MINUTES SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE March 17, 2000 9:06 AM TAPES SFC-00 # 52, Side A & B CALL TO ORDER Co-Chair John Torgerson convened the meeting at approximately 9:06 AM PRESENT Co-Chair John Torgerson, Co-Chair Sean Parnell, Senator Al Adams, Senator Dave Donley, Senator Lyda Green, Senator Loren Leman, Senator Randy Phillips, Senator Gary Wilken Also Attending: KEVIN BROOKS, Director, Division of Administrative Services, Department of Fish & Game; VICTOR GUNN, Staff, Senator P. Kelly; GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Fish & Game; JOEL BENNETT, Defenders of Wildlife; Attending via Teleconference: From Anchorage: KEVIN SAXBY, Assistant Attorney General, Natural Resources Section, Department of Law; From Matsu: ROD ARNO, Registered Guide. SUMMARY INFORMATION SB 281-OPERATING BUDGET MISSIONS AND MEASURES Kevin Brooks from the Department of Fish & Game testified. The amended bill was passed out of committee. SB 267-MANAGEMENT OF GAME Victor Gunn from the sponsor's office testified, along with the Department of Fish & Game, Department of Law, Defenders of Wildlife and the general public. The bill was held in committee. SENATE BILL NO. 281 "An Act relating to missions and measures to be applied to certain expenditures by the executive branch of state government and the University of Alaska from the state operating budget for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2001; and providing for an effective date." Amendment #1: This amendment deletes old and inserts new language as follows: DELETE (b)(1) - (b)(2) Insert: (b)(1) Amount of revenue from land and cash. (b)(2) Percent of disbursement of Trust income for mental health programs Senator Leman made a motion to adopt Amendment #1. Senator Leman explained that the Mental Health Trust Authority is not a direct provider, which the current legislation would seem to imply. He noted that this amendment would rectify this misrepresentation. Co-Chair Torgerson hearing no objection ADOPTED Amendment Amendment #2: This amendment would delete old and insert new language as follows: Page 6, line 15: Delete "of public officials" Insert "to the public of candidates and public officials in accordance with the Alaska Statutes" Page 6, line 16: Delete "division" Insert "commission" Page 6, line 19, following "by": Insert "candidates and" Page 6, line 20, following "the": Insert "average" Co-Chair Parnell made a motion to adopt Amendment #2. Co-Chair Parnell explained that this amendment addresses the missions and measures for Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC) to ensure the accountability of public officials and candidates. He added that there was no opposition to this amendment, but told Senator Adams that he did not believe that APOC had necessarily reviewed it. Senator Wilken noted that the Department of Administration had signed off of both amendment #2 and #3. Co-Chair Torgerson hearing no objection ADOPTED Amendment Amendment #3: deletes old and inserts new language as follows: Page 6, line 25: Delete "appeals" Insert "permits" Co-Chair Parnell made a motion to adopt Amendment #3. Co-Chair Parnell explained that Amendment #3 clarifies that the Conservation Commission as referenced processes permits rather than hearing appeals. Co-Chair Torgerson hearing no objection ADOPTED Amendment # 3. Amendment #4: This amendment deletes old and inserts new language as follows: Page 8, line 29, following "increase": Delete "the" Page 8, line 30, following "international": Insert "trade and" Page 9, lines 30 - 31: Delete all material and insert: "(4) the increase in student achievement and interest in math and science as a result of ASTF teacher grants." Page 10, lines 14 - 18: Delete all material and insert: "(1) the number of unscheduled outages of hydroelectric projects owned by the authority; (2) the number of four-dam pool project repairs and upgrades completed on time and within budget; (3) the amount of revenue created by projects owned by the authority." Senator Green made a motion to adopt Amendment #4. Senator Green explained that the department requested these changes. She added that these changes helped to better define what the department's roles are, including very technical changes for grammatical purposes. Co-Chair Torgerson hearing no objection ADOPTED Amendment Amendment #5: This amendment deletes old and inserts new language as follows: Page 43, line 13, following "develop": Insert ", operate, maintain," Co-Chair Parnell made a motion to adopt Amendment #5. Co-Chair Torgerson explained that the department brought this amendment. Co-Chair Torgerson hearing no objection ADOPTED Amendment Amendment #6: Co-Chair Torgerson noted that this amendment was WITHDRAWN. Amendment #7: This amendment deletes old and inserts new language as follows: Page 2, line 9 Delete "track" Insert "reach" Co-Chair Parnell made a motion to adopt Amendment #7. Co-Chair Parnell explained that this amendment was provided by the Department of Administration. Co-Chair Torgerson hearing no objection ADOPTED Amendment Amendment #8: This amendment deletes old and inserts new language as follows: Page 37, lines 23 - 26: Delete all material. Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Page 47, following line 4: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 149. DOT/PF - Highway Safety Planning Agency. (a) The mission of the Highway Safety Planning Agency is to administer Grant programs that promote safer highways. (b) The legislature intends to measure the success of the agency in achieving its mission by considering the number of highway deaths per year." