SB 43-EXTEND BIG GAME BOARD; OUTFITTER LICENSE  1:01:27 PM CO-CHAIR TARR announced the first order of business would be CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 43(FIN), "An Act extending the termination date of the Big Game Commercial Services Board; relating to a person's eligibility to hold a registered guide-outfitter license, master guide- outfitter license, class-A assistant guide license, assistant guide license, or transporter license; and providing for an effective date." 1:01:49 PM SENATOR DAVID WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, stated CSSB 43(FIN) would extend the termination of the Big Game Commercial Services Board until 6/30/24, which is one year less than the six years recommended by the Division of Legislative Audit. He explained that the board consists of two licensed registered guide-outfitters, two licensed transporters, two private landholders, two public members, and one member from the Board of Game. SENATOR WILSON related that an audit of the board conducted by the Division of Legislative Audit made three recommendations to improve the board: 1) the Division of Corporations, Business and Professional Licensing director should improve the management oversight to procedures to ensure that documentation is obtained, reviewed, and retained to support licensure; 2) the division's chief investigator should increase oversight to improve the timeliness of investigations; and 3) the Office of the Governor, Boards and Commissions director should work with the board to identify potential applications in a timely manner. In regard to the timeliness of investigations, he pointed out that multiple agencies are involved and only 37 cases are open as of today, with of those 13 being Alaska Wildlife Trooper cases over which [the division] has no control for the timeliness. He stated it was recognized that more supervisory rapport is needed for more quality control. SENATOR WILSON said the division has responded to the audit's recommendations by working to add supervisors in addition to the examiner, as well as working to improve training procedures. There is a new chief investigator, he continued, and two new senior investigators have been added to provide more quality assurance. He stated the division has heard the message from Legislative Audit and is working to hold investigations accountable for the paperwork. 1:04:46 PM SENATOR WILSON provided a sectional analysis of CSSB 43(FIN). He said: Section 1, page 1, lines 6-8, would amend AS 08.03.010(c)(9) to extend the Big Game Commercial Services Board for five years, through June 30, 2024. Section 2, page 1, line 9, through page 2, line 16, would amend AS 08.54.605(a) to allow the board to immediately suspend a license for violations that already disqualify a person from receiving or renewing that license. Section 3, page 2, line 17, through page 3, line 7, would amend AS 08.54.610(b) to increase the minimum qualifications for a master guide-outfitter license, including a requirement to have a clean record for 15 years. Section 4, page 3, lines 8-17, would add new subsections to AS 08.54.710, which allow the board to revoke a master guide-outfitter license if a person's privileges are revoked or if the person is convicted of a violation. A person whose master guide-outfitter license is revoked under this provision can still be issued a registered guide-outfitter license if qualified. Section 5, page 3, line 18, would add an immediate effective date. SENATOR WILSON stressed the board plays an important role in managing the activities of commercial game hunters in the interest of Alaska's wildlife resources. He reminded members that the bill addresses whether the board should continue its work and does not address the function of the board. 1:06:40 PM CO-CHAIR TARR noted Section 1 is clearly the extension. She observed Section 2 would add the word "hold" to that section of statute. She asked whether she is correct in understanding that Section 2 isn't about the initial receiving or renewing of a license, but is about putting a restriction on someone who already holds a license if the person has the problems identified in [paragraphs (1) and (2) of Section 2]. SENATOR WILSON replied yes. 1:07:15 PM REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN inquired whether the bill addresses "real life" situations in which the board was unable to act or the audit found the board did not act appropriately, or whether the bill addresses situations that are speculative in nature. SENATOR WILSON replied that during a hearing before the Senate Finance Committee it was learned that [a license holder] can continue to provide guiding services for over two and one-half years after being found guilty of a violation while going through the appeals process after a guilty verdict. Thus, he said, the board requested the authority to put a person's license on hold during adjudication of the appeals process. REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN offered her understanding that there were real life examples that caused the board to ask for additional tools to "hold" a license and this provision would do that. SENATOR WILSON responded yes, there have been several examples. 