Legislature(1997 - 1998)

03/13/1997 08:25 AM House STA

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
             HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE                            
                         March 13, 1997                                        
                            8:25 a.m.                                          
 MEMBERS PRESENT                                                               
 Representative Jeannette James, Chair                                         
 Representative Ethan Berkowitz                                                
 Representative Fred Dyson                                                     
 Representative Kim Elton                                                      
 Representative Mark Hodgins                                                   
 Representative Ivan Ivan                                                      
 Representative Al Vezey                                                       
 MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                
 All members present.                                                          
 COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                            
 HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 14                                                 
 Relating to supporting the "American Land Sovereignty Protection              
      - PASSED CSHJR 14(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                  
 SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 14                                                
 Relating to support for federal legislation permitting state                  
 concealed handgun permittees to carry concealed handguns in other             
      - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                
 HOUSE BILL NO. 83                                                             
 "An Act relating to commercial motor vehicle inspections; and                 
 providing for an effective date."                                             
      - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                
 HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 25                                                 
 Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska to            
 guarantee the permanent fund dividend, to provide for                         
 inflation-proofing, and to require a vote of the people before                
 spending undistributed income from the earnings reserve of the                
 permanent fund; and relating to the permanent fund.                           
      - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                
 *HOUSE BILL NO. 84                                                            
 "An Act limiting the authority to conduct pull-tab charitable                 
 gaming to qualified organizations that are exempt from taxation               
 under 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3) or (19); and providing for an effective             
      - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                
 *HOUSE BILL NO. 78                                                            
 "An Act relating to the definition of certain state receipts; and             
 providing for an effective date."                                             
      - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                
 *HOUSE BILL NO. 153                                                           
 "An Act relating to the eligibility of aliens for state public                
 assistance and medical assistance programs affected by federal                
 welfare reform legislation; and providing for an effective date."             
      - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                
 *HOUSE BILL NO. 155                                                           
 "An Act relating to hearings before and authorizing fees for the              
 State Commission for Human Rights; and providing for an effective             
      - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                
 (* First public hearing)                                                      
 PREVIOUS ACTION                                                               
 BILL:  HJR 14                                                               
 SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) JAMES, Barnes, Hodgins, Sanders,                
 Masek, Martin, Kemplen, Phillips, Cowdery, Vezey, Ryan, Porter,               
 JRN-DATE      JRN-PG             ACTION                                       
 01/21/97       111    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)                 
 01/21/97       111    (H)   WTR, STATE AFFAIRS                                
 01/22/97       125    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): PORTER, OGAN                        
 02/13/97              (H)   WTR AT  5:00 PM CAPITOL 124                       
 02/13/97              (H)   MINUTE(WTR)                                       
 02/17/97              (H)   WTR AT  5:00 PM CAPITOL 124                       
 02/17/97              (H)   MINUTE(WTR)                                       
 02/18/97              (H)   WTR AT  5:00 PM FAHRENKAMP RM 203                 
 02/18/97              (H)   MINUTE(WTR)                                       
 02/19/97       397    (H)   WTR RPT  5DP 1NR                                  
 02/19/97       397    (H)   DP: PHILLIPS, COWDERY, KOTT, BARNES               
 02/19/97       397    (H)   AUSTERMAN                                         
 02/19/97       397    (H)   NR: KUBINA                                        
 02/19/97       398    (H)   ZERO FISCAL NOTE (H. WTR)                         
 02/19/97       398    (H)   REFERRED TO STATE AFFAIRS                         
 03/13/97              (H)   STA AT  8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                       
 WITNESS REGISTER                                                              
 MYRNA McGHIE, Legislative Assistant                                           
    to Representative Jeannette James                                          
 State Capitol, Room 102                                                       
 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                     
 Telephone:  (907) 465-3743                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony on HJR 14.                            
 PAUL C. JONES, Executive Director                                             
 Minerals Exploration Coalition (MEC)                                          
 1019 8th Street, Suite 305                                                    
 Golden, Colorado 80801                                                        
 Telephone:  Not provided                                                      
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony in support of HJR 14.                 
 PATRICK DALTON                                                                
 P.O. Box 1413                                                                 
 Delta Junction, Alaska 99737                                                  
 Telephone:  Not provided                                                      
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony in support of HJR 14.                 
 GREG HALL                                                                     
 P.O. Box 813                                                                  
 Delta Junction, Alaska 99737                                                  
 Telephone:  (907) 895-5050                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony in support of HJR 14.                 
 JON JARVIS, Superintendent                                                    
 Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve                                 
 P.O. Box 439                                                                  
 Copper Center, Alaska 99573                                                   
 Telephone:  (907) 822-5234                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony on HJR 14.                            
 FRANK DILLON, Executive Director                                              
 Alaska Trucking Association                                                   
 3443 Minnesota Drive                                                          
 Anchorage, Alaska 99503                                                       
 Telephone:  (907) 276-1145                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony in support of HJR 14.                 
 STEVE BORELL, Executive Director                                              
 Alaska Miners Association, Inc.                                               
 501 West Northern Lights Blvd., Suite 203                                     
 Anchorage, Alaska 99503                                                       
 Telephone:  (907) 276-0347                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony in support of HJR 14.                 
 LEONARD EFTA                                                                  
 P.O. Box 353                                                                  
 Kenai, Alaska 99611                                                           
 Telephone:  (907) 283-7670                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony on HJR 14.                            
 ERIC WEATHERS                                                                 
 P.O. Box 1791                                                                 
 Cordova, Alaska 99574                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 424-3745                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony on HJR 14.                            
 DENNY WEATHERS                                                                
 P.O. Box 1791                                                                 
 Cordova, Alaska 99574                                                         
 Telephone:  (907) 424-3745                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony in opposition to HJR 14.              
 IRENE ANDERSON                                                                
 P.O. Box 1974                                                                 
 Nome, Alaska 99762                                                            
 Telephone:  (907) 443-4023                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony in support of HJR 14.                 
 JOHN BREIVOGEL                                                                
 HC 60 Box 106                                                                 
 Copper Center, Alaska 99573                                                   
 Telephone:  (907) 822-5870                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony in support of HJR 14.                 
