Legislature(2015 - 2016)BUTROVICH 205
03/23/2016 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB137 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 137 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 137-HUNT/FISH/TRAP: FEES;LICENSES;EXEMPTIONS
3:30:47 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL announced consideration of HB 137 [CSHB 137(FIN)
am was before the committee] saying this is the bill's third
hearing and it was last heard on February 29.
3:31:12 PM
SENATOR COGHILL moved to adopt SCS CSHB 137(RES), version 29-
LS0625\V, dated 3/23/16, as the working document.
CHAIR GIESSEL objected for discussion purposes.
3:31:56 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO joined the committee.
JOSHUA BANKS, Staff to Representative Talerico, Alaska State
Legislature, introduced himself and said he was available to
comment on SCS CSHB 137(RES), version 29-LS0625\V, for the
sponsor.
3:32:04 PM
AKIS GIALOPSOS, Staff to Senator Giessel and the Senate
Resources Committee, Alaska State Legislature, explained Version
V, as follows: 1. Page 1, Lines 1-5: Changes the title of the
bill by adding the following semicolons: "An Act relating to the
powers and duties of the commissioner of fish and game;
establishing an intensive management surcharge; providing for
the repeal of the intensive management surcharge; establishing
an anadromous sockeye salmon tag for certain rivers;" The rest
of the original title resumes after line 5.
2. Page 2, Lines 2-9: Adds a new Section. 1 of the bill,
inserting legislative intent that educational programs funded by
the Department of Fish and Game using funds from the fish and
game funds shall include a component on the history and
principles of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model.
3. Page 2, Lines 10-13: Adds a new Section. 2, adding a new
paragraph (22) to AS 16.05.050(a) "Entitled: Powers and Duties
of the Commissioner," which directs the Commissioner of Fish and
Game to maintain and improve land used to access both
subsistence and personal use dipnet fisheries, and to maintain
and operate sanitary facilities provided for the use of dip-net
fishing.
4. Page 3, Line 5: Amends Section. 4 [Prior Version Section. 2]
by raising the listed age from "62" to "65" years of age; this
change in age will conform throughout the Committee Substitute.
5. Page 5, Line 1: Amends Section. 7 [Prior Version Section. 5]
by raising the resident hunting license from "30" dollars in the
previous version of the bill, to "40" dollars.
6. Page 5, Line 3: Amends Section. 8 [Prior Version Section. 6]
by raising the resident hunting and trapping license from "45"
dollars in the previous version of the bill, to "60" dollars.
3:34:41 PM
7. Page 5, Line 5: Amends Section. 9 [Prior Version Section. 7]
by raising the resident trapping license from "20" dollars in
the previous version of the bill, to "25" dollars.
8. Page 5, Line 7: Amends Section. 10 [Prior Version Section. 8]
by raising the resident hunting and sport fishing license from
"45" dollars in the previous version of the bill, to "60"
dollars.
9. Page 5, Line 9: Amends Section. 11 [Prior Version Section. 9]
to conform to the changes in Section. 10 by raising the resident
hunting and sport fishing license from "54" dollars in the
previous version of the bill, to "69" dollars. Also corrects the
amount in statute that is being removed, because of the
legislation, from "45" dollars in the previous version of the
bill, to "60" dollars.
10. Page 5, Line 11: Amends Section. 12 [Prior Version Section.
10] by raising the resident hunting, fishing, and sport fishing
license from "60" dollars in the previous version of the bill,
to "80" dollars.
3:35:52 PM
11. Page 5, Line 25: Amends Section. 13 [Prior Version Section.
11] to conform to the changes in Section. 12 by raising the
resident hunting, trapping and sport fishing license from "69"
dollars in the previous version of the bill, to "89" dollars.
Also corrects the amount in statute that is being removed
because of the legislation, from "60" dollars in the previous
version of the bill, to "80" dollars.
12. Page 6, Lines 5-6: Amends Section. 14 [Prior Version
Section. 12] by raising the nonresident sport fishing license by
the following provisions:
a. The 14 day license is increased from "60" dollars
in the previous version of the bill, to "75" dollars.
b. The seven day license is increased from "40"
dollars in the previous version of the bill, to "45"
dollars.
13. Page 6, Lines 12-13: Amends Section. 15 [Prior Version
Section. 13] to conform to the changes in Section. 14 by raising
the nonresident sport fishing license by the following
provisions:
a. The 14 day license is increased from "69" dollars
in the previous version of the bill, to "84" dollars.
