HOUSE BILL NO. 105 "An Act establishing the Gordon Haber Denali Wolf Special Management Area." 4:13:47 PM REPRESENTATIVE ANDY JOSEPHSON, SPONSOR, provided some background for the bill. The legislation aimed to create the Gordon Haber Denali Wolf Special Management Area which would be a buffer zone near the border of Denali National Park where wolves may not be hunted. The area would be named for Gordon Haber, who was a biologist that had done wolf-prey research in Denali National Park and other areas of Alaska from 1966 to 2009. While doing the work that he loved, Gordon tragically died in a plane crash in Denali National Park on October 14, 2009. For many years Denali National Park had been known as one of the best places in the world to view wild wolves. In 2013, Denali had 530,921 visitors, who contributed $513,355,000 to Alaska's economy. The opportunity to view wolves is a big incentive to visit the park. Unfortunately, wolf viewing success has declined dramatically. A buffer zone previously established in 2000 on the park's eastern boundary to protect the wolves was removed by the Board of Game in 2010. In 2014, less than 6% of park visitors were able to see wolves, down from 45 percent back in 2010. Wolf population has declined from 116 in spring 2006 to 50 in spring 2014. House Bill 105 helps to correct these trends. Representative Kawasaki referred to the map in member files (copy on file). He asked why the blue area was not part of the area and black. Co-Chair Seaton wanted to ensure that invited testimony had a chance to get on record. 4:28:54 PM RICK STEINER, PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA, read from a prepared statement (copy on file): I appreciate the opportunity to provide comment in support of HB 105, and look forward to any questions you may have afterward. For the record, I am a conservation biologist with Oasis Earth (www.oasisearth.com) in Anchorage, and I was a professor with the University of Alaska from 1980 - 2010, stationed in Kotzebue, Cordova, and Anchorage. As legislators, you all face many difficult decisions this session, but HB 105 is not one of them. This bill should be an easy and unanimous "YES." 1. One simple standard with which to decide bills in front of you is: does it hurt, or help the Alaska economy? And regarding HB 105, it is an overwhelming economic positive. In these challenging economic times the state needs to do everything possible to support the Alaska economy. One of the easiest and most cost-effective measures lawmakers can take to enhance our economy is to do everything possible to enhance the wildlife tourism industry - a $2.7 billion/year industry in Alaska (I will elaborate more on that a bit later). 2. Another critical standard to base your decisions on is the principle of fairness and common ownership of all resources (including wildlife) by all Alaskans, embodied in the State Constitution, Article 8, Section 3: "Common Use": Wherever occurring in their natural state, fish, wildlife, and waters are reserved to the people for common use. All of us own and have equal access to the wolves in Denali, including the 70,000 Alaskans who visit the park each year -- not just the 2 or 3 individuals who hunt and trap them along the NE boundary. and this month marks the 100th anniversary of Alaska's most iconic tourism destination. The would be the perfect time to finally resolve the century-old problem of conserving park wildlife along the park's eastern boundary. HB 105 goes a long way toward doing just that. [The only friendly amendment I would respectfully suggest is to include, in addition to wolves, a prohibition on take of all park predator species - bears, lynx, wolverine, coyote, etc., as these are valuable watchable wildlife for the park as well.] Wolf Townships History In 1906, when east coast hunter-naturalist Charles Sheldon explored the Denali area, he noted that commercial hunters selling Dall sheep meat to railroad workers and miners were decimating local wildlife populations. Sheldon went to Washington D.C. and, along with the Boone and Crockett Club, advocated establishment of Mt. McKinley National Park as a "game refuge." President Woodrow Wilson signed the original 2 million acre park into law on Feb. 26, 1917. But the precise boundaries necessary to protect park wildlife were unclear, imperfect, and continued to be debated. In particular, lands northeast of the original park boundary, where park wildlife migrate seasonally, were considered by many to need park protection as well. According to Fairbanks historian Ed Davis, since the initial establishment of the park, there have been many unsuccessful attempts to add lands along the northeast boundary, now known as the "Wolf Townships" and "Stampede Trail," into the park to protect park wildlife: 1922 - AK Railroad proposes to include Wolf Townships in McKinley Park to protect Park wildlife. 1965 - State selects Wolf Townships, but cites need to expand Park to protect caribou, and that existing Park boundary is "an arbitrary line." 1969 - Johnson administration considers, but declines, to add Wolf Townships into Park 1978 - Wolf Townships found worthy for inclusion in Denali National Monument, but lands had been selected by State. 