Legislature(1997 - 1998)
11/18/1997 05:00 PM House FSH
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 149 - PREFER CONSUMPTIVE USE SALMON FISHERIES Number 0025 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN announced the committee would hear HB 149, "An Act relating to the management of salmon fisheries; and providing for an effective date." He stated that the objective of the hearings is to hear the public's testimony on fishing issues, in addition to HB 149. He stated that the purpose is not to make any changes in the bill, it is to take testimony. During session is when the committee will work on any changes or modifications on HB 149. He asked Representative Kohring to present his sponsor statement. Number 0123 REPRESENTATIVE VICTOR KOHRING, Sponsor, stated that he represents Wasilla and Peters Creek and thanked everybody for coming. He explained that HB 149 is to primarily direct the Board of Fisheries to give the first priority, after the escapement goals are met, to the consumptive user; which are the sport fishermen and personal and subsistence user. He stated that the bill does not give instructions on how this priority would be carried out. He stated that the goal of the legislation is to provide the personal consumptive user group with a 5 percent allocation of the statewide resource. He stated that there are problems with diminished runs of king, coho and red salmon in the Mat-Su Valley. Number 0505 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated that the intent is to get an equitable share of the resource and to get an adequate sustained yield of the salmon resource, which will benefit everybody. He stated that if the bill were to pass, it would be a benefit to everybody because it will protect the resource. Number 0547 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated that he feels he has substantial support in Southeast Alaska because of the evidence of the Fairness in Salmon Harvest (F.I.S.H) Initiative. He stated that the Initiative was found unconstitutional because the Supreme Court felt it was the roll of the legislature, not the public, to make allocative decisions. He stated that there were 28,000 people that signed the Initiative, indicating support. Number 0645 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated that perhaps HB 149 is not the solution, it is just an option. He stated that he knows there are a lot of commercial fishermen who are unhappy with the bill. He stated that the purpose of the legislation is to get a dialogue going and to point to the fact that there is a problem in Southcentral Alaska. He stated that he has been exploring some potential solutions to either enhance the bill or use in lieu of the bill. He stated that habitat protection, additional enforcement on the rivers, additional surveys on where the fish are coming from and who is intercepting the fish are issues that need to be considered. He stated that he is considering a setnet buy- back program. Number 0903 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated that the bill is only applicable to Cook Inlet. He stated that there is a serious problem on the Mat- Su. He said, "We are just trying to help the little guy, helping families put fish in their freezers and fish on their table." He asked for comments on how HB 149 could be made better. He stated that he just wants to help everybody by enhancing the resource, get more fish in the rivers but also provide more for the commercial industry as well. Number 0943 REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT OGAN asked Representative Kohring to clarify the constitutional ruling of the Supreme Court. He stated that the idea of the Initiative was not ruled unconstitutional it was ruled unconstitutional because the public cannot allocate a resource by initiative, it is the legislature's prerogative. Number 1025 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING replied that it is correct. Number 1037 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN reiterated that he wanted to clarify for the record that the Initiative was not deemed unconstitutional, it was allocation by initiative that was ruled unconstitutional. Number 1053 REPRESENTATIVE GENE KUBINA stated that he realizes the bill is not up for debate but he wanted to point out a few items that bothered him. He stated that the 5 percent allocation is deceiving. He stated that no one is saying that anyone should not be able to have 5 percent of any particular fish, in fact people would be more than happy to allocate 5 percent of each species, especially pink salmon to sport fishermen. Number 1145 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA stated that he wanted to address a previous comment that there are pike up in the valley. He stated that he has a study by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) dated September 1996 that he has submitted the chairman for discussion with ADF&G in the coming session meetings. The report documents where the pike in Northern Cook Inlet has totally wiped out coho salmon in four of the streams. He stated for the record that Grant Miller from the Board of Fisheries was present. He stated that he is appreciative to have Mr. Miller at the meeting. Number 1353 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN stated that Representative Kohring has been very receptive to try and find a solution to the problem. He stated that he received a letter from Representative