Also corrects the amount in statute that is being
removed because of the legislation, from "60" dollars
in the previous version of the bill, to "75" dollars.
b. The seven day license is increased from "49"
dollars in the previous version of the bill, to "54"
dollars. Also corrects the amount in statute that is
being removed because of the legislation, from "40"
dollars in the previous version of the bill, to "45"
dollars.
14. Page 6, Line 23: Amends Section. 19 [Prior Version Section.
17] by increasing the nonresident hunting and trapping license
from "350" dollars in the previous version of the bill, to "375"
dollars - in reference to wolverines.
15. Page 7, Lines 1-2/Page 7, Lines 5-7/Line 15: Amends Section.
20 [Prior Version Section. 18] by changing the amounts of
various nonresident big game tags to include:
a. Lowering the black bear tag from "600" dollars in
the previous version of the bill, to "450" dollars.
b. Lowering the brown or grizzly tag from "1200"
dollars in the previous version of the bill, to "1000"
dollars.
c. Raises the deer tag from "275" dollars in the
previous version of the bill, to "300" dollars.
d. Raises the elk tag from "575" dollars in the
previous version of the bill, to "600" dollars.
e. Raises the goat tag from "575" dollars in the
previous version of the bill, to "600" dollars.
f. Raises the wolverine tag from "350" dollars in the
previous version of the bill, to "375" dollars.
3:38:41 PM
16. Page 7, Line 25: Amends Section. 21 [Prior Version Section.
19] by raising the applicable age from 60 years of age to 65
years of age.
3:39:49 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL interrupted to say on page 7, line 15, he just
read the wolverine tag was raised from something to 375 dollars,
and it's supposed to be 350 dollars.
MR. GIALOPSOS said she was correct and apologized for the
misstatement. He continued to review the changes.
17. Page 8, Line 29 to Page 9, Line 5: Adds a new Section. 25,
establishing a "15" dollar fee for the Chitina dip net fishing
permit changing existing statute that charges a "0" dollar fee.
18. Page 9, Line 14: Amends Section. 26 [Prior Version Section.
23] by raising the applicable age from 60 years of age to 65
years of age.
19. Page 10, Lines 2-28: Adds a new Section. 28, establishing an
anadromous sockeye salmon tag for the Kenai and Kasilof Rivers
under the same restrictions and provisions as the statewide king
salmon tag, and fees would be assessed under the following
schedule:
a. Residents would be charged "15" dollars
b. Nonresidents would be charged:
i. "15" dollars for a one day tag
ii. "30" dollars for a three day tag
iii. "45" dollars for a seven day tag
iv. "75" dollars for a 14 day tag
v. "150" dollars for an annual tag
3:40:40 PM
20. Page 10, Lines 29-31 to Page 11, Lines 1-8: Adds a new
Section. 29, establishing an intensive management surcharge for
the purpose of funding the intensive management of the state's
game populations under AS 16.05.255(e). The surcharge will be
assessed on hunting licenses in the amount of "10" dollars for
all applicable schedules. Individuals qualifying for a "5"
dollar license or a free license would be exempt from the
surcharge.
21. Page 11, Line 30: Amends Section. 31 [Prior Version Section.
26] by raising the applicable age from 62 years of age in the
previous version of the bill, to 65 years of age.
22. Page 14, Line 4: Adds a new Section. 37, repealing the newly
created Section. 29 (Intensive Management Surcharge). This is
part of a sun-setting process that will be concluded later in
the bill.
23. Page 14, Lines 8-26: Amends Section. 39 by conforming the
order of sections referenced; raising the applicable age from 62
years of age in the previous version of the bill, to 65 years of
age; extends the sunset dates from January 1, 2019 in the
previous version of the bill, to January 1, 2020; and extends
the sunset dates from December 31, 2018 in the previous version
of the bill, to December 31, 2019.
3:42:08 PM
24. Page 15, Lines 5-7: Amends Section. 41 by conforming the
renumbered sections to the conditional effects referenced in the
legislation.
25. Page 15, Lines 8-10: Amends Section. 42 by conforming the
renumbered sections to the respective effective dates referenced
in Section. 41 of the legislation.
26. Page 15, Line 11: Adds a new Section. 43, creating an
effective date of December 31, 2020, for Section. 37 of the bill
(the repeal language of the Intensive Management Surcharge).
27. Page 15, Lines 12-13: Amends Section. 44 by extending the
effective date to all provisions not otherwise designated prior
to January 1, 2017.
3:43:05 PM
SENATOR STOLTZE asked the fiscal impact of changing the age
range for participants requiring a license.
