Legislature(1995 - 1996)
02/03/1995 08:15 AM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE RESOURCES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 3, 1995
8:15 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bill Williams, Co-Chairman
Representative Scott Ogan, Vice Chairman
Representative Ramona Barnes
Representative John Davies
Representative Irene Nicholia
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Joe Green, Co-Chairman
Representative Alan Austerman
Representative Pete Kott
Representative Eileen MacLean
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
*HB 121"An Act relating to the timber resources within the
state."
HEARD AND HELD
HB 113"An Act relating to reports by fishing vessels that are
not registered under the laws of the state."
SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
(* First Public Hearing)
WITNESS REGISTER
JACK PHELPS, Aide
Representative Bill Williams
State Capitol, Room 128
Juneau, AK 99801
Phone: 465-3424
POSITION STATEMENT: Prime Sponsor of HB 121
ERNESTA BALLARD
705 Main Street
Ketchikan, AK 99901
Phone: 247-0846
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
SANDRA MESKE, President
Alaska Women in Timber
111 Stedman Street
Ketchikan, AK 99901
Phone: 225-1060
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
BOB LOISELLE, President
Klukwan Forest Products
P.O. Box 34659
Juneau, AK 99803
Phone: 789-7361
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
RIKI OTT, Representative
Habitat Committee
United Fishermen of Alaska
P.O. Box 1430
Cordova, AK 99574
Phone: 424-3915
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
TERRY HERMACH, Representative
Prince William Sound Conservation Alliance
P.O. Box 2493
Valdez, AK 99686
Phone: 835-5673
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
BILL COPELAND, Representative
Alaska Wilderness Recreation and Tourism Association
P.O. Box 2581
Valdez, AK 99686
Phone: 835-5863
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
LOUIE BENCARDINO, Representative
Kenai Economic Development Board
P.O. Box 99664
Seward, AK 99664
Phone: 224-5798
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
AL SHAFER
P.O. Box 610
Seward, AK 99664
Phone: 224-3138
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
STEVE GIBSON
1622 Highland Drive
Homer, AK 99603
Phone: 235-6487
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
DUANE ANDERSON
37685 Conner Road
Soldotna, AK 99669
Phone: 262-7233
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
STAN STEDMAN, Economic Development Director
Kenai Peninsula
110 S. Willow
Kenai, AK 99611
Phone: 262-7233
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
KEN FREEMAN, Projects Coordinator
Resource Development Council
121 W. Firewood #258
Anchorage, AK 99507
Phone: 276-0788
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
TABITHA GREGORY, Representative
Alaska Center For The Environment
P.O. Box 100686
Anchorage, AK 99510
Phone: 274-3621
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
SEAN MCGUIRE
351 Cloudberry
Fairbanks, AK 99789
Phone: 479-7154
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
DAN RITZMAN, Representative
Northern Alaska Environmental Center
324 Yana
Fairbanks, AK 99789
Phone: 455-7868
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
JOE YOUNG, President
Young's Timber
P.O. Box 42
Tok, AK 99780
Phone: 883-5060
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
K.A. Swiger, Executive Director
Stand Up!
P.O. Box 23645
Ketchikan, AK 99901
Phone: 225-8627
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
CHRIS MOSS
P.O. Box 1115
Homer, AK 99607
Phone: 235-8053
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
WILLY DUNNE, Representative
Alaska Environmental Lobby
P.O. Box 22151
Juneau, AK 99802
Phone: 463-3366
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
TYLER JONES, City Manager
City of Seward
P.O. Box 167
Seward, AK 99664
Phone: 224-4047
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
RON LONG
P.O. Box 2464
Seward, AK 99664
Phone: 224-7068
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
G.R. BROOKMAN
715 Mui Avenue
Kenai, AK 99611
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
RED SMITH, Representative
Alaska Husky Wood
P.O. Box 770
Cooper Landing, AK 99572
Phone: 595-1281
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
CLIFF EAMES, Representative
Alaska Center For The Environment
519 W. 8th, #201
Anchorage, AK 99501
Phone: 274-3621
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
ROBERT LACOCK
4511 Laurel Street, #31
Anchorage, AK 99501
Phone: 561-1238
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
DOUG YATES, Representative
Alaska Boreal Forest Council
P.O. Box 221
Ester, AK 99725
Phone: 479-8388
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
MARK LUTTRELL, President
Eastern Kenai Environmental Action Association
P.O. Box 511
Seward, AK 99664
Phone: 224-5372
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
LARRY SMITH
Fritz Creek, AK 99603
Phone: 235-3855
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 121
CHUCK ACHBERGER, Executive Director
Juneau Chamber of Commerce
124 W. 5th
Juneau, AK 99801
Phone: 586-6420
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
CHRIS GATES, Executive Director
Alaska Forest Association
111 Stedman Street
Ketchikan, AK 99901
Phone: 225-6114
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 121
TOM BOUTIN, Director
Division of Forestry
Department of Natural Resources
400 Willoughby Avenue
Juneau, AK 99801
Phone: 465-2491
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information and answered questions
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 121
SHORT TITLE: SALVAGE TIMBER SALES
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) WILLIAMS, Therriault, Ogan,
Grussendorf, Toohey, Mulder, Rokeberg, Kelly, Kott, Green,
G.Davis,Foster
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/25/95 132 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/25/95 132 (H) RES
01/26/95 148 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KELLY, KOTT
01/30/95 180 (H) COSPONSOR(S): GREEN, G.DAVIS, FOSTER
02/03/95 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124
BILL: HB 113
SHORT TITLE: REPORTS BY OUT OF STATE FISHING VESSELS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) WILLIAMS,Grussendorf,Kubina,Mackie
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/23/95 116 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/23/95 117 (H) FSH, RES
01/25/95 136 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KUBINA
01/26/95 148 (H) COSPONSOR(S): MACKIE
01/30/95 179 (H) FSH WAIVED PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE,
RULE 23
02/01/95 (H) FSH AT 05:00 PM CAPITOL 124
02/03/95 (H) RES AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 124
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 95-8, SIDE A
Number 000
The House Resources Committee was called to order by Co-Chairman
Williams at 8:15 a.m. Members present at the call to order were
Representatives Williams, Davies and Ogan. Members absent were
Representatives Green, Austerman, Barnes, Kott, MacLean and
Nicholia.
HRES - 02/03/95
HB 121 - SALVAGE TIMBER SALES
JACK PHELPS, AIDE, REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS, PRIME SPONSOR,
said HB 121 addresses a significant problem facing Alaska's
forests. He stated HB 121 provides the Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) with new management tools to help address forest
health problems. He noted that while the spruce bark beetle
problem is the most well-known problem, HB 121 provides the
department with the tools to address a variety of other issues
and problems they are encountering in managing the state's timber
lands for multiple use, sustained yield and general forest
health.
