Senate committee hears bill to create Alaska invasive species council; sets amendment deadline

The Senate Resources Committee on Monday, May 12, 2025, heard testimony on Senate Bill 174, which would establish an Alaska Invasive Species Council within the Department of Fish and Game to coordinate statewide prevention and rapid response to invasive species. The committee set an amendment deadline of May 16 at noon and set the bill aside for further work.

Supporters told the committee that Alaska faces mounting biosecurity risks from aquatic invasive plants and mussels that threaten salmon, recreation and commercial fisheries, and that a small, advisory council would improve coordination among agencies and stakeholders.

Tobias Schworer, research assistant professor of natural resource economics at the International Arctic Research Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks, told the committee that aquatic invasive species are spreading through watercraft and other vectors and that Alaska’s current inspection and response capacity is fragmented. "If we do not have a statewide response, there's always a chance that it spreads from there into water bodies that are just clean," Schworer said. He presented estimates that Alaska managers have spent about $7,000,000 on herbicide and other management for elodea since 2013 and that accumulated economic damages to fisheries could total about $1,000,000,000 to date.

Schworer described boat traffic and seasonal visitors as vectors for invasive mussels and said inspections currently exist only at some points of entry, such as the Alcan (Alaska-Canada) border seasonal station run with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Customs and Border Protection. He told senators the limited inspections and uninspected arrivals create ongoing introduction risk.

Project manager Danielle Verna, environmental monitoring project manager at the Prince William Sound Regional Citizens’ Advisory Council, and Summer Ney of the Alaska Invasive Species Partnership (AKISP) testified in support of SB 174. Verna told the committee the proposed council would be advisory, would not have authority to direct agencies or funding, and would provide an annual update to the Legislature. "Prevention is the key to mitigating these impacts," Verna said, urging stronger emphasis on prevention and rapid response and praising existing agency and community work while arguing for top-down coordination.

Ney described AKISP as a statewide coalition that runs monthly virtual meetings and annual workshops attended by roughly 200 participants; she said a council would reduce redundancy, align efforts and help leverage resources across the state.

Committee members asked technical and policy questions. Sen. Myers pressed on regional differences in response time, and Schworer said response speed depends on geography and system hydraulics as well as resources—for example, flowing systems and remote lakes require more herbicide and logistics and therefore often take longer and cost more to treat. Schworer said average herbicide cost is roughly $1,000 per surface acre in straightforward cases and can rise above $2,000 per acre in flowing or remote systems; he also said that in a past estimate roughly 1,000 watercraft entered Alaska annually via diverse routes (he described that figure as older data).

Sponsor Sen. Dunbar told the committee the bill is intended to elevate the issue and create coordinated strategy; he said specific council recommendations on inspections or enforcement would follow if the council is created. Committee Chair Sen. Giselle set an amendment deadline of May 16 at noon and took no formal vote, leaving the bill "set aside" pending amendments and further committee work.

Discussion points: testimony focused on the statewide scope of risk (including elodea and the potential for quagga/zebra mussels), the costs of delayed or fragmented response, and the council’s proposed advisory role. The record shows support from regional nonprofits, tribal and citizen advisory councils, and the statewide partnership; committee members asked for details on costs, inspection points and likely council membership size. The bill as introduced provides for five voting council members with additional optional advisory members, according to testimony.

Next steps: SB 174 will remain pending in the Senate Resources Committee with an amendment deadline of May 16 at noon and return to the committee for consideration of any amendments.