1980 - The original version of ANILCA included the Wolf Townships within the new park boundaries because this area provides critical habitat for park wildlife. Although this area was removed from the final bill, the Senate report accompanying ANILCA made it clear the expectation was for the wolf townships to become part of Denali: The prime resource for which the north addition is established is the critical range necessary to support populations of moose, wolf, and caribou as part of an integral ecosystem. Public enjoyment of these outstanding wildlife values would thus be assured. 4:38:07 PM Representative Ortiz noted that the buffer was eliminated in 2010. He queried the reason for that decision. Mr. Steiner replied that it derived from the Park Service ideology from various interest groups. He remarked that there were several proposals asking that the existing buffer be expanded, because it was too small. He remarked that there were as many as 19 park wolves in that small buffer. He remarked that 15 to 20 percent of the total park population was killed after the wolves crossed the buffer. Representative Ortiz came from Southeast Alaska and could certainly understand the benefits of an area with wildlife viewing, and felt that tourism to view wildlife had a greater effect on the economy than hunting. Representative Guttenberg suggested that the area had been his previously in his district. He felt that the buffer change did not have to do with biological certainty. Mr. Steiner agreed. He stated that the Denali wolf was a political pawn in the process. Vice-Chair Gara noted that the opposition letters were focused on the impact of subsistence and other hunting. Mr. Steiner responded that the trapping and hunting of wolves in the area was non-subsistence, rather it was sport hunting. Vice-Chair Gara commented that the letters probably were referring to more wolves and less moose. Mr. Steiner stated that there were complaints about the high number of moose in the area. He remarked that the closed area would be 340,000 acres. He stressed that most of the moose hunting took place to the east of the area. He stressed that there would be millions of dollars from the tourism industry as a result of the legislation. 4:43:40 PM SEAN MCGUIRE, ALASKANS FOR WILDLIFE, FAIRBANKS, agreed with the previous speaker's statement that Denali was the crown jewel for the area. People went to Denali to see the mountain and wildlife including wolves. He suggested that the land management for the skinny He relayed that people were baiting wolves to go outside of the boundary. Mr. McGuire objected profusely people baiting wolves and removing the opportunity for tourists to see wolves. He recalled Cecil the lion that was lured out of the park and gunned down. He thought the state was allowing people to bait the wolves out of the park. 4:49:40 PM AL BARRETTE, SELF, FAIRBANKS (via teleconference), spoke in favor of the legislation. Co-Chair Seaton noted committee members had his written testimony in their packets. Representative Wilson asked about page 3, lines 20 and 21. She surmised that the interpretation would be that accidentally shooting a wolf could result in a misdemeanor. Mr. Barrette responded that the issue was related to trapping, not hunting. 4:55:36 PM Representative Guttenberg noted that the area west of Healy was the bus from "Into the Wild." He stressed that people should never go in that area. Mr. Barrette asked if it was a question. Representative Guttenberg stated that it was an observation. TIM LESCMER, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), worked with grey wolves and took care of them at the zoo in town. He spent more time around wolves than 90 percent of the population. He thought what was getting lost was the intelligent of the animals and the centurion nature of the animals. He invited members to come meet the wolves personally. He applauded Representative Josephson. He spoke in support of HB 73. Co-Chair Seaton CLOSED Public Testimony for HB 105. Co-Chair Seaton remarked that he wanted some questions about subsistence addressed at the next hearing on the bill. 4:59:23 PM Representative Wilson asked that the department address the indeterminate fiscal note. Representative Josephson responded that the fiscal note related to the original version of the bill. Representative Wilson responded that there were 3 fiscal notes and it was possible that some of them were not related to the current version of the bill. Co-Chair Seaton clarified the version before the committee. Representative Wilson requested the fiscal note clarification at the next hearing. Vice-Chair Gara asked about the misdemeanor issue in the bill. Co-Chair Seaton asked to put the question off until the next bill hearing. Co-Chair Seaton announced that amendments were due by Thursday, May 6, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. HB 105 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration. 5:03:34 PM Representative Ortiz asked about amendments for SB 78. Co-Chair Seaton conveyed that that amendments for SB 78 were also due by Thursday, May 6, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. He relayed the agenda for the following meeting. He indicated the following week would be focused on general fiscal impact. Co-Chair Seaton recessed the meeting to a call of the chair. He recessed the meeting to a call of the chair [Note: the meeting never reconvened].