CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 149(RES) "An Act relating to timber, to the sale of timber by the state, and to the management of state forests." KELLY HUBER, STAFF, SENATOR TAYLOR, SPONSOR, provided information on the bill. She observed that the legislation promotes resource development for timber management in Alaska's two state forests. There is a zero fiscal note attached. CHRIS MISH, FORESTER, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES testified via teleconference. He provided a brief overview of the bill. He noted that Section 2 would delete the reference to considerations under the forest land use plan section, and place them in a section under the forest management plan, which is a broader planning document. He noted that the document for forest timber sales would be biennial rather than annual. Timber sales would still be required to appear in at least one five-year schedule prior to sale. Individual sales would still be reviewed through the forest planning process. Sections 8 and 9 address management plans within the Haines State Forest. Sections 11, 12 and 15, would change the management emphasis in legislatively designated state forests: Haines (270,000 acres) and Tanana State Forest (1.8 million). The emphasis on timber management would allow for other beneficial uses, which are compatible with timber. The primary purpose of state forests would be changed from multiple uses to "timber management that provides for the production, utilization and replenishment of timber resources while allowing other beneficial uses". Mr. Mish observed that they are currently required to review plans every five years. The legislation would allow plans to be reviewed as necessary. He added that Section 10 would only allow more stringent standards [than those under section (a)] if they were in the state's interest. Representative Berkowitz questioned what would happen in the case of a conflict between fishing and timber. Mr. Mish noted that they would refer to the state Forest Practices Act, which establishes minimum protection standards for different stream standards. He speculated that if the conflict was not related to commerce, it might place timber on a higher level of consideration. He stressed that all parties agreed that the standards would protect habitat and clean water. Representative Kerttula summarized that the bill would prioritize timber. Mr. Mish noted that the priority would only occur in time of conflict. Representative Kerttula asked what burden would have to be proved to show that timber is not the first use in a conflict. Mr. Mish noted it would depend on the merits of each use, but that timber would be weighted more heavily. Representative Kerttula questioned the reason for the bill. Mr. Mish stated that other conflicts had arisen and been resolved. Representative Kerttula asked if the legislation would aid more timber development. Mr. Mish acknowledged that he had heard that justification from the timber industry. Representative Kerttula asked about impact on other uses. Mr. Mish predicted no additional impact on other uses in the short-term. He speculated that there would have to be a great increase in harvest levels before it would impact other uses. Vice-Chair Meyer MOVED to report CSSB 149 (RES) out of Committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION it was so ordered. CSSB 149 (RES) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and one zero fiscal note from the Department of Natural Resources.