MR. GIALOPSOS said his office had not done any fiscal analysis,
but perhaps the sponsor had.
3:43:50 PM
JOSHUA BANKS, Staff to Representative Talerico, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, said their office hadn't done a
fiscal analysis, but the department probably had.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked the policy reason behind the bill, because
it doesn't have a fiscal reason.
MR. BANKS replied the reason behind lowering the age to 16 in
the \H version of HB 137 (that passed the House) was to
encourage young hunters to participate in hunting and fishing.
The reason for lowering the age for the permanent license from
65 to 62 was to match with social security, and the sponsor is
not opposed to those two changes.
SENATOR STOLTZE said for a long period of time the personal use
fisheries were classified as subsistence and the board changed
that. Many still consider that a subsistence fishery he said,
and asked the philosophy behind the dip net fee.
MR. BANKS deferred that to the department.
MR. GIALOPSOS replied that this bill came from the Chitina Dip
Netters Association who wanted to find a mechanism by which the
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOTPF) or
the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), if those duties were
transitioned to that agency, would be able to be funded to clean
the toilet facilities, maintain the roads for access on state
land for the Chitina dip netters, and also collect the requisite
garbage to be able to deal with the human health impacts there.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked if this fee was assessed whether or not
one uses lands or launches at a private facility, as many folks
do to access the Copper River fisheries. In other words, he
asked if this is a broad-based tax on the personal use
subsistence fishery.
3:47:56 PM
MR. GIALOPSOS said that was correct.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if that fee would apply to fish
wheels on Chitina.
MR. GIALOPSOS said he did not know.
SENATOR STOLTZE said fish wheels fall under a personal use
fishery and he wondered why the term "dip netting" was used
instead of "personal use fisheries."
MR. GIALOPSOS said their office crafted that language with the
Chitina Dip Netters Association, but if there was a mistake in
editing, that was his own mistake.
CHAIR GIESSEL responded that her communication with the Chitina
Dip Netting Association revealed that folks do launch from
private areas. They may hire someone to take them to a location
on the river, but regardless they are likely contributing to
garbage issues and would like to see the area kept clean. And
there are the folks that would like to be able to take their
four-wheelers back there, but because of the condition of the
road and the continuing sluffing of that slope, it needs to be
cleaned up each year by DOTPF, and frankly, DOTPF is getting
budget cuts.
SENATOR STOLTZE said he understands, but he just wanted to put
some of this on the record.
3:49:46 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI remembered a recent Supreme Court case on
how gear is identified and asked if they can constitutionally
charge a fee for dip netting (on the Chitina River) but not for
using a fish wheel or a rod and reel.
MR. GIALOPSOS said he could not answer that.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said the Kenai River has a resident
anadromous sockeye tag, and that looks like it applies only to
sport fishing and not to the small number of subsistence users
in Kenai River or the dip netters.
MR. GIALOPSOS replied that is correct. It does not cover the dip
netters, and the Kenai River Sportfishing Association said that
language could be modified if necessary.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI clarified that he is not advocating that.
CHAIR GIESSEL found no further questions and removed her
objection and announced that SCS CSHB 137(RES), version 29-
LS0625\V, was before the committee.
CHAIR GIESSEL asked if the sponsor had any comments about the
committee substitute.
3:52:39 PM
MR. BANKS responded that the sponsor supported all the changes
except the grizzly and black bear tags for non-residents. He
believes there is high demand from non-residents to hunt grizzly
bears and that $1200 is a reasonable increase and that $500 is a
reasonable increase for a black bear tag. He still has
reservations about the intensive management surcharge, but is
willing to have a $5 surcharge. He maintained his concerns about
further increases to the resident hunting and fishing licenses
(changes 5-11).
SENATOR STEDMAN commented that a decade or so ago the license
fees were raised to pay back bonds that were issued to build two
hatcheries, one in Fairbanks and one in Anchorage, which have
now been built. It would be nice to have an update on the status
of those bonds, because as he recalled, eventually the bonds
would be paid off and that was supposed to bring the amount of
the license fee back down. Now they are talking about embedding
fees that are to pay off the bonds and never repealing them. And
today they are talking about raising the rates again before the
bonds are even paid off. He said it would also be nice to have a
geographical breakdown of where in the state people are buying
these permits. It was kind of surprising a decade or so ago,
when they did that they found that there are vast areas in
Alaska that had very little license fee collection. Had that
changed?