MR. PHELPS pointed out an item in committee member folders
entitled "Alaska Forest Health 3/94" (may be found in the House
Resources Committee Room, Capitol #124, and after adjournment of
the second session of the 19th Alaska State Legislature, in the
Legislative Reference Library). He noted the handout states that
extensive loss of old-growth habitat, increased fragmentation,
and lack of natural regeneration constitutes the largest
ecological crisis facing Alaska's forests today. The potential
for catastrophic fires from increased fuel loadings poses a
growing social problem. The loss of economic forest values
(tourism, wildlife/fish, and timber) will hinder Alaska's ability
to diversify its economy and reduce the state's economic
dependency on oil. He stressed those are important issues which
HB 121 addresses.
MR. PHELPS felt it is exceptionally important that the problem be
addressed and pursued with vigor, management practices which will
help restore the state's forests to health. He said section 1 of
HB 121 allows the department to open the public comment period
and begin to process timber sales in salvage situations without
having to list those sales on two successive five-year plans. He
stressed it was important to not only recognize what HB 121 does
but also to understand what the bill does not do. He stated this
proposed section does not exempt salvage sales from AS 38.05.112
which requires that a site specific forest plan be developed for
timber sales. He emphasized this section only allows the
department to begin sooner in difficult and crisis situations and
does not by-pass any of the site specific responsibilities or the
public comment period.
MR. PHELPS stated subsection (b) in HB 121 exempts the
department, if a salvage sale is being handled as a negotiated
sale, from limitations imposed in AS 38.05.115, which include a
one year limitation on the sale and a one-half million board foot
limitation on the sale. He said the second section of HB 121
simply amends existing negotiated sale provisions to include
crisis situations. He told committee members to note that all
three conditions listed on lines 2-4, page 2, are required in
order for the sale to take place.
MR. PHELPS said it is important for the committee to note that
provisions of HB 121 are in harmony with current state
regulations, which were built off of the Forest Practices Act
(FPA). He read a brief excerpt from a handout in member's
folders, 11 AAC 95.180 Insect and Disease Prevention and Control
(may be found in the House Resources Committee Room, Capitol
Room 124, and after adjournment of the second session of the 19th
Alaska State Legislature, in the Legislative Reference Library).
"When trees on state and municipally owned forest land contain
insects or disease which pose a significant threat to surrounding
healthy trees, they must be salvaged as rapidly as is
practicable, dependent upon access and marketability, to prevent
spread of the forest pests or disease. Trees must also be
salvaged where environmental catastrophes such as wind or
flooding cause them to be highly susceptible to bark-beetle
infestation. Where salvage of trees killed by insects or disease
is conducted for the sole purpose of using wood fiber and is
consistent with the management objectives for state and municipal
forest land, salvage should occur before wood deterioration
results, if a significant loss of merchantability is to be
avoided."
Number 099
CO-CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS noted for the record that Representative
NICHOLIA had joined the committee at 8:17 a.m.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES noted he intends to offer amendments
on HB 121. One amendment regards reforestation and another
amendment regards the prospective nature of the commissioner
determining that something might happen two years from now.
ERNESTA BALLARD, KETCHIKAN, testified via teleconference and
expressed support for HB 121. She noted her pleasure in seeing
the legislature continuing to take initiatives to increase
opportunities for commercial access to state timber. She said
HB 121 represents the kind of common sense and practicality that
are the hallmark of economic development. The provisions of HB
121 are good for the state and the timber industry.
MS. BALLARD stressed HB 121 is good for the state because it
allows the DNR to respond to disease, insect infestation and fire
in state forests within the short window of economic opportunity
before all commercial value is lost. She said the normal five
year planning cycle prescribed by Title 38 does not work when
such natural disasters occur. She believed that the public
interest is adequately protected in the new language of HB 121
which provides for a best interest determination by the DNR
commissioner. She felt this process accommodates the need for
public comment and interagency coordination.
MS. BALLARD stated HB 121 is also good for the state because it
provides the commissioner the opportunity to negotiate a timber
sale when the stand is diseased, infested or damaged by fire.
The negotiation procedures of AS 38.05.118 provide real
advantages to the state in the volatile timber market. She
pointed out that a negotiated sale can proceed far more quickly
than a sale conducted with a competitive bid. She stressed the
state also benefits from the exemption offered in HB 121 from the
sales restrictions listed in AS 38.05.115. Diseased and damaged
timber must be moved quickly. She said the state has challenge
enough in securing a willing and qualified buyer for this special
timber.
Number 154
MS. BALLARD told committee members HB 121 is good for the people
of the state. Sale of damaged timber provides revenue to support
other state programs. She noted that the excellent record of the
DNR in sale management, reforestation, and multiple use of
forested lands attests to their qualifications to manage these
sales. She said it was important to note these sales of damaged
timber will be categorized as salvage sales. Despite the fact
the commissioner has discretion under state law in managing
salvage sales, DNR has a long-standing policy to require
reforestation.
MS. BALLARD stated HB 121 is good for the timber industry. She
stressed HB 121 potentially offers thousands of board feet of
timber for harvest and production. Alaska is home to a large and
skilled work force with expertise and experience in every aspect
of this industry including timber cruisers, engineers, heavy
equipment operators, cutters, tug boat operators, and sales
representatives. She said these people have made their homes
here, invested in their businesses, and are raising their
families in Alaska. She urged committee members to support
passage of HB 121 into law.
SANDRA MESKE, PRESIDENT, ALASKA WOMEN IN TIMBER, testified via
teleconference and expressed support for HB 121. She said HB 121
is a healthy forest enabling bill. She stressed HB 121 allows
the DNR to expedite its timber sale program for insect damaged
trees on state lands, which will in turn assist in proper forest
management on state lands. She urged committee members to assist
Representative Williams in passage of HB 121.
Number 177
BOB LOISELLE, PRESIDENT, KLUKWAN FOREST PRODUCTS, INC., stated
the committee will receive much thoughtful and well-considered
testimony on HB 121, both for and against. He said some will be
based on philosophical beliefs. He noted his testimony is based
on his philosophy that the state should make wise use of its
resources, but is also based on his personal experience as a
purchaser of state timber sales in recent years. Based on this
experience, there is no doubt in his mind that HB 121 is needed.
MR. LOISELLE stressed the recent Kalgin Island sale is a good
case in point. He said his company's cruise of this timber
indicated that 57 percent of the trees were dead and 90 percent
were infected by the spruce bark beetle. Despite DNR's
successful defense of a motion to stay this sale, when bid day
arrived, no one came. He stated the timber was of such poor
quality that most would have had to been chipped for pulp and
there was not enough revenue to cover operating costs. He noted
the key point is that DNR is behind the curve in the forest pests
problem and if the state continues to offer these sales after
most of the trees are dead or infected, many of them will not
sell because of the difficult economics involved. He felt forest
management in the state will be set back severely. He also felt
there is still adequate public process and review of these sales.
