SENATE BILL 230 "An Act providing that state land, water, and land and water may not be classified so as to preclude or restrict traditional means of access for traditional recreational uses." KEN ERICKSON, STAFF, SENATOR DRUE PEARCE, spoke in support of SB 230. He noted that it had been introduced to protect Alaskan's right to access state land and water for recreational uses. In a time when the federal government continues to restrict and prohibit Alaskan's access to many areas of the State, the State government, needs to ensure that decisions made to restrict access are made in a responsible, fair and well represented process. Alaskans are presently losing their right to traditional recreational use on some state and park lands without appropriate notification and justification. He cited that citizens believe that the "public comment process" is not being administered and that all user groups are not being represented. Mr. Erickson suggested that non-restricted areas of our State are being closed without proper oversight by the Legislature. Mr. Erickson recommended that SB 230 would provide a change in the process, ensuring that all Alaskans have proper representation by their elected officials, with restrictions and prohibitions placed on traditional recreational activity needing to be justified to the Legislature. He added that some areas of Alaska may need to be restricted to partial recreational activity, suggesting that these important decisions be made at the legislative level. 2 Representative Mulder pointed out that the Chilkat State Park would be increased by eleven acres. Mr. Erickson agreed, pointing out that there are three parcels of land involved, previously purchased by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and then transferred to the Parks Management Division by using inter-agency land management agreements. The federal funds used to purchase those eleven acres had strings attached indicating that they would need to be managed as if they were part of the Chilkat State Park. In response to Representative Therriault's comment, Mr. Erickson stated that Section #1 would add a list of duties required by Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The Department must annually submit a report to the Legislature on each designation of incompatible use that would prohibit or restrict a traditional means of access. The report must state reasons for the restriction or prohibition, the specific area affected, and the duration of the restriction or prohibition. The section would further define "traditional means of access" and "traditional recreational activity". Representative Brown referenced language on Page 3, Line 12, "...where a popular pattern or use has developed;...". Mr. Erickson stated that this language would incorporate uses which have occurred traditionally. JUNE BURKHART, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ALASKA BOATING ASSOCIATION, MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, MAT- SU, spoke in support of SB 230. She proceeded to provide examples of problems resulting from concerns on lack of restrictions. Ms. Burkhart added that the public hearing process has not worked. JIM STRATTON, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR), noted that the Department supports Sections 1, 2, and 3, although, voiced opposition to Sections 4 and 5. He stated that it was the mission of Alaska State Parks to provide for a range of recreational opportunities. Mr. Stratton commented on Denali State Park as referenced by Ms. Burkhart. When that legislation was passed in 1970, the Division of State Park's was not given direction from the Legislature on how to incorporate incompatible uses when planning for the park. The Department went forward with the generic park regulations and crafted a balance between motorized and non-motorized use. Mr. Stratton advised that the 1989 planning process for the Denali State Park took two years to write. He emphasized 3 that the public was provided with a "more than adequate" opportunity in creating a balance in park regulations. The Department does not feel that many recreational users would be displaced with the proposed closure. He emphasized that the decision had been made through the public process. Mr. Stratton stressed that hundreds of hours have been "put-in" to achieve the compromise. He advised that it would be "bad" business not to support the agreed result. Mr. Stratton referenced the language on Page 7, Line 20, (4), "...provide ample access for recreational mining", suggesting that language was problematic. The current definition of recreational mining would include a 6" suction dredge. The Department does not feel that kind of recreational mining is compatible with purposes of state parks. Although, he added, recreational gold panning is allowed in state parks. He requested that an amendment be made which would change that language. Representative Kelly interjected that 6" dredge should be allowed. Representative Martin MOVED a change to Page 7, Line 20, by deleting "mining" and inserting "gold panning". Mr. Erickson noted that Senator Pearce would not object to that change. Representative Kelly OBJECTED emphasizing that mining is a valid recreational activity. Representative Brown asked what was involved with using a six inch suction dredge and how much noise would it create. Mr. Stratton stated that a six inch dredge was a mechanized suction device which would suck gravel through a six inch pipe. Co-Chair Foster interjected that size dredge was more like a "toy". A permit would be needed if concerns were voiced regarding the water quality. Co-Chair Hanley inquired the current uses allowed for mining in state parks. Mr. Stratton replied that state parks are closed to mining although gold panning is allowed. He added that there is no definition of recreational mining in statute, although, there are regulations within other divisions at DNR. Committee members discussed the differences of "recreational" mining. Co-Chair Foster noted that he could support mining if done recreationally with a 2.5" dredge pipe, including rockers and small slues boxes not over 4' in length. He suggested that the noise would be minimal. Representative Kelly asked if there was a pipe increment between the 6" and the 2.5" hose. Co-Chair Foster stated that a 4" hose would still need a motor vehicle to drag it into the area. 4 Representative Brown proposed adding the language "non- mechanized" to the intent. Representative Kelly supported keeping language which would include the 2.5" mechanized dredge pipe. He maintained that the Alaskan heritage is based on mining, noting his frustration that mining is continually being cut off. Representative Navarre pointed out that mechanized mining would be an expansion to what is currently allowed. Co- Chair Hanley pointed out that the section being discussed would only apply to the Denali State Park. Representative Brown MOVED to AMEND the amendment to delete "gold panning" and insert "non-mechanized". Representative Kelly OBJECTED. Representative Martin WITHDREW Amendment #1. Representative Brown repeated the MOTION. Representative Kelly OBJECTED. A roll call was taken on the MOTION to insert "non- mechanized". IN FAVOR: Brown, Grussendorf, Martin, Navarre, Hanley, Foster. OPPOSED: Kelly, Kohring, Mulder, Therriault. Representative Parnell was not present for the vote. The MOTION PASSED (6-4). EDDIE GRASSER, ALASKA OUTDOOR COUNCIL, JUNEAU, urged the Committee's support of HB 230. The purpose of the Outdoor Council is to protect public access to public resources, suggesting that the proposed legislation would amply cover those concerns. (Tape Change, HFC 96-132, Side 2). Representative Martin MOVED to report HCS CS SB 230 (FIN) out of Committee with individual recommendations and with the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. HCS CS SB 230 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a fiscal note by the Department of Natural Resources dated 3/28/96.