 MATT KRINKE                                                                   
 P.O.Box 545                                                                   
 Glennallen, Alaska 99588                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 822-3390                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony in opposition to HJR 14.              
 PAUL WEIR                                                                     
 P.O. Box 275                                                                  
 Glennallen, Alaska 99588                                                      
 Telephone:  (907) 822-3902                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony on HJR 14.                            
 STANLEY LEPHART, Executive Director                                           
 Citizens Advisory Commission on Federal Areas                                 
 Office of the Commissioner                                                    
 Department of Natural Resources                                               
 3700 Airport Way                                                              
 Fairbanks, Alaska 99709-4699                                                  
 Telephone:  (907) 451-2775                                                    
 POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided testimony in support of HJR 14.                 
 ACTION NARRATIVE                                                              
 TAPE 97-26, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 0001                                                                   
 The House State Affairs Standing Committee was called to order by             
 Chair Jeannette James at 8:25 a.m.  Members present at the call to            
 order were Representatives James, Berkowitz, Hodgins, Ivan and                
 Vezey.  Members absent were Dyson and Elton.                                  
 HJR 14 - SUPPORT AMERICAN LAND SOVEREIGNTY ACT                              
 The first order of business to come before the House State Affairs            
 Standing Committee was HJR 14, Relating to supporting the "American           
 Land Sovereignty Protection Act."                                             
 CHAIR JEANNETTE JAMES called on Myrna McGhie, Legislative Assistant           
 to Representative Jeannette James, to present the resolution.                 
 Number 0068                                                                   
 MYRNA McGHIE, Legislative Assistant to Representative Jeannette               
 James, explained in 1971 the United States joined the United                  
 Nation's program calling to establish biosphere reserves and world            
 heritage sites around the world.  In these areas human activity was           
 restricted.  For management purposes, these reserves were divided             
 into three zones:  The core zone, the buffer zone and the                     
 transitional zone.  Activities in the zones were off-limits to                
 human influence, except for monitoring and research activity.  The            
 activity in the buffer zone was organized so that it did not hinder           
 conservation objectives.  The transitional zones were areas of                
 cooperation with agriculture, human settlements and other uses.               
 The zones extended far beyond the boundaries of the core; they                
 could even be twice as large.  Today, 47 national parks were                  
 designated as these sanctuaries covering 51 million acres in the              
 United States, of which, 40.7 million acres were here in Alaska.              
 Most disturbingly, these designations had taken place without                 
 congressional oversight and without any public process.  There was            
 legitimate concern, therefore, regarding international interference           
 during decision making processes on domestic land.  In addition,              
 too often Alaskans found themselves under federal oversight without           
 recourse and now Alaskans could find themselves under international           
 oversight without recourse.  "We cannot let this happen any                   
 longer," she declared.                                                        
 MS. McGHIE further explained that the resolution reaffirmed the               
 constitutional authority of the U.S. Congress, as elected                     
 representatives of the people, over the lands of the United States.           
 The sponsors of the resolution preferred that congress approved of            
 any designations; not just the president and his appointees.                  
 MS. McGHIE further explained there was a committee substitute and             
 there were expert witnesses on the teleconference line to answer              
 any questions.                                                                
 Number 0278                                                                   
 PAUL C. JONES, Executive Director, Minerals Exploration Coalition             
 (MEC), explained that MEC was an advocate of the multiple-use of              
 public lands in the United States.  He announced his support of HJR
 14.  He had over 35 years of experience in the mineral industry in            
 North and South America at all levels of the business.  The MEC was           
 an advocate of the public policy issues involving the access to,              
 and the safe environmental use of public lands in the U.S. for                
 mineral exploration and development.  Its membership included over            
 30 corporations and a diverse group of professionals engaged in               
 mineral exploration.                                                          
 MR. JONES further addressed the unprecedented use of the World                
 Heritage Convention by special interest groups in the U.S. and the            
 current administration to circumvent the proper application of U.S.           
 law related to the mineral industry.  He cited the 1995                       
 intervention of the World Heritage Committee - an organization                
 attached to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and                   
 Cultural Organization (UNESCO) - and the federal permitting process           
 for the proposed New World Gold Mine located north-east of                    
 Yellowstone National Park in Montana.  The New World project was a            
 planned 1,500 ton per day underground mine using conventional                 
 technology.  It would have had a life of about ten years, it would            
 have employed about 175 people on a year round basis, and it would            
 have produced approximately 130,000 ounces of gold and 3,000 tons             
 of copper per year.  In December of 1995, the World Heritage                  
 Committee prematurely and without basis of adequate facts, declared           
 the Yellowstone National Park a world heritage site in danger                 
 because of presumed harm from the New World project.  He attended             
 a set of hearings hosted by the National Park Service and conducted           
 by the World Heritage Committee.  The committee took limited                  
 testimony of both a non-technical and technical nature on the                 
 purported effect of the New World project.  Many of the non-                  
 technical comments were based on the impractical "what if"                    
 scenarios.  It appeared from the questions and statements made by             
 the chairman of the World Heritage Committee and its executive                
 director that the committee had come to Yellowstone with its mind             
 already made up on the subject.  The committee refused to review              
 more than three years of good science and fact-based research                 
 prepared for the environmental impact statement process before                
 making its determination.  More importantly, the company had asked            
 the committee to reserve judgement until the draft environmental              
 impact statement had been completed.  In December of 1995, when the           
 World Heritage Committee in Berlin, Germany arbitrarily declared              
 the Yellowstone National Park a world heritage site, the committee            
 contravened the established permitting process in the United States           
 thereby unduly influencing U.S. domestic policy.  The publicity               
 surrounding the designation reiterated the slogans of the special             
 interest groups.  In early 1996 the federal administration began              
 negotiations to acquire the New World project in exchange for                 
 surplus federal lands.  The land exchange was announced on August             
 12, 1996 by President Clinton.  In addition, on March 12, 1997 it             
 was announced that the federal administration would offer to pay              
 the mining company $65 million in cash from oil, gas and coal                 
 royalties for the project rather than making a land exchange.  The            
 agreement, and the extraordinary circumstances leading to its                 
 inspection, set a terrible precedent by the federal administration            
 for using foreign intervention in U.S. domestic policy.  The                  
 precedent did not set well with the U.S. regulatory system either.            
