The Haines Borough Assembly Tuesday adopted a bear attraction nuisance ordinance that targets garbage but does not address fruit trees or livestock.
Haines police, the Alaska Chilkoot Bear Foundation and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game had “strongly” recommended a more restrictive version of the ordinance, according to a memo to the assembly from police chief Gary Lowe. However, no representatives of those organizations addressed the assembly Tuesday.
“The intent of the ‘bear attraction’ ordinance is to make sure that we can co-exist living with bears,” Lowe wrote. “We certainly do not want a person injured or their property damaged, but the ordinance also looks out for the welfare of the bears. A fed bear is a dead bear.”
According to the amended ordinance, a bear attraction nuisance is defined only as “more than one-half gallon of any putrescible waste, including packaging or other surfaces to which the material is adhered.”
A nuisance does not include “material in a certified landfill; manure or sewage; material in a garbage can temporarily placed outside for purposes of collection after 4 a.m. on a day scheduled for collection” and “material completely enclosed in a structure or container which requires hands or tools to open.”
Member Steve Vick asked about residents who smoke fish in their yards, and Lowe said the “hands or tools to open” wording would apply to those individuals. “I would think that would be excluded, by definition,” Lowe said.
The ordinance was introduced in September, and at its first public hearing Oct. 12, “any organic material of a type which has previously attracted a bear to the property” and soiled, disposable diapers also were included as bear attraction nuisances. Those were removed from the adopted ordinance.
At the second public hearing Tuesday, the assembly considered two new drafts of the ordinance. “Draft 2 focuses strictly on garbage as a bear attractant,” Lowe wrote.
The other draft listed a second bear attraction nuisance, “Any organic material of a type which has previously, within the past 30 days, attracted a bear to the property,” and referenced “bear-resistant fencing” for livestock.
Those who installed “electric fencing, chain link fencing or any other material sufficiently strong to restrict bear access to the property” would not be in violation if a bear got into that portion of their land.
“I think there was a strong reaction and an assumption on the public’s part that these fencing items and everything were mandatory, and I didn’t see that as part of it,” member Joanne Waterman said of the rejected draft. “It’s a gradual thing. It would (have) become mandatory if you’re calling about a nuisance bear, and the bear keeps coming back to your yard.”
The adopted ordinance makes no mention of “bear-resistant fencing.” Instead, it defines a garbage can as “a watertight, odor-free, corrosion-resistant container and equipped with a tight-fitting cover secured so as to remain in place if the can is knocked over” and putrescible waste as “organic materials” that are “capable of being decomposed by microorganisms” and are “prone to degrade rapidly, giving rise to obnoxious odors.”
When introduced in September, the ordinance would have penalized offenders first with a warning, then with a fine up to $100, followed by a fine up to $200 for repeat offenses.
Penalties under the adopted ordinance would fall under borough code stating that “any person failing to abide by any provisions or failing to comply with any of the mandatory requirements of this code is guilty of a violation, and unless otherwise specifically provided may be punished by a fine of not more than $300.”
Another change limits the scope of the law to the Haines townsite.
New assembly member Greg Goodman, former police chief, said the ordinance was “long overdue” as bears become more habituated. “In the 17 years that I was on the police department, I think I killed one bear,” he said.
Chief Lowe said representatives of Fish and Game and the bear foundation were out of town. “Both of them said focusing on garbage would eliminate most of the problem. It would have been nice to have it all wrapped up in one package,” to address other nuisance attractions, “but just focusing on garbage will make a big difference.”