1:09:11 PM REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS brought attention to page 2, line 29, through page 3, line 1, of the bill, which state: (3) submits a list to the department of at least 45 [25] clients for whom the person has personally provided guiding or outfitting services and the person receives a favorable evaluation from 30 [10] of the clients selected from the list by the department; REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS requested clarification as to what constitutes a "favorable evaluation." SENATOR WILSON deferred to [Mr. Henry Tiffany] for an answer. 1:09:58 PM HENRY TIFFANY IV, Chair, Registered Guide-Outfitter, Big Game Commercial Services Board (BGCSB), Division of Corporations, Business and Professional Licensing, Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development (DCCED), deferred to Ms. Sara Chambers since it is the division that reviews the license applications. He advised that the board extensively deliberated on the proposed changes within the bill and is in unanimous support of the proposed increase in the number of favorable recommendations. He further advised that the proposed increase in favorable recommendations would be a more standard number. He also noted that the proposed language in paragraph (4) of 15 years is also standard in other professions. 1:12:20 PM SARA CHAMBERS, Director, Division of Corporations, Business, and Professional Licensing, Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development (DCCED), explained that the vetting process for a registered guide who is applying for a master guide- outfitter license, includes providing a list of clients who are then contacted by the division for information pertinent to the applicant's proficiency in the field that would relate to the scope of what a guide-outfitter is allowed to do. She said registered and master guides are in charge of people's lives and thus must be in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations for hunting as well as land use, and the division asks clients to review their experience with that guide. She stated the board had an opportunity to review CSSB 43(FIN) and supports [the changes proposed in paragraph (3)]. 1:14:29 PM REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS inquired as to a time period over which those 45 clients would have had to work with that guide. MS. CHAMBERS answered she is unsure of whether there is a window of time. She said she and Mr. Tiffany go back and forth because she has the administrative part and he has the qualitative part. She said her understanding through working on this bill is that the timeframe would be during the life of the applicant's registered guide-outfitter license, so it would be a client who had contracted with the guide. She explained that the structure of guiding goes from an assistant guide to class-A assistant guide to a registered guide to a master guide-outfitter. The dividing line between the two assistants and the two contracting guides, she continued, is that [the contracting guide] is the boss and actually signs the contract with the client. So, she added, it would need to be within the life of the applicant's registered guide activity, but she is unsure if there is a window of time unless otherwise stated in the bill. 1:15:49 PM MR. TIFFANY clarified that for a client to qualify as a name submitted for a master guide-outfitter application, the registered guide (at that point) doesn't necessarily have to have been a contracting guide for that individual client. He explained that there are many guides within Alaska, and some don't ever contract hunts; they work for other registered or master guides, but they may still choose to obtain a master guide license and it isn't wanted to hinder that. If the applicant has physically guided a client in the field, he continued, then that client's name would be applicable for the applicant to put on his/her application towards a master guide license. He offered his belief that there isn't any stipulation that it needs to be within a certain time limit of a couple of years because the number of clients divided by the number of years proposed comes to three clients a year, and most of the guides that either contract or guide clients for someone else have about three or more clients per year. 1:17:49 PM REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS offered his understanding that there is no window for the timeframe of those 45 people to give their evaluations; it could be any time in the last 40 years if that person has been a registered guide, but three clients per year is a logical number. MR. TIFFANY confirmed there is no limitation. If it took the applicant 40 years to collect the right number of names, then so be it, he said, or if it took fewer years that is alright also. REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS asked whether the division contacts all 45 clients. He further asked whether that is standard for the division providing other types of occupational licenses. 