Kohring regarding a couple of changes to the bill that the committee will take up in session, such as taking the 5 percent language out of the bill or further defining it. CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN stated that the committee would hear testimony from the people here in Sitka first and then they would hear testimony from sites on teleconference. Number 1552 LINDA BEHNKEN, Executive Director Alaska Longline Fishermen's Association, stated that the association is opposed to HB 149. She stated that Alaska has healthy resources because of the system that exists for managing the fisheries. She stated that the Board of Fisheries bases their decisions on science and not on politics. She stated that there is only one commercial fisherman on the board. She stated that it would be a big mistake for the legislature to start deciding on allocation issues because it will set a precedence for every allocation problem to be presented to the legislature. She stated that there is a large amount of proposals that are submitted to the Board of Fisheries and the legislature does not have the time to sort though all the various allocation proposals. Number 1906 MS. BEHNKEN stated that the 5 percent allocation of statewide salmon stocks does not leave the Board of Fisheries any room to deal with reliance in particular areas on particular species. She stated that Southeast Alaska is very dependant on the troll fisheries which depends on coho and king salmon. She stated most likely the 5 percent would be taken out of those species which would result in putting the troll fishery out of business. She stated that the hatchery in Sitka benefits all the users. She stated that the hatchery would have to wait until the 5 percent was met until they could conduct their cost recovery fishery. This would put the hatchery out of business, hurting the town and the fishermen. Number 2025 MS. BEHNKEN stated that the issue of the guided sport management plan for halibut that the North Pacific Counsel recently passed is not on the legislature's agenda but the counsel did receive a letter from a legislator indicating a misunderstanding of counsel action. She stated that because of this, she would like to explain how the plan would work. She stated that there are three components to the plan, the first is to expand the record keeping and reporting requirements designed by ADF&G to gain the performance report from the guided sport industry. It will contain information such as location, catch figures, number of clients, resident information and identity of the vessel and operator. She stated that there is adequate information on the catch that is taken but not on who is active in the fishery. This prevented the counsel from taking action on a moratorium because they couldn't differentiate between the participants. She continued that the second component of the plan is to establish a guideline harvest level. This was set at 125 percent of the 1995 halibut harvest relative to the total quota by the guided sport fishery. That year had the highest catch rate, proportionately by the guided sport fishery. She stated that there is a 25 percent buffer for additional growth. She stated that the projections that the counsel had presented, indicated that the guided sport fishery would not reach that guideline harvest level for three to five years, which will give time for the industry to develop the management measures that they want implemented in the fishery. She stated that a key part of the guideline harvest level is when the industry reaches or exceeds that level they will not be shut down. The intent is to provide the industry with a continuous season of historic length and if at the end of a season, the data indicates that the following season, the guideline harvest level may be reached or exceeded, measures will be implemented to slow down the harvest to kept the harvest within the 125 percent harvest level. She stated that all that may be needed to restrict the guide harvest to that level is a moratorium. She continued that the third item is to establish a frame work for developing local management plans. She stated that in Sitka and other towns, due to the growth of the guided sport industry and the implementation of the Individual Fish Quota (IFQ), the number of vessels in the local area has increased, resulting in an intensified impact on the local sport and subsistence fishermen and their ability to catch a halibut for their own consumption. She stated that Sitka residents organized a group through the local fish and game management committee that represented all the different users, in order to come up with consensus position of what regulations they would like to see to make fish available for local people. She stated that the counsel will take this up in February. She explained that the plan will provide additional information on the guided sport halibut industry. It assures the guided sport halibut industry a continuous season, of historic length and maintains and enhances subsistence and nonguided sport access to halibut in the Alaska coastal communities. In addition, it ends the open ended reallocation of halibut from the commercial to the guided sport sector. Number 2754 MS. BEHNKEN stated that the halibut quotas are set by the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC), which conducts their stock assessment on an annual basis and at the end of the season they assess the harvest by