 In summary, the determination by the World Heritage Committee that            
 Yellowstone National Park was a world heritage site in-danger was             
 premature and without basis of adequate facts.  It was based on               
 presumed and unsubstantiated allegations that the New World project           
 would create irreparable harm to the park.  The published                     
 environmental impact study would, most certainly, refute these                
 allegations.  "And, I personally doubt it will every be published,"           
 he said.  The premature, unjustified and unwarranted declaration on           
 the part of the World Heritage Committee provided special interest            
 groups and their associates within the federal government to induce           
 further challenges to a fair and unbiased permitting process.  In             
 addition, a new forum to circumvent U.S. domestic policy was also             
 created by the World Heritage Committee with the help of the U.S.             
 administration, special interest groups, and the media.  The                  
 intervention could just as well have affected a logging project, a            
 ranching project, a recreation project or some other segment of               
 American life on public lands.  The MEC strongly supported the                
 American Land Sovereignty Protection Act, sponsored by Chairman Don           
 Young.  It would limit the activity of international and other                
 organizations such as the World Heritage Committee within the U.S.,           
 unless such activity was authorized by Congress.  In December of              
 1996, the MEC's board of directors - unanimously - passed a                   
 resolution in support of the bill.  The MEC also strongly urged the           
 passage of HJR 14 by Representative James in support of Congressman           
 Young's act.                                                                  
 Number 0884                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE MARK HODGINS asked Mr. Jones what he saw as the                
 danger to the average Alaskan or American with the World Heritage             
 Committee and its plans?  He also asked Mr. Jones if the World                
 Heritage Committee was primarily a political or an environmental              
 Number 0911                                                                   
 MR. JONES replied the World Heritage Committee was a quasi-                   
 political, environmentally oriented group.  It was more politically           
 oriented, however.  It was an outgrowth of the concept that the               
 "have nots" should enjoy that which the "haves" had at the expense            
 of the "haves."  The danger was the circumventing of U.S.                     
 procedures as a result of outside influences like what happened to            
 the New World project.                                                        
 Number 0990                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE ETHAN BERKOWITZ stated that he had a problem, like             
 Mr. Jones, with someone testifying before a committee whose mind              
 was already made up.  It was his understanding that the United                
 States had entered into a treaty of which the regulations had                 
 flowed from.                                                                  
 MR. JONES replied that was his understanding as well.  The U.S.               
 entered into a World Heritage Convention, a form of a treaty, in              
 the early 1970's.                                                             
 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked Mr. Jones if that treaty had been              
 congressionally approved?                                                     
 MR. JONES replied it would have to be for it to be recognized.                
 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ stated it was his understanding that                 
 regulations had to be promulgated in order to effectuate the terms            
 of a treaty.                                                                  
 MR. JONES replied that was not necessarily so.  A treaty had the              
 force of law if Congress ratified it without any regulations being            
 Number 1078                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked Mr. Jones if regulations were                  
 promulgated in response to the convention?                                    
 MR. JONES replied, no, not to his knowledge.  He did not feel                 
 competent to answer the question, however.                                    
 Number 1097                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES explained in 1993 there was an additional treaty                  
 entered into called the Bio-Diversity Treaty, an entirely different           
 treaty, that had not been approved by Congress.  Yet, the federal             
 administration had already implemented part of the treaty.  She               
 asked Mr. Jones if he was familiar with the Bio-Diversity Treaty?             
 Number 1120                                                                   
 MR. JONES replied, "Yes."  Chair James was correct.  The treaty had           
 not been ratified by Congress and portions of it had been                     
 Number 1133                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES explained the Bio-Diversity Treaty required that the              
 United States place 50 percent of its land-base into wilderness.              
 MR. JONES replied he was not familiar with that part.  He knew,               
 however, that there was a large "wilderness" concept floating                 
 around in the environmental community.  He hated to use the word              
 "environmental" community because he was an environmentalist in his           
 mining activity.  "I want it done right."  The special interest               
 groups were purporting the expansion of wilderness areas in the               
 corridors between existing wilderness areas that would also include           
 non-wilderness areas.                                                         
 Number 1180                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES stated the biggest threat were the buffer zones around            
 these areas.  The areas that had been designated were already                 
 existing parks thereby the buffer zone added another layer and                
 restricted activity.  In addition, the buffer zone could also be              
 placed over private and state lands.                                          
 Number 1214                                                                   
 MR. JONES replied that was an accurate portrayal.  The chairman of            
 the World Heritage Committee from Thailand stated that he thought             
 it was an excellent idea to create an 18 million acre buffer zone             
 around Yellowstone National Park.  The zone would go as far east as           
 Cody, Wyoming; as far north as Livingston, Wyoming; and well over             
 into Idaho.  The chairman thought it would be a great idea because            
 it would help the U.S. government manage the area.  Furthermore,              
 the area that the New World Mine deposit was in was specifically              
 excluded from a wilderness area by Congress in 1978 because of its            
 mineral potential.  "These people that want to push this concept              
 are all for managed areas.  And, managed areas mean controlled                
 areas that means you and I can't do what we otherwise might like to           
 do in those areas."                                                           
 Number 1329                                                                   
 PATRICK DALTON was the first person to testify via teleconference             
 in Delta Junction.  He thanked the Representatives for putting                
 together a great resolution.  "I can't believe it when something              
 good comes out of the legislature."  He suggested adding a                    
 provision to provide for the prosecuting of the individuals that              
 took away U.S. lands and gave them to the enemy.  The land was                
 being transferred from the U.S. to the United Nations.  "In my                
 opinion, this falls under the category of treason," he declared.              
 The Constitution of the U.S., said in Article III, Section 3, that            
 the rules and the laws of the lands were determined by Congress;              
 not by executive orders.  He did see how a treaty could supersede             
 a law like this.  He cited the supreme court ruling of Norton v.             