CHAIR GIESSEL responded that ADF&G suggested retaining those
fees for maintenance and operations of the hatcheries.
3:55:49 PM
BRUCE DALE, Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), Palmer, said Deputy
Commissioner Brooks would address that issue.
KEVIN BROOKS, Deputy Commissioner, Alaska Department of Fish and
Game (ADF&G), Juneau, Alaska, explained that the hatchery bonds
will be paid off no later than 2023. There had been some early
payment of the debt, because license sales have started to pick
up. So, that date could move up as early as 2021. House Finance
increased the surcharge to $9 once the bonds are paid off.
Currently, that surcharge sunsets on Dec 31 in the year the
bonds are paid. They have a variable rate with some of the non-
resident licenses having a higher amount. That changes to a $9
increase across the board in the bill that passed the House.
3:57:43 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN recalled that the Southeast region paid about 27
percent of the revenue needed for those hatcheries and got very
little benefit. Now he is concerned about embedding those fees
in the system, and it should be discussed as a policy decision.
Once the fees are embedded, they would never go away. He does
not know the current status of those hatcheries, but he hopes
they are functioning better than they were several years ago.
3:58:50 PM
MR. BROOKS said that both hatcheries are operating at full or
near full production. Some growth capacity was built in. He said
he would be glad to provide license purchase data back to the
committee using zip codes or by community.
SENATOR STEDMAN said he would like to see some of the fees that
they talk about sunsetting getting taken out instead of becoming
embedded.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the sockeye salmon fee for the
Kenai River applies to tributaries like the Russian River.
4:00:34 PM
TOM BROOKOVER, Director, Sportfish Division, Alaska Department
of Fish and Game, Anchorage, replied that the resident tag would
be required for the Kenai and Kasilof Rivers, and while it
doesn't specifically say main stem or tributaries, they tend to
view that type of categorization as the drainage for the whole
system.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said for clarity if you go to the Russian
River Sanctuary you are fishing in Kenai and you can move five
feet and be in the river. Is that how they are going to
interpret it?
MR. BROOKOVER replied that they would interpret it by default
for that drainage as a whole, and it would include the Russian
River. There would be no demarcation between the Russian and
Kenai Rivers.
SENATOR COSTELLO said 75 percent of department's income comes
from non-resident fees, and she asked how these fee changes will
affect that percentage.
MR. BROOKS answered that they had done an analysis for each
version of the bill that breaks the fees out by hunting,
fishing, resident, and non-resident, and they would work up that
same analysis for any CS. She is correct that a large amount of
the revenue comes from non-residents.
4:02:54 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO asked how long these fees will be in effect.
MR. BROOKS replied that fees have not been changed for about 20
years. Once they are set they tend to stay a long time.
SENATOR COSTELLO asked how Alaska's resident fees compare to
those of other states.
MR. BROOKS replied that comparisons have been done primarily
with the western states, because a lot of the licenses are
similar. Generally speaking, Alaska's fees are low for both
residents and non-residents.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked if the sockeye tag is intended to apply to
the personal use fishery and the subsistence fishery.
4:04:42 PM
MR. BROOKOVER responded that it would not apply to the personal
use fishery, because the language says: "A resident may not
engage in sport fishing on the Kenai or Kasilof Rivers without
having a current year's sockeye salmon tag."
SENATOR STOLTZE asked if it is his interpretation that this will
only apply to anglers.
MR. BROOKOVER said that is his original interpretation.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked for him to let the committee know if that
interpretation evolves.
SENATOR STEDMAN said one of his favorites subjects is
hatcheries, because he has quite a few in his district, and he
wanted the department to get back him on the status of the
hatchery bonds and if there had been any discussion to privatize
them to get rid of the maintenance issue. He also wanted to know
if any general fund monies had gone to the hatcheries.
MR. BROOKS said he would get a bond repayment table from the
Department of Revenue and that no general fund money is being
used to run the two sportfish hatcheries, the William Jack
Hernandez Hatchery in Anchorage and the Ruth Bernard Hatchery in
Fairbanks. Fish & Game funds and federal Dingle Johnson funds
are used to run those.
He explained that for several years the appropriation bill had a
provision for all state agencies to get some money due to a
"fuel trigger" when oil was over $100/barrel, and that hasn't
happened for a while. But at that point in time general funds
were used, because a lot of the heat production at two
hatcheries was from fuel purchases.
SENATOR STEDMAN said he was concerned with the funding source
game-change in the finance committees.
MR. BROOKS said he would provide information that is required.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked if there is an urgency to making this
change now, because the issue will sunset and be before the
legislature in five years.