1:18:50 PM MS. CHAMBERS replied the division solicits that information for a variety of license types and depends upon how the [related] statute is written. She said the division has quite a few license types that require some sort of evaluation. For example, she continued, for healthcare or mechanical professions evaluations are solicited from supervisors or others who have worked closely with the applicant in a similar capacity. So, she added, it is unusual because it is somewhat subjective, but it is pertinent and relative to that type of work. 1:19:58 PM REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN stated that the proposed increases in the number of clients that must be submitted [from 25 to 45] and number of favorable evaluations [from 10 to 30] is a huge jump given the small number of clients per year and the 20-40 year span of time in the applicant's career. She submitted that given the length of time, some of those clients are no longer alive and many are foreign nationals, and therefore it would be a huge increase in the burden for both the applicant and the division to contact all those clients and receive 30 favorable evaluations. She further submitted that this would narrow things so much that hardly anyone would qualify. SENATOR WILSON responded that the master guide-outfitter title is a prestigious and high standard for guides, and the title carries additional privileges for guides as well as additional responsibilities to clients. He said it needs to be ensured that these folks are the top ethical guides who will follow the guidelines and regulations and therefore setting the bar higher for obtaining the master guide-outfitter license was wanted. 1:22:22 PM MS. CHAMBERS agreed and explained that master guide is somewhat of an honorary title because the registered guide can perform the same guide/outfitting duties as a master guide. She related that when reviewing this the division asked the same questions of whether it seemed reasonable and deferred to the board. She continued: It is not prohibiting anyone from gaining a higher level of economic opportunity because the master and the registered guides can do the same things. But the master guide does have that value added, as Senator Wilson said, that it is a title recognizing that you are at the very top of your game. It doesn't get, in the United States, any more exclusive in the guiding industry than that. But it is not a tier where we might look at trade issues and restriction of trade by saying this is really hard to get and it might serve only an elite few, which is preventing everyone here from being able to earn the same living. They're on the same par, at least as far as their economic opportunities are concerned. 1:23:48 PM REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN noted that the previous requirement was 10 out of 25 clients over a 12- to 15-year period and that the bill would increase the look back period from which clients could be submitted and would triple the number of positive responses. She questioned whether the fiscal note of $35,000 [Identifier SB043CS(FIN)-DCCED-CBPL-04-09-19] would be sufficient to fund the investigation of an additional 20 positive evaluations on every application. She further questioned whether the guides who are potentially qualified to apply for this feel that they can produce those names and have current contact with clients. Representative Hannan said she wants to ensure that this big leap in numbers is being done for the right reasons and not just because there were some people with lower licenses who were bad actors, which would be a separate issue. She agreed [master guides] are the best of the best and therefore should not get poor evaluations. She asked whether the board, the industry, and the department think the proposed thresholds are manageable. MS. CHAMBERS answered that the department does not anticipate a problem with the increase in its administrative workload. She deferred to Mr. Tiffany to speak to the board's discussion, which included master guides, in the vetting of those numbers. 1:26:13 PM MR. TIFFANY concurred that a master guide license is, more than anything, an honorary title. He said it does not allow, from an economic standpoint, an individual to necessarily do anything more than a registered guide can do, except that master guides can advertise themselves and carry themselves with that title. In its discussions the board understood this, he related. He explained that a total of 45 names submitted with 30 favorable recommendations over a 15-year period is very feasible because an applicant must have been a registered guide for at least 15 years and that would be guiding 3 clients a year. He added that many guides take 10-15 clients in one year. He stated the board doesn't think it is onerous or a burden on applicants who want to obtain the title because they have proven under these proposed changes that they have been exemplary in the profession for a long time with no violations. He pointed out that the board was in unanimous agreement on that and doesn't feel it is terribly burdensome. He related that one of the board members is currently a registered guide and getting close under the current regulations to being eligible to apply for his master guide license. He said this board member fully understands that this would prolong the time it takes him to apply for a master guide license and yet this board member voted in full support of these changes. REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN said she is fine with the answer. 