Legislature(1997 - 1998)
01/23/1997 03:32 PM Senate STA
Audio | Topic |
---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 35 MANAGEMENT OF PARKS & RECREATIONAL AREAS JANE WINEGAR , legislative aide to Senator Green, sponsor of SB 35, stated SB 35 is a citizens' access bill. SB 35 is identical to SB 230, except for the removal of the Denali Park issue. It passed the Senate 17-3 and the House 33-7 during the Nineteenth Legislature but was vetoed by Governor Knowles. SB 35 addresses citizens' concerns about access on state lands and waters for recreational uses. The State of Alaska mandates that all closures over 640 acres be legislatively designated. Lands under that acreage are designated without the representation of Alaskans. The Division of Parks has chosen to close areas to recreational access without notification or proper justification. SB 35 would require the Division of Lands to provide to the Legislature an annual report describing how all state lands are being designated. SENATOR MACKIE asked for an explanation of the changes being made to Chilkat State Park under SB 35. Number 352 KEN ERICKSON , former staffer to Senator Pearce, explained Section 3 of SB 35 adds slightly less than three acres of land to Chilkat State Park. That land was purchased with federal funds by DNR in the late 1970's, then transferred to the Division of Parks with ILMAs (Interagency Land Management Agreements). That acreage requires management under Chilkat State Land Authority (AS 41.21.110-113) because it was purchased with federal funds. SB 35 mandates that land acquired by the Division of Parks via ILMA be managed under a different statute. DNR is thus faced with purchasing similar land at 1997 prices, or adding the affected land to the park itself. SB 35 resolves that dilemma by statutorily adding the affected land to the park. SENATOR MACKIE asked whether the expansion of Chilkat State Park was requested by DNR. MR. ERICKSON replied it was requested by the Division of Parks. Number 367 JIM STRATTON , director of the Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, DNR, testified via teleconference, stating the Division is not opposed to the intent of SB 35, specifically the reporting language, however it is concerned that Section 2 could be interpreted to only allow legislatively established parks to become part of the park system. This would essentially "de-park" about 80 ILMA established units in the park system. All 80 units are less than 640 acres; they average about 87 acres each. These ILMA units are primarily road accessible campgrounds, fishing access areas, parking lots, trailheads, boat launch ramps, picnic areas and other roadside recreational or park attractions. It is important these units remain part of the park system because park system regulations allow for the collection of fees which accounts for about 40 percent of the Division of Parks' budget. He submitted an amendment to Senator Green's staff which rewords that section to clarify the intent of Section 2. The Division of Parks is further concerned there are three legislatively created units in the park system, Chugach State Park, Kenai River Special Management Area, and Point Bridgette State Park, whose enabling legislation specifically allows for administrative expansion. While SB 35 does not specifically remove that authority, it clouds it. SENATOR MACKIE requested a copy of Mr. Stratton's proposed amendment. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked Mr. Stratton to read the proposed amendment. MR. STRATTON stated his proposed amendment would completely replace Section 2 as follows: Notwithstanding (a)(3) of this section, the department may not administratively expand the boundaries of those parks, areas, and preserves legislatively established under AS 41.21.110- 41.21.630, except for those parks which specifically allow for such expansion under AS 41.21.110-41.21.630. CHAIRMAN GREEN stated she did not intend to offer the proposed amendment. Number 419 SENATOR DUNCAN asked if Mr. Stratton's first concern is that even though language in the enabling legislation of the three parks allows for administrative expansion, that expansion might be prohibited under SB 35. MR. STRATTON replied affirmatively. SENATOR DUNCAN asked if Mr. Stratton's second concern was that SB 35 might prohibit the collection of user fees on the smaller units managed by the Division of Parks. MR. STRATTON replied affirmatively, and explained Section 2 could be interpreted as preventing the Division of Lands from managing any unit of the park system if the land was not legislatively designated as such. Since most roadside areas are administratively created, they would drop out of the park system and no longer be under the jurisdiction of park regulations