sport, subsistence and guided sport fishermen as well as the bycatch needs of the commercial fishermen. This is taken off the top and what was left was the allocation for the commercial fishery. She said, "That without some upper bound on the growth in the guided sport sector, the potential is there for continual reallocation of the quota from the commercial historic fleet to guided sport sector." Number 2842 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated there were resolutions against the IFQ program from every community when the system was proposed. He stated that it used to be that commercial fisherman had a limited area and amount of time to harvest halibut. Through the IFQ program commercial fishermen can get their quota at their leisure and choice of area. He stated that some do so in the middle of the tourist season and it is conflicting with the sport fishermen both resident and nonresident. He asked if this has been addressed by the counsel. Number 3007 MS. BEHNKEN stated that it has been addressed. She stated that the counsel has also heard complaints from subsistence and sport fishermen of the impact of guided sportfishermen on their traditional access to customary areas. She stated that is why the counsel has set up the third part of the plan so that all the different groups can offer their management plans and present them through the Board of Fisheries to the counsel. In order for a framework to be developed to accommodate, through regulation, those kind of impacts. Number 3055 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN asked if it was ADF&G and the Board of Fisheries that were going to work the frameworks together and then bring them to the counsel. Number 3100 MS. BEHNKEN stated that was correct. She stated that ADF&G's sport division and members of the guided sport industry, stated that they would like to be involved with the process of setting up the plans and were more comfortable with the Board of Fisheries process because all the fish and game advisory committees work through the Board of Fisheries. It was a way to better coordinate local involvement. Number 3142 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked if she has looked over the latest changes to Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), assuming that the state accepts the constitutional amendment and there is state management. He stated that the new advisory counsel system will have a lot of deference. He stated that four members will be appointed by tribal organizations, three members will be subsistence users and three members will be sport or commercial users. He stated that adds up to seven against three. He stated that he would imagine most tribal members to be subsistence users. He stated that in his opinion the commercial and sport fishermen are in the minority. He stated that the main board would not be able to overturn any of the advisory board's decisions unless they were arbitrary or capricious decisions. This gives a lot of authority to the local boards. He asked Ms. Behnken if she was aware of that. Number 3324 MS. BEHNKEN stated that she is not all the familiar with it but her sense is that unless Alaska makes some compromises and concessions to accommodate the problems that exist with subsistence, Alaskans will really be in trouble. She stated that none of the solutions are probably what any one group would like to see but clearly something needs to be done, if Alaska is going to retain control of its resources. Number 3417 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated that to him it is not really state management, it will have the state management name on it but ANILCA has to be adopted into the state's constitution in order to retain the "state control". He stated that they are being told by the Department of the Interior and by ANILCA that it will be submanaged into different areas by these advisory committees and sport and commercial fishing interests will not be represented. He encouraged everyone to take a look at this. Number 3506 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA stated that he would be willing to debate the subsistence issue. Number 3502 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN stated that is not what the committee is here for. Number 3516 SHAYNE HUMPHREYS, Engineer, stated that he was on a vessel that was sinking and he wanted to thank Alaska Marine Safety Education Association (AMSEA) because the training made everything go smoothly. Number 3623 GRANT MILLER, Member, Board of Fisheries, stated that he wanted to touch on the sustainable fisheries project. He stated that the Board of Fisheries has a committee, that he is working on, developing a policy for the state to maintain sustained yield with a goal towards genetic diversity. To do this, escapement goals, subsistence priority, harvest management, allocation, habitat, water quality and environmental events need to be considered. He stated that there is a lack of information and it costs money to get this information. He stated that the legislature needs to fund the programs in order to continue to have this resource, which benefits the state. He stated that in the Cook Inlet area, the sport fisherman harvest the vast majority of the king and coho salmon, it is in the 70 to 80 percent range. He questioned what is meant by 5 percent of the statewide stocks. He asked if it meant 5 percent of each species, he stated that he did not think that was the