CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 303(RES) "An Act relating to the Big Game Commercial Services Board and to the regulation of big game hunting services and transportation services; and providing for an effective date." This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance Committee. Co-Chair Wilken explained that the Senate Rules Committee, at the request of the Legislative Budget & Audit Committee, sponsors this legislation. The bill would re-establish a Big Game Guide Board system for the guiding industry in a fashion similar to one that had previously been established. HENRY WEBB, Staff to Representative Ralph Samuels, and Aide, Legislative Budget & Audit Committee (LB&A) stated that this bill would reestablish the Big Game Commercial Services Board, in response to "oversight of the industry" concerns raised in a Division of Legislative Audit [copy on file], dated October 16, 2003, that have developed since the Board was terminated in the mid 1990s. The concerns identified include the inability of various State departments, including the Department of Community and Economic Development, the Department of Fish and Game, the Department of Public Safety, the Department of Environmental Conservation, and the Department of Natural Resources as well as various federal agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management, the Forest Service, the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) and the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to coordinate with each other. Another problem identified in the Audit was a lessening of ethical standards, as no code of ethics currently exists in State statute. Furthermore, there is a lack of detailed business and operating standards; there is an inadequate hunter safety standard; and there is "a diminished disciplinary climate for unethical conduct." The Department of Community and Economic Development is unable to adequately address consumer complaints, and therefore, "their [the consumer] only recourse is litigation." There are currently no sanctions for multiple consumer complaints or game violations. Mr. Webb continued that following the termination of the Board, "fines for infractions were significantly reduced," and registration qualifications are only applicable to registered guides. While it has been suggested that the Department of Community and Economic Development could address concerns without the establishment of a Board, the consensus is that were this feasible, the concerns would not have elevated to their current level. There is no ability to bring all the affected parties together to address solutions. Mr. Webb stated that the re-establishment of a Board would provide a venue through which problems facing the hunting industry could be addressed, including improving communication, having expertise with which to oversee the industry, and having the ability to "act proactively rather than reactively." A Board is deemed to be a necessary oversight tool. This legislation was developed after discussions with various interested departments. He stressed that the Board would be self-supporting. Senator Hoffman inquired to the composition and appointment of Board members. Mr. Webb stated that the members of the Board are identified in Section 3, subsection (b) page two, beginning on line four as follows. (b) The board consists of seven members as follows: (1) two members who are current, licensed registered guide-outfitters; (2) one member who is a licensed transporter; (3) one member of the Board of Game who is chosen by the Board of Game and who does not hold a guide or transport license; (4) two members who represent private landholders affected by guided hunting activities or transportation services and who do not hold a license issued under this chapter; and (5) one public member. Senator Hoffman observed there to be a lack of regional representation. Mr. Webb responded that the private landowner member could provide the regional consideration. Senator Olson pointed out that the Division of Occupation licensing, Fiscal Note #1, specifies the regional representation composition of the Board. Mr. Webb understood that the fiscal note's analysis was developed in an effort to determine expenses. Senator Olson voiced that the representation specified in fiscal note #1 would not adequately represent big game hunting activity in the State, specifically that the areas west of Fairbanks should have higher representation. Mr. Webb could not adequately respond, as he was not involved in the development of the Department's fiscal note. Senator Olson asked for further information, specifically the negative affects that have resulted, by the termination of the original Board. Mr. Webb responded that, while he was not involved in the process at the time, "there was a perception that the Board was captured by special interest" groups. He deferred to the Legislative Audit Division to further answer the question. PAT DAVIDSON, Legislative Auditor, Legislative Audit Division, explained to the Committee that one of biggest factors in terminating the Board was a 1988 Alaska Supreme Court decision, the Owsichek Decision, which outlawed Exclusive Guide Areas (EGA), which were established in 1976 by the original Board. At that point, a lack of consensus as to the direction of the Board, rather than a particular action, seemed to occur that furthered its dissolutionment. She noted that all Boards operate under the auspice of a termination date. Senator Olson asked for examples of the negative affects that have caused reconsideration of this Board. Ms. Davidson responded that the Audit found that no Best Business practices have been established in Statute or regulations in this regard. In addition the Division of Occupational Licensing was unable to provide sufficient criteria in which to provide an environment in which "hunters felt economically comfortable." While the Audit did conclude that some statutory changes would be necessary to enhance the industry, it had not concluded that the establishment of a Board was essential. However, it should be noted that when a Board exists there is a more active regulatory regime because it actively pursues regulation changes and enhancements in order to follow "the direction of where the industry is going." The audit left the re-establishment of a Board