1:28:43 PM REPRESENTATIVE TUCK offered his understanding that under current law, AS 08.54.720(a), a licensed master guide does not lose his/her title as a master guide if he/she commits an offense. SENATOR WILSON confirmed Representative Tuck's understanding. REPRESENTATIVE TUCK stated his support for [CSSB 43(FIN)] because it would provide conditions under which a master guide title can be lost. He observed that Section 4, subsection (l), would provide that a master guide-outfitter who lost his/her license could still be issued a registered guide-outfitter license and, he surmised, would have to wait 15 years before he/she could get back the title of master. SENATOR WILSON replied yes. 1:30:45 PM REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ inquired whether the evaluations could be completed via a written or online survey instead of an interview. MS. CHAMBERS responded she will check with staff, but is pretty sure the clients are contacted in writing. She said it would make her a little anxious to believe that someone's license depends upon verbal note taking, so she is certain there is a written record of that, but she doesn't know specifically what that looks like. REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ offered her understanding that a letter is sent out to which clients respond in writing, rather than the clients being called and interviewed. MS. CHAMBERS answered yes; clients respond in writing. 1:32:26 PM KRIS CURTIS, CPA, CISA, Legislative Auditor, Division of Legislative Audit, Alaska State Legislature, directed attention to the document in the committee packet entitled, "A Sunset Review of the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development, Big Game Commercial Services Board (board)," dated 9/14/18, Audit Control Number 08-20114-19. She explained that the purpose of a sunset audit is to determine whether a board or commission is serving the public's interest in whether it should be extended. She stated the audit found that this board is serving the public's interest by conducting meetings in accordance with applicable laws, by amending regulations to improve the occupations under its purview, and by supporting changes made by the Department of Law to improve the timeliness of the disciplinary process. Additionally, she said, the audit found that this board had eliminated the deficit of over $1 million that was reported in the 2015 sunset audit. She noted the audit also concluded that the board licenses were not consistently supported by adequate documentation, a high number of investigations had unjustified periods of inactivity, and three board positions were vacant for an extended period. She said the audit recommended a six-year extension for this board. MS. CURTIS turned to page 8 of the audit, Exhibit 2, Licensing Activity, and reported that as of May 2018 there were a total of 1,219 active licenses, a 20 percent reduction when compared to the 2015 sunset audit. She related that, according to the board chair, this decrease is due in part to guides retiring and a decreased interest in the profession. Additionally, she said, the chair reported that there were fewer transporters because many changed operating as air taxis to avoid the transporter's reporting requirements and fees - there were 151 licensed transporters as of April 2015 compared to 90 as of May 2018, a 40 percent reduction in the number of transporters. MS. CURTIS moved to page 10 of the audit, Exhibit 3, Schedule of Revenues and Expenditures, and said the board had a surplus of [$132,224] at the end at fiscal year 2018 (FY 18). She noted this is significant given the board's deficit of [$1,120,051] at the end of FY 15. 1:34:28 PM MS. CURTIS stated the audit contains three recommendations for improvement. She said Recommendation No. l, page 14 of the audit, is that the director of the Division of Corporations, Business, and Professional Licensing (DCBPL) should improve management oversight procedures to ensure required documentation is obtained, reviewed, and retained to support licensure. She noted the audit tested 25 new licenses and found errors in 14 of them. She drew attention to the errors listed on page 14 and pointed out that the more serious errors were missing background checks and a lack of adequate investigatory review. She related that, according to the DCBPL management, turnover in the staff that supported the board contributed to the errors. She added the audit also noted a lack of supervisory review. MS. CURTIS said Recommendation No. 2, page 15 of the audit, is that DCBPL's chief investigator should increase oversight to [improve] the timeliness of investigations. She noted the audit tested 22 investigations that had been open for over 180 days during the audit period and found periods of unjustified inactivity for 20 of the 22. She related that, according to the chief investigator, periods of inactivity were due in part to inadequate resources to investigate the high caseload and supervisors not adequately monitoring the cases. MS. CURTIS said Recommendation No. 3, page 16 of the audit, is that the Office of the Governor, Boards