case. He continued that HB 149 is divisive as it pits one group against the other, which Alaska does not need. He continued that a sport priority would lead to the harvest of lower quality fish for commercial fishermen. He stated that it is not the answer, commercial fishermen are having enough trouble competing with farmed fish. He stated that the state needs to focus on producing the best quality fish, which is part of the management plan. He stated that the Board of Fisheries needs to take a look at value added processing and quality in the proposal form as a consideration. Number 4117 MR. MILLER stated that the number of commercial fishermen and resident sport fishermen have remained relatively stable. He stated that the only changing element is the expanding user group of the nonresident sport fishermen. He continued that the additional use of the resource is being taken from the commercial fishermen, the largest private sector employer in Alaska. He stated that it needs to be recognized and he asked if there continues to be an expanding user group how is there going to be management for sustained yield. He stated that the harvest rates are not going to be counted. There needs to be a way to control and collect harvest data so there is an account of what is being caught. He stated that even in the recent years of record runs of salmon, the Board of Fisheries has recognized that there are local areas of depressed stocks, such as in the Mat-Su area. He explained that there are many reasons for the low coho salmon runs and it is not as simple as the commercial fishermen are overharvesting. He stated that harvest practices, habitat, development, water quality and predation have an effect on the resource. He gave an example of a marine mammal predation problem in Bristol Bay of beluga whales eating migrating smolts. He asserted that there are a lot of things to consider and without the research to get the data that is needed, Alaska will lose its resource. Number 4521 MR. MILLER stated that it is imperative that the legislature recognize the importance of adequate funding for research, so there can be an informed management of the species. He referred to the Board of Fisheries' dilemma in trying to manage an area where the escapement level on the king salmon is unknown. ADF&G does not have enough funds to answer the questions and without those answers the damage, impacts, and potential of the resource is unknown. Number 4614 MR. MILLER stated that he will look into the ANILCA panel. He stated that if the state loses its management of the resource, Alaska will be in trouble. He stated that through the direction of the Board of Fisheries and the programs that they have put in place throughout the state there is starting to be a handle on the problems. He stated the public involvement in the Board of Fisheries is something that needs to be expanded on. He stated that additional funding needs to be spent to empower the advisory committees in this process. TAPE 97-34, SIDE B Number 0010 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN thanked Mr. Miller for attending the hearing and stated that his comments regarding the funding is something that the committee has been hearing on a statewide basis. Number 0044 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated that he would be happy to talk to Mr. Miller about the changes to ANILCA. He stated that fish and game management is going to be radically changed by this time next year. Number 0134 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING thanked Mr. Miller for his testimony. He stated he recognizes that the 5 percent portion of the bill is vaguely worded and it will be left to ADF&G to decide as far as what species would be allowed to go over certain numbers. He stated that he does not want to micro-manage the fisheries. He stated that he recognizes the concern of asking for 5 percent of the statewide stocks and then only focus on one or two species. He stated that he would be happy to modify the bill to be more specific. Number 0308 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN recognized that Representative Grussendorf was present. Number 0318 JAMES SWIFT, Commercial Fisherman, stated that he is against HB 149. He stated that compared to the fisheries in the Lower 48, Alaskans are very fortunate. He stated that there are good stocks and good management due to ADF&G, the Board of Fisheries, and the various counsels and advisory groups. He questioned if we should change a system that is working well. He stated that there are certainly problems but overall Alaska is really fortunate, as other states do not have any fish. The decisions need to be based on science, as it is not a political process. He referred to the IPHC which was formed by the fishermen through a treaty with Canada and has a resulted in a healthy fishery. He stated that he is pleased with the system and the process of the Board of Fisheries. He stated that the charter boat industry is the wild card in the system and it is expanding. Number 0926 RALPH GUTHRIE stated that he is opposed to SB 40 because it is a discreet stock management style. He said to Representative Ogan, "I think you came here for a public meeting and not to inject discrimination into the situation." He stated that there has been many board members from all points of Alaska on the Board of Fisheries and it functions for the people of Alaska. He said "If we are going to change the management