4:10:18 PM
MR. BROOKS answered that there is no urgency since there is a
window before the bonds are paid off. Neither the sponsor nor
the department was involved in bringing that amendment forward,
but the department would implement the bill however it finally
comes out.
4:10:58 PM
MR. BANKS added that the sponsor said the change was made in the
House Finance Committee, and he was fine with it, but he would
also be fine if the committee took those sections out.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked if he could tell the committee something
about the provenance of the amendment.
MR. BANKS replied that he didn't know which member in the House
Finance Committee offered it.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked if it was in a committee substitute or an
amendment.
MR. BANKS replied that it was in a committee substitute.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked the differences between section 5 and
section 6 on page 4. It looks like section 5, AS 16.05.340(a)(1)
is amended to read that the fishing license goes from $15 to
$20. Then it looks like section 6 amends section 5 to go to $29.
MR. BROOKS said Section 6 has a different effective date that
would kick in when the bonds are paid off. That is how it was
done in each case where there is an increase in license fee
resulting from the conversion of a $9 surcharge.
4:13:17 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he was trying to figure out how much a
sport fishing license is going to cost and asked if the
effective date in this bill is 2017.
4:14:48 PM
MR. BROOKS said, yes, and he explained that Section 5 would go
into effect on January 1, 2017, and Section 6 is tied to the
full pay-off of the bonds in roughly 2022 or 2023. That similar
construct is used throughout.
MR. BROOKS addressed an earlier question about the fiscal impact
of raising the age for obtaining the permanent license from 60
to 65 years and raising the age of requiring a license from 16
years to 18. He said there was an analysis of the earlier
version of the bill.
4:15:25 PM
CHAIR GIESSEL thanked Mr. Brooks and opened public testimony.
4:15:36 PM
At ease
4:16:40 PM
AL BARRETTE, representing himself, Fairbanks, said he has been
following this bill since its inception, and he had heard a lot
of good questions today. One he really wanted answered is if the
Board of Fisheries (BOF) has the authority to require a
sportfishing license for a personal use fishery. AS 16.05.330,
which declares a person has to have a license for hunting and
sport fishing, does not mention subsistence. That is why
subsistence fishers are not required to have a license. That is
not in the bill, but neither does the bill say a personal use
fishery needs a license, but the BOF seems to think they have
the authority to require that.
MR. BARRETTE said that page 2 of the bill talks about the
principals of the American Wildlife Conservation Model and he
would be reluctant to have that language in there without adding
trapping. In fact, it discourages the sale of game animals and
that is what trappers do. Also, this bill only talks about
providing education for hunters and sport fishers, and again, he
is a trapper and supports trapping and fellow trappers.
Next, he said, the low income license is for a "family or
household," and they should realize that there are households
with two or three families in them, and this language would
greatly deprive them from combining all their incomes into one
household. Furthermore, new language for the low income license
really doesn't do anything, because in order to receive state or
federal subsidies, most, if not all, of those programs are based
on the federal poverty guidelines. If you are getting federal or
state subsidies now, it's because you fall within those poverty
guidelines. So, at least 20,000 Alaskans will get that license
and the fee hasn't been raised as the others have been.
4:19:50 PM
MIKE TINKER, Alaska Wildlife Conservation Association, Ester,
Alaska, said HB 137 needs more work. He did point out that a lot
of work had already been done it showing the interest in it.
However, the definitions need more work to reflect some of the
orientations that the senators and Mr. Barrette had talked
about.
He surmised that Wildlife Conservation would get about $5.4
million more, but assuming a 10 percent drop in sales because of
the new rates, that would come down to $4.86 million. Sportfish
at about $6.25 million may come up with only about $5.5 million.
The trap is that Pitman Robertson funds are capped at $25
million and the present use is around $20 million. That leaves
them $5 million. So, $1.6 million is needed in order to reach
the cap and every dollar raised over that doesn't get a federal
match. People shouldn't think that because all this money is
being created that the state is also going to get a 3 to 1
match.
MR. TINKER said from his experience, the non-resident 3-day
license in Washington is just what Alaska's is going to be. The
Alaska hunting license with the surcharge is going up 100
percent and for non-residents up 44 percent. This will be a
problem for some people and the same goes for the King salmon
stamp that is going up 50 percent and 30 percent for non-
residents. Alaska statutes require that license revenues benefit
the purchasers and this is an area where the subsistence users
are possibly in trouble.
