Legislature(1997 - 1998)
04/21/1997 02:05 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL 198
"An Act relating to regional dive fishery development
associations and to dive fishery management
assessments; and providing for an effective date."
Representative G. Davis MOVED that work draft, CS HB 198
(FIN), #0-LS0415\C, Utermohle, 4/21/97, be the version
before the Committee. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAM WILLIAMS stated that the Southeast
Alaska dive fishermen have been attempting for the past
7
decade to establish orderly, consistent and stable fisheries
capable of providing dependable economic opportunity for
themselves, their families and the communities. The urgency
to create an economically viable fishery is highlighted by
the recent closure of the regions largest employer and other
related negative economic effects on the economy.
Substantial untapped dive fishery resources have been
identified through diver and underwater activities for over
a decade. The dive fishery resources appear to be abundant
and diverse throughout the region. The potential for future
jobs for harvesters, processors and support industries is
considerable. The temporary fishery opening is based on a
one time source of funding that will expire June 30, 1997.
In order to continue the fishery and to develop the other
dive fishery resources, a stable source of funding would be
necessary.
Representative Williams pointed out that HB 198 would not
mandate but allow the creation of regional dive fishery
development associations for the purpose of developing dive
fisheries and would create a working relationship between
the divers and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game
(ADF&G) to develop annual operating plans. The legislation
is permissive and once a regional association is formed,
divers can hold a ballot election of all interim-use permit
holders to answer questions.
If approved by election, divers would be assessed, the State
would collect and the Legislature may appropriate the
assessment back to ADF&G. The appropriation would be based
on the mutually developed annual operating budget and plan.
ADF&G would then fund the specific purposes outlined in the
legislation for the regional dive fishery development
association and ADF&G.
Representative Williams concluded that HB 198 would be a
positive step forward by the private sector to support
economic development and diversification without seeking a
general fund appropriation. He urged the Committee's
support of the bill.
GERON BRUCE, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND
GAME, testified on the proposed legislation. He noted that
the Department does appreciate the divers coming forward
requesting the creation of a new fishery, however, the
Department is concerned that expectations for increased
funding are being created by this business which might not
materialize. The development of the new fisheries will come
at the expense of existing fisheries.
Mr. Bruce continued, it does not appear that the program
8
will qualify for the designated program receipt funding as
it currently is written in the bill. Without such
designation, these expenditures will appear as additional
general fund expenditures. Without it being an increment,
funding for the new fisheries will have to come from the
existing fisheries.
He added, the bill would establish a close relationship
between a particular group of harvesters and the Department
of Fish and Game. There are a number of concerns which the
public may have on developing resources. The bill would
establish a special relationship, and the Department is
concerned with maintaining the balance of managing public
resources for a broad cross section of public interests.
Mr. Bruce suggested that the Committee consider a sunset
being added to the legislation which would force later
reconsideration of the issue. Co-Chair Therriault asked if
the Department was in support of the legislation. Mr. Bruce
advised that would depend on how some other bills moved
through the Legislature this year, and specifically, how
program receipt authority would be addressed.
Representative Williams noted that he would not support a
sunset clause being added to the legislation.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned if the legislation would
gradually move into a limited entry permit system.
Representative Williams stated that he did not know until
all the information regarding need had been received. This
is the first year of the moratorium.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned why language had been
included specifying interim-use permits. He recommended
that language be held for future legislatures to determine
if it should be transferred to that kind of system.
Representative Williams recommended that inclusion would
save a step in repeating the process.
Representative G. Davis believed that a rough estimate could
be provided regarding the resource cost of management. Mr.
Bruce commented that the Department estimates at this time,
the expenditures will be about $250 thousand dollars per
year.
Representative J. Davies voiced concern with the way the
money is budgeted. He suggested that people supporting the
legislation should follow it closely and support program
receipts being used. He MOVED a conceptual amendment that
revenues containing various percentages within the bill be
classified as program receipts. Co-Chair Therriault
OBJECTED.
9
Representative J. Davies noted that he would be amenable to
changing the concept by adding that language to the intent.
Co-Chair Therriault suggested that Representative J. Davies
offer a Letter of Intent. He pointed out that currently,
the Senate has been drawing the line on program receipts
that are contractual, recommending more one-time items
rather than on-going functions.
A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION to adopt the
conceptual amendment.
IN FAVOR: Moses, J. Davies, Grussendorf
OPPOSED: G. Davis, Foster, Kelly, Kohring,
Therriault
Representatives Martin, Mulder and Hanley were not present
for the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (3-5).
(Tape Change HFC 97-109, Side 2).
Representative Williams provided a brief synopsis of the sea
urchin history in Alaska. Today there are 500 sea urchin
divers in Southeast Alaska. Co-Chair Therriault noted that
over the next few years, there may be more people who want
to enter into that fishery and that those persons would be
precluded unless they buy one of the existing permits.
Representative Grussendorf informed Committee members that
in creating a moratorium, there becomes a block of time to
assess and analyze what stock is available and if that stock
could sustain a certain level of fisheries. Then the
determination can be made regarding how many people should
be involved in that fishery. The interim permit increases
the number of persons becoming involved, although, the
moratorium would be approaching in three or four years. A
point system would be established to determine how many
people be allowed in the fishery in order to keep it
healthy.
Co-Chair Therriault asked if the limited entry process would
be identical to that used in the salmon fishery.
Representative G. Davis spoke to his concerns with ownership
of the resource. Representative Williams stressed that HB
198 does not address limited entry. Co-Chair Therriault
reiterated concern with removing the Legislature from
deliberation cycle in deciding whether a limited entry
permit should be granted.
FRANK HOMAN, FORMER COMMISSIONER, LIMITED ENTRY COMMISSION,
10
advised that the moratorium passed last year requires the
Commissioner to provide a thorough study of the dive
fishery, with a provision that they look at a non-
transferable type arrangement. Those things will be studied
for the next three years.
Representative G. Davis MOVED to report CS HB 198 (FIN) out
of Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 198 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
"individual recommendations" and with a fiscal note by the
Department of Fish and Game dated 4/10/97, and zero fiscal
notes by the Department of Revenue dated 4/10/97 and the
Commercial Fish Entry Commission dated 4/10/97.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|