style a little bit, many of our people are fishermen. They have a feeling for conservation too." He stated that conservation is a major deal for the long term usage of the fisheries. MR. GUTHRIE stated that he is against HB 149. The problem is in the Mat-Su area and should be taken care of in that area. He stated that the Board of Fisheries has always tried there best to deal with the conservation needs of the state. He stated that having the legislature allocate fish is inconsistent with the Board of Fisheries' process. Number 1207 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated that the reason for the legislation is because of the frustration the many people feel in Southcentral Alaska, that the board is not addressing this issue adequately. He stated that he understood the philosophy that the legislature should stay out of the process but he filed the bill because he does not feel his constituents' needs were being addressed. Number 1309 MR. GUTHRIE stated that part of the problem may be that there are too many fishermen. He stated that this legislation is not going to deal with the expanding number of fishermen taking the resource. He stated that one does not increase fisheries in order to get fish back. He stated that after the federal government started to destroy the Southeast Alaskan salmon fisheries, the state of Alaska cut back all users to get the fish back into the streams. He stated that this legislation that affects the entire state is not going to give Representative Kohring one more fish in the river. Number 1511 BRIAN BIGLER, Member, Northern Southeastern Regional Aquaculture Association; and Employee, Wards Cove Packing Company, stated that he shares the concerns of HB 149. He stated that he is a member of the processing industry and has a personal interest in this issue. He agreed with the statement, "The state of Alaska can brag that we have the healthiest wild sustainable salmon run resource left in the world." He stated that since Alaska's statehood the Board of Fisheries process has operated very well, however he would not dispute that there are some difficulties with certain areas in the state. He stated that HB 149 addresses the issue in the wrong way, it is undermining a very successful program. He stated that the system is good in Alaska and we should work within those bounds to find a solution. Number 1734 MR. BIGLER explained the pay and retirement program for a biologist at ADF&G. He stated that as a result of this program there are going to well qualified people who are no longer going to be in the system. He stated that the reduction of funds to ADF&G will result in retirement incentives which will cause a loss of qualified people. The new qualifications for hiring new biologists are different then the qualifications twenty years ago. He stated that the resource could suffer severe damage due to the reduction in funds to ADF&G. Number 2044 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN agreed with Mr. Bigler and stated that it is important that people are aware of what is going to happen with the changes to ANILCA. He stated that the allocation system and ADF&G as we know it, are going to be things of the past. Number 2150 DEBRA LYONS, Crew Member, Northern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association Board (NSRAA), stated that she is also a member of Northern Panel of the Pacific Salmon Commission and is a representative of the power and hand troll fishermen in the U.S.- Canada stake holder negotiations. She stated that she used to be on the Board of Fisheries. She stated that British Columbia, Premier Glen Clark has been saying that "There is no point in conserving or producing the salmon if they are going to be caught by foreigners." She continued that we have allocation problems in the state but one never hears a Mat-Su fisherman saying, "I'm not going to conserve or protect these fish because those bums out in Kodiak are catching them." She stated that Alaskans do not think that way, they always put the resource first. She read the following into the record: "In Southeast Alaska we have learned that by cooperating with one another and supporting projects which enhance all fishing opportunities in the region, we strengthen the total fishing economy we all depend on. On the NSRAA Board, through the projects of the association, we produce Chinook, coho, sockeye and chum salmon, that are shared by all common property fishermen. Two years ago more than 40 percent of all total sport catch in Sitka Sound were hatchery fish and a big percentage was from the NSRAA hatchery. "NSRAA is also involved in a pilot project with the Sitka Tribe to utilize salmon carcasses and wood chips to produce high quality compost. It's our Southeast fish and chips project. We've begun work with the Northwest food banks to make surplus fish available to Sitka residents. We provide the fish to feed the birds at the raptor center. The meeting hall is a community resource, we make it available free of charge. It is a popular place for quilters, potluck dinners and informational forums. We have been very responsible in the way we conduct our activities at NSRAA in order to preserve the health of wild stocks as our number one priority in the region. "We are a board of tight-fisted, penny pinching fishermen. Our projects are designed to ensure that 70 percent of what is produced is taken in the common property fisheries and that there will be stocks