 Shelby County which stated an unconstitutional act was not lost,             
 but rather it was inoperative as though it had never been passed.             
 Number 1439                                                                   
 GREG HALL was the next person to testify via teleconference in                
 Delta Junction.  He thanked Chair James for all that she had done             
 and because she had stood up for the voice of the people.  He also            
 thanked Representative Young for introducing legislation in the               
 U.S. House of Representatives.  He strongly supported the                     
 Number 1471                                                                   
 JON JARVIS, Superintendent, Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and              
 Preserve, was the next person to testify via teleconference in                
 Anchorage.  He explained the park was a part of the world heritage            
 site that included Kluane National Park, Tatshenshini-Alsek                   
 Provincial Park and Habitat, and Glacier Bay National Park making             
 it the largest land-based world heritage site in the world.                   
 MR. JARVIS further stated that he did not represent the entire                
 National Park Service or Washington D.C.  He spoke only from his              
 personal experience of managing a world heritage site.  The                   
 authority for a world heritage site designation came from Congress            
 in an amendment to the National Historic Preservation Act in the              
 mid-1970's.  The amendment granted the authority or the                       
 responsibility to the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to              
 participate in the World Heritage Convention.  Subsequently, there            
 were regulations promulgated that identified the process.  The                
 regulations did not convey any authority over the lands to any                
 other body other than the U.S. Congress and the U.S. government.              
 "All that the World Heritage Convention does is recognize that a              
 particular piece of land is of world class character."  It was the            
 U.S. government that created and influenced the World Heritage                
 Convention as an idea to get other countries to protect key                   
 resources - natural and historical; such as, the Great Wall of                
 MR. JARVIS further explained the regulations said that the area               
 would be identified, Congress would be notified, as-well-as the               
 appropriate congressional committees, before any action would be              
 taken before designation.  In addition, once designated the U.S.              
 government made a commitment to protect the lands with its own                
 laws.  A designation brought international attention to the lands             
 which was what the New World Mine experienced in Yellowstone                  
 National Park.  There were not any new laws or regulations on                 
 private or Native lands associated with world heritage sites.                 
 Since the establishment of Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and               
 Preserve as a world heritage site there was no history or record of           
 any influence of an international body on management decisions for            
 the area.  The park had received, however, a significant amount of            
 international tourists because it was a world heritage site which             
 contributed significantly to Alaska's economy.  It also established           
 a close working relationship with Canada in the Kluane and the                
 Tatshenshini-Alsek parks; in particular, as it related to search              
 and rescue.                                                                   
 Number 1728                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES asked Mr. Jarvis to explain the difference between a              
 world heritage site and a biosphere reserve?                                  
 Number 1733                                                                   
 MR. JARVIS replied they were different conventions and different              
 designations.  He did not know exactly what the biosphere                     
 designation was because he had never worked in one.  He was more              
 familiar with the World Heritage Convention.                                  
 Number 1751                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES asked Mr. Jarvis if the world heritage sites had buffer           
 zones and transitional zones?                                                 
 Number 1756                                                                   
 MR. JARVIS replied they did not.                                              
 CHAIR JAMES explained the biosphere reserves had buffer zones and             
 transitional zones.  That was her biggest concern because the                 
 buffer zone around the identified biosphere reserve restricted                
 human activity.  Denali National Park was a biosphere reserve, for            
 Number 1776                                                                   
 MR. JARVIS replied that was his understanding as well.  The concept           
 of a biosphere reserve and its buffer zone was being used                     
 positively in communities in other countries by not eliminating               
 human occupancy and use, but by recognizing that the people were              
 closely linked to the lands.                                                  
 Number 1927                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES stated that the whole issue and the rationale sounded             
 innocent.  The problem was the implementation when most of the land           
 in Alaska was tied up anyway.  Therefore, restricting access and              
 restricting the ability to use the land was threatened.  In                   
 addition, the general public was not aware or notified of this                
 until it had already happened.  She asked Mr. Jarvis if he                    
 understood her concern?                                                       
 Number 1873                                                                   
 MR. JARVIS replied, "Yes."  The 1979 designation of the Wrangell-             
 St. Elias National Park and Preserve was a very big public deal.              
 There were many dinners and celebrations.  Glacier Park National              
 Park in Montana was a new proposed world heritage site and there              
 were a variety of public meetings and media attention.  It was not            
 something that was done behind closed doors.                                  
 Number 1906                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES replied it was not the world heritage sites that were             
 a threat but rather the biosphere reserves.  They had a different             
 function, correct?                                                            
 Number 1916                                                                   
 MR. JARVIS replied he was not qualified to speak on the biosphere             
 reserve system.                                                               
 Number 1923                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE KIM ELTON asked Mr. Jarvis how long had the                    
 Wrangell-St. Elias Park and National Preserve been a world heritage           
 MR. JARVIS replied it was designated in 1979.                                 
 REPRESENTATIVE ELTON asked Mr. Jarvis if during that time had he              
 ever received a directive or an order from anybody at the United              
 MR. JARVIS replied, "No."  There was no record, file or any                   
 indication that the park had received anything from the World                 
 Heritage Committee or any international body concerning the                   
 management of the area.                                                       
 REPRESENTATIVE ELTON stated that Mr. Jarvis saw a strong economic             
 component of the designation of a world heritage site because of              
 the increase in international tourism.                                        
 MR. JARVIS replied, "Yes."  It was a fact.                                    
 REPRESENTATIVE ELTON stated that Mr. Jarvis also indicated that the           
 relationship between Alaska and Canada was cooperative and not                
 MR. JARVIS replied the relationship was very cooperative.                     