Number 212
RIKI OTT, REPRESENTATIVE, HABITAT COMMITTEE, UNITED FISHERMEN OF
ALASKA (UFA), said the habitat committee opposes HB 121. She
stated Speaker Gail Phillips came the day before to speak to UFA
and a general packet of bills disposing large amounts of public
lands into private hands with restricted public comment was
discussed. She stated Speaker Phillips assured UFA that it is
not the House's intent to limit public hearings and Speaker
Phillips noted that a Special Committee on Fisheries was set up
specifically to addresses fisheries issues.
MS. OTT felt HB 121 should be referred to the Special Committee
on Fisheries. She stated HB 121 is unnecessary because DNR can
already complete the timber sale process in less than two years.
DNR also has the authority to carry out emergency timber sales in
response to forest health problems. She stressed HB 121 exempts
forest logging from the sustained yield principle. Section 1 (b)
of HB 121 provides for exemption from AS 38.05.115. She pointed
out that specific statute includes the sustained yield principle.
MS. OTT stated HB 121 provides for an exemption from forest
cutting size limits. For example, the entire Tanana Valley could
be cut. She said the habitat committee is also concerned about
the ability of DNR to predict forest health problems.
Specifically, under the FPA currently, there are numerous
problems with DNR and Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G).
She said the due deference given under the FPA has not been
working and felt HB 121 gives DNR even more power, away from
ADF&G.
MS. OTT told committee members the commercial fishing industry is
paying its own way and is the largest employer of Alaskans. She
said the commercial fishing industry cannot afford to subsidize
irresponsible timber harvest. She said HB 121 uses the forest
health as an excuse for opening public lands to private cutting.
She stated if the timber industry feels this is necessary, the
habitat committee would ask that the timber industry, the fishing
industry and other users of the forest get together, as they all
did under the FPA, and work out the issue together.
Number 269
TERRY HERMACH, REPRESENTATIVE, PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND CONSERVATION
ALLIANCE, testified via teleconference and expressed opposition
to HB 121. He said HB 121 would create a maze of roads hindering
the long-term health of a natural ecosystem and open up areas for
large scale road hunting which would highly impact the game in
the area. He stated HB 121 would also hinder the long-term
recovery of the forest. He felt if trees are left as they are,
regeneration occurs. He noted it would be a detriment to the
state to create a timber industry where none now exists.
BILL COPELAND, REPRESENTATIVE, ALASKA WILDERNESS RECREATION &
TOURISM ASSOCIATION (AWRTA), testified via teleconference and
explained AWRTA. He stated ecotourism comprises about ten
percent of the $315 billion that Americans spend each year on
travel. It is the industry's fastest growing segment, with a
growth rate of 20 percent per year. He pointed out that in 1993,
Alaska visitors spent $1.5 billion, which created 15,200 jobs and
generated a tourism industry payroll of between $275 and $300
million. By contrast, the forest products industry contributed
only $565 million to the Alaskan economy, creating 3,185 jobs and
producing an industry payroll of $140 million.
Number 311
MR. COPELAND said after reviewing HB 121, AWRTA has no objection
to the overall idea of providing for negotiated salvage timber
sales where there is a demonstrated economic and scientific basis
for salvaging timber and mitigating outbreaks of tree disease or
insect infestation. He felt it must be provided, however, that
these timber sales be subject to the requirements of public
notice and allowance for public comment and involvement in the
decision making process, and be consistent with overall land use
plans and the provisions of the FPA. He stressed decision making
on timber salvage sales should consider other beneficial and
competing uses in the area, as well as the impacts of creating
access to the salvage areas.
MR. COPELAND stated AWRTA objects to the proposed language under
AS 38.05.117(b) to exempt negotiated salvage sales from
AS 38.05.115. Rather, AWRTA suggests the following: Add a new
subsection applicable only to negotiated salvage sales of over
500,000 board feet that reads the same as the present
AS 38.05.115(a), except delete the "without advertisement"
provision contained in the third sentence. He stressed this new
subsection would retain the language requiring the sale to be
consistent with the sustained yield principle and be subject to
preferences among other beneficial uses, but would require
advertisement of salvage sales over 500,000 board feet.
MR. COPELAND said AWRTA suggests that for negotiated salvage
sales, a cap on maximum volume and a contract period be
established by statute. He added that under the present language
proposed in HB 121, there is no limit to the volume negotiable
and a 25 year maximum is currently allowed by AS 38.05.118(a).
He pointed out that the proposed language for AS 38.05.117(a)
would allow the DNR commissioner to offer salvage timber sales in
stands that will lose substantial economic value if not salvaged
within two years. He noted this suggests the term of these
salvage contracts should not exceed two years, since after that,
the timber will then be of little value.
MR. COPELAND stated AWRTA objects to the proposed language of
AS 38.05.118(c) to include the addition of the phrase "or will
exist within two years" in the first sentence. He said it is
difficult enough to make resource decisions on existing
conditions, and adding a hypothetical condition only weakens the
decision.
REPRESENTATIVE RAMONA BARNES requested Mr. Copeland to fax to the
committee information on where he gets his ecotourism figures.
She said they are not the figures she has seen. She reminded
those who were testifying that all the money in the state comes
from development dollars such as petroleum.
Number 385
LOUIE BENCARDINO, REPRESENTATIVE, KENAI ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
BOARD, testified via teleconference and stated he is in favor of
HB 121. He said the Seward area meets all the requirements
listed in HB 121. He added that Seward also has a $30 million
mill which has been shut down for the past six months. He
stressed there is a definite need for timber in order to get the
mill back in operation. He noted the biggest problem is
convincing companies that there is timber available for
harvesting in Alaska.
MR. BENCARDINO stated he favors supporting the federal forest
regulations regarding distance from creeks and crucial slide
areas. He felt the timber in the United States (U.S.) has been
studied and restudied and the regulations already in effect
should be used. He said there is a good possibility for
reforestation. He also felt it important that the plant in the
Mat-Su valley be supported. He said the state should take
advantage of the timber available and thought DNR could do a good
job as long as they have the tools.
AL SHAFER, SEWARD, testified via teleconference and said he is in
the logging business. He recalled that previously all timber in
Alaska which had matured was called over mature which meant it
was dying. He said the Kenai Peninsula has the bug kill and
stressed it is ridiculous for someone to say let those trees die
and fall down to put nutrients into the soil. He stressed Alaska
is a resource state. He urged support of HB 121.
Number 454
STEVE GIBSON, HOMER, testified via teleconference and said his
understanding was that the Seward mill was shut down because it
was more profitable for the owners to export than mill locally.
He expressed opposition to HB 121. He felt HB 121 is a
simplistic approach to the problem. He noted that all mature
spruce on the Kenai Peninsula are at risk for the spruce bark
beetle but that does not mean the entire area should be cut down.