and Commissions director should work with the board to identify potential applicants in a timely manner. She noted that from July 2015 through May 2018, two board positions were vacant for six months due to a lack of interested applicants, and the board position occupied by a member of the Board of Game was vacant for eight months because the Office of the Governor was not notified of the vacancy. She related that, according to Boards and Commissions staff, the transporter and private landholder board positions are difficult to fill due to a lack of qualified candidates. MS. CURTIS drew attention to the agency responses found on page 25 of the audit. She related that the DCCED commissioner agrees with Recommendations No. 1 and 2 and has taken action to resolve both recommendations. Addressing page 27 of the audit, she further related that the Office of the Governor has responded to Recommendation No. 3 and agreed to fill vacancies in a timely manner. She stated that page 29 provides the BGCSB chair's response to Recommendation No. 3 in which the chair agreed to work with the Office of the Governor to fill vacancies in a timely manner and stated that all the board positions were filled at that time. 1:37:00 PM REPRESENTATIVE TUCK requested the date of the previous audit. MS. CURTIS replied May 2015. REPRESENTATIVE TUCK inquired whether this current audit found the same issues that were identified in 2015. MS. CURTIS turned to page 13 and pointed out the four prior recommendations from the 2015 audit. She stated [auditors] felt that most of the 2015 recommendations were addressed, especially the $1 million deficit [third recommendation]. She said the first recommendation had to do with support to the board, and while [auditors] felt the support did improve they identified a new problem with the license documentation, so that is considered a reiteration of a prior recommendation. She advised that the problems with prior applications [identified in the fourth recommendation] were dealt with. But, she continued, the problem of timeliness of investigations [second recommendation] has not been addressed. REPRESENTATIVE TUCK asked who conducts the investigations. MS. CURTIS responded that DCBPL conducts the investigations. The board stays out of the investigative process as it performs a semi-judicial role in ruling on an investigation's results once the ruling is brought to the board. REPRESENTATIVE TUCK offered his understanding that many investigation positions from various departments are moving to the Department of Law (DOL). He asked how this would affect efforts to resolve the backload that is had. MS. CURTIS answered: I don't think we know right now the impact of that. There has been an Administrative Order [No. 306, dated 2/13/19] to consolidate the investigative process within the Department of Law. It is my understanding this board is included in that process. I know that there has been some discussion to have an audit on that process, looking at the consolidation, how that impacts timeliness, efficiency, and I believe there's work right now to draft an audit request. 1:39:38 PM REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN inquired about the idea of taking all the investigators from all of the agencies and consolidating them in the Department of Law. She asked whether the audit that is being requested is of the process of the new consolidated investigations prior to them being done, or if it will be given some time and then be audited for whether it is a more efficient way to do it. MS. CURTIS replied that she suggested "at least three years." REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN offered her understanding that it wouldn't be known for three years. She expressed her concern that a prior recommendation from a previous audit is still an ongoing issue. She continued: If this board in five more years has an audit that again raises that there is a problem with the investigation, but this time we've sort of structurally shifted and ... we won't know whether that backlog is created by it being an ongoing problem, these are complex things to investigate, or whether it was because we've shifted how we've investigated them. ... It's not that I'm encouraging them to be held harmless, but it seems to be an area of concern for an industry that is profitable but complex, and seasonal in nature, migratory in practice, and then we are trying to make sure that investigations of things that may span legal boundaries, because again many of the clients who might be called as a witness in an investigation of bad actors in the field could be foreign nationals. So I could certainly see why these are complex investigations to carry forward and I'm wondering whether the department has had the opportunity to share all of those concerns in a global and specific way as these dialogues about consolidating investigators to the Department of Law have happened. MS. CHAMBERS responded that those details would be worked out in FY 2020. She said the taskforce to implement the Administrative Order for consolidating all the investigations under the Department of Law would begin in early 2020 and that questions would be asked of this particular board, the other 43 licensing entities managed by [the Division of Legislative Audit], as well as all the rest around the state. She stated she expects a discussion to work out safeguards and tracking mechanisms. She said the administrative order is a plan that will be thorough, and it is possible that [the Division of Legislative Audit's] investigators may become Department of Law employees. They will retain the same knowledge, background, and experience that benefit from oversight through the Department of Law, she advised. There are a variety of ways that this could look, but this is just the beginning of the process, she added. 