governing fees. SENATOR DUNCAN asked if those two concerns lead to the veto of the legislation last year. MR. STRATTON replied affirmatively. SENATOR DUNCAN asked Senator Green why the Legislature would want to take action that could jeopardize the state's ability to collect user fees that support the Division of Parks' budget and allow for better management. CHAIRMAN GREEN responded she understood the veto language pertained to Sections 4-5 in SB 230, which dealt with Denali Park. Those two sections have been omitted from SB 35. Additionally, there is a question as to whether the Division of Parks' concerns are as legitimate as proposed. Number 443 SENATOR MACKIE believed the Division of Parks' suggestions to be reasonable, especially if the inclusion of those suggestions might prevent another veto. He asked for clarification of any problems associated with the proposed amendment. MR. ERICKSON reviewed action taken on SB 230 at this time last year. One of the primary reasons for introduction of SB 230 was an administrative closure at Blair Lake. The closure upset many user groups in that area. That parcel of land is an ILMA: it is less than 640 acres. Under existing statute, the director can independently determine what happens on that parcel. By requiring future actions on ILMA's to undergo some sort of scrutiny, legislative review will occur. That is the question central to SB 35. SENATOR MACKIE asked if a boat launch existed in the middle of a park, but was not part of the park, the Division of Parks could close the boat ramp even though it is not an official part of the park under current law. MR. ERICKSON replied if the park is under 640 acres, the Division of Parks could do so. Number 471 MR. STRATTON clarified if the boat launch is not part of the park, but is on other state land, the Division of Parks would have no authority over the boat launch. He explained Blair Lake was added to Denali Park via an ILMA. The previous Legislature's concern centered on the expansion of Denali Park because regulations governing Denali Park then applied to Blair Lake. He understood the intent of Section 2 of SB 35 to be to prevent the Division of Parks from taking that sort of action again. Eight or nine park units exist that do not have statutory language addressing the issue of expansion. Several units have language specifically prohibiting expansion and three specifically allow for expansion. His intent in offering the proposed amendment is to clarify the specific prohibitions so that the Division's ability to manage other units by themselves is not clouded, such as an 80 acre unit along the highway not attached to a legislatively created unit. SENATOR MACKIE asked why Section 2 of SB 35 would create a problem for the Division of Parks if it makes no changes to current practices. MR. STRATTON repeated Section 2 could be interpreted to mean if there is a boat launch ramp not anywhere near an existing park, and the boat launch ramp is transferred to the Division through an ILMA, it would become a unit of the park system. SENATOR MACKIE did not believe the proposed amendment adequately addresses the problem, and suggested drafting a new section for the sponsor's review. MR. STRATTON clarified he is concerned the restriction in Section 2 would spread beyond the ILMAs not connected to legislatively created parks. He understood the intent of Section 2 was to prevent the Division from taking something the Legislature had created and expanding it. His concern is that Section 2 will apply to roadside units that are part of the park system, but will require legislative action in the future. SENATOR GREEN questioned whether the problem is a matter of semantics. MR. STRATTON believed it is and noted he and Mr. Erickson agreed on the intent of the language in SB 230, however a different legal interpretation triggered the veto. He offered to work with staff on the proposed amendment. SENATOR GREEN agreed. Number 515 CHAIRMAN GREEN took teleconference testimony on SB 35. SUSAN OLSON testified in opposition to SB 35, in particular to the definitions included in the bill. She questioned who would determine what "historical" means, and what a "proper pattern of use" is. SB 35 is an attempt at micro-management by the Legislature, and will not provide for an appropriate method of dealing with user conflicts. ELIZABETH HATTON agreed with Ms. Olson's testimony and added parks should be managed in the public interest, which includes many interests. An Economic Development Council study found only 12 percent of Anchorage householders use snow machines, and that 80+ percent seek quiet parks recreation. SB 35 is directed at the 12 percent of users; not the general public. Number 553 LYNN LEVENGOOD discussed a recent attempt by the