CSHJR 58(RES) REFORM THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT  CHAIRMAN LEMAN brought CSHJR 58(RES) before the committee as the final order of business. ANTHONY KRUPPE , representing the Alaska Environmental Lobby (AEL), stated they have several concerns with the legislation, but they have narrowed it down to the two most important things that they believe will strengthen the resolution. The first suggested change is to delete the resolve clause on page 2, lines 7-9, which requests the Congress to proceed with reauthorization of the Endangered Species Act, using HR 2275 as the basis for the reauthorization legislation. He said he believes that by deleting those lines, it will make the resolution a bit stronger because AEL does not believe that HR 2275 is a piece of legislation that the Alaska Legislature should support. The second suggested change is to delete lines 22 and 23 on page 2 which eliminates the concept of "distinct population segment" from the definition of "species." He said the concern with distinct population segments in the definition of species could be resolved by establishing an interpretation of the definition similar to the policy supported by the National Marine Fisheries Service. Their specification designates that species must satisfy particular criteria distinguishing the segment of species as reproductively isolated and significant in the evolution of the species. CHAIRMAN LEMAN commented that if HR 2275 is used as the basis, it does not necessarily mean that the bill as originally introduced will become law. It is a starting point, and as Congress works to get a consensus, the bill will probably be crafted along the way to accommodate concerns, so he thinks using it as the mark-up vehicle is fine, at least from the Alaska perspective, because it probably comes the closest to accommodating some of the concerns we have as a state to the implementation of ESA. Number 400 CHAIRMAN LEMAN asked if it was correct that the "distinct population segment" is causing problems with the management of our fisheries in Alaska. JAY NELSON , Department of Fish & Game, confirmed that the listed population of Snake River fall chinook that is causing problems for the fisheries in Alaska is listed under the "distinct population segment" provision of the law. He added that the problem with the "distinct population segment" is it benefits the state with regard to land vertebrates, in general, but with fish it is a different situation. He said while the administration is not satisfied with a blanket removal of the "distinct population segment" provision, it agrees there probably needs to be a more surgical solution to it. CHAIRMAN LEMAN asked if inserting the words "for anadromous fish" after the word "species" would help. MR. NELSON responded that would definitely be more surgical. Number 455 SENATOR TAYLOR asked if the Governor agrees with the position that the Queen Charlotte goshawk and the Alexander Archipelago wolf are distinct population segments deserving attention under ESA. MR. NELSON responded that the Alexander Archipelago wolf and the Queen Charlotte goshawk were both requested to be listed by a private group based in the Lower 48 with two Alaskan citizens involved. The proposal to list it as an endangered species was opposed by the department, as well as opposed by the federal government, and now there are pending lawsuits by that same private party to list them. He added that the Queen Charlotte goshawk and the Alexander Archipelago wolf are classified as subspecies. He said changing that from a subspecies is a complicated thing, and the department has not taken a position on that. Even if they were eliminated as a subspecies, they still might under the Fish & Wildlife Service decision fall under "distinct population segment." He also said the Governor does not view HR 2477 as the best vehicle for reauthorization of the Act. TAPE 96-44, SIDE A Number 015 SENATOR TAYLOR asked if the Governor is doing what he can to make certain that this legislation doesn't pass. MR. NELSON answered that with the exception of one letter from the Governor, they have done nothing in the way of working on this legislation in Washington, D.C. SENATOR TAYLOR asked if the Governor's letter was supportive, and MR. NELSON answered that it wasn't. CHAIRMAN LEMAN commented that if the Governor had a positive approach and told Mr. Katz that we want to work this really hard and help our delegation, then we might have a little bit different resolution. There being no further testimony on CSHB 58(RES), CHAIRMAN LEMAN asked for the pleasure of the committee. SENATOR TAYLOR moved CSHJR 58(RES) be passed out of committee with individual recommendations. SENATOR HOFFMAN objected. A vote of the committee was taken with the following result: Senators Frank, Pearce, Taylor and Leman voted "Yea" and Senator Hoffman voted "Nay." The Chairman stated the motion carried.