1:43:14 PM REPRESENTATIVE HANNAN addressed Ms. Curtis and urged [the aforementioned problem] be footnoted now because auditors are probably the best at footnoting something and remembering where it is and coming back to it. She continued: This has been in two audits, yet I don't know if you have any specificity of where the problems and the timeline to produce those investigations have been that can be shared with the Department of Law so it doesn't have to be relearned by a new lawyer trying to figure out how to investigate a licensure issue that is in [an] unusual industry. ... Each of our investigative jurisdictions [is] unique, but I think this one is not only unique it's quirky. ... I would just urge that we make sure we've footnoted that so when we return to this in five years we don't go, "A third audit where the investigation backlog is overwhelming," and think that we've somehow been flawed in it because I think it is one of those places where it's going to be a weird thing for the Department of Law. ... The legal violations they're going to have straight up dialed in ... if they've been working on fish and game issues and violations. But I think that the guide industry, it's that intersect of a lot of different elements of commerce that are really unique, and I want to make sure we remember that when we hold someone to task five years from now about not doing it right. 1:44:51 PM REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS asked how the board accumulated a $1.1 million deficit in fiscal year 2015. MS. CURTIS replied that in general terms it may have involved not raising fees timely, as well as incorrectly allocating indirect costs over the years. She deferred to Ms. Chambers to answer further. MS. CHAMBERS advised that circa 2012 DCCED discovered inadequate checks and balances in its accounting systems and DCBPL was allowed to provide incorrect information externally to its boards and to the public. It was accounted for correctly in the old state accounting system, she continued, but all the numbers and reports given to and utilized by the boards were not tied to the accounting system. When this was discovered, she explained, DCBPL worked with its administrative services to rectify that and an exhaustive search through all data was done to find out where each licensing program actually stood. She said some were actually doing better than what they were being told and some were not, and the Big Game Commercial Services Board was in the "very, very not" category. Much to its credit, she continued, the board at that time committed to doing whatever it took to get things done. She explained that the division spent a few years working hand-in-hand with the board assessing how often fees were being increased appropriately and whether there were fees that were not being captured to cover the administrative workload that the statute requires. Particularly in the time period between those two audits, she noted, work was done to calibrate those fees and now they are in a reasonable surplus. She advised that this program and all the division's licensing programs are being checked every year with the division's fee analysis tool. The division is in close contact with the board, she added, because the board doesn't want to go through that again and neither does the division. 1:48:17 PM REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS surmised the increased user fees since 2015 are paying for the new positions talked about by the bill sponsor to address the backlog of complaints and concerns. MS. CHAMBERS confirmed that licensing fees pay for all of the division's costs and noted that those positions are shared with the other programs as well. She pointed out that the 2018 audit covered a span of three years, so the information is now four years old. Since the beginning of the audit, she said, the division has put in a variety of improvements, safeguards, and additional resources to address the issues that were raised in the audit. MS. CHAMBERS continued and stressed that the audit findings are against the division and not against the board itself, which is a body of volunteers appointed to govern. The licensing and investigative issues are the responsibility of the division, she pointed out. She said that, to date, the division has: narrowed down double-checks with the new senior investigators for all the division's programs; reduced the licensing workload for this program; closed 22 cases so now only 39 cases are open; and double-checked every 60 days or so that there is adequate documentation in the division's case file. She noted the audit did not find that investigations were performed poorly or that the board wasn't doing its job. She advised the audit found that division staff did not document lapses when things were over with the troopers or with the Office of Special Prosecutions. The division has taken that very seriously, she added, because it is a poor reflection on the division when the audit isn't clean. 