4:23:08 PM
CHUCK DERRICK, President, Chitina Dipnetters Association,
Fairbanks, noted that Section 220 refers to improving state-
owned land accessing subsistence and personal dipnet fisheries
and to maintain sanitary facilities, but nothing refers directly
to Chitina. The association is only concerned with the Chitina
dipnet permit, and has tried to find a way to designate a
special account within the fish and game fund that the dipnet
permit fees could go to pay for the three things concerning the
Chitina dipnet fishery: garbage, toilets, and maintaining the
trail that runs along the canyon, which is the major ground
access to the fishery and totally unsafe for four-wheelers.
Their intent was not for subsistence or other dipnet fisheries.
MR. DERRICK said HB 137 directs the ADF&G commissioner to
maintain land used to access both subsistence and personal-use
dipnet fisheries and to maintain and operate sanitary facilities
for dipnet fishing. Again, it generalizes all the dipnet
fisheries and even includes subsistence. He asked if dipnet
permit fees are going to be used to maintain roads for all other
fisheries. He said he appreciated all the work everyone has
done, but he hoped his concerns would be addressed.
CHAIR GIESSEL noted that "subsistence" was on page 2, lines 11-
13, and thanked him for bringing it to their attention.
4:26:59 PM
RICKY GEASE, Executive Director, Kenai River Sportfishing
Association (KRSA), Kenai, Alaska, said KRSA has asked to
include the sockeye salmon stamp for the Kasilof and Kenai
Rivers for both the sport fish and personal use licensing. He
suggested that page 10, line 5, includes: "a resident may not
engage in sport and/or personal use fishing for anadromous
salmon....," and that family members need just one license (if a
family member has the sockeye salmon stamp, then other members,
while they are engaged in dipnetting, would not). So, the person
getting the dipnet permit would be the person required to get
the sockeye salmon stamp.
MR. GEASE said the Kenai has the two largest personal-use
fisheries in Cook Inlet-the Kenai and Kasilof Rivers. Budget
reductions means that funding is needed for enforcement and
management infrastructure, especially on the Kasilof River where
a municipality does not collect fees. It needs porta-potties,
trash pick-up, and fisheries management, but overall, KRSA
supports the legislation.
4:29:10 PM
TED WELLMAN, President, Kenai River Special Management Area
Advisory Board, Kenai, Alaska, said the advisory board was
created in statute when the park was created. It has 17 members
and includes the public and the municipalities. It also includes
state and federal agencies as non-voting members.
He expressed support for the sockeye salmon stamp, and that
support goes way back to the 1997 Comprehensive Plan, which
discussed having a user fee on the Kenai River to cover
enforcement. He said the impacts to the Kenai River have
increased substantially in the last few years, and money is
needed for enforcement, bank protection, and rehabilitation on
the river - as many people use the Kenai River as a bank
fishery.
MR. WELLMAN said the board has always considered this assessment
going to the personal use fishery, as well, because the personal
use fishery uses substantial facilities inside the park. This is
a good way to provide extra funds for the agencies until the
pipeline is built when even far more people will use the area.
4:31:09 PM
JOE CONNORS, sportfishing lodge owner, Sterling, Alaska,
supported HB 137 as well as including the sockeye salmon stamp
language. He said he had lived there for 45 years, and both
residents and non-residents will help defray the cost of
providing for this fishery.
4:32:15 PM
DOUG VINCENT-LANG, representing himself, Anchorage, said he
supported an adequately funded department, but he had several
concerns with HB 137. First is the lack of accountability
towards ensuring that the increased fees would actually benefit
the department. Also, there has been no significant outreach to
representative user groups to determine priorities and how the
increased revenues would be spent to benefit fishers, hunters,
and trappers. For this reason he suggested not moving the bill
now and asking the department to develop a detailed five-year
spending plan in consultation with the users who will be paying
the increased fees.
He also suggested that the committee closely examine what an
adequately-funded department is, in light of the department's
reluctance to defend its right to manage federal lands. They are
willing to cede authority to over two-thirds of the state, and
one has to question whether increased revenues are really
needed. This failure to defend the state's right to manage is
highlighted by the state's failure to oppose the US Fish and
Wildlife Service regulations at the recent Anchorage hearing,
despite being in attendance.
