SJR 3-FIREARMS IN NATIONAL PARK  2:01:02 PM CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of SJR 3. SENATOR THERRIAULT, Sponsor of SJR 3, stated that the resolution supports a Bush administration policy decision and urges the Obama administration to continue and perhaps expand support of that policy. He continued: It is the intent of SJR 3 to show appreciation for the change in National Park policy that now allows park users to carry the firearms they need for personal protection in National Parks. Alaskans, who have in their state over 75 percent of the National Park system, understand how important it is to have personal protection in the wilderness. Specifically in the parks in Alaska I am more concerned about protection against the wild critters that live there. Whereas in other areas of country protection of the National Park system may be from other people who are in the park system. The bill affirms that progress has been made to allow the carrying of firearms under the previous administration and encourages the new one to continue that. Whether it's for bear protection, obtaining food in a survival situation, or signaling for assistance when needed, firearms have been on the hips and in the arms of many Alaskans since the frontier was first explored. This is just to encourage that the current policy decision continues. 2:03:02 PM CHAIR FRENCH observed that his bill packet has only the first page of the "FAQ-Interior Firearms Policy Update" and the last question doesn't have an answer. He asked Mr. Stancliff to answer the question "Won't visitors and wildlife be endangered by allowing concealed firearms in parks and refuges?" DAVE STANCLIFF, Staff to Senator Therriault, replied there are varying opinions on whether people should be able to carry firearms in national parks. As the sponsor indicated, his research revealed some tragedies that probably would not have occurred had people been able to defend themselves against wildlife. He also discovered that the ten most dangerous parks are on the list because of dangers associated with drug trafficking and assaults that have happened. So there are two groups of people wanting protection for two different reasons and the policy is under legal challenge. The Brady group filed suit on December 30, 2008 after talking with the new Interior Department appointee. Mr. Salazar expressed strong support for Second Amendment rights and said he is very comfortable with firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens. He promised to look at the procedure to ensure that it is being followed correctly, but gave no indication he would try to reverse or politically disrupt the decision. Because the Brady group has filed suit, the resolution is very timely. MR. STANCLIFF described "guns in national parks" as a philosophical issue and said that the pushback in Alaska is significantly less than in the Lower 48. He referred to the two young women who were lost in Denali Park last summer and said they had no way of signaling, protecting themselves or obtaining food. "It's a policy question, but as Alaskans I think we can see both sides of it fairly clearly," he concluded. CHAIR FRENCH asked if any Alaska parks are on the most dangerous list. MR. STANCLIFF said no; the ones that are listed are dangerous because of people. The sponsor brought to his attention that some of the most dangerous law enforcement assignments are to park rangers in national parks. SENATOR THERRIAULT clarified that the FAQ sheet was included in the packet to answer specific questions about the issue of "similar state lands." He isn't sure what the answer was to the last question on the page. CHAIR FRENCH said it was more of a rhetorical question than anything else, but he would add that when he visited the Brooks Lodge at Katmai he was stunned to learn that you couldn't carry a firearm to protect yourself against bears. After several visits he's changed his mind and believes it's really quite safe if you obey certain rules. Referring to the Kenai and Russian rivers, he said that Alaskans really have figured how and when to use guns and when not to. MR. STANCLIFF said it's important to note that the policy doesn't apply to national parks in states that don't allow individuals to carry concealed firearms. The rational was that the federal government was looking carefully at what individual states wanted. CHAIR FRENCH questioned whether states could apply different rules to different parks in the same state. For example, carve out one rule for the Brooks Lodge [Katmai] and another for Denali or Gates of the Arctic. In some places you may more legitimately need a firearm to defend yourself or signal for help. 2:11:05 PM SENATOR ELTON said his sense of the purpose of a resolution is to ask for a change. He questioned sending a resolution that essentially says good job, keep it up. SENATOR THERRIAULT responded there's an effort to undo the federal regulation and the resolution basically puts the State of Alaska on record saying it supports the Bush administration policy decision and it conforms to Alaska law. Responding to the Chair's question, he said the federal regulation allows a state to carve out a particular park, just as Alaska allows concealed carry, but not in a women's shelter or a court building. "We're basically saying we support the step that was taken just recently and we're encouraging the new administration to resist the attempts to undo it. And to potentially even consider … letting people carry openly in the parks where states allow that." 2:14:11 PM SENATOR ELTON suggested that with the exception of extending it to non-concealed, the resolution is superfluous. He asked if it's permissible now or if it has been permissible to carry a rifle in a national park. MR. STANCLIFF relayed a personal experience he had in Denali Park. "The answer is you cannot be packing a rife in sight. If you have a firearm in a park, they're going to probably make you take the bolt out or break it down and put it in a location away from where others will see it and maybe where you could avail yourself to using it." SENATOR ELTON recapped that it's okay to have a rifle in a park so long as it's unloaded and the bolt has been removed. MR. STANCLIFF clarified that he's referring to parks where hunting isn't allowed, but he doesn't know anyone who would take their rifle or shotgun into a park for fear of having it confiscated. SENATOR ELTON said so you can only carry a concealed firearm and that's probably not possible with a rifle. MR. STANCLIFF agreed it would be very difficult. 2:17:25 PM SENATOR THERRIAULT added that Alaskans are generally supportive of the change the federal government made and so it's appropriate for the state government to weigh in and encourage the new administration not to undo it. Also, the policy is very similar to what the BLM and the U.S. Forest Service have on carrying firearms. SENATOR ELTON said he appreciates the clarification and he would just note that the U.S. Forest Service and BLM allow hunting while national parks do not. 2:18:39 PM SALLY GIBERT, ANILCA Coordinator, Office of Project Management, Department of Natural Resources, clarified that all the national park preserves and all the national parks that were created under ANILCA are open to hunting. Therefore they are open to carrying firearms. "This resolution as well as the original Bush administration regulations only apply to the pre-statehood pre- ANILCA parks, which include basically the old core of Mount McKinley National Park, old Glacier Bay, old Katmai and Sitka and Klondike." CHAIR FRENCH said so under the new regulations I can take a gun climbing and shoot avalanches. MS. GIBERT said yes as long as they're concealed. CHAIR FRENCH asked her to clarify that the state or park director could carve out a section of the river near the Brooks Lodge as a no gun zone. MS. GIBERT said yes the federal government defers to the state; the park service can go along with whatever the state allows. The same with the McNeil River, she said. 2:20:43 PM CHAIR FRENCH announced he would hold the resolution until the next meeting [Wednesday].