1:51:00 PM REPRESENTATIVE TUCK stated that the audit's concerns are about investigations as well as oversight and monitoring of the cases. He noted that currently DCBPL supervises the cases. He read aloud from AS [08.01.050(a)(19)], administrative duties of department, which states, "provide inspection, enforcement, and investigative services to the boards and for the occupations listed in AS 08.01.010 regarding all licenses issued by or through the department". He said the statutes are very specific on who investigates and who oversees those investigations and opined that the governor's Administrative Order is really an Executive Order because it changes statutes. Given this order to put all investigations under the Department of Law, he asked who is now responsible for the oversight, supervision, and monitoring of those investigations. MS. CHAMBERS responded that the task force would work out these questions prior to executing the Administrative Order. She said she has taken note of Representative Tuck's statements. 1:54:01 PM [CO-CHAIR TARR opened public testimony.] 1:54:37 PM KURT WHITEHEAD, Master Guide-Outfitter, testified he has been a guide in Alaska since 1995 and has worked for good outfitters and bad outfitters. He stressed the importance of the Big Game Commercial Services Board. He explained that an applicant applying for a registered guide license is tested before a panel of master guides and/or registered guides and oral testing reveals the applicant's competence. He urged the committee to reauthorize the board because it provides oversight and the necessary oral testing. Without the board, he said, there would be no more oral testing and an applicant would only take a multiple-choice test. 1:57:08 PM WAYNE KUBAT, Master Guide-Outfitter, Vice President, Alaska Professional Hunters Association (APHA), testified that the APHA represents Alaska's important and historic guide industry and has been in existence for nearly 50 years. He said the APHA supports state's rights and is working to maintain Alaska's right to manage game species in accordance with state law. He stated he is very familiar with CSSHB 43(FIN) and that there is misleading information circulating about the Big Game Commercial Services Board (BGCSB). He said the guide industry pays its own way and is net positive for the state. He pointed out that guided non-resident effort is less than 3 percent of the total big game hunting effort, and in 2015 accounted for $55.2 million new dollars and with multipliers accounted for $87.2 million in total economic activity, with a lot of it occurring in rural areas. He advised that guide numbers are decreasing, not increasing, which was mentioned in the audit. MR. KUBAT addressed the issue of complaints about the board not taking action in certain cases. He related that at the meetings he has attended the board's binder shows the actions it has taken, and while it may not be all cases, the board is putting a dent in them. He said the guide industry needs a voice that knows the truth and can represent guides fairly, and the Big Game Commercial Services Board is that voice. He further stated that the board is an important piece of the puzzle toward maintaining the long-term health and viability of the guide industry. He urged the passage of CSSB 43(FIN). 1:59:35 PM MARK RICHARDS, Executive Director, Resident Hunters of Alaska (RHAK), testified he is representing RHAK's 2,000 members in asking the committee to reject the [proposed] five-year extension of the Big Game Commercial Services Board and to instead extend it for only two years. He noted the board has been audited every three years since its reinstatement in 2005 and every audit has outlined the same problem regarding the ability to investigate cases in a timely manner along with an ongoing backlog of cases, which doesn't provide confidence that things will change. He opined that a shorter extension period would give the board incentive to resolve its issues. MR. RICHARDS stated the other body amended the bill, in part, in response to RHAK's complaints about guides continuing to hold a guide license after numerous violations. The amended bill, he continued, would change parts of the Title 8 statutes to make it somewhat easier for the board to revoke or suspend a guide license and RHAK agrees with those changes. He said there might be parts of the Title 8 statute the committee is unaware of. He maintained the guide industry has been very successful over the decades in monopolizing anything to do with making money from hunters and that this is how "outfitter" got tacked onto guide and now a guide is known as guide-outfitter. He again urged the committee to amend the bill to a two-year extension. 