He added that the requirements of the FPA can be met with two
listings in about a year and one-half which is not a
prohibitively long time.
MR. GIBSON stated there are many reasons some stands should not
have salvage sales even though there is insect damage. Often a
stand is made up of components which would suffer more damage to
the regeneration than would be justified by the recovery of the
salvageable trees. He felt the public review should not be
shortened or exempted in the case of negotiated sales. For
example, the forest in the Ninilchik area, which has been the
focus of state sales, contain about 4,000 feet an acre. The
rotation time in those woods are typically 100 to 150 years,
unlike the forest in Southeast and outside. At minimum bids,
this timber is currently advertised at about $35 an acre or $8.79
per thousand. He said many of the smaller and younger trees are
damaged by salvage and thought it was in the public's right to
have a year and one-half to consider the trade-offs which will be
involved.
MR. GIBSON stated DNR needs to focus on earlier intervention in
those areas which are adjacent to the already catastrophic
infestations and execute their prescriptions with a much lighter
hand. He felt HB 121 does nothing to address those problems. He
stressed that salvaging marginal timber cannot be equated with
forest health and in many cases it is just the opposite. He
pointed out the public needs a complete opportunity to review an
evaluation of that.
Number 511
DUANE ANDERSON, KENAI, testified via teleconference. He said
there is one lie which continues to circulate and that is, timber
loses its value immediately or very soon upon becoming dead.
Referring to a book published by the National Log Home Builders
in the U.S., he said there are 126 people (log home builders) and
the manufacture is primarily American products. Since 1970, 105
of those people have gone into business, of which none are
currently in Alaska. He said those outside western American
areas became viable primarily for two reasons. First, the bark
beetle suddenly made a large volume of dry timber available which
makes logs a very viable, valuable, and commercially worthwhile
product. Second, the American home building industry and its
people who have the controls and develop guidelines for
construction use of acceptable material for home building began
to realize that log homes traditionally were highly successful
and began to establish and remove the barriers that were in
place. He added that finance institutions have precluded
effective log home financing.
MR. ANDERSON said Alaska is very late in the entire scenario. He
stated the resource now dying is not nearly under so much stress
of time or value lost as perceived. The state needs to realize a
very large opportunity. He stated HB 121 mainly gives a very
quick mechanism for wood chip people on the Kenai Peninsula to
get their hands on more wood.
Number 573
STAN STEDMAN, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, KENAI PENINSULA,
testified via teleconference and said he is not prepared to
represent his organization. However, he recognized and
appreciated the intent of HB 121 and the desire to protect the
state's forest health and provide an opportunity for public
involvement. He stated he would also like to see a shortening of
the time frame to realize the opportunity of utilization of the
resource.
MR. STEDMAN pointed out that in terms of the criteria listed on
page 2, lines 2-4, the Kenai Peninsula has the highest regional
rate of unemployment in the state. He added he is working with
small operators, through the business assistance program, who are
challenged with being able to access a supply of timber for their
operations. He noted the Kenai Peninsula has the most severe
timber beetle infestation in the U.S. He looked forward to the
possibility of utilizing the timber and expressed appreciation
for the tool to possibly accomplish that.
KEN FREEMAN, PROJECTS COORDINATOR, RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
(RDC), testified via teleconference and stated RDC is a proponent
of a healthy forest products industry and has worked over the
years to advance a forest health initiative addressing the spread
of the spruce bark beetle infestation in Southcentral and
Interior Alaska. He said RDC supports HB 121, which is not a
breach of the FPA. The FPA provides exemptions to the five-year
schedule for timber salvage.
MR. FREEMAN pointed out that currently, the commissioner of DNR
can conduct a negotiated sale if there is a high level of
unemployment, an underutilized manufacturing capacity, and an
underutilized allowable cut of state timber. He said HB 121
merely amends current law to add timber that will lose
substantial economic value due to disease, fire, or land use
conversion. He stated HB 121 simply adds another circumstance
under which the commissioner can utilize the existing negotiated
sale authority. He noted that HB 121 will give DNR the ability
to accelerate its timber sale program for insect-damaged trees.
TAPE 95-8, SIDE B
Number 000
MR. FREEMAN said HB 121 provides the tools to advance proper
forest management on state lands and helps decrease the potential
for damage to the forest and its resources. He stated HB 121
will help expedite the recovery of the forest by promoting
managed reforestation, which is considerably faster than natural
regeneration. Habitat values for fish and wildlife will benefit
if Alaskans are allowed to harvest and reforest. In addition,
he stressed HB 121 will encourage the establishment of a rural
forest products industry with year round jobs and tax revenues
for local communities. He said RDC encourages the committee to
pass HB 121.
TABITHA GREGORY, REPRESENTATIVE, ALASKA CENTER FOR THE
ENVIRONMENT, testified via teleconference and stated HB 121
removes the multiple use mandate for state forested land.
Alaskans have many views on the best use for forest lands. She
noted it is far from unanimous that the highest value of trees,
even dead or dying trees, is after they have been cut and hauled
out of the forest. In many areas which are targeted by HB 121,
trees prove much more valuable (aesthetically, ecologically, and
economically) when they are an integral part of a forest system.
She felt it is unacceptable to unilaterally elevate the use of
trees as timber over their importance for other things. This
alone creates a single-use, not a multiple use, management agenda
for DNR. She pointed out by removing the 500,000 board feet size
limit on salvage sales, HB 121 would promote timber harvest on
state lands on an uncontrollable scale. She said HB 121 makes
salvage sale just another term for "come and get it".
MS. GREGORY felt HB 121 shuts people out of decision making
processes. She said one of the most important aspects of forest
management is public involvement. Currently, timber sales must
be shown on the five year schedule for at least two years prior
to being offered for sale. This provision is there so that
people are aware of upcoming changes to their area's forests and
can respond to decision makers. She stressed that often,
important local knowledge is passed on to DNR foresters so they
can alter harvest and sale plans to better provide for all of the
people in Alaska, not just the timber industry.
MS. GREGORY expressed belief that it is not appropriate to direct
the commissioner of DNR to predict the future in order to free up
more timber sooner, and with no public oversight. She said HB
121 sets the stage for the commissioner to negotiate sales for
forests that may, in actuality, not experience fire, disease, or
insect infestation for a decade or longer. She stressed HB 121
allows DNR to use these natural conditions as excuses to allow a
greater cut on forests that are traditionally used for other
things.
MS. GREGORY stated that although HB 121 asks the commissioner to
negotiate timber contracts in an effort to head off possible high
levels of future unemployment, there is no provision for the very
real threat to existing industries like tourism and fishing by
this increased logging. She expressed opposition to HB 121
because it creates single-use forests, removes meaningful public
oversight, and directs the commissioner to predict the natural
and economic future in order to open the state's forests to large
scale logging.
