HB 329 - RESTITUTION FOR CERTAIN GAME VIOLATIONS Number 1096 REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE said HB 329 is an Act providing for restitution to the state for the unlawful taking of game. "Penalties for violating wildlife protection laws vary with the crime and the state. The most common crime classification for wildlife violations in all states is the criminal misdemeanor. For misdemeanor, states generally give judges discretion in choosing the amount of the fine, length of jail term, or both. In Alaska, persons convicted of wildlife violations are guilty of a misdemeanor. The penalty is jail for up to a year and a fine of up to $5,000 (AS 16.05.925 (a)). "In addition to criminal penalties, some states have civil liability provisions of some kind. About half the state legislatures have assessed the value of wildlife for civil liability purposes and list damages which may be sought as part of a civil penalty. Some states require the violator to pay, as a condition of sentencing, restitution to the state for each animal take. Alaska is one of only 12 states which does not have restitution provisions for wildlife violations in statute. HB 329 provides a schedule of restitution for wildlife violators to repay as a condition of sentencing. "Alaskans are losing valuable wildlife to poachers. Each piece of game that is illegally taken from our state is an economic loss that affects both our hunting and tourism industries. HB 329 will hold those illegal takers of game accountable for the value of their lake. Poachers will now have to pay restitution, as well as, the penalties already in statute." Number 1246 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN related a first hand experience and requested to be included as a co-sponsor. He encouraged the committee to expedite the process and move the bill out of committee. Number 1298 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES asked if the purpose of the legislation was to make a mandatory fine. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE explained that it is a civil penalty for the loss of that state property. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES stated that the prevailing penalty exceeds any of these, except if there were multiple cases, so the judge could fine up to that amount already. So, the argument from Representative Ogan's point of view is that while judges could do that, they don't do that, and so the purpose of this bill would be to set a floor on the penalties? Number 1330 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE responded in the affirmative stating that many first time offenders have pretty small fines and are liable for up to $5,000. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES presumed that the fines and the restitutions would be deposited in the general fund. CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN stated that it would be a nondedicated fund. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said that is correct. It is a loss to the state. Number 1387 CO-CHAIRMAN GREEN discussed with Representative Bunde whether the money going into the general fund would be lost rather than going to a dedicated area that would actually ensure the restoration of those diminished resources. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE replied that these are resources that are valued to the state, in general, and not just to the Department of Fish and Game. He said that representatives were here from the Department of Fish and Game. Number 1457 REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA said she wanted to hear the full testimony from the Department of Fish and Game. REPRESENTATIVE OGAN moved that HB 329 move from the House Resources Committee with individual recommendations. There was an objection, so a roll call vote was taken. Representatives Ogan, Kott, Green and Williams voted in favor of moving the bill. Representatives Davies and Nicholia voted against moving the bill. So HB 329 moved from The House Resources Committee. Number 1532 REPRESENTATIVE NICHOLIA asked for the fiscal note on the bill. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said the fiscal note was zero and that he would make a copy available to the committee.