2:02:55 PM REPRESENTATIVE TUCK observed that RHAK's 4/25/19 letter in the committee packet states that nothing has changed in terms of the caseload and that the process has not been streamlined. He inquired whether RHAK has suggestions on how to streamline the process. He recalled Ms. Curtis stating there are problems with being able to investigate and adequately monitor the cases. MR. RICHARDS answered that only one investigator is attached to this board and one investigator alone cannot handle all the cases. He said the board does not have money to hire another investigator and opined that the way the board resolved its debt issue is problematic because it moved to consent agreements rather than taking guides to administrative court hearings that are costly. So now, he continued, guides with violations are basically given a slap on the wrist, a minimal probationary period, and are allowed to continue to hold their guide license. It is a Catch-22 here, he advised, in that trying to resolve the investigative issues and the caseloads has resulted in something that is allowing guides to continue guiding with violations. 2:04:37 PM NATHAN TURNER, Trapper, Registered Guide-Outfitter, testified he works primarily as a trapper, has been a hunting guide for 22 years, a registered guide for 19 of those years, and is serving his ninth year on the Board of Game. He stated he is speaking today as a hunting guide. He said he supports extending the Big Game Commercial Services for a full six years and that he also supports the [bill's proposed changes] to master guide-outfitter qualifications. MR. TURNER said the board has clearly acknowledged the financial problems and investigative backlog and that it continues to work diligently on the areas that it can through board actions and authority. But, he added, as has been presented a lot of the issues are beyond the board. He stated the board takes these issues very seriously. He related that for most of the years the board has been operating again, he has sat in the meetings and the subcommittee meetings and participated in the guide testing and has been impressed with the sincerity of individual board members and the tone and tenure of the meetings. He urged that, regardless of the length of extension that is chosen, consideration be given at the end of the extension to remove the sunset provision. He said the administrative problems being faced today are nothing compared to what would happen if this board was to sunset, as was evidenced when it was sunset before and the problems in the field led to the board's re-creation. MR. TURNER stated he supports the [proposed] changes to master guide-outfitter qualification. He said he has been qualified since 2012 but hasn't submitted an application because of his belief that the bar is [currently] so low it doesn't equate with his understanding of what a master of any trade should be. As currently exists, he opined, a guide doesn't need to be outstanding in any manner; a guide simply needs to be in business long enough and will qualify to be called a master. He said his belief that when another guide sees the title "master," he/she should be impressed. 2:08:02 PM REPRESENTATIVE TUCK recalled Mr. Turner's statement of being a guide for 22 years and a registered guide for 19. He asked how a person becomes an unregistered guide. MR. TURNER explained he was an assistant guide first to earn his qualification to become a registered guide. 2:08:29 PM VIRGIL UMPHENOUR, Master Guide-Outfitter, testified he served three terms on the Board of Fisheries and afterwards served eight years as chairman of the Fairbanks Fish and Game Advisory Committee. He said Alaska is well known throughout the country for its boards of fish and game and its Big Game Commercial Services Board. He maintained that the other states are jealous of Alaska's system of public process for how the state's fish, game, and hunting resources are managed. Allowing this board to sunset would be a slap in the face to all wild resource users in Alaska, he said. He pointed out that Alaska is much different than other states in that regular individuals can put forth proposals to change the regulations, the proposals are published through a board process, and at the board's meetings the public participate in the discussion about changing the regulatory process. Getting rid of it would be going backwards, he said. VIRGIL UMPHENOUR noted he is a master guide-outfitter and has been guiding for 33 years, his son is also a master guide- outfitter, and his daughter is an assistant guide. Guides pay their own way, he continued, in that non-residents pay a non- resident fee in addition to their license and this fee pays 73 percent of the Division of Wildlife Conservation's budget, and sport fish licenses pay for the majority of the Division of Sport Fish's budget. MR. UMPHENOUR pointed out the board doesn't have anything to do with the investigation process. The investigator works for the department, he said, so any problems are the department's problem, not the board's problem. The board does not supervise the investigator, he continued, and the board has gotten the investigator to quit so many frivolous investigations that don't amount to anything. 2:12:25 PM CO-CHAIR TARR closed public testimony after ascertaining no one else wished to testify. CO-CHAIR TARR announced that CSSB 43(FIN) was held over.