committee will travel to the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument and visit with state
park officials at the Escalante Petrified Forest and Anasazi Indian ruins.
MOTION: Rep. Hatch moved to meet on June 26-27. The motion passed unanimously. Sen. Evans and Reps. Buttars and Carlson were absent during the vote.
2. Outlook for Flooding - Mr. Bob Morgan, Division of Water Rights, noted that water percentages in southern areas of the state are normal. There is still a lot of snowpack in the
mountains which could produce high water in some areas. The potential for flooding is high
along the Bear River, Weber River, and Provo Lake drainages. He pointed out that Snowbird
normally has almost 12 inches of moisture this time of year. Currently, it has over 38 inches of
moisture. He anticipates there could also be some problems along the Ogden River. The state
will continue to see long-term flooding problems on the Logan, Blacksmith Fork, and possibly
the Little Bear Rivers. Depending on how fast the snow melts, there could be some flooding
along the Provo River.
3. Deer and Elk Management Plans - Mr. John Kimball, Division of Wildlife Resources, distributed information on the statewide deer and elk management plans and noted that the
regional advisory council meetings on the plans were very well attended.
Mr. Wes Shields, Division of Wildlife Resources, discussed objectives for winter deer
and buck/doe populations. He pointed out that three of the five regions in the state are
demonstrating positive trends in productivity and improving their ratios. Productivity in the
southeastern region is static. He noted there are difficulties in those areas due to environmental
factors and predation.
Mr. Shields discussed the elk population status in the state. The winter population
objective has been established at 62,019. Currently there are 18 herd units which exceed the
winter population objective. The division is prepared to offer enough permits to get the elk herds
back in compliance with the plans within two years. He noted that this year the Wildlife Board
has almost doubled the number of antlerless elk hunting permits.
Mr. Alan Clark, Division of Wildlife Resources, distributed information on the plans'
economic impact on the division. From 1992 to 1995, general season deer permit sales dropped
by approximately one-half. During that same time, there was an increase in the fees for resident
and nonresident general season permits. In 1992, general season deer permit revenue exceeded
$6.1 million. In 1995, the revenue for that same permit was only $3.6 million. The division
received General Fund money to help cover the difference.
In 1992 the total number of permits issued for general season elk hunting was over
43,000. It was down to 37,000 in 1995. Resident and nonresident fees were increased. The net
effect on the division was that it took in $712,800 more in 1995. The division lost approximately
$2.3 million in restricted fund revenue during 1992 to 1995 with the deer and elk programs
which was partially offset by the General Fund appropriation it received for three years.
Mr. Shields added that it was originally intended that the first deer and elk management
plans be in effect for three years. After critical review and some adjustments, the plans are to be
implemented for a five-year period to determine trends. If the division is not able to achieve the
established objectives, other options will be carefully considered. He noted that recently the
Wildlife Board approved a process of adopting new wildlife management units for the purpose of
achieving more holistic management. There will be fewer and larger units in the state which will
require the division to review the plans to correlate them with the new boundaries.
4. Wildlife Heritage Program - Mr. Kimball stated that a study conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1991 showed that Utah residents spent about $170 million in Utah on
nonconsumptive wildlife recreational activities. He noted all wildlife license buyers, including
nonconsumptive wildlife users who purchase Wildlife Heritage certificates, are required to
purchase habitat authorizations. Habitat authorization money is used to enhance wildlife habitat,
which is the key to survival for all wildlife in the state.
Mr. John Neuhold, Wildlife Heritage Advisory Committee, explained that four years ago
the Legislature enacted the Wildlife Heritage Advisory Committee to serve as an advisory
committee to the Wildlife Board on matters concerning nonconsumptive wildlife use. In 1994, a
Wildlife Heritage program plan was approved by the Wildlife Board. The program developed by
the committee contains educational, habitat, and research components. Mr. Neuhold explained
that due to lack of adequate funding, the committee attempted to solicit funds from other
organizations. To some extent, their efforts were successful. He suggested that with some up-
front money and resources of the division, it is possible to get the program off the ground. A
full-time coordinator in the division is needed as well as a one-time appropriation of $100,000 to
create publicity for the program.
Mr. Neuhold appealed to the hunting public for support. He asserted that with decreasing
interest in hunting, in order to preserve wildlife populations for viewing and hunting, hunters
have to join with the nonconsumptive users to make goals possible for both.
Mr. Craig Axford, Utah Cougar Coalition, said that to facilitate the sale of Wildlife
Heritage certificates, they have been distributing certificate applications to local retailers. The
application and fee may be sent to the division to obtain a certificate by mail.
They have also been working to find alternative sources for funding from
nonconsumptive users. He distributed information on the Teaming With Wildlife (TWW)
effort to pursue federal legislation for funding management of wildlife that is not harvested. A
surcharge at the manufacturer on outdoor recreational equipment is proposed. The allocation to
each state of the amount collected nationally is based on a weighting of 1/3 on land area and 2/3
on population, but there is a ceiling to prevent an excess to highly populated states. As a result,
Utah residents would pay $1.2 million in surcharges, but would be allocated $4.6 million. He
added that if the Legislature demonstrates their support for the program, other entities will step in
and support it.
MOTION: Rep. Carlson moved to draft a resolution that supports the Wildlife Heritage program and adequate funding for the program. She also moved that the program be
reauthorized.
Due to lack of a quorum, the committee was not able to take any action on the motion.
Ms. Susan Kuziak, Wildlife Heritage Advisory Committee, stated it is important to find a
large base of support for the certificate. If a full-time individual can be devoted to getting the
program started, along with a one-time allocation for advertising, there will be a large number of
people who will participate. She encouraged the committee's support and requested they
carefully consider the matter.
MOTION: Rep. Hatch moved to adjourn the meeting at 4:50 p.m. The motion passed unanimously.