HB 105-DENALI WOLF SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA  1:09:18 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 105, "An Act establishing the Gordon Haber Denali Wolf Special Management Area." CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON advised the committee would be a forthcoming committee substitute (CS) to the bill that would change the special management area to a critical habitat area. He said representatives from both the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) and the Department of Law were online and available for invited testimony, and the committee had heard previous invited testimony on the bill. CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked Mr. Dale to share his thoughts on the forthcoming CS that would move control of the special management area, currently under the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), to a critical habitat area to be controlled by ADF&G. 1:12:14 PM BRUCE DALE, Director, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G), stated that the department has thirty-two special areas that it currently manages, including McNeil River State Game Sanctuary and Refuge. He noted that there are three or four classifications of areas, one of which is a critical habitat area that generally involves a management plan with the Division of Habitat. He explained that the enabling legislation "lines out" the purposes and then the department creates a management plan to meet those purposes. CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked Mr. Dale to clarify whether he is the director of the Division of [Wildlife Conservation] or the Division of Habitat. MR. DALE replied he is the director of the Division of Wildlife Conservation. CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON inquired whether the department holds a position on HB 105. MR. DALE answered that the state is neutral to HB 105. He said the department always remains neutral and makes recommendations on allocation issues. He noted that this is not a biological concern, but is an issue surrounding the allocation of resources between viewers of wildlife and those who have other wilderness values, versus those who are interested in hunting and trapping. CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON inquired whether the department considered the issue an allocation issue even though there are a few wolf packs that may no longer exist. MR. DALE stated that he would not speak on behalf of the National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Department of the Interior. He explained that Denali National Park and Preserve ("park") wolves are harvested at a very low level that does not affect population size or population dynamics. He said ADF&G looks at wildlife in terms of populations and is tasked to manage wildlife on a sustained yield basis. He shared that there has been little to no disagreement among biologists that the pack population is not affected by low harvests, and there is no debate that packs come and go as a part of wolf ecology. He added that packs can break up and be recolonized - sometimes with no loss of den and pup production. He referenced a 1997 study that looked into the idea that family groups persist for a long length of time. He said the study looked at the genetics of wolves in Denali National Park and Preserve and in the Superior National Forest, Minnesota, and basically found that wolves strongly avoid inbreeding, which indicates that there is regular turnover of the genetic makeup in packs [document not provided]. CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON shared his understanding that the department is neutral on HB 105. He asked whether data suggesting that the wolf population decreased from 160 in 1990, to 57 in 2015, was a concern to the department. MR. DALE replied there is still a healthy and viable wolf population there. He informed the committee that wolves are just like any other game where populations rise and fall. He affirmed that there is clear evidence of this supported by publications by the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Department of the Interior. He mentioned a book called "Wolves of Denali" that explains how caribou numbers fluctuate, caused by weather events in Denali National Park and Preserve, and that the wolf population followed that same trend. He noted that wolf populations that are not heavily harvested are affected mostly by prey, ungulate availability, and the vulnerability of prey in terms of environmental conditions, such as snow, and the nutritional status and condition of the prey species. 1:18:58 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON opined that the department is not concerned with trapping but instead is interested in climate and browse. REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO offered his understanding that the department currently has no data from the east side of the Nenana River. He said that he would refer to the wolves of the area as the Totatlanika pack, the Healy Creek pack, and the Wood River pack. He asked whether the department was going to have any data from that area available during [the 2017-2018 legislative] session. MR. DALE said the department has recent data for the area that will be presented to the Board of Game (BOG), DNR, meeting beginning 2/17/17. He said the density of wolves is over twice as high east of the park as it is in the park. CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON reopened invited testimony. 