MR. VINCENT-LANG also requested lower fee increases for the
general resident and non-resident hunting license, replacing
that with a larger intensive management surcharge that can only
be used to fund projects approved by Board of Game under the
state's intensive management statute. He said the fee should be
$15 for residents and $45 for non-residents. If surcharge fees
are only used for intensive management, he suggested the
creation of a subaccount within the fish and game fund modeled
after the sportfish hatchery surcharge, so that deposited
surcharge fees only be used to fund intensive management as set
out under AS 16.05.255(e). These projects have a proven track
record in benefiting hunters.
MR. VINCENT-LANG also suggested recommending to the Finance
Committee that they use CIP budgets to direct spending of
increased revenues generated from these funds rather than
increase the operating budget where the agency has too much
discretion and flexibility to adjust priorities and expenditures
within broad missions and goals, some of which are not supported
by the hunting community.
Finally, he related that he was closely involved with
establishing the sport fish hatchery surcharge and both the
department and the bill's sponsor, Senator Seekins, made a
commitment to anglers and user groups that this surcharge would
go away when the bonds are paid off. "I made that commitment,"
he said. To keep this surcharge and remove the language
dedicating the collected fees to hatchery bond repayment breaks
a promise and a commitment made to anglers. If the legislature
wishes to turn the surcharge into a general license fee, they
should make it clear that this is their intention and do so
after the surcharge and hatcheries are paid off. Otherwise
future bond surcharges will be viewed with skepticism, and
rightfully so.
In closing, Mr. Vincent-Lang said he supported an adequately-
funded department, but he urged an assessment of what is
adequate to provide greater accountability for moving this bill
forward, especially in terms of the intensive management
surcharge.
4:35:26 PM
NANCY HILLSTRAND, representing herself, Kachemak Bay, Alaska,
said she owns a fish processing business on the Homer Spit. Her
customers are fishermen, wildlife watchers, photographers, and
commercial photographers. She lives in the Bush and commutes by
boat, and she collects firearms, so she contributes to the
Pitman Robertson and the Dingle Johnson funding to the state.
She would like to purchase a license that reflects her
utilization of wildlife, and presently she is not represented or
able to contribute to ADF&G directly.
MS. HILLSTRAND said she sent the committee a paper entitled "How
to Prospect For A New ADF&G Funding Mechanism," saying the 2015
Tourism, Fishing, and Mining Report from the Institute of Social
and Economic Research (ISER) indicated that tourism in Alaska
has a return for the maximum benefit of its people. The economic
importance of Alaska's wildlife, which was published by ADF&G in
2014, further clarifies that maximum use consistent with public
interest. Their report indicated that $1.2 billion was spent by
non-residents to observe wildlife, and the hunting non-residents
spent only $150 million, and that money is significant. For the
fiscal health of Alaska, it is important to recognize this
additional $1 billion spent by wildlife viewers, along with $230
million in revenue to the government and $976 million in labor
income from this viewing constituency.
MS. HILLSTRAND said she supported adding a $5 license fee for
both residents and non-residents on top of the $20 emblem and a
mandatory license for photographers: $10 for resident commercial
viewing guides and commercial photographers and $20 for non-
resident commercial guides or commercial photographers.
In closing, she said she is hoping they can do something to add
a larger constituency to pay into the fish and game fund,
because obviously with close to 700,000 people utilizing our
wildlife, some means of tying them into some type of payment
should be included for management of fish and game. For example,
there are 900,000 cruise ship people, most of whom want to see
wildlife, and if each passenger paid $5 included in the cruise
ship taxes, that would bring in an additional $4.5 million.
4:39:00 PM
RICHARD BISHOP, representing himself, Fairbanks, said he
appreciated everyone's efforts in bringing this to the attention
of the legislature and the public. He agreed that trapping be
included as part of the North American Conservation Model.
MR. BISHOP said he supports, in particular, the intention behind
the surcharge, the Chitina permit fee, and the increases in
resident licenses and tag fees. He also supports the higher age
criteria for permanent licenses. The revision of the low income
license standard seems to be appropriate. He said he is not
particularly concerned with prior non-resident license and tag
fees negatively affecting the sales or the amount of income,
because Alaska will continue to draw non-resident hunters.
CHAIR GIESSEL thanked him for his testimony and updated him that
today the new Version V was introduced, and he was looking at
Version X, which was the version right before it.
4:42:10 PM
THOR STACEY, lobbyist, Alaska Professional Hunters Association
(APHA), Fairbanks, said he very much supported a well-funded
department and Version V of the bill. He said the professional
hunters have a big stake in the game regarding sustainability of
the wildlife populations and access to those resources. The
increase of 100 percent for black and grizzly bear fees are
pretty significant, he noted, and he wanted to see the increases
be consistent from species to species.