 Number 2006                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE AL VEZEY asked Mr. Jarvis to clarify his position              
 and his connection with the Canadian park system - the Kluane                 
 National Park, in particular.                                                 
 Number 2017                                                                   
 MR. JARVIS replied he was superintendent of the Wrangell-St. Elias            
 National Park and Preserve.  He worked for the National Park                  
 Service.  Wrangell-St. Elias and Kluane were designated together as           
 a world heritage site in 1979.  Since then, Tatshenshini-Alsek and            
 Glacier Bay were added because they were contiguous.  As a result,            
 the world heritage site designation had facilitated a working                 
 relationship.  He cited this summer a Mexican climbing team was               
 caught in an avalanche on Mt. St. Elias, of which, the Kluane                 
 rescue team was able to rescued them off of the mountain in a                 
 matter of hours; quicker than flying a helicopter from Anchorage              
 or Fairbanks.  It was this type of cooperation that occurred                  
 throughout the year.                                                          
 Number 2082                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY stated that he did not realize these parks               
 were a contiguous unit.                                                       
 MR. JARVIS explained that the Wrangell-St. Elias Park and Preserve            
 touched the Canadian border and Kluane was on the other side.                 
 Moving south, the Tatshenshini-Alsek touched Glacier Bay.                     
 Number 2117                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES stated that a mining effort in Haines was halted                  
 because of the world heritage site designation.  Do you remember              
 that Mr. Jarvis?                                                              
 MR. JARVIS replied he was not familiar with that.                             
 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY explained the project was called the Windy               
 Craggy project in Canada.                                                     
 CHAIR JAMES asked Mr. Jarvis if that project was in the area?                 
 MR. JARVIS replied he was not familiar with that.                             
 Number 2146                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS asked Mr. Jarvis what he saw as his primary            
 duty in respect to world heritage site directives?  And, what would           
 he do if he got a directive from the United Nations today?                    
 Number 2161                                                                   
 MR. JARVIS replied he would ignore the directive because he worked            
 for the U.S. government and he took his direction from U.S. law,              
 such as, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act                  
 (ANILCA) and the regulations that were promulgated in the public              
 process.  "I'm a strong believer in the public processes, the                 
 American public process."  Therefore, any directive from the United           
 Nations would be way out of line and he would report it to                    
 Washington D.C.                                                               
 MR. JARVIS further stated that his responsibility as a manager of             
 a world heritage site was primarily to educate the public -                   
 American and international - on the significance and importance of            
 the area; such as, its long-term uses that were recognized in                 
 Number 2217                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS asked Mr. Jarvis, if he would ignore the               
 directive, then why be a world heritage site?                                 
 MR. JARVIS replied a world heritage site recognition had nothing to           
 do with any directives.  It was only a recognition along with 175             
 other sites from around the world that were considered important              
 from a world-class standpoint.  "It's basically a recognition that            
 the Wrangell mountains are unparalleled in the world; there's                 
 nothing else like them."  It was tough to get on the list so it was           
 something to be proud of.                                                     
 Number 2255                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked Mr. Jarvis if the designation of a             
 world heritage site simply meant that it was a pretty place?                  
 MR. JARVIS replied, "No."  There were many pretty places in the               
 world.  A designation meant that there were a combination of                  
 factors that made it unique in the world.  There were many, many              
 countries that would love to get sites on the list that had been              
 unsuccessful.  It was more than just pretty.                                  
 Number 2284                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked Mr. Jarvis what regulations were               
 promulgated by the Departments of Agriculture and Interior pursuant           
 to the convention that applied to his work, and when were they                
 MR. JARVIS replied he did not have that information with him now.             
 He would have his office forward that information to him.                     
 Number 2313                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked Mr. Jarvis if he had received any              
 regulations; and, roughly, what were their subject matter?                    
 MR. JARVIS replied the regulations were related to the                        
 implementation of the World Heritage Convention.  He would send a             
 copy of them to the committee.                                                
 Number 2329                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE FRED DYSON asked Mr. Jarvis if the tenor of what he            
 was saying was that the designation was valuable to the people of             
 the U.S., and that the resolution was an overreaction?                        
 MR. JARVIS replied there were legitimate concerns by the public,              
 but they were generally born out of confusion of what the World               
 Heritage Convention really meant.  It did not convey any authority            
 to anyone, other than the American government and the people.  The            
 convention asked that any country that had a world heritage site              
 use to its own authority to protect the site.                                 
 Number 2376                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON stated that he was personally a bit skeptical.           
 The mine outside of Yellowstone National Park was precluded from              
 being developed because of the designation.  Correct?                         
 MR. JARVIS replied, "I think you're correct."  It did play a part             
 because it brought world recognition and attention to the issue.              
 It certainly did not bring about any new rules or regulations,                
 Number 2406                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON commented there was concern that any                     
 designation would put significant, if not insurmountable, barriers            
 around resource and infrastructure development.  He asked Mr.                 
 Jarvis if that was an unduly concern?                                         
 MR. JARVIS replied there was nothing in the designation that                  
 prohibited any of the current and on-going activities on the lands            
 in Alaska.  For example, in the Wrangell-St. Elias National Park              
 and Preserve there were 675 mining claims, of which, 3 were                   
 operating at this time and there were no restriction as a result of           
 the designation.  Other activities such as sport hunting continued            
 in the park as well.                                                          
 Number 2466                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON explained there was concern that major                   
 developments, such as roads, would be....                                     
 TAPE 97-26, SIDE B                                                            
 Number 0001                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked Mr. Jarvis if we should be concerned?              
 Number 0006                                                                   
 MR. JARVIS replied it would definitely bring more public attention            
 from an international standpoint to major developmental issues.  If           
 a major development was proposed for an area that had been                    
 designated, and there was a perception that it compromised the                
 primary integrity of the area, then there would be additional                 
 public attention.                                                             
 Number 0033                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES asked Mr. Jarvis if in Glacier Bay National Park                  
 cultural and historical subsistence use were restricted in the                
 Number 0043                                                                   
 MR. JARVIS replied he was not familiar enough with the Glacier Bay            
 issues to answer the question.  He would rather defer the question            
 to the superintendent of Glacier Bay.                                         
 Number 0053                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE ELTON asked Mr. Jarvis if he had implied that there            
 would be an international component to the decision making process?           
 Number 0070                                                                   
 MR. JARVIS replied, "No, Sir."  International organizations would             
 not have any role in the decision making process; it was a decision           
 that would be made via the normal public process and legal                    
 requirements of the United States.                                            
 Number 0095                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY explained that some members of the Alaska                
 State Legislature were about to have a legislative exchange with              
 the Yukon Territory.  He asked Mr. Jarvis if he could think of any            
 suggestions or issues that should be brought up with the Canadians?           