SEAN MCGUIRE, FAIRBANKS, testified via teleconference and
expressed opposition to HB 121. He questioned the concept of
protecting the forest from itself. He said before the white men
arrived, North America had some of the most vast and healthy
forests on the planet. He felt the idea of needing to save the
forest from itself is a bogus proposition. He mentioned that a
renowned forester from Canada recently detailed how important it
is to have old growth die and fall down. It is important for
habitat. The forester said it was crucial that old growth be
allowed to fall down and that the health of the forest is
dependent on old logs dying and rotting. If those old logs are
taken out of the system, within a couple of cycles, the forest is
no longer healthy.
MR. MCGUIRE stated he does not want a situation where one person,
such as the commissioner, can make broad decisions about the
forests. He stressed that all Alaskans own the state's forests.
He felt HB 121 provides a way for loggers to get around the
public process. He stressed Alaska has the only remaining intact
boreal forest ecosystem in North America. He said HB 121 appears
to be little different than the idea that everyone now knows is
bogus and that is, all forest fires should be put out.
MR. MCGUIRE pointed out that tourism is the state's fastest
growing industry and he felt that industry is the key to the
state's economic health in the future. People are visiting
Alaska in ever increasing numbers to see the state's natural
wonders. He noted that people all over the nation are sick about
what has happened to their forests. Polls have shown that over
one-half of the nation's population wants all cutting on federal
lands stopped. He stressed the state's forests are most valuable
left standing.
Number 092
DAN RITZMAN, REPRESENTATIVE, NORTHERN ALASKA ENVIRONMENTAL
CENTER, testified via teleconference and expressed opposition to
HB 121. He said HB 121, as written, would exempt salvage timber
sales from the existing size limits, public review and
reforestation provisions of the state law. He felt the
provisions in HB 121 give the DNR commissioner extraordinary
latitude in predicting forest health. He stated as he read HB
121, any tree that could lose economic value due to insect or
fire could be salvaged, without any public comment. He stressed
the entire forest would fall into that category.
MR. RITZMAN said under current Title 38 language, DNR can
complete the timber sale process in less than two years. He
pointed out that HB 121 salvage sales would be unnecessary if DNR
efficiently and competently planned sales under existing laws.
He commented on the forest health issue and the need for salvage
sales. He stated there are currently a number of people and
organizations crying out for the need to save the forest from
insects, and the need for logging to do this. He cited an
analogy. If he was concerned with a sound coming from his car's
engine and wanted to know if it was normal, he would check with a
mechanic rather than a car dealer. Both of these people
presumably know about cars, but the mechanic would be concerned
with how the car runs and the dealer would have an economic
interest in convincing him he needs a new car.
MR. RITZMAN said the same can be said of the people and
organizations pushing for salvage. He did not find it surprising
that groups, who have an economic interest in cutting those
trees, are promoting large scale logging as a response to spruce
bark beetles and suggesting a logged forest is a healthy forest.
He told committee members if they check with biologists and
ecologists who are concerned with how wild forests function and
do not have an economic interest in logging, they will find many
who believe that insect epidemics are important to the long-term
health of a naturally functioning forest. He added that where
fires are infrequent, such as on the Kenai, insect epidemics are
believed to be nature's way of recycling the older trees to make
way for the new forest. Along the way, the insects provide food
for a variety of birds and the dead trees provide valuable
habitat for wildlife before enriching the soil for the new forest
that will follow.
MR. RITZMAN stated before succumbing to the sales pitch offered
by groups with an interest in logging, Alaskans need to do more
research and get other opinions from trusted professionals. He
felt it should not be assumed that a logged forest is a healthier
forest or that beetle killed trees increase the fire hazard. He
encouraged members to find out what effects logging has on
fisheries and tourism, find out why logging has actually
increased unwanted grass and why reforestation efforts have had
poor results. He stressed it is important to understand what the
salesmen are trying to sell before buying their line.
Number 136
JOE YOUNG, PRESIDENT, YOUNG'S TIMBER, testified via
teleconference and said he has a value-added milling operation in
Tok. He expressed support for HB 121. He felt HB 121 will
provide a tool to speed up the process for salvaging dying timber
and will also increase the wildlife habitat.
K.A. SWIGER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, STAND UP!, testified via
teleconference and stated her testimony reflects the voice of
community people throughout the region dedicated to maintaining a
stable economy in Southeast Alaska. She said in terms of sound
resource management, HB 121 is a win-win proposition. She
pointed out that HB 121 provides for people and the economy, as
well as the value of forest health. She felt the avenue
providing the DNR commissioner the power to negotiate timber
sales in diseased or damaged forest areas within two years is
highly acceptable. Stand UP! believes this will enable foresters
to act in a timely manner to arrest bug infestation or rot due to
fire or blow down, as well as add value to a resource otherwise
wasted.
MS. SWIGER mentioned that land in the Haines valley currently
contains 14,000 acres of forest killed by beetle infestation.
She noted Haines is an area of high unemployment, has an
underutilized timber manufacturing capacity, and has timber which
is losing substantial economic value due to insects. She said
after years of rampant bug kill, there are currently two salvage
sales underway. She stressed the level of salvage is so small,
there is no chance of curbing the infestation, and therefore no
real help to restoring the forest. She pointed out that Haines
would be a likely benefactor from the passage of HB 121, by
perhaps increased sales which will ultimately benefit the forest
and the people.
MS. SWIGER stated damaged trees are already exempt from sustained
yield management and for a good reason. The entire stand must be
harvested if the disease is going to be brought under control.
That is why the size of harvest of a damaged stand should not be
a matter of law, but rather a matter of silviculture. She said
Stand UP! does not believe the public process is jeopardized by
HB 121. Preparation, planning, following guidelines and public
comment are still very much a part of the sale offering process.
Stand UP! encourages the committee to adopt HB 121 and push for
its passage.
Number 188
CHRIS MOSS, HOMER, expressed opposition to HB 121. He felt HB
121 gives too much latitude to the DNR commissioner in
determining what "losing substantial economic value" is,
determining what the disease process is, and determining what
will exist in two years. He also expressed concern about the
size and length of negotiated contracts and the possibility of
lack of public input on a fast track method. He stressed the
disease process cannot be stopped by cutting trees. He said most
disease and fires create mosaic patterns which leave islands of
viable populations within a forest and he would like to see
protection of those areas for reforestation in the future.
MR. MOSS said as a resident in Homer, he knows what happens to
most of the trees which are cut on the Kenai Peninsula. Those
trees are packed down in log bundles and piles of chips are sent
overseas. He stated there are a number of small operators in
that area who create a rough cut lumber bought locally. He hoped
that if HB 121 is passed, there will be a method where the chunks
of salvage timber is sold in small enough lots enabling local
people to have an opportunity for land also.