Division of Parks to adopt regulations to establish exclusive use areas for elitist user groups, even though other uses were not harmful to the resource. Those regulations were withdrawn due to public input. Multiple use should be allowed; creating exclusive zones divides Alaskans. He asked the committee to delete subsection (7) on page 2 because it would allow BLM employees to search and seize on and off federal lands. ROY BURKHART , a board member of the Alaska Boating Association, spoke in support of SB 35. He asked the committee to request, from the Division of Parks, the number of acres and miles of waterways motorized users are restricted from using, and vice versa. Park lands are not allocated equally among motorized and non-motorized users. Non-motorized users have access to motorized areas, yet motorized users cannot use non-motorized areas. TAPE 97-1, SIDE B Number 00 STEVE MORGHEIM , Executive Director of the Alaska Marine Netters Association, testified in support of SB 35. He has found Jim Stratton willing to reach out to motorized users to find out what they want. Extra pressure on the resource has created a situation of regulation by lock-up. The Division of Parks' budget continues to be cut which makes decisions even harder to make. SB 35 will instill confidence in the public by ensuring their voices will be heard. Passage of SB 35 will help to create a win-win situation. LEONARD HAIRE , President of the Mat-Su Chapter of the Alaska Boating Association, testified in favor of SB 35. DAN ELLIOTT , President of the Mat-Su State Park Citizen Advisory Board, believed SB 35 will create unnecessary paperwork. He questioned how traditional uses will be determined. BILL HAGAR testified in support of SB 35. Number 528 JANE ANGVIK , Director of the Division of Lands, concurred with Jim Stratton's comments on behalf of DNR. SENATOR MACKIE asked if DNR's concern is not with the intent of SB 35, but with some of the technical language in the bill, and whether that concern could be easily addressed during the committee process. MS. ANGVIK replied affirmatively. CLIFF EAMES, Alaska Center for the Environment (ACE), testified in opposition to Section 1 of SB 35 because of its intent to favor motorized users over other users. Serious conflicts developed among Eagle River residents who are seriously concerned about a new snow machine trail in that area, and a proposed snow machine corridor between Anchorage and Eagle River. Areas with significant motorized use have already been effectively zoned or allocated as such because motorized use displaces many people who are seeking a quiet experience. CRAIG LYON, special assistant to the Resource Development Council (RDC), testified in strong support of SB 35. Access to Alaska's vast lands is a major priority for RDC. DON SHERWOOD , President of the Alaska Boating Association (ABA), testified in support of SB 35 as it will provide DNR with a guide to follow. He suggested adding the language "complete all new existing parks and special management areas" to subsection (14) on page 3. ABA is tired of management's stand against motorized users, even though no scientific data proves motorized vehicles are harmful in park areas. Number 485 SENATOR TAYLOR , District A, requested committee members to resist the portion of DNR's proposed amendment which pertains to the thre specific parks that were legislatively designated. In creating those parks, the Legislature gave a blank check to the Administration to expand those parks at any time, with no parameters. That blank check needs to be cancelled. Any new state parks should be created by the Legislature rather than by bureaucrats. He questioned Mr. Stratton's opinion that SB 35 will preclude DNR from collecting fees on administratively created areas and suggested obtaining a legal opinion. He believed such a problem, if it exists, could be cleaned up with a minor technical change. He advised the committee to adopt the amendment suggested by Mr. Levengood which would delete the section providing for cooperation with the U.S. government and its agencies since the U.S. Government has proposed regulations providing federal enforcement officers with search and seizure opportunities on non- federal park areas, such as state parks. SENATOR TAYLOR noted his surprise at opposition to SB 35 since it only requires the Division of Parks to provide the Legislature with a report. SB 35 would still allow the Division of Parks to continue to take action with no public input: it does require those actions to be reported to the Legislature. He suggested rewriting subsection (14) on page 3 to allow any such actions by the Division of Parks to exist only until the next legislative session, at which time those actions could be affirmed by the