 Number 0118                                                                   
 MR. JARVIS suggested that the members ask what was the Canadian               
 view of a world heritage designation site.  It would be interesting           
 to hear from other countries what their view of a world heritage              
 site meant.                                                                   
 Number 0136                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES stated, for the record, that her biggest concern was              
 the biosphere reserves as opposed to the world heritage sites.  She           
 appreciated the testimony of Mr. Jarvis today on the world heritage           
 sites, nevertheless.                                                          
 Number 0147                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY explained that the folks in the Yukon                    
 Territory were benefitting from a substantial economic boom in                
 timber harvesting because the Canadian government had removed large           
 amounts of timber in British Columbia from the market.                        
 Number 0167                                                                   
 FRANK DILLON, Executive Director, Alaska Trucking Association, was            
 the next person to testify via teleconference in Anchorage.  The              
 association supported HJR 14 because the trucking industry feared             
 that it would loose options in its use of the natural resources in            
 the land base available for economic development.  The industry had           
 been dealing with terms like "wilderness" and "national parks."               
 Now, there were terms like "world heritage sites", "biosphere                 
 reserves", "wildlife refuges" and "national landmarks."  There was            
 also a plethora a state and local zoning considerations for land-             
 use as well as Indian country designations.  The association was              
 worried that the overall goal behind these designations and the               
 reasons were not straight forward.  There was a reason to be                  
 concerned about the biosphere reserves and the language that was              
 used to protect the area.  He was also concerned about the buffer             
 zone and the understanding of where the discrete ecosystems were.             
 "Does an ecosystem change when we get to the border of a park or a            
 wildlife area?  I don't think so."  There was really only one                 
 ecosystem that was interconnected from a molecular level to a                 
 universal level.  Therefore, the definitions seemed wide open to              
 expansion and exclusion.                                                      
 Number 0262                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked Mr. Dillon if he was more concerned            
 with the biospheres rather than the world heritage sites?                     
 Number 0270                                                                   
 MR. DILLON replied the association was concerned about the enormous           
 amount of effort it took to identify these types of areas expanding           
 the control.  He did not want issues in Alaska to be decided upon             
 by the folks in the United Nations.  "It's bad enough having                  
 decisions in Alaska decided in Washington D.C."                               
 Number 0290                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked Mr. Dillon if he was concerned that            
 there would be areas of Alaska that would be withdrawn from                   
 potential development?                                                        
 MR. DILLON replied, "Correct."  He was also concerned about the               
 potential control by foreigners.                                              
 Number 0305                                                                   
 STEVE BORELL, Executive Director, Alaska Miners Association, Inc.,            
 was the next person to testify via teleconference in Anchorage.               
 The association supported HJR 14.  World heritage sites and                   
 biosphere reserves were possibly the single-greatest threat to                
 future economic activity in Western Alaska; and, specifically, in             
 the area of mining.  Designations could be used to block mineral              
 development and any other perceived activity that was felt to be a            
 threat to the designations.  Congressman Don Young's bill - HR 901            
 - was simple; yet, extremely important.  It required that Congress            
 approve any international designation, including world heritage               
 sites and biosphere reserves.  Currently, world heritage sites                
 could be nominated by the U.S. Departments of Interior and                    
 Agriculture; and biosphere reserves could be designated by the U.S.           
 Department of State, without congressional input.                             
 MR. BORELL further stated that he was aware of two instances where            
 a world heritage site was used to block a mining project.  He cited           
 the Yellowstone mining project where both national and                        
 international groups used the argument that it was a world heritage           
 site to oppose mining development outside of the park in an area              
 where mining had begun before the park was established and had been           
 occurring for over 100 years.  The other example involved the                 
 designation of a world heritage site in Kamchatka, Russia -                   
 Volcanoes of Kamchatka World Heritage Site - in 1996.  Immediately            
 after the designation a group of U.S. and international                       
 environmental groups challenged the Overseas Private Investment               
 Corporation (OPIC) to not insure the mine developmental                       
 MR. BORELL further stated that in Alaska the association's                    
 immediate concern was the proposed park in Western Alaska.  The               
 language was crafted to say that it would not affect any new lands            
 that were not in a conservational system unit.  Nevertheless,                 
 tremendous dangers were involved.  The proposals were:  An                    
 international park that included parts of the Russian Far East, a             
 world heritage site, and a marine biosphere reserve for the Bering            
 Sea between Alaska and Russia.  He fully expected, if one of the              
 designations occurred, groups would seek to block development.  He            
 reiterated there was not a provision in the law that would not                
 allow something to be built outside of a world heritage site, but             
 he was concerned about the perception that was presented to the               
 world and to the investment communities.  The investment community            
 could not withstand that type of pressure which was what happened             
 to the project outside of Yellowstone.                                        
 MR. BORELL further stated that Northwest Alaska had about one-                
 fourth of the U.S.'s coal reserves.  The only way to transport the            
 coal, in his opinion, was by rail to a port crossing several                  
 different conservational system units.  He was concerned about the            
 groups screaming at the top of their voice if these units were                
 designated as a world heritage site.  In addition, he wondered what           
 exactly was a marine biosphere reserve which was being proposed for           
 the Bering Sea.  Did it include whaling, for example; and would the           
 same pressures against Norwegians be placed upon Alaskan Natives?             
 MR. BORELL further wondered how a world heritage sight or a                   
 biosphere reserve could be used as an economic tool against the               
 United States and against Alaska, in particular.  The market for              
 the coal from Northwest Alaska would be the Pacific Rim and the               
 competitors in the Pacific Rim were:  Indonesia, Australia, India             
 and South Africa.  He was concerned about the governmental                    
 connections between the U.S. and Indonesia.  Indonesia was a                  
 country with massive coal deposits and with ports already in place.           
 "Why would the Indonesians and why would other countries not look             
 to create pressure against a major competitor like the coal in                
 Northwest Alaska."  Furthermore, if the international mining and              
 investment community had known that the Red Dog mine would have               
 been such a major factor in the world market, they would have                 
 funneled monies into groups to block the project.                             