1:21:18 PM FRAN MAUER informed the committee he is a 46-year resident of Alaska and has worked as a wildlife biologist for almost 30 years. He stated his support for HB 105 which would establish a special management area to protect wolves from hunting and trapping on state lands adjacent to the northeast corner of Denali National Park and Preserve. He noted that the area is sometimes referred to as the wolf townships. He said previous testifiers already described how the area is important for Denali National Park and Preserve wildlife, especially wolves. He added that the aforementioned speakers also described situations where hunters and trappers used extreme methods, such as bait stations and animal carcasses, to lure wolves out of the park to their deaths. He explained that ecologists define a decline in wolf population as a "population sink" if annual mortality exceeds reproduction on an annual basis. He opined that a population sink is occurring in the proposed special management area and would continue to decrease the Denali wolves as long as "these silly practices are allowed to continue." MR. MAUER disagreed with Mr. Dale and expressed his understanding that the bill is focused on wolves and specific den sites in the northeast part of the park, that are commonly seen by visitors on the Park Road. Although a decimated wolf population can repopulate the area, a population sink will continue as long as mortality rates are higher than reproduction rates. He pointed out there is evidence that if a breeding male or female is killed during the breeding season it would affect the pack by possibly breaking up the entire pack. He opined that Mr. Dale is "dancing around the actual specifics of what is going on in Denali." He shared his belief that BOG seems to be incapable of solving the population sink problem because it only looks out for hunters and trappers. He recommended fostering a responsible wildlife viewing program that is renewable and holds great economic benefit for Alaska. Mr. Mauer urged for the passage of HB 105. 1:25:13 PM KNEELAND TAYLOR said he has lived in Alaska for 41 years and has served on three BOG subcommittees. He agreed with Mr. Dale that the problem is an allocation issue between the interests of two hundred and fifty thousand people who ride the buses through Denali National Park and Preserve in the summer, versus one to four hunters and trappers. He explained that according to the Alaska State Constitution, wildlife is a publically-owned resource and opined while preferential uses are permitted, in this choice between the desire of many people to view them, versus a few individuals who want to take the wolves, the choice should be obvious. He recalled from 2001 to 2003 he served on a BOG subcommittee that was unable to reach consensus on the Denali wolf buffer. As the non-consumptive user representative, he said he felt "his side" asked for too much land, and he encouraged the committee to consider a smaller parcel of land that was only in the wolf township-Stampede Trail area. He said that protection of a smaller area worked well with the wolves next to the Park Road and Teklanika and Toklat Rivers. Further, he related a suggestion from a trapper that when family groups leave the park, there could be an emergency closure because the packs could be located by radio collars on alpha wolves. Recently, there have been several requests for emergency closures, but the commissioner [of the Alaska Department of Fish & Game] failed to act because there was no biological emergency. He suggested the committee consider giving the commissioner express authority to close areas for trapping and hunting of wolves when there is information that particular groups of wolves have left the park. He offered his belief that BOG feels that the closure of wolf hunting and trapping outside the park is some sort of a bargaining chip for the state to get the federal government to be more accommodating to the state. He reiterated that according to the state constitution wild animals belong to all and are to be managed for the maximum possible benefit. Mr. Taylor opined using the animals as a bargaining chip is unconstitutional. 1:30:30 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON opened public testimony. 1:31:02 PM JOEL BENNETT said he has lived in Alaska for forth-eight years, is an active licensed hunter, and disclosed he was legislative counsel for seven years. Also, he served on BOG for thirteen years - including 1992 when the first buffer zone was created - and the debate at the time was an allocation issue and a recognition that there were competing interests, as well as the fact something should be done about the issue. Although it was difficult to define geographic borders, BOG created the buffer zone in good faith; however, this issue is coming forward again, after twenty-five years, showing BOG cannot deal with this issue. In his experience, the legislature becomes involved in such issues because the greater public interest requires resolution by statute. He stressed there is an urgency for action due to the special geography and the location of the wolf townships that make the issue more than just a trapping and hunting closure issue. He urged the legislature to create a special area, if only for economic reasons. Mr. Bennett reiterated many tens of thousands of visitors to the park are state residents, and wildlife viewing is growing in popularity. He urged for the committee to pass a reasonable bill that would stop the issue from reoccurring. REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE asked Mr. Bennett for the reason the past wolf buffer zone agreement included a sunset date. MR. BENNETT answered that the action of BOG in 1992 was a compromise, because some wanted a larger area and some a smaller area. 1:36:12 PM GERALD BROOKMAN stated that he has been an Alaska resident since 1957 and he currently lives in Kenai. He said he used to hunt, and trapped with his father as a youth. He expressed his strong support for the bill and opined the area affected is a relatively small area. Mr. Brookman urged the committee to pass the bill as written. 