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Co-Chair Parnell made a motion to adopt Amendment #8. Co-Chair Parnell explained that it was important to measure how state services or facilities are maintained for the public. He noted that one measure for the related agency to assess their success is to tabulate how many individuals are killed on highways and he added that ultimately, this number of deaths should be reduced over time. Co-Chair Torgerson hearing no objection ADOPTED Amendment Amendment #9: This amendment deletes old and adds new language as follows: Page 1, line 7: Delete "secs. 1 - 153" Insert "secs. 1 - 154" Page 23, following line 12: Insert a new bill section to read: "*Sec. 73. DF&G - Division of Subsistence. (a) The mission of the Division of Subsistence is to (1) gather, quantify, evaluate, and report data about uses, users, and methods of subsistence hunting and fishing; and (2) make recommendations on the impacts of federal and state laws and regulations on subsistence uses and users. (b) The legislature intends to measure the success of the division in achieving its mission by considering the percentage of (1) Alaska communities in each region for which fisheries harvest data are collected and reported; (2) Alaska communities in each region for which wildlife harvest data are collected and reported; (3) Subsistence proposals at meetings of the Board of Fisheries and the Board of Game for which subsistence data are assessed and recommendations are made; (4) Proposed statutory and regulatory changes by federal and other state entities for which subsistence data are assessed and recommendations are made." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Page 29, line 19: Delete "secs. 94 - 97" Insert "secs. 95 - 98" Co-Chair Parnell made a motion to adopt Amendment #9. KEVIN BROOKS, Director, Division of Administrative Services, Department of Fish & Game explained that the department had proposed this amendment. Co-Chair Torgerson hearing no objection ADOPTED Amendment Amendment #10: This amendment deletes old and adds new language as follows: Page 48 line 6 - 10 delete all material and insert: (2) the number of students enrolled in and graduated in teacher education, health careers, process technology, transportation and logistics, information technology and other high demand job areas; Renumber sections accordingly Co-Chair Parnell made a motion to adopt Amendment #10. Co-Chair Parnell explained that this section as currently written considers the new or expanded degree programs as noted. He felt it was appropriate to measure how many expanded degree programs are created as versus trying to measure the quality of programs, which already exist, by determining the number of enrollees and graduates. Senator Green suggested a language change. Co-Chair Parnell made a motion to amend Amendment #10 to delete "number of students enrolled in and graduate in teacher," and insert "percentage of students graduating with degrees in teacher." A general discussion regarding the ways to clarify this assessment language followed. Without objection, Amendment #10 was AMENDED. Co-Chair Parnell made a motion to move SB 281, work order number 1-LS1392\D from Committee. Co-Chair Torgerson hearing no objection moved SB 218 FROM THE COMMITTEE. SENATE BILL NO. 267 "An Act relating to management of game." VICTOR GUNN, Staff for Senator P. Kelly read the sponsor statement into the record. He declared that Senate Bill 267 directs the Commissioner of Fish and Game to "accord a high priority to the implementation of programs and regulations adopted by the Board of Game under AS 16.05.255(e) - (I)" which provides for intensive management programs to restore the abundance or productivity of identified big game prey populations as necessary to achieve human consumptive use goals of the board. He noted that this bill directs the commissioner to allocate fiscal and staff resources to implement intensive game management programs and regulations in a timely and effective manner. Mr. Gunn stated that Senate Bill 267 amends AS 16.05.2555 by adding a new subsection, which provides for the taking of wolves on the same day airborne. He added that the board or department may require no additional permit. He specified that the prohibition of same-day airborne hunting (AS 16.050783) would not apply when the Board of Game has adopted regulations to provide for intensive management of an identified big game prey population. Mr. Gunn continued that this bill also authorizes an agent of the Department of Fish and Game, as part of a game management program, to shoot or assist in shooting predators on the same day airborne. He recounted that this legislation was a result of a meeting in McGrath over the problems of predators in the area, as well as those individuals around the state who are concerned about prey populations. He referred to a previous fiscal note that had been reduced to zero. Senator Phillips asked if the Board of Game had requested this legislation. Mr. Gunn responded no, but noted that the Board was consulted during the language drafting. Senator Phillips asked why the previous fiscal note of $600,000 was reduced to zero. Mr. Gunn responded that this change took place during the Committee Substitute adoption in the Senate Resources Committee. Senator Phillips stated that he had problems with this bill. He noted that his constituents feel as though the Board of Game is overreacting to the situation in McGrath. Co-Chair Torgerson referred to line six and seven, on page one and read the language as follows: "shall allocate fiscal and staff resources for the department as necessary" and asked if this language gave to the Board of Game the power of appropriation over the legislature in order to implement this program. Mr. Gunn responded that this language was drafted in order to give priority to this problem. Co-Chair Torgerson referred to line 14, page one and read the following language as follows: "for purposes of