available to take for cost recovery. The cost recovery monies, as you know, in addition to the 3 percent Aquaculture Tax on the Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (CFEC) permit holders, cover the costs of the projects and allow us to repay our debt to the state. We are very happy, as we have almost eliminated that debt. "We are not hear to whine or ask for any special treatment from you or for any handouts. We are not here for a big battle but we are very concerned that HB 149 is quite threatening to the economic stability of the region and it ignores the historical context of the fisheries. "What HB 149 could do is establish a preference for the limitless thousands of cruise ship passengers that come to our area. It would potentially involve a major reallocation especially if, as I read your bill, salmon returning to spawn in the waters of Alaska could extend to our hatchery returning fish. We would argue for an exemption from that but if that is how this is interpreted, that is where we see our organization's projects being involved, in what HB 149 would do. There is an expectation that hatchery produced Chinook salmon would be taken in the commercial fisheries and where that comes from is the Pacific Salmon Treaty." Number 2889 MS. LYONS referred to a quote from Senator Stevens. She stated that in 1985, there was a treaty that allowed Alaska to not have to count the hatchery fish produced in Alaska against the treaty quota. Therefore all hatchery fish were allowed to be kept as mitigation for the loses taken when the treaty was signed because we permanently gave away part of Alaska's share of fish. She stated that projections were that 200,000 Chinook salmon would be harvested by 1990 in Southeast Alaska. She stated that last year only 56,000 Chinook salmon were harvested in Southeast Alaska by all the gear types. She stated that fishermen are waiting for the hatchery fish to offset the reduction that they took in 1985. Number 2934 MS. LYONS referred to her handout on the Pacific Salmon Treaty regarding the comparison of the catch rates before the treaty was signed and at present with the abundance based management program. She stated that the commercial catch is split with the 80 to 20 percent allocation and as a result the sport fisheries are doing very well. They have a good number of fish that they are fishing on especially as compared to where they were before the treaty. She stated that troll harvest is still down 24 percent compared to where they were before the treaty was signed, even though the abundance is 50 percent higher. The sport fishery is 158 percent higher then where they were before the treaty was signed. She stated that right now the sport fishery can take all the hatchery fish that they can catch. Number 3142 MS. LYONS stated that all HJR 38 would do is allow the public to vote whether limited entry could be applied to these groups and then at a later time it could be implemented to all or part of the state. She stated she sees a lot of merit in putting limited entry on the ballot and then it could be decided on what part of the state it would apply to. Southeast Alaska, because of the unlimited number of cruise ships coming in, needs a limited entry sport fishing system. Number 3231 MS. LYONS stated that she is very concerned that the state retain its management of the resources on the subsistence issue. She agreed with Representative Ogan's concern about the way the subsistence board would make regulations, as their recommendations would be very hard to overturn. She stated that she thought the reason some people in the room took offense to that was because of the idea that an all Native Board could not represent broader interests. She stated that there are Native people in the communities who are commercial fishermen, or who run sport fishing lodges, although they would be on the subsistence board it is not impossible that they could represent other aspects of the community. She stated that we need to make the compromises work because federal management would be a disaster. Number 3435 MS. LYONS referred to the funding issue. She said, "There are new aquaculture farms down in the area where we have a cabin. We have a lot of illegal activity, where the people are digging clams not on their permitted areas and there is no way to enforce it." She stated that there is no budget for enforcement. She stated that they have given up on having a legal functioning aquaculture program there, because of lack of funds. Number 3524 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated that he meant no disrespect to the commercial fishermen but the tourism industry is a significant part of the Mat-Su's economy. He said, "I make no bones about the fact that I am excited about the prospects of my legislation getting through because of the economic gain that we will see in the valley. Because it is more than just simply putting out fish on the tables or about Alaskans and families putting fish in the freezers it is also the economic considerations. So it just seems to me that there is a lot of potential here in Sitka and the Southeast for something of this nature and concept of this bill to direct more sport fishing opportunities, providing more sport fishing opportunities to the public, which could in turn greatly enhance the tourist aspect of the economy. I mean no disrespect to the commercial folks here but it just seems like that should be given consideration