Legislature within 60 days. SENATOR TAYLOR proposed an amendment to prevent closure of park lands to motorized uses by the Department of Fish and Game unless DFG can prove those uses are causing significant biological harm to wildlife. The amendment (#1) reads as follows: Page 1, line 1, following "Act" : Insert " relating to the means of transportation used to provide access for the taking of game; " Page 1, following line 7: Insert a new bill section to read: " *Section 1. AS 16.05.255(a) is amended to read: (a) The Board of Game may adopt regulations it considers advisable in accordance with AS 44.62 (Administrative Procedure Act) for (1) setting apart game reserve areas, refuges, and sanctuaries in the water or on the land of the state over which it has jurisdiction, subject to the approval of the legislature; (2) establishing open and closed seasons and areas for the taking of game; (3) establishing the means and methods employed in the pursuit, capture, taking, and transport of game, including regulations, consistent with resource conservation and development goals, establishing means and methods that may be employed by persons with physical disabilities; however, the board may not prohibit or restrict access into an area by a means of transportation that has historically been used in that area unless the board finds, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the means of transportation has resulted in significant biological harm to the game population for which the means of transportation is being used;" (4) setting quotas, bag limits harvest levels, and sex, age, and size limitations on the taking of game; (5) classifying game as game birds, song birds, big game animals, fur bearing animals, predators, or other categories; (6) methods, means, and harvest levels necessary to control predation and competitions among game in the state; (7) watershed and habitat improvement, and management, conservation, protection, use, disposal, propagation, and stocking of game; (8) prohibiting the live capture, possession, transport, or release of native or exotic game or their eggs; (9) establishing the times and dates during which the issuance of game licenses, permits, and registrations and the transfer of permits and registrations between registration areas and game management units or subunits is allowed; (10) regulating sport hunting and subsistence hunting as needed for the conservation, development, and utilization of game; (11) taking game to ensure public safety." Page 1, line 8: Delete " Section 1." Insert " Sec.2. " Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Number 402 SENATOR MILLER moved adoption of Amendment #1. SENATOR DUNCAN asked Mr. Stratton if he had seen Amendment #1. Mr. Stratton responded most of the areas that come to the Division of Parks administratively are under 100 acres in size. Those areas are added to the parks for recreational development opportunities. The closures that occur are not for biological reasons, they are for public safety reasons. For example, dirt bikes might be prohibited in picnic areas except on roadways. SENATOR TAYLOR clarified Amendment #1 only relates to the Board of Game under Title 16; it does not relate to the Division of Parks at all. SENATOR DUNCAN noted he asked the wrong person the right question. He asked whether there was anyone in the audience who could respond to his question. SENATOR TAYLOR offered to answer. Number 392 SENATOR DUNCAN cautioned Senator Green, as sponsor of SB 35, that SB 35 could probably survive as written, but may not if many changes are made. CHAIRMAN GREEN thanked Senator Duncan for his advice. SENATOR MACKIE asked if there are many incidences in the past where the Board of Game has restricted access, or whether his intent is to prevent such occurrences in the future. SENATOR TAYLOR replied there are many instances where the Board of Game has restricted access to vast areas without any biological basis. Amendment #1 establishes the biological basis to be used. SENATOR MACKIE asked if the Board of Game can close areas in a state park. SENATOR TAYLOR responded the Board of Game can restrict methods and means of access, such as snowmachines and four-wheelers. Under Amendment #1, the Board of Game could only restrict access if a legitimate biological reason exists. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if there was continued objection to Amendment DFG. He repeated his concern SB 35 might get bogged down with the amendment. There being no further objection to the adoption of Amendment #1, it was adopted. SENATOR WARD moved SB 35am with accompanying fiscal notes out of committee with individual recommendations. There being no objection, the motion carried.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|