 MR. BORELL stated, in conclusion, he was pleased to see the                   
 resolution before the legislature.  He was also pleased to see                
 Congressman Young seeking to put sideboards on a situation that was           
 very dangerous.                                                               
 Number 0862                                                                   
 LEONARD EFTA was the next person to testify via teleconference in             
 Kenai.  He did not see why a bill was needed to protect the                   
 sovereignty of the nation.  He knew of nothing in the constitution            
 that authorized anyone to turn over one inch of this country to a             
 foreign power.  "If the Senate did indeed pass a treaty authorizing           
 this, I believe that the steps should be to tell the Senate; and,             
 I said "tell" not "ask" the Senate, to get us out of that treaty,             
 CHAIR JAMES explained to Mr. Efta that was exactly what the                   
 resolution did.                                                               
 Number 0916                                                                   
 ERIC WEATHERS was the next person to testify via teleconference in            
 Cordova.  He supported the need for an alarm of the world heritage            
 sites and the biosphere reserves because it was unconstitutional              
 for the President to make treaties with foreign countries.  "I                
 believe he should be tried for treason immediately and shot, and              
 all U.N. affiliates run out of this country."  He did not recognize           
 any world organizations.  "There will not and shall not be any                
 international agreements within the United States.  No compromise.            
 Get out of my country."                                                       
 Number 0948                                                                   
 DENNY WEATHERS was the next person to testify via teleconference in           
 Cordova.  She commended the committee members.  "I know you're                
 trying to do the best."  At the same time, she opposed HJR 14                 
 because it was unconstitutional.  According to the Constitutions of           
 the U.S. and Alaska, jurisdiction of Alaska did not belong to the             
 United States; it belonged to the people of Alaska.  She cited                
 Article XV, Section 18, Constitution of Alaska, "Territorial Assets           
 and Liabilities"; and Section 25, "Effective Date."  The assets of            
 the Territory became the property of the state when it joined the             
 union.  She further stated that the Constitution of the U.S.                  
 protected the fifty sovereign states from the U.S. jurisdiction               
 under Article IV, Section 3, Section 4, and Amendment number 10.              
 The U.S. jurisdiction was better defined under Article I, Section             
 8, which allowed for the U.S. to exercise like authority over all             
 places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state for           
 the erection of forts, and arsenals, for example.  She stated no              
 where in either constitutions did it give the U.S. Congress or the            
 President the power or authority within Alaska to create or                   
 designate national parks, world heritage sites or biosphere                   
 reserves.  The states only had the powers designated to them by the           
 constitution and no more.  In addition, Title 18, Section 7, U.S.             
 Codes, specified that territorial jurisdiction extended only                  
 outside of the boundaries of the lands belonging to any of the                
 fifty states.  There were many court cases concerning the U.S. and            
 the jurisdiction of the stat, of which, one indicated that the                
 states were separate sovereigns in respect to the federal                     
 government.  She cited the court case of Heath v. Alabama.  In              
 1992, the New York supreme court ruled that Congress exercised its            
 confirmed powers subject to the limitations contained in the                  
 constitution.  Thus, if a state ratified or gave consent to any               
 authority that was not specifically granted by the Constitution of            
 the United States, it was null and void.  She requested that the              
 Alaska State Legislature make no deals with the federal government            
 without first getting approval from the voters.  "I do not believe            
 Alaska is for sale to the federal government."  Maybe, it would be            
 wise to follow the lead of the other states seeking to boot out the           
 feds; such as:  Montana, Nevada, Idaho, Colorado, Wyoming and                 
 Oregon.  In conclusion, she opposed HJR 14 because the laws were              
 already there; it was not necessary, because "we owned our land."             
 MS. WEATHERS asked if the Alaska State Legislature legally seceded            
 property over to the United States or the federal government                  
 without the knowledge of the people of Alaska?                                
 CHAIR JAMES replied, "No."  She was not an authority, however.  She           
 would take her question into consideration and respond to her                 
 Number 1198                                                                   
 IRENE ANDERSON was the next person to testify via teleconference in           
 Nome.  The resolution was needed because the general public needed            
 to know about the conservation and international groups that wanted           
 to do things that the state was afraid of - the control of land use           
 in the buffer zones and the transitional areas.  She did not want             
 them to interfere in access to the sea or restrict the people here            
 in Nome.  She cited the access problems of the Bering Land Bridge.            
 The people in Shishmaref were surrounded by the Bering Land Bridge            
 so they were not able to build a road, for example.  And, the                 
 people of Wales would like to be guaranteed their right to                    
 subsistence.  She also felt for the Natives on the Russian side               
 because they were already poor and a designation would limit their            
 land-base and ownership.  The U.S. government should not use its              
 power and the people's taxes to make an international park when               
 they were already poor.  Furthermore, there were millions of                  
 dollars being spent on research projects in the Bering Land Bridge.           
 "We feel that we're too little.  We're just a little group of                 
 people up here in the Seward Peninsula area."   She appreciated the           
 work of the legislature; otherwise, she feared the Nome area would            
 become overrun and become worse than a third world nation because             
 it would not have access to that which it needed.  It needed, for             
 example, access to Serpentine Hot Springs, of which, a request had            
 already been denied.  It was hard for the people of Shishmaref to             
 get gravel for infrastructure.                                                
 Number 1590                                                                   
 JOHN BREIVOGEL was the next person to testify via teleconference in           
 Glennallen.  The main value of the bill was so that the people                
 would be aware that something ominous was going on.  Ownership did            
 not need to be proved.  The people in the area of the Wrangell park           
 were sincere.  They did not realize that they were being                      
 manipulated by the collective will of the 185 member nations of the           
 United Nations, however.  There was an international court of                 
 justice.  There were three United Nations organizations in                    
 Anchorage:  The United Nations Association of the U.S.A. - Alaska             
 Chapter, The Northern Forum, and The Alaska-United Nations 50th               
 Anniversary Commission.  He said, if one really wanted to know what           
 was going on, go to Walter Hickel, honorary chairman of the                   
 commission; Willy Hensley, co-chairman; and Bill Sheffield,                   
 chairman.  In addition, go to Senator Frank Murkowski, who                    
 nominated Walter Hickel to the World Court.  He reiterated the park           
 service was totally unaware of how they were being manipulated.               