1:37:58 PM AL BARRETTE said that at the last hearing he heard a lot about tourism and protecting the tourism economy; in fact, in a recent state parks and recreational area budget overview it was stated there were over five million visitors to state parks and recreational areas. According to his research, tens of millions of dollars are being invested outside the entrance to the park, which indicates tourism is thriving. Mr. Barrette stated Denali National Park and Preserve has had record-setting years with hardly a decrease in visitations over the past two decades. He pointed out the bill proposes to protect wolves from being hunted and trapped, yet trapping will still be allowed in the area, and he inquired if a trapper incidentally catches a wolf in a trap not initially set for a wolf, then all other trapping will be shut down. He referred to evidence that trappers catch wolves in sets not designated for wolves. Turning to BOG, he said BOG has to comply with state law and the Alaska State Constitution. In [Article] 8, [Section] 3, the common use clause led the legislature to enact AS 16.05.258, which dealt with subsistence uses, preferences, and priority. He opined that even if BOG's decisions are not popular, it is bound to comply with the law. Finally, Mr. Barrette said he was disturbed that a proposed special use area was named after a person who was known to commit game violations. CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON asked whether Mr. Barrette was claiming that the late Gordon Haber committed game violations. MR. BARRETTE answered yes. 1:41:02 PM JOHNNY JOHNSON testified in support of HB 105. He said he has lived in Alaska for almost 50 years and has many connections to Denali National Park and Preserve, beginning in 1968 as a park ranger, and later as a wildlife photographer. Mr. Johnson said he has hunted and trapped in the area, although not for wolves, and was a close personal friend of Gordon Haber. Referring to testimony by the previous speaker, he informed the committee the [alleged game violation] incident in question was when Mr. Haber released a wolf that he was told was trapped in an area closed to wolf trapping. Mr. Johnson expressed his support for the proposed bill because it is the right thing to do, and added that wolves are important to the integrity of the park, and the park is of great value to Alaska. He acknowledged there are a lot of people who dislike wolves; in fact, at one time it was common to poach wolves in the park. For his wildlife photography business, photographs of wolves are difficult to obtain, and his best have been taken inside the park and have contributed substantially to his income. He opined the wolves hold great value both for tourism and for commercial photographers. REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON shared her appreciation for Mr. Johnson's photography and testimony. MR. JOHNSON read from the Alaska State Constitution, [Article 8, Section 3] as follows: Wherever occurring in their natural state, fish, wildlife, and waters are reserved to the people for common use. 1:45:29 PM SCOTT OGAN spoke in opposition to HB 105, noting that he spent 25 years working on federal overreach issues. The federal government is currently managing and classifying more lands as national parks, and is doing a horrible job managing wildlife on federal lands, as in the [Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife Refuge]. He shared that he has spent thousands of hours flying and in the bush, and it is very rare to see a wolf; in fact, the proposed bill may decrease wildlife sightings "if there's too many wolves knocking down the ungulates." He stated that he is opposed to expanding boundaries beyond the federal park for a buffer zone. Mr. Ogan restated his strong opposition to extend federal management scenarios beyond the boundaries of federal lands. 1:47:20 PM ED SCHMITT said that although he has only lived in Alaska since 2007, recently he has taken notice of the decline in Denali wolf pack populations. He mentioned the six-year moratorium BOG placed on the issue, and added an organization with which he is involved encouraged BOG to discuss the situation, and although BOG acknowledged the Denali wolves were disappearing, it still took no action. He opined management should include an active and appropriate response to the numbers of wildlife in the population, which is not occurring from BOG. Mr. Schmitt said he is in support of the proposed bill and a management plan that could acknowledge that the importance of wildlife viewing is in the state's best interest. REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO asked Mr. Schmitt to identify the aforementioned organization. MR. SCHMITT answered he is the president of the Alaska Wildlife Alliance. REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked whether there were additional witnesses waiting to testify. CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON said there were about 19 and stated