Number 215
WILLY DUNNE, REPRESENTATIVE, ALASKA ENVIRONMENTAL LOBBY (AEL),
said the AEL supports the salvage sale of timber on land which
will be converted to non-forest use, but AEL has reservations
about other provisions in HB 121. He stated the DNR has
acknowledged that cutting down the forest does not improve forest
health. Forest ecologists believe that forest insect epidemics
are often self-regulating and can often improve habitat for many
types of wildlife. He added that HB 121 would only consider the
economic value of timber when determining salvage sales. He
stressed other economic values such as hunting, fishing,
trapping, outdoor recreation, other forest products, etc. would
be ignored. AEL would like to see those economic values
acknowledged in HB 121.
MR. DUNNE stated HB 121 does not mention damaged timber but
mentions on line 6, page 1, "timber stands that will lose
substantial economic value because of insect or disease epidemics
or fire..." He felt that verbiage is open to interpretation.
AEL would like to see language specifically indicating salvage
refers to dead or downed timber.
MR. DUNNE said the biggest problem AEL has with HB 121 is the
provision for a negotiated timber sale which could last up to 25
years in length. AEL would like to see an amendment restricting
negotiated salvage sales to no longer than two years. He stated
the U.S. Forest Service has had a history of abusing salvage sale
rules and now their salvage sales are restricted to only dead and
down material.
MR. DUNNE stated under current Title 38 regulations, the DNR can
conduct timber sales in less than two years and has the authority
to have emergency sales in response to forest health problems.
He said AAC 71.010 specifically addresses the loss of economic
value of timber as a reason for allowing salvage sales. He added
that AEL objects to the phrase beginning on line 15, page 1, "or
will exist within two years," because it gives the DNR
commissioner the authority to predict future events. He noted
last year the legislature passed SB 308 and one of the main
arguments was that the DNR commissioner should not be required to
predict future events in the disposing of natural resources.
MR. DUNNE closed by reading a quote from a government survey of
an Alaska forest, "Spruce bark beetles have killed a large number
of trees. It is estimated that 60 percent of the spruce is
already dead or dying. In a few years green spruce will be hard
to obtain, and travel will be made more difficult by windfalls.
The danger of forest fires will be increased. The beetles are
not confining themselves to one particular area, but are
threatening to devastate the entire region of spruce." He stated
the quote might sound like a survey conducted in 1995 on the
Kenai Peninsula, but in fact is from a 1933 survey in the Susitna
Valley. He said that area is now designated as a critical
habitat area due to its exceptional fish and wildlife habitats.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked Mr. Dunne if he had flown over the
Kenai Peninsula recently.
MR. DUNNE responded he has flown over it numerous times.
Number 303
TYLER JONES, CITY MANAGER, CITY OF SEWARD, testified via
teleconference and said the city council had not had the
opportunity to act on HB 121 specifically. However, previously
the council has taken specific actions to favor enhancement of
productive and timely use of the forest resources in the Seward
area. He assumed he had council backing when making his
comments. He stated the comments previously made from Seward and
those supporting HB 121 would be echoed by the council and the
community.
MR. JONES told committee members that Seward has a high rate of
local unemployment and an underutilized timber manufacturing
capacity with a dormant mill and an underutilized allowable state
timber in the area. Therefore, the city qualifies under the
terms of HB 121 and would be interested in enjoying the more
ready access to beetle kill timber in the area. He stated HB 121
does shorten the time frame for access to timber which is
something the community would support. He noted there are still
requirements for the professional evaluation for the appropriate
treatment of diseased or infested timber. He added that HB 121
does not detract from adequate public comment processes or limit
public engagement. Therefore, the council feels HB 121 would be
supported and useful in Seward.
MR. JONES stated it is the sentiment of the community of Seward,
although not unanimous, that the beetle kill issue on the Kenai
Peninsula is not being addressed productively. He urged
committee support for HB 121.
Number 355
RON LONG, SEWARD, testified via teleconference and pointed out
that one of the duties of good government is responsibly managing
resources for quality. He said sometimes that means recognizing
when situations change, such as the beetle kill problem on the
Kenai Peninsula (indiscernible) and the tools are in place to
deal with. He added the (indiscernible) strategy is not in
existing regulations to address those changes. He felt a
provision should be allowed to respond to the changes
responsibly. He said existing regulations prohibit response and
serious thought should be given to changing them. He urged
committee support of HB 121.
G.R. BROOKMAN, KENAI, testified via teleconference and felt HB
121 is too broad, too vague, and gives too much authority to the
DNR commissioner. He said the commissioner will be relying on
advice from the state forester and other professionals. He
stated when a law is put in the books, it is going to remain
there into the indefinite future and it is not known who will be
occupying those positions of power. Therefore, he expressed
wariness of the idea of giving this much power to any future DNR
commissioner.
MR. BROOKMAN said another reservation he has is the fact that a
negotiated sale can go 25 years into the future. He suggested a
two year time limit should be included in HB 121. He stated on
page 2, lines 2-4, there are undefined terms such as "high level"
and "underutilized".
Number 407
RED SMITH, COOPER LANDING, testified via teleconference and said
he bought his first sawmill through the Sears catalog in 1951
because the highway projects were wasting all of the timber. He
stated he has continuously owned sawmills throughout the years.
He stressed he has never seen anything as disgusting and as
deplorable as the management of the timber resource on the Kenai
Peninsula in the 46 years he has resided there. No one has ever
been able to catch up with the continuous waste of the timber
there. He noted that at one time about 25 years ago, statistics
could show that destruction by bugs and various construction
projects was occurring at 40 times the milling capacity of all
the sawmills on the Kenai. He stressed today, that statistic is
vastly beyond that figure. The bugs, by government statistics,
are killing about 2,000 acres of the area's spruce forest every
day. He added there is no milling capacity that anyone has
envisioned or even suggested which can come close to utilizing
the waste which is occurring in the forest.
MR. SMITH stated the public decision making process is a dismal
failure. He has listened to many people, some of them purporting
to be scientifically knowledgeable, talking about things they
know nothing about. He felt if they would come to the forest and
see what good forest management can do, they would change their
minds on how to approach the management of the state forests. He
stressed the waste cannot be allowed to continue. He felt the
waste will not continue and the problem will be addressed in
every manner reasonable to get an industry started which can
utilize the wasting resource.
MR. SMITH said he listens and tries to understand the attitudes
of the environmental community but everybody has told him the
dead or dying timber should be used rather than cutting the
healthy green. He stated that is the best public relations for
any conservationist or environmentalist. He felt it was
important to stop destroying the forests, particularly the
healthy forests and develop better programs for utilizing the
dead and dying trees.
