SB 171-RESIDENCY REQ: HUNTING, TRAPPING, FISHING  3:45:45 PM CHAIR BISHOP announced the consideration of SB 171 SENATE BILL NO. 171 "An Act changing the residency requirements for sport fishing, hunting, and trapping privileges; and providing for an effective date." 3:45:55 PM CHAIR BISHOP opened public testimony on SB 171. 3:46:30 PM STACEE KLEINSMITH, representing self, Chugiak, Alaska, testified in opposition to SB 171. She expressed appreciation for collective knowledge, experience, and the ability to collaborate on issues. However, emphasized concerns about the way SB 171 was written. She said while she understands the legislative intent, there is an absence of quantifiable evidence regarding the harm it aims to address. As currently drafted, the bill's unintended consequences would personally affect her, as she would no longer qualify for the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD). She shared her family's health challenges, which required significant recovery time, but were not deemed excusable under the PFD criteria. SB 171 would classify her as a non-resident, leading to real and unintended consequences. She stated that others might also find themselves in similarly unfortunate circumstances and urged the committee to put brakes on the progression of SB 171. 3:49:09 PM DAVID EGELSTON, representing self, Thorne Bay, Alaska, testified in support of SB 171. He said he spent over thirty years in law enforcement, primarily enforcing state and federal laws and regulations surrounding fish, wildlife, and environmental statutes. He opined that fish and wildlife should be prioritized for feeding residents before they are shared with outsiders. Non-residents are allowed to partake and harvest resources, they should follow regulations, respect Alaska's ways when harvesting resources, and pay for the privilege as they do in other states. This bill would not change the residency status for current Alaskans, who can retire and temporarily leave the state but would remain residents as long as PFD requirements are met. He expressed concerns about vacationing residents potentially abusing the system and stealing resources. He highlighted examples including the potential for non-residents to falsify residency to obtain more salmon than legally allowed in the state. These individuals have an advantage in obtaining big game and often take advantage of systems harvesting those resources. The financial cost to Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. SB 171 would impose no costs on the state but would bring in a significant amount of revenue for state resources. He suggested that residency requirements should be clear. While non-residents cannot be forced to act ethically, those who unethically navigate the system could be held responsible through legal action. 3:51:36 PM ELLEN HANNAN, representing self, Craig, Alaska, testified in support of SB 171. She said she has been following the House version of SB 171 and noted that the Senate version includes provisions for permanent licensing. She referenced the potential savings outlined under SB 171, which would benefit the state by improving law enforcement capabilities and assisting new residents in obtaining federally qualified user status for subsistence benefits. Clarifying residency requirements through the PFD is long overdue. 3:52:48 PM KEN VORISEK, representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska, testified in opposition to SB 171. He said residency in Alaska is clearly defined in statute, which requires one's intent to maintain residency in the state, to attempt to return, and to not claim residency benefits in any other state. SB 171 recategorizes residency in a hierarchy format by placing additional terms on the state residency law and requires an individual to remain in the state for a certain amount of days before accessing fish and game resources. The bill only adds additional terms to bona fide residents like himself, whose retirement plans depend on the ability to access these resources. He noted that he spends time hunting in other states. SB 171 is a commercial grab on Alaska's resources and implies that residents do not have equal access. All residents should be treated equally as long as legal residency requirements are met. He raised concerns about the potential for enforcement challenges under SB 171, where individuals might qualify for the PFD but face obstacles in meeting hunting license prerequisites, or vice versa. He urged the committee to prevent this bill from progressing. 3:56:27 PM CO-CHAIR BISHOP closed public testimony. CO-CHAIR BISHOP held SB 171 in committee.