|
|
|
|
State of
DEPARTMENT
OF NATURAL RESOURCES |
|
|
JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM governor |
REBECCA A. HUMPHRIES director |
|
|
|
|
State of
DEPARTMENT
OF NATURAL RESOURCES |
|
|
JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM governor |
REBECCA A. HUMPHRIES director |
POSITION
The Department supports
the concept of hunting and fishing as a privilege and recommends the following
amendments:
Page 1, line 2 – replace “all WILD fish,” with “all FISH IN THE WILD,”. As written, the Bill does not recognize fish
that are stocked into public waters, and therefore excludes those fish from
consideration. Fish stocked into public
waters of the state should be treated equally with wild fish that are not
stocked.
Page 2, line 8 – replace “PEOPLE’S RIGHT TO LAWFULLY FISH AND HARVEST
FISH THAT ARE THE” with “PEOPLE’S
RIGHT TO LAWFULLY FISH AND TO LAWFULLY HARVEST FOR NON-COMMERCIAL PURPOSES FISH
THAT ARE THE”. As written, the Bill could
be interpreted as providing specific rights for commercial fishing and the
commercial harvest of fish, which the Department believes do not currently
exist in state law. The Department would
oppose attempts to create such rights for commercial purposes, since the
Department believes that commercial fishing and the harvest of fish for
commercial purposes are privileges granted by the State.
PROBLEM/BACKGROUND
The Bill is attempting to ensure that the state's
citizens maintain their ability to lawfully fish and lawfully harvest fish.
DESCRIPTION
OF BILL
The Bill
requires the Department to protect and promote the right to lawfully fish and lawfully
harvest fish that are the property of the state. The Bill indicates it is a furtherance of
Section 52 of Article 4 of the Constitution that states: "The
conservation and development of the natural resources of the state are hereby
declared to be of paramount public concern in the interest of the health,
safety and general welfare of the people.
The Legislature shall provide for the protection of the air, water and
other natural resources of the state from pollution, impairment and
destruction."
SUMMARY OF
ARGUMENTS
Pro
The Bill further
recognizes the concepts developed in the Public Trust Doctrine by clearly
stating that the state's citizens have a right to lawfully fish and lawfully
harvest fish, along with the statement that fish are the property of the
state. This additional recognition
enhances the understanding of and the support for the Department's
mission. While the right to lawfully
fish and lawfully harvest fish is clearly embedded in the Public Trust
Doctrine, it has not been specifically stated as such in state law.
Con
It is unclear what additional activities and
responsibilities are intended in the requirement for the Department to protect
and promote the people's right to lawfully fish and lawfully harvest fish. Depending on the additional activities and
responsibilities intended, the Bill may constitute an unfunded mandate.
The
interactions with other legislation that prevent the harassment of anglers are
unclear. In addition, the Bill could
create legal issues for the Department by inadvertently creating a right to
lawfully fish commercially and to lawfully harvest fish for commercial purposes,
which would cause significant problems for the proper management of the state's
fisheries. Pursuant to the Public Trust Doctrine,
any right to lawfully fish and lawfully harvest fish cannot diminish those same
rights for others.
FISCAL/ECONOMIC IMPACT
Are there revenue or
budgetary implications in the bill to the --
Budgetary:
The budgetary implications of this Bill for the
Department are unclear, but there may be unintended legal problems that arise with
respect to commercial fisheries. In
addition, it is unclear what additional activities and responsibilities are
intended in the requirement for the Department to protect and promote the
people's right to lawfully fish and lawfully harvest fish. Depending on the additional activities and
responsibilities intended, the Bill may constitute an unfunded mandate.
Revenue:
The Bill will not generate additional revenue for the
Department.
Comments:
None.
Budgetary:
The budgetary implications of the Bill for the State
are unclear, but there may be unintended legal issues that arise with respect
to commercial fisheries.
Revenue:
The Bill will not generate additional revenue for the
State.
Comments:
None.
(c) Local Government
Comments:
As written, the Bill poses no direct effects on local
governments, but it may prevent the enforcement of angler harassment laws.
OTHER STATE DEPARTMENTS
No
direct effects on any other Departments.
ANY OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
The
interaction of this bill with statutes prohibiting the harassment of anglers is
not clear. The Department is also
concerned that the Bill could be interpreted as
providing specific rights for the commercial harvest of fish, which the
Department believes do not currently
exist in state law.
ADMINISTRATIVE
RULES IMPACT
No direct effects on administrative rules.
_______________________________
Rebecca A. Humphries
Director
_______________________________
Date
FI/LED