 "The real enemy is much closer to home and we need to look at this            
 real carefully.  The biggest part of the problem is right in                  
 downtown Anchorage and all these little clubs that are associations           
 which get grants and funds from everywhere."  He would be glad to             
 share his information with anybody that was interested.                       
 Number 1958                                                                   
 MATT KRINKE was the next person to testify via teleconference in              
 Glennallen.  He opposed HJR 14.  "If you give them more to work               
 with, this bill would become legal and we will not have our                   
 rights."  He suggested looking at the material that was available             
 to see how the state was being ripped off of its land.  The land              
 belonged to the people.  "Please uphold our constitution and try to           
 save us from these evil people who are steeling our land from us."            
 Number 2007                                                                   
 PAUL WEIR was the next person to testify via teleconference in                
 Glennallen.  He was against any connection to the United Nations.             
 "We need to keep the U.S. sovereign."  Red China, Cuba and many               
 other communist nations were members of the U.N.  "We need to get             
 the United States out of the United Nations."  He thanked Chair               
 James for her fine piece of legislation.                                      
 Number 2039                                                                   
 STANLEY LEPHART, Executive Director, Citizens Advisory Commission             
 on Federal Areas, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Natural           
 Resources, was the next person to testify via teleconference in               
 Fairbanks.  The commission voted - unanimously - to support the               
 passage of HJR 14.  Although the commission had a lot to learn                
 about biosphere reserves and world heritage sites, it was                     
 concerned.  It was particularly concerned about the effects of the            
 designations and the ability of the state to exercise its                     
 management authority over its natural resources both fish and                 
 wildlife.  It was also concerned about the impact on private                  
 property interest either within or adjacent to areas designated               
 under one of the programs.  The United Nation's biosphere ban was             
 created in 1968 and the World Heritage Convention was created in              
 1972.  During the intervening years, the programs operated in                 
 relative obscurity as-far-as the American public was concerned.               
 Furthermore, the UNESCO guidelines discouraged publicity of a                 
 nomination to maintain objectivity of the evaluation process and to           
 avoid embarrassment to those concerned.  The guidance had been                
 revised, however, to state that participation by local people in              
 the nomination process was essential to ensure a shared                       
 responsibility with the state party and the maintenance of the                
 site.  World heritage sites had increased the public's awareness of           
 the programs surrounding a site, such as, the Yellowstone example;            
 and had affected local management prerogatives.  The proposal to              
 develop the Windy Craggy Copper Mine in British Columbia provided             
 the impetus for the Department of Interior to nominate Glacier Bay            
 National Park as a world heritage site in 1991.  The submission               
 letter noted the environmental threats posed by the mineral claims            
 on the Brady Ice Field, the 10 Native allotment claims, and the               
 existence of commercial fishing.  "I can't help but wonder how                
 these statements fit with the program's guidelines to try to                  
 garnish support by local people in this case - fishermen and                  
 allotment owners for the support and nomination of the maintenance            
 of the site."  Glacier Bay as both a world heritage site and a                
 biosphere reserve continued to be a major factor in the efforts by            
 the National Park Service and a number of environmental                       
 organizations to close the bay to commercial fishing.  He further             
 explained that there were four biosphere reserves in Alaska:                  
 Glacier Bay National Park/Admiralty Island National Monument,                 
 Denali National Park and Preserve, Noatak National Preserve, and              
 the Aleutian Islands National Wildlife Refuge.  In addition, there            
 were eight world heritage sites in Alaska:  Arctic National                   
 Wildlife Refuge, Denali National Park and Preserve, Gates of the              
 Arctic National Park and Preserve, Katmai National Park, Wrangell-            
 St. Elias National Park and Preserve, Glacier Bay National Park and           
 Preserve, Cape Krusenstern National Monument, and the Aleutian                
 Island Unit of the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge.  Six             
 of the areas mentioned had been nominated while only Glacier Bay              
 and Wrangell-St. Elias were actually inscribed as world heritage              
 sites.  In practice, there was not a distinction between a                    
 nomination and an inscribed area.  There were buffer zones                    
 identified, but according to the....                                          
 TAPE 97-27, SIDE A                                                            
 Number 0001                                                                   
 MR. LEPHART further stated that a designation of an area as a                 
 biosphere reserve or a world heritage site was not suppose to                 
 convey any regulatory powers over the lands within the United                 
 States.  However, there were numerous examples of how the                     
 designations influenced the management decisions by U.S. federal              
 agencies.  The commission believed that there was sufficient                  
 concern to justify an approval by Congress, state, or local                   
 governments before any area was designated.                                   
 CHAIR JAMES called for a motion to adopt the committee substitute.            
 Number 0152                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS moved that the committee substitute, 0-                
 LS0355/E, Luckhaupt, 3/7/97, be adopted.  There was no objection,             
 the committee substitute was so adopted.                                      
 Number 0182                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS moved that HJR 14, as amended, move from the           
 committee with individual recommendations and the attached fiscal             
 Number 0209                                                                   
 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY objected to make a few comments.  He did                 
 intend to vote to pass the bill out of the committee.  He was sorry           
 that the committee could not get more of the testimony from Stan              
 Lephart, Executive Director, Citizens Advisory Commission on                  
 Federal Areas.  The commission was part of the Department of                  
 Natural Resources.  It was a resource that was available to this              
 committee and he encouraged the members to make use of it.  "Stan             
 has done the most thorough research on this subject that I have               
 ever seen."                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES stated that just because the resolution was passed from           
 the committee the work was not done.  It was an on-going issue.               
 She asked Representative Vezey if his objection was still                     
 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY replied, "No."                                           
 CHAIR JAMES asked the committee members if there was further                  
 objection to the motion.  There was no further objection, the CSHJR
 14(STA) was so moved from the House State Affairs Standing                    
 Number 0347                                                                   
 CHAIR JAMES adjourned the House State Affairs Standing Committee              
 meeting at 10:04 a.m.                                                         

Document Name Date/Time Subjects