his intention to leave public testimony open on HB 105 and move to the next bill at 2:00 p.m. 1:50:56 PM REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH has heard from witnesses who have had to wait. He inquired as to whether the committee extends the invitation to testify, and to whom. CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON answered that it is the prerogative of the chair to invite testimony. CO-CHAIR TARR added that the sponsor of a bill works with the committee chair to choose invited testimony, for example, witnesses who are experts on a particular item related to the bill. REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH surmised there is no expectation that invited testimony will represent both sides of an issue. REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON questioned whether in the case of a committee bill, the committee determines invitees. CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON said no. In further response to Representative Johnson, he said he did not intend to reopen public testimony during the hearing of the forthcoming CS for HB 105. CO-CHAIR TARR, in further response to Representative Johnson, said sometimes a second round of public testimony on a CS is necessary. 1:53:03 PM PAULINE STRONG stated her support for HB 105. Ms. Strong said Alaska should be large enough for one area where a wolf pack can live without being trapped or hunted. She said Gordon Haber's studies showed that wolf packs can develop long-term institutional knowledge that makes them different from wolf packs with less experienced members [document not provided]. Furthermore, the loss of the eastern buffer zone set up to protect wolves is the reason long-established wolf packs no longer exist. Recently, it is common to hear that one of the remaining few adult wolves - often a pregnant one - was killed, which breaks up the formation of packs. If baiting stations are allowed close to the park boundary, the park will not contain the wolf pack, and wolves on the eastern park boundary need more room; however, with the reestablishment of a buffer zone, there is a possibility that a wolf pack could develop naturally, over time, into more than just a few inexperienced or orphaned juveniles. Ms. Strong said it would be wonderful to know there is room in Alaska for at least one truly wild, unaltered wolf pack. 1:55:01 PM JOAN FRANKEVICH, Spokesperson, National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), said NPCA is a nationwide nonprofit, with over 2,000 members in Alaska, that was founded in 1919 to protect national parks. She said NPCA supports HB 105, noting that the issue addressed by HB 105 really needs a long-term solution. She stated that this is not a hunting versus a non- hunting issue, nor is it a state versus federal issue. Ms. Frankevich opined that the best question to ask is, "What is in the best interest of the state, and what makes the most sense on how wolves are managed on this land?" One of the core services of the Division of Wildlife [Conservation], ADF&G, is to maintain and enhance opportunities to hunt, trap, and view wildlife. Furthermore, she said in 1992, when BOG created the first wolf buffer, it clearly wrote in its findings, "The wolves that inhabit Denali National Park are valued resources of the people of Alaska and the United States" and she agreed. Ms. Frankevich stated she and her husband are employed in tourism and tourism feeds many Alaska families. In a manner similar to the state protection of bears in the [McNeil River State Game Sanctuary and Refuge], and walrus in the [Walrus Islands State Game Sanctuary], it needs to protect the wolves primarily inhabiting Denali National Park and Preserve because they can be easily seen in the wild by Alaskans and visitors. Finally, she invited the committee to visit the park and use a map to understand how state land, and critical habitat for caribou, extends into the park and creates an issue in need of a permanent solution. 1:59:27 PM MARILYN HOUSER stated that she supports HB 105, which would protect wolves by establishing a no hunting, trapping area on state land adjacent to the northeastern park boundary. She observed that the removal of an established buffer area in 2010 by BOG has led to a reduction in the number of wolves and stable wolf packs in the park, and has significantly reduced viewing opportunities for both Alaskans and tourists. She opined that in the time of dwindling revenue, the state needs to do all that it can to support the tourism industry, and wildlife viewing is a primary motivation for many of the visitors who come to Alaska. Ms. Houser said that in the almost 40 years she has lived in Alaska, during numerous trips to Denali National Park and Preserve, she used to occasionally hear or see a wolf in the park, but in recent years she has not. She urged the committee to quickly move the bill from committee. 2:01:01 PM PATTI BARBER stated that she is opposed to HB 105. She explained that anti-trapping groups petitioned BOG to establish a protective zone along the boundary of Denali National Park and Preserve, but later it was removed because animals did not observe the boundaries. She surmised that the proposal is a back door attempt to close hunting and trapping near national parks around the state. Wolf packs have eaten all of the available ungulates. Ms. Barber requested a map of the area that would be affected by the proposed bill. 2:02:09 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced HB 105 was held over with public testimony open.