HB 12-MUNICIPAL REGULATION OF TRAPPING  9:13:17 AM CHAIR MCCORMICK announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 12, "An Act relating to municipal regulation of trapping; and providing for an effective date." 9:13:31 AM REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON, Alaska State Representative, prime sponsor, presented HB 12. He paraphrased the sponsor statement [included in the committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: House Bill 12 seeks to make explicit the authorization for home rule and general law municipalities to regulate trapping for the limited purpose of preventing injury to persons or property, including domestic animals. Stories of pets and people inadvertently caught in (or simply triggering) traps are legion, and cause worry and concern for many Alaskans who enjoy Alaska's extensive outdoors. In a state as large as ours, local government is often best-positioned to understand local land-use issues, and this bill aims to guarantee the ability of local municipalities to tailor specific regulations to promote safe trapping practices within their jurisdiction. Absent the passage of this bill, local government may lack the ability to regulate trapping under existing state law or the state Constitution. Drawing on provisions of Alaska statutes and the Alaska Constitution, an Attorney General's opinion from 1982 determined that municipalities cannot directly regulate game but may enact ordinances with an 'incidental effect' on game. In effect, approximately fifteen cities or boroughs within Alaska regulate trapping in some way already. The scope of these regulations spans from prohibitions on trapping of domestic animals, which is arguably already illegal under the state's cruelty to animals statute, to prohibitions on trapping within the entire jurisdiction, which arguably is a direct regulation of game. HB 12 seeks to remove legal uncertainty over whether existing or future municipal safe trapping ordinances are direct regulations or merely have incidental effect. It does so by: (1) stipulating the statutory authorization of state game management in Title 16; and (2) specifically authorizing municipalities to limit trapping in certain ways (for example, trap tags and signage) for a specific purpose (preventing injury to people and domestic animals) in particular areas (where injury is likely to occur) and allows for exemptions (for example, to prevent the spread of disease), in Title 29. I urge you to support this legislation. Please feel free to contact my staff Alexander at 465-4939 with any questions. 9:21:47 AM ALEXANDER SCHROEDER, Staff, Representative Andy Josephson, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Josephson, prime sponsor of HB 12, presented a PowerPoint, entitled "HB 12: Municipal Regulation of Trapping," [hard copy included in the committee packet]. He began on slide 2, "Alaska Constitution," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: Two constitutional sections pertain to trapping • Article X, Section 11. Home Rule Powers: A home rule borough or city may exercise all legislative powers not prohibited by law or by charter • Article VIII, Section 3. Common Use: Wherever occurring in their natural state, fish, wildlife, and waters are reserved to the people for common use. • There is ambiguity as to whether cities/municipalities can manage trapping within their local boundaries. MR. SCHROEDER continued to slide 3, which featured a chart of the municipal codes in 15 municipalities that prohibit trapping within their boundaries in some capacity. 9:24:28 AM MR. SCHROEDER proceeded to slide 4, "Trapping Regulations," which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: Alaska trapping regulations are extremely permissive regarding traps set near public-use trails 2023-2024 Alaska Trapping Regulations • "Avoid situations where you might catch a domestic dog or cat, such as near homes or trails frequently used by hikers, skijorers, dog mushers, or other people" (page 6) • "Remember to act responsibly by trapping in ways that minimize conflict between trappers and other users. Failing to do so may jeopardize the future of trapping in Alaska" (page 4) • There is no clear penalty for failing to avoid situations where a pet or child is caught in a trap by a trail Alaska Statute • AS 16.05.790: Obstruction or hinderance of lawful hunting, fishing, trapping, or viewing of fish or game • Violation of this statute could result in a $500 fine and 30 days imprisonment • Additionally, AS 16.05.791 allows civil penalties for costs related to violation of AS 16.05.790 • There is a clear penalty for intentionally obstructing or hindering a trap, even if it is near a public-use trail MR. SCHROEDER turned to slide 5, which featured the headlines of articles reporting on animals caught in traps. 9:27:15 AM MR. SHROEDER concluded on slide 6, "HB 12 What does it do?" Slide 6 read as follows [original punctuation provided]: • Resolves ambiguity about home rule cities/municipalities powers to regulate trapping within their boundaries • Allows them to do so "to protect persons and property within its boundaries?" • Nothing in bill prohibits exercising powers of DEC, DF&G, or DPS CHAIR MCCORMICK opened invited testimony. 9:28:15 AM LORRAINE TEMPLE, Director, Safe Trails Committee Cooper Landing, gave invited testimony during the hearing on HB 12. Shared her experience with trappers in Cooper Landing, explaining that trappers and recreational users are forced to occupy the same areas causing at least 9 dogs and 1 child in the past 20 years to have encounters with traps. She reported that a 50-yard setback from campgrounds was enacted by the Board of Game after the Safe Trails Committee submitted five proposals to establish 100-yard setbacks from specific trails, roads, campgrounds, beaches, and recreational areas. She relayed anecdotes about close encounters with active traps in Cooper Landing. She opined that a safer scenario could be achieved and allow for all users to have the benefit of wilderness in their rightful ways with an updated form of management. 9:33:51 AM REPRESENTATIVE MEARS sought to confirm that the bill would support local governments in implementing their own rules. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON answered yes and cited Article 10 of the Alaska Constitution. 9:35:06 AM KNEELAND TAYLOR, representing self, gave invited testimony during the hearing on HB 12. He provided historical context in the way of court cases and public safety ordinances related to trapping. He shared his understanding that first-, second-, and third-class boroughs have the statutory authority to enact ordinances that impact trapping; however, the state contends that they do not, he said, which creates a jurisdictional conflict. Therefore, the bill is needed to provide clarity. He explained that commonly used traps used in Alaska can kill small children and dogs. He opined that local governments are best equipped at identifying the places that are inappropriate for trapping. He reminded the committee that HB 12 would not require municipalities to enact ordinances, and that doing so would be at the discretion of each municipality. 9:42:55 AM CHAIR MCCORMICK sought questions from committee members. 9:43:02 AM REPRESENATIVE BAKER asked whether any municipalities had made it known to the bill sponsor that they could not manage this proposal. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON answered no. REPRESENATIVE BAKER asked whether there are any communities that could not manage this issue without the passage of HB 12. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON responded yes. He reported that the list of communities that want to take affirmative action is growing. 9:45:52 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked how many dogs or cats are killed by vehicles every year. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON did not know the answer. REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE said he was struggling with the bill because he felt for the animal owners and pets; however, he said he blames the owners for not keeping their pets under control. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON shared his belief that municipalities may want to grant people the privilege of walking their pets off leash without having to worry about traps. Furthermore, he opined that a 50- or 100-yard setback would not be burdensome to trappers. REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE asked whether it would be acceptable for the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) to contract with a local trapper to reduce an infestation of muskrats, for example. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON answered yes. He directed attention to page 1, lines 9-10 of the bill, which speaks to municipal exemptions. 9:50:36 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT referenced "Grubby" the opossum in Homer. She asked how much of Alaska is available to trappers. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON suspected that it exceeds 99 percent [of state land]. REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether, by the bill sponsor's estimation, that allowing municipalities to govern themselves by setting aside areas free from trapping would have a minimal impact on trappers' economic activity. REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON agreed that trappers' objective would not be seriously impeded. 9:52:14 AM CHAIR MCCORMICK said he wanted to bring the bill forward for its applicability to rural Alaska. [HB 12 was held over.]