Number 475
CLIFF EAMES, REPRESENTATIVE, ALASKA CENTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT,
testified via teleconference and stated there are a couple of
assumptions that underlie HB 121 which are not warranted. He
said the first assumption is that logging should be a primary use
of state forests...that is the only economic value which really
matters is trees which are cut and taken off the land. He noted
there was testimony from hundreds of people on HB 310 last year
who believe that is not the case. Rather, they believe the
state's forests should be managed for a wide variety of uses and
resources. He stated it was ironic that a legislature which paid
so much consideration to the multiple use idea would now pass a
bill like HB 121 that gives commercial logging a clear preference
on the state's forests.
MR. EAMES agreed with previous testimony that the assumption the
trees are going to waste if they are not logged is not accurate.
He said most scientists believe the damage from large scale
logging and road building in many of these areas is greater than
allowing the beetle to take its course. He echoed the idea there
is no need for HB 121. The state can already quickly get through
the five year requirement. He stated it is clear that HB 121 is
aimed at the Kenai Peninsula, yet already on the five year
schedule is the proposal to log two-thirds of all of the state-
owned commercial forest land on the peninsula within ten years.
MR. EAMES noted other reasons for logging, in addition to
salvage, is to bring the insect infestation under control. He
stressed that is not going to happen. He said the fire hazard
has also been grossly exaggerated and he did not think
professional foresters would risk their reputation using that as
a justification.
Number 542
ROBERT LACOCK, ANCHORAGE, testified via teleconference and
expressed opposition to HB 121. He said the presumption that the
best solution to the beetle infestation is to cut the forest only
addresses the short term economic value and does not consider how
the long term health of the forest can be helped. On the
contrary, logging will be a detriment to the long term health of
the forest by the profound negative impacts on any ecosystem from
the introduction of roads and destruction of wildlife habitat.
He noted that even though wildlife habitat may be under stress
due to the beetle infestation, that stress would be only worsened
by HB 121 and logging.
MR. LACOCK said HB 121 also ignores the many other long term
values of the forest and the beetle infestation. A forest with
the beetle still provides (indiscernible), recreation, and fish
and wildlife. He noted all of these exist even in areas infested
by the bark beetle. He stated the forest value is only worsened
far beyond the effects of the bark beetle by logging. He noted
HB 121 does not consider anything outside the short term economic
profit by timber harvest. HB 121 exempts forest harvest size
limits and an appropriate period of time for public review. He
stressed HB 121 ignores the long term health of the forest.
Number 578
DOUG YATES, REPRESENTATIVE, ALASKA BOREAL FOREST COUNCIL (ABFC),
testified via teleconference and stated pursuant to the hearing
on HB 121, the ABFC pointed out that insect outbreaks are a
normal part of forest ecology. Insect outbreaks have always been
a part of the forest and in many times, it is believed they are
self-regulating. He said to base a policy strictly on commodity
values is not good stewardship. He added that provisions within
HB 121 would give DNR extraordinary latitude in determining and
even predicting forest health, employment levels, and timber
values while removing from the decision making process the wisdom
of local residents and the concerns of the public which own and
use the resources.
MR. YATES said given the consequences to Alaska's fisheries from
increased logging that can be assumed by the passage of HB 121,
Alaska's fish and subsistence users deserve a greater voice in
debating this critical issue. He expressed support for earlier
testimony suggesting HB 121 be referred to the Special Committee
on Fisheries. He said ABFC opposes HB 121 in its current form.
TAPE 95-9, SIDE A
Number 000
MARK LUTTRELL, PRESIDENT, EASTERN KENAI PENINSULA ENVIRONMENTAL
ACTION ASSOCIATION, testified via teleconference and expressed
opposition to HB 121. He felt HB 121 would inhibit the public
process, the intended proper scientific management and the proper
compliance and oversight by professionals. He said HB 121 also
gives the DNR commissioner too much power and asks the
commissioner to predict the future. He also objected to the
unlimited size of a salvage sale. He stressed that HB 121
focuses on the single commercial value of timber and does not
address other values, both economic and aesthetic.
MR. LUTTRELL stated he is not against logging but is against
wholesale logging without public input or recognition of other
forest values such as outdoor recreation.
LARRY SMITH, HOMER, testified via teleconference and encouraged
committee members to read testimony received by the committee
last year. He said there have been many salvage sales around
Cook Inlet. He noted the west side salvage sale involved 223,000
acres in the early 1970s and cost the state $1.5 million. He
felt the state's salvage sale abilities have not improved as
$150,000 was just lost, compared to a scarce $600,000
appropriated by legislative budget and audit in the last few
months for reforestation. He said that money was squandered to
try and hold a timber sale but Klukwan's report advised the state
it would never happen because there was no way to make any
revenue.
MR. SMITH said there is another salvage sale proposed at False
Creek. The state hired and paid a contractor $50,000 to $60,000
to lay out the timber sale and then had to redo all the work with
state employees. He suggested that DNR should not be any more
trusted with salvage sales today as it has in the past. He felt
giving bad management more tools just leads to more bad
management and more dollars spent. Therefore, a significant
fiscal note is needed for HB 121.
MR. SMITH stated the DNR never fights the Division of Forestry's
budget and there was a need to almost impose the request for
reforestation dollars granted recently. He said thanks to
Speaker Gail Phillips that money was received. He noted that
Speaker Phillips has pledged to oppose these subsidized timber
sales.
MR. SMITH pointed out that in present circumstances HB 121 would
be better represented as an export subsidy measure. He felt
HB 121 is a thief of local jobs. He said there is no reason to
have these trees shipped off instead of being available on the
long term for local sawyers. He asked committee members, that
before they enlarge the salvage sale problem, to use the
legislative investigative and honest staff to look at last year's
failed subsidy and waste of reforestation dollars. He encouraged
members to visit the Kenai area.
Number 062
CHUCK ACHBERGER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, JUNEAU CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
(JCC), stated the JCC supports HB 121. He said HB 121 does not
hamper the public process. He noted that with regard to timber
sales, the FPA would still be in effect. He pointed out that
HB 121 provides DNR with the additional tools necessary to deal
with special situations addressed in the bill (disease, insect
infestation, and fire). He said put aside the jobs which might
be created, the recreational opportunities that can be saved, and
the lives and property which are lost to uncontrolled wild fires
resulting from nature's efforts to manage dead and dying forests.
Instead, the committee should look at their role as stewards
managing the state's ecosystem to create food and shelter for the
creatures who call the forest home.
MR. ACHBERGER stressed HB 121 provides the necessary tools to
manage the state's lands for a healthy ecosystem...management
done in a controlled manner that eliminates the need for nature's
catastrophic fires...management that can turn a dead and dying
forest into one which is productive and healthy. He said if, in
the process, this creates jobs, saves lives and communities are
spared from nature's whims, great.