4:43:17 PM
EDDIE GRASSER, lobbyist, Safari Club International, Alaska
Chapter, Juneau, Alaska, supported SCS CSHB 137( ), version \V.
He said they had worked with the Territorial Sportsmen, the
Alaska Outdoor Council, and APHA to support legislation to
adequately fund the department, and they believe version V goes
a long way towards that.
One thing his group insists upon, since they didn't get tag
fees, is that there be an IM surcharge and their support of the
bill is tied to that. Along with Mr. Tinker, they also believe
that AS 16.05.100 needs to be amended to set up a separate
account for the money to go into, similar to the sportfish
hatchery section.
SENATOR STOLTZE said that some of his constituents support
adjusting the license fees but have an inherent mistrust of the
department's philosophical directions on a number of issues and
think there should be some quid pro quos about changing some of
the environmental leaning versus Alaska's hunting community.
MR. GRASSER responded that the reason for supporting the
surcharge has nothing to do with what he just said. Of greater
concern is the fact that administrations come and go, and some
in the room remember the 90s when management for hunting within
the structure of the department "kind of went down the tubes."
So they feel strongly that the IM surcharge helps alleviate
those concerns. It's imperative that is in the bill for them to
support it.
4:46:30 PM
RON SOMERVILLE, lobbyist, Territorial Sportsmen, Juneau, said
his group appreciates all the effort put into this bill. Their
whole approach, as explained by Mr. Grasser, has been to produce
enough money not only to make up for the 23 years since there
has been an increase in wildlife fees, but also looking 10 or 15
years ahead when the state is not going to get any more
increases, especially if the fiscal situation remains the same.
He said that one of the really important things from the
standpoint of this coalition is the IM sunset provision because
of the distrust around it. The sunset does one thing: it allows
residents to decide to continue it or not if the money is not
being used appropriately.
MR. SOMERVILLE said he always tries to explain to people that
they have the authority to "harass you people," that the budget
has an oversight, and that mechanisms exist to make sure that
those distrusts are addressed. He said they are happy with the
bill; it will provide adequate funds to carry the department for
a while and do the things that are expected. He reminded people
that inflation since 1993 is 65 percent, and they have proposed
a license increase for residents of only 60 percent. So, it's
still a good deal.
4:49:24 PM
DOUG LARSON, Territorial Sportsmen, Inc. (TSI), Juneau, Alaska,
thanked the sponsor for bringing this issue forward and the
committee and staff for all their hard work. Their efforts have
coalesced and that speaks to the legitimacy and need for this
measure. No tag fees are included in these changes and he
doesn't advocate for that at this point, but since there aren't
any, when one looks at what Alaskans pay ($40 license fee in V),
they can kill four and in some places, six deer a year, one
moose, a sheep, a goat, several black bear (in some parts of the
state), and a brown bear-a pretty amazing cadre of species for
$40. "It's a steal." By comparison, in other states the license
fee, itself, would be substantially more than $40. But then on
top of that, for each of those deer they pay another fee, maybe
$50-100 for one deer, and more for a moose and a bear. All those
fees are added in other states.
CHAIR GIESSEL said the Territorial Sportsmen is an intriguing
name because she and Senator Coghill call themselves Territorial
kids, having been born here before statehood, and asked if
that's where the title came from.
MR. LARSON answered yes; it came from the territorial days. He
also is a Territorial child.
CHAIR GIESSEL, finding no further comments, closed public
testimony on HB 137 and said the committee would continue to
accept written testimony. She asked for amendments to come to
her office by tomorrow at 5 p.m. and held HB 137 in committee.
SENATOR STOLTZE said he wanted to know how the family unit being
a household member or several members of households that are
fishing together on a boat is interpreted and enforced in the
personal use fishery.
CHAIR GIESSEL agreed that that might need further definition in
the bill, and she also wanted to see a budget plan for the use
of the increased fees.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB137-Comments-Doug Vincent-Lang.pdf |
SRES 3/23/2016 3:30:00 PM |
HB 137 |
| HB137-Comments-Resident Hunters of Alaska.pdf |
SRES 3/23/2016 3:30:00 PM |
HB 137 |
| HB137-Version V.pdf |
SRES 3/23/2016 3:30:00 PM |
HB 137 |
| HB137-Explanation of Changes-Version V.pdf |
SRES 3/23/2016 3:30:00 PM |
HB 137 |
| HB137-Comments-Nancy Hillstrand.pdf |
SRES 3/23/2016 3:30:00 PM |
HB 137 |