protecting wildlife." He commented that this was very open-ended language. Senator Adams stated that he supported this legislation, but he had a question about language in Section 3, line 6 - 8 on page two, with the use of the word "agent." Mr. Gunn responded that this could be an individual contracted by or employed in a temporary capacity. He added that this language would be helpful to the department to hire airplane pilots and such. GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Fish & Game stated that the subject of SB 267 is to control predators, particularly wolves, through same day airborne shooting and the use of agents in the department to conduct aerial control programs. He commented that historically, this is a controversial subject, which produces strong and negative reactions from many individuals. He continued that the Department has grave reservations about being legislated to do something that such a large segment of the public so clearly opposes. He referred to Section 1 of this legislation and added that it requires the department to implement predator control programs without violating the Separation of Powers Doctrine. He noted that the department is still unsure whether this Section is successful in doing so. Mr. Bruce referred to Section 2, which addresses same day landing and shooting of wolves in the area of the state subject to intensive management programs. He noted that this comprised about two-thirds of the state. He added that these same day shootings are subject to abuse and it is difficult to enforce, especially keeping hunting within designated areas. He described Section 3, which authorizes the use of agents under a Fish & Game predator control program. He added that the department does not support this Section since aerial shooting is already controversial and since the use of Fish & Game employees ensures more accountability to the public. Mr. Bruce commented that the department respectfully offers, that legislative policies that are objectionable to a large segment of the public, are not the way to resolve the impasse over the management of wolves and the control of predation. He declared that the department believes that only through the development of a compromise, resulting in a balanced wildlife management program, can the gridlock over predator management be resolved. Co-Chair Torgerson asked if the McGrath residents feel as though the department has come up with a compromise to deal with this wolf program. Mr. Bruce responded negatively. Senator Phillips assumed that the department does not support this bill in its present form. Mr. Bruce responded that this was a correct assumption. Senator Phillips asked if the Board of Game had requested this legislation. Mr. Bruce responded that he was not aware of the Board requesting this legislation. Senator Phillips asked for clarification on the total moose and bear population in the McGrath area, along with allowed takings of the same. He asked if the hunting of bear with the aid of snow machines was allowed. Mr. Bruce responded that this latter assessment would be illegal. Senator Phillips understood that the Board of Game recommended this predatory control be conducted by Fish & Game staff or locals. He wondered if this was the recommendation of the Board of Game. Mr. Bruce responded that at the last board meeting, a number of regulations were considered to try to increase the harvest of wolves and bears. He added that the board has authorized a predator control program in this area that has not been implemented. He reported that the department did not plan to implement a plan themselves at this time. Senator Adams referred to Section 2 and clarified that Mr. Bruce thought this section was too broad, by encompassing too much of Alaska. Mr. Bruce responded that this was correct. He noted that while two-thirds of the state is subject to intensive management plans, a much smaller area of the state has experienced predator control programs adopted by the Board of Game. He continued that this was much broader in places where the board has recognized that predator control is necessary. Senator Adams asked if the department has looked at using the McGrath area as a control area under game management or as a longitude/latitude specific designation. He added that this would avoid the legislation being too overly broad. Mr. Bruce responded that the department has considered these options. He added that if the legislation is restricted to these areas, where the board has authorized the predator control program, this would narrow the focus of the bill to those areas where the Board of Game has determined that there is an actual problem with wolf predation affecting prey populations. He continued that this effort would help focus this issue more narrowly. KEVIN SAXBY, Assistant Attorney General, Natural Resources Section, Department of Law testified via teleconference from Anchorage regarding the wording problem of Section 2. He noted that neither the public nor the enforcement officers will be able to tell which areas are determined exceptions to the same day airborne policy. He stated that this was partly because the board has already adopted a number of regulations under the intensive management law, which are intended to provide for recovery of various game populations. He then gave some examples of these, such as liberalizing bag limits in season on wolves and bears. He pointed out that in no place within regulations does it identify that these regulations were adopted for intensive management purposes or is an area identified as subjected to these types of intensive management regulations, and in essence, the public will not be able to tell. He added that two-thirds of the state has been designated as important for high levels of consumptive