decision up to the Legislature. Senator Olson asked whether outfitters and guides support the legislation. Ms. Davidson responded that the focus of an audit is to review State agency action. While the Department of Community and Economic Development does not support the re-establishment of a Board, the Department of Fish and Game does. Senator Olson asked whether the guide industry would support this legislation. Ms. Davidson stated that while she was confident that the industry would support the re-establishment of a Board, she could not officially speak on their behalf. Senator Hoffman asked whether the "best business practices" are represented in this bill. Ms. Davidson responded that that the bill addresses many of the issues raised in the audit. Senator Hoffman, referencing language in Section 9, subsection (C)(ii) on page eight, lines 16 through 19, questioned whether the language in that section promotes best business practices as it might be difficult for an individual, in the military for example, to obtain the required experience. (ii) has at least 10 years' hunting experience in the state; military service outside of the state for not more than three years shall be accepted as part of the required 10 years' hunting experience; and SFC 04 # 75, Side A 10:42 AM Ms. Davidson deferred to other entities to answer the question, as the audit does not address that issue. Mr. Webb understood that the language in question is in existing statute. Senator Hoffman asked whether this bill would comply with decision of the aforementioned lawsuit. Ms. Davidson understood that the bill would not establish Exclusive Guide Areas. EGA were determined to be unconstitutional as a result of that decision. Senator Hoffman contended, therefore, that guides would compete for the best hunting areas. This would make it harder to manage the resources in those areas. Co-Chair Wilken asked whether this concern is addressed in Section 28. Use area registration. on page 17, beginning on line 20. WAYNE REGELIN, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game, informed the Committee that the Alaska Professional Hunters Association helped draft this legislation, requested that the Audit be conducted, and "are in full support" of its enactment. Continuing, he stated that the bill would not have any effect on the Owsichek decision that outlawed exclusive guide areas. Senator Hoffman understood therefore that the bill would continue to be in compliance in that regard. Mr. Regelin affirmed that this legislation would have no affect on exclusive guide areas. EGAs would not be permitted under this bill. Senator Hoffman asked how a desirable area's resources would be protected. Mr. Regelin stated that this legislation would "go a long way toward" resolving existing problems. Big Game Guides would continue to have three areas in which to hunt and conflicts could be addressed. This legislation would provide the Board of Game, who strongly support this bill, another Board to work with to try to resolve such things as user conflicts and the regulation of the number of guides and transporters operating in a certain area. Mr. Regelin noted that while federal agencies are currently regulating and limiting hunting activity on federal land, the State is currently unable to do so. The establishment of this Board would further coordinate activities on State land. Senator Hoffman referenced the section in the bill that could essentially provide military personnel living outside the State, a preference in that their military time would be recognized as qualifying time for the guide hunting experience requirement. He asked whether those who are familiar with an area could be provided some sort of preference. Mr. Regelin responded that while he is not thoroughly knowledgeable with all the intricacies of the bill, he understood that while guides must be familiar with an area and could register for up to three permits, no local user preference is provided. Mr. Webb stated that during discussions with Ron Summerville, a member of the Board of Game, it was suggested that a course be developed through which local knowledge could be shared within the industry. Senator Hoffman questioned how this would benefit the local individuals, as they are already familiar with local resources. Senator Bunde noted that in existing statute, there is language that would encourage locals to become assistant guides. This would provide a step toward becoming a registered guide. Senator Bunde expressed being aware that, on occasion, transporters exceed the definition of being a transporter and conduct guide type work. Therefore, he noted that conflict might arise due to having both guides and transporters on the Board. Mr. Webb agreed that the transporter issue is of concern. This bill would attempt to further define the line between being a transporter and a guide/outfitter. The guide/outfitter reference is made repeatedly in the bill to clarify that in order to be an outfitter, a person must be a licensed guide. Co-Chair Wilken asked for further discussion in this regard as this is an important issue. Mr. Regelin commented that this bill would authorize the Board to address issues such as the regulation of transporters. The Board's broad membership representation would enable it to appropriately further the issue. This is a sensitive issue that would take small steps over a series of year to address. Mr. Regelin also noted that the Board of Game has no authority regarding conflicts that could arise when transporters take large numbers of hunters to the same area. It is also important that this Board be re-authorized, as this industry "desperately" needs an effective mechanism with which to discipline guides who are not following the law. Senator Bunde agreed that there is a need for an oversight body. He asked whether current State statute clearly defines of what constitutes an outfitter, guide, or transporter. Mr. Webb stated that definitions are included in Section 32. Sec. 08.54.790. Definitions. beginning on page 20 and continuing through page 22 of the bill. Senator Olson asked whether this legislation would affect air taxi operators who provide transportation throughout the State. Mr. Webb clarified that this legislation would not affect air taxi service operators. Co-Chair Wilken announced that the bill would be HELD in Committee.