process would
include a decision prior to making any kind of an offer on
access as to whether or not habitat degradation would occur. He
assumed that meant that anyplace the department thought had
habitat degradation wouldn't be prioritized as an area needing
access and would focus on areas in which degradation was less
likely to occur.
MS. GILBERTSON replied that that language could be put in the
bill if the sponsor supported it.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA explained that since the state is the
landowner, Department of Natural Resources would, in
consultation with the Department of Fish and Game, decide what
areas needed to be protected. AS 38.05.035 gives ADF&G the power
to regulate access and habitat protection and that language
could be clarified in the bill.
4:22:15 PM
SENATOR BERT STEDMAN said he was not comfortable with this bill.
For example, language on page 2, line 4, says that private land
ownership prevents public access to a section or waterway that
is highly desirable for fishing or other recreational
attributes. "Recreational attributes" is broad language and he
was concerned about potential abuses. Also, he wanted to see
more property privatized rather than the other way around.
4:23:39 PM
CHAIR WAGONER said that the state can already determine that an
area does not have enough public access and acquire property
through the right of eminent domain. But he was having a tough
time with the idea of taking land out of private hands and
putting it into public hands and taking it off the tax rolls.
4:24:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA responded that overall he understood the tax
issue and the need to get more land into private hands, but that
doesn't mean the state shouldn't protect public access. Language
on page 2, line 16, asks the department to focus on undeveloped
lands that aren't doing much for the tax rolls anyhow. Making
access available would benefit the state in other ways.
4:25:55 PM
SENATOR FRED DYSON asked if an easement would increase a
property's value.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA explained that the value of surrounding land
would go up because of additional access. He added that
acquisition of land is completely voluntary.
CHAIR WAGONER remarked that there is a lot of litter and noise
along public accesses.
4:29:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA explained that he is just asking the state
to identify at least two linear miles (from about 100,000 miles)
of riverbank, which he thought would take 10 to 20 years to buy.
Three areas have been identified already - Montana Creek, the
Anchor River and the Salcha River. The bill also focuses on
undeveloped areas so land should be cheaper to purchase.
CHAIR WAGONER asked if those streams have problems currently.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA replied yes, problems are developing on
Montana Creek. He was not talking about the Kenai River and said
he could exempt it in this bill, but rather small streams that
can't be floated down where people have to stop on the gravel
bars.
4:31:41 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN was concerned that "initial list" on page 3,
line 26, carried the potential of abuse since that applied to
any stream in the state with fish in it.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA responded that the bill's intent is to do
just the opposite. He reiterated that the state can exercise
eminent domain anywhere now, but this bill says to only
prioritize two miles for access and to focus on undeveloped
lands, basically staying away from developed properties that are
way to expensive to spend state money on. Language on page 2,
line 18, says the state should focus on the "greatest potential
for public recreational and subsistence use."
SENATOR STEDMAN said he didn't see that language in the bill.
Clearly the initial language includes any stream that has fish
in it. Also, language on page 3, line 13, says the plan must
include a minimum access - not less than a total of two linear
miles. So it could be greater than two linear miles.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA responded that he didn't think the state
would identify more than two miles since it's expensive to
survey and government would resist spending the money to
identify a 100-mile list of lands when it doesn't even have the
money to buy the first two miles.
SENATOR ELTON said he can see both sides, but he envisioned this
process would be more community-based.
4:38:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA replied that the bill provides for public
comment. He added that the only lands that are being bought back
now are the ones that resource groups have identified for
purchase.
4:39:29 PM
CHAIR WAGONER said he would hold the bill for further study.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|