use, but it does not follow from this, that intensive management regulations have been adopted in this area as well. Mr. Saxby pointed that intensive management, even when predation has deemed to be the problem, may not be focused on wolves, but instead, on bears. He noted that as a result, the focus could potentially be on the wrong predator with this legislation, under the current language. He continued that there are other areas in the state where predation is not the problem, but rather habitat is. He recounted, that as a result, the board might adopt regulations intended to benefit prey populations in these areas, but wolves and bears would not have anything to do with it. He concluded that even in areas where the board has identified wolves as the primary limiting factor, sometimes the board opts to adopt a non-lethal control program. He added this legislation could greatly interfere with exercising such an option. Mr. Saxby clarified that at the last Board of Game meeting, it was decided that in [inaudible] and in two other areas of the state, wolves could be taken from a snow machine. He noted that this had yet to be codified, but it was a decision made by the board. ROD ARNO testified via teleconference from MatSu. He stated that he has been a registered guide for 35 years. He noted that he supports this legislation, but has some concerns, both of which were addressed. He continued that having this legislation apply to intensive management of an identified big game prey population area, should be changed specifically to only relating to a wolf predation control implementation plan as adopted by the Board of Game. He referred to Section 2, line 15, where it states, "the purpose of protection," and suggested that the following language should be added "and enhancing wildlife." He noted that there was clearly support for the sustainable future of Alaska's renewal resources, and quoted revenue figures for food harvests statewide. He added that there are financial reasons to enhance wildlife in areas without eradicating the prey populations in these same areas. He continued to address public perception issues. JOEL BENNETT, Defenders of Wildlife noted other organizations have been involved in these types of processes and he did not expect that his organization should be criticized for their beliefs. Tape: SFC - 00 #52, Side B, 9:54 AM Mr. Bennett continued that he is a 35-year resident to Alaska and a life-long hunter. He noted that he is a former 13-year member of the Board of Game. He spoke strongly against CSSB 267. He stated that this legislation radically changes the citizens vote of 1996 on Proposition 3, by reinstating a practice of land and shoot hunting of wolves. He continued that Alaskans in the past have identified this as a practice that is subject to abuses and is an unfair, unpopular method of hunting. He explained that this form of hunting is impossible to enforce and many times other animals are taken in this same manner while in the pursuit of wolf. He referred to remarks made by Senator P. Kelly that seemed to reverse his position of supporting SB 74 introduced last year, which did not include same day landing and shooting of wolves and other predators. Senator Donley responded that this characterization was not accurate. He added that Senator P. Kelly spoke to a separate piece of legislation. He continued that this was inappropriate to impugn the intent of legislation from last year. Co-Chair Parnell reiterated that this legislation specifically says that a person may not shoot from the air. He continued that the language Mr. Bennett used means numerous things to the public and that the public could construe from these remarks that this present legislation allows shooting wolves from the air. Senator Phillips stated that he tends to agree in principal with what Mr. Bennett had said about this legislation, but noted that there is still a problem with wolves in the McGrath area. He added that he does not support this legislation in its current form and asked for other viable solutions to this problem. He summed up that some of his constituents question this methodology. Mr. Bennett stated that the situation in McGrath is very complex, involving bears as well as wolves. He thought that the board was considering other measures to address bear predation. He also mentioned bounties on wolves, which in the past was very effective. Mr. Bennett commented that he flew for seven hours over the McGrath area to review the habitat. He challenged anyone to designate this area as high-density moose habitat. He referred to McGrath's 42 percent success rate for moose last year, which was one of the most successful in the state. He added in response to Co-Chair Parnell and Senator Donley's comments that he only compared the two pieces of legislation in order to reflect their conflicting sentiment. Mr. Bennett remarked that he saw the State of Alaska at a serious crossroad and noted the wide chasm between major elements of the public, which is getting wider. He felt as though legislation such as SB 267 would widen this chasm and produce polarization. Mr. Gunn noted a Dittman Poll from last year which asked residents statewide whether they would support, when a biological emergency exists, a same day aerial wolf control program and 63 percent said they would support this initiative. Co-Chair Torgerson summarized previous areas of concern with this bill as mentioned and requested that language in this bill be modified accordingly. He HELD the bill in committee. Senator Green reiterated that it was important to stress that this present legislation has nothing to do with anyone shooting wolves from an airplane or helicopter. The bill was HELD in Committee. ADJOURNED Senator Torgerson adjourned the meeting at 10:13 AM. SFC-00 (14) 3/17/00