Number 084
CHRIS GATES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA FOREST ASSOCIATION,
testified via teleconference and said much of the previous
testimony provides information in regard to reasons why nothing
much has happened on the Kenai Peninsula. He stated one can
still drive through miles and miles of dead and dying timber
which is of no value to the recreation industry and tourism
industry, and which could have provided substantial jobs and
economic activity to the region. He said the state has in the
past and is now paying substantial money to build fire breaks on
the Kenai Peninsula to protect people from losing their lives and
property from fire and beetle kill areas. He stressed that money
could have been used productively for rural and year round
jobs...much higher paying jobs than normally occur in tourism.
MR. GATES advised that a recent report said 20 million trees died
in Alaska last year, which is about 38 trees a minute. He stated
these trees died because there is no mechanism available to take
advantage of those trees. He said an earlier testifier tried to
confuse committee members with a fact that a sustainable yield is
not being dealt with. Mr. Gates stated a dead tree does not come
under any confines of sustained yield. He stressed the tree is
dead and needs to be harvested and produce value to people.
MR. GATES said HB 121 will not hurt the multiple use of the
forest but rather will build the health of trees by eliminating
the area where beetles can generate to affect other areas. He
stated the environmentalists will never talk about the cost of
reforestation. He pointed out the real damage and real problem
with the Kalgin sale was the trustees for Alaska delayed the sale
long enough that the value could not support the $500,000 of
required reforestation. He felt that was a shame because the
wildlife now has to wait for the trees to die and reforest
naturally, which is much longer and has a much more severe impact
than if it would have been done under managed reforestation. He
encouraged committee members to think about reforestation and the
costs of reforestation when considering HB 121.
Number 128
TOM BOUTIN, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF FORESTRY, DNR, said he would
answer any questions from committee members.
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated there has been a lot of testimony
stating the best way to manage a forest is not to manage it at
all but rather allow the trees to die and fall. He wondered what
Mr. Boutin's opinion was on that subject.
MR. BOUTIN said much of the testimony spoke to the Kenai
Peninsula situation and noted that HB 121 has a statewide
application and implication. He responded specifically to the
Kenai where DNR is being sued both for not logging enough timber
and for logging too much timber. He added that many of the
people testifying are plaintiffs against the state.
MR. BOUTIN stated most professional foresters and scientists
believe the situation on the Kenai Peninsula is not a natural
situation. The spruce bark beetle is endemic to Alaska and it
can be seen in other places throughout the state. He said on the
Kenai Peninsula, large scale fires have been suppressed in the
past eighty years. Therefore, the mosaic of different age
classes of timber has been prevented. He added that fire is now
not an acceptable remedy for the situation on the Kenai
Peninsula. He stressed that no one at DNR has ever represented
that logging will eliminate the spruce bark beetle.
MR. BOUTIN noted in regard to the timber sales being offered and
sold on the Kenai Peninsula, the winning bidder is committing to
incur most of the reforestation. Therefore, it is possible to
get regeneration going more quickly by logging. He said absent
the timber sale, regeneration in many cases might take 30 to 40
years.
REPRESENTATIVE IRENE NICHOLIA stated testimony indicated that DNR
already has the capability of implementing an emergency salvage
sale.
Number 189
MR. BOUTIN responded AS 38.05.113 allowed DNR to promulgate
regulations allowing emergency sales to be exempt from
AS 38.05.113. He said DNR did that but added that the advice
from the Department of Law was in theory AS 38.05.113 could be
interpreted to mean a requirement of one year and one day.
Therefore, the Department of Law advised if DNR is going to use
emergency regulations they had better be for a sale which can be
sold, logged, and done within one year and one day or less. He
noted logging on the Kenai is winter only and occurs in a very
short period of time. Therefore, those regulations are not
useful for the Kenai Peninsula.
REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA wondered if a reapplication and extension
would be possible.
MR. BOUTIN replied the Department of Law advised DNR not to
extend a sale. He reiterated the department has been advised to
be done with a sale in one year and one day or less.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked why DNR could not issue an emergency
order in those situations, simultaneously put that sale on the
five year plan, and go through the emergency time period of one
year and one day. He felt by having parallel tracked the sale on
the five year plan, the department would be ready to offer a
considered sale beyond the end of that time period.
MR. BOUTIN stated if HB 121 were enacted and signed into law, the
Division of Forestry would put all sales into the five year plan.
He stressed the five year plan is a valuable public process and
needs to be complete and comprehensive. He explained even in the
instance of a small sale involving a forest health situation
where the department could get that sale up quickly, the
department would still put that sale in the existing five-year
plan. He added that on the Kenai Peninsula, the department has
put all sales in the five-year plan. The department does not
have the ability to have two five-year plans in the span of one
year and one day. Therefore, the bark beetle sales have
deteriorated much in the period of time when the department has
gone through the five-year plan or 24-month process.
Number 254
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES clarified the department's intention is to
always also parallel emergency sales on to the five-year plan.
MR. BOUTIN replied that is correct but added the Division of
Forestry would utilize HB 121 and many salvage sales would be put
up for sale, logged, and reforested inside of a two year period.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stated that many people testifying
suggested there should be a time limit. He wondered if there is
a time limit which might be workable.
MR. BOUTIN responded the timber sales currently have a three,
four, or occasionally five year time limit. He added the
division is not required by law to have a time limit but
administratively and as a matter of contract performance, the
division needs a time limit. He stressed the current time limit
seems to work well. He was not sure what advantage there is in
having a time limit in the law.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stated concern has been expressed that the
salvage sale mechanism would be abused to establish 25 year sales
and concern was also expressed about future people in Mr.
Boutin's position in regard to that abuse.
MR. BOUTIN stressed there is no time limit today on the duration
of a timber sale. The division could do a 50 year timber sale
currently under state law. He said there is a limit if the sale
is sold as a negotiated sale and that limit is in regulation, not
in law. DNR adopted a regulation pursuant to AS 38.05.115 which
limits negotiated sales to one year. He noted that DNR very
rarely uses negotiated sales. He said it is far better to have a
competitive sale and have one bidder than to have a negotiated
sale. He added that salvage sales would be less likely to be of
long duration because the timber is dying or dead.
Number 317
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked for Mr. Boutin's interpretation of
the word underutilized allowable cut in the context of a multiple
use forest.
MR. BOUTIN stated that has been defined in regulation.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked if the calculation of allowable cut
takes into account the multiple use planning which goes into
developing the area plans for a forest.
MR. BOUTIN stated under AS 41.17.060 which is the intent language
for the FPA, multiple use is clearly defined and the department
cannot violate that multiple use in its forest land use plans
under AS 38.05.112 or in its five year harvest schedules under
AS 38.05.113. He said allowable cut is in accord with multiple
use. He noted that multiple use and sustained yield are
overriding factors. He pointed out HB 121 does not address
sustained yield.
CO-CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS stated HB 121 would be brought back to the
committee for action on Monday, February 6 at 8:00 a.m. and the
committee will also hear HB 113.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the House
Resources Committee, Co-Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting
at 10:00 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|