as far as the significant economic benefit." Number 3637 MS. LYONS stated that there is a large sport fishing community in Sitka, but she stated that she felt Representative Kohring does not realize that he could end up eliminating other group that is also very important to the economy. She stated that the number of tourists are so great compared to the small number of treaty king salmon. She stated that a preferential allocation would result in eliminating another important group's ability to use the resource. She stated that Representative Kohring does not have a real grasp of the proportion of the effect the bill will have. Number 3725 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN stated that he concurred with Ms. Lyon's assessment that federal management of the resource would be a disaster and stated that he does not want that. Representative Ogan stated that he would like to apologize if he offended anybody or inferred that it was a negative racial remark because that was not what he intended. He stated that he just wanted to outline the proposed make up of the board. He stated that three out of the ten will represent the sport and commercial fishing interest and the other seven will be from other interests. He stated that the sport and commercial fishermen need to look at that because he did not think that is was a good representation. He stated that we will have federal management whether there is a state name on it or not. In order to avoid the federal takeover we have to conform our constitution and our statutes to match the federal management system which is ANILCA. He stated that it can be called federal management by the state or federal management by the feds if the constitution is not amended, but either way it will be the federal system. He stated that people need to look at the system and its impact to decide what is to be done. Number 3858 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA stated that he does not want to sit here and listen to Representative Ogan give his opinions on subsistence and not be able to say anything himself. He stated that the issue of subsistence has been before the state for years. He said, "We have had a refusal by the republican legislature and this is a fact, to address this issue to let the people decide. I have sat in two special sessions on this where we did not have the votes because not one republican would vote to let the people of Alaska decide and now you are getting more shoved down your throat." He stated that he has been for rural subsistence preference ever since he was in the legislature because he does not want to be divided by race. He stated that the federal government has the ability to divide as there are Native preferences all over the country relating to resources. He stated that the legislature has to stand up and take some action and deal with the issue and not just sit back and not do anything. He stated that the minority can not do it without the majority. He stated that he did not want to debate subsistence all day (spectators applauded). Number 4041 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN stated that we are not here to debate the subsistence issue. He said, "The question of whether commercial fishermen should pay attention to what is happening with the subsistence issue is something that everybody needs to pay attention to." He stated that there will be no further debate of the subsistence issue. Number 4105 ERIC JORDEN stated that he is a life long Alaskan, his father was a commercial fisherman and charter operator. He stated that he has sport and subsistence fished and served fifteen years on the local fish and game advisory committee, four of them as chairman. He stated that Sitka is a place where the residents have a history of working together to conserve and share the abundance of the marine resources. He stated that Sitka was; the first area to conserve abalone for resident harvests, the author of the concept of the minimum threshold of herring available before there could be a commercial harvest and is at the present concentrating on efforts to conserve and share the halibut resource. He stated that the method that has been successful is to work within the Board of Fisheries, with the advisory committee system, along with ADF&G, to develop consensus positions and then work within the system to have these positions passed into regulation. He stated that before the groups can share the resource the idea that a particular group has a higher right to the fish needs to be given up. He stated that he would advise the legislature to fully fund ADF&G so that they can do the research and management needed to conserve these discreet stocks of concern. He stated that he would recommend funding and training for the advisory committee system so the volunteers are able to bring the public together to conserve and share these resources. Number 4510 MR. JORDEN stated that he has recently served on a sustainable fisheries panel to the Board of Fisheries and this project could help meet the goals of the discreet stock management bill. He stated that one of the specifics of that project is a gap analysis of the difference between what is being done and what needs to be done to sustain the salmon stocks. He stated that in the state's analysis, a biologist said, "The best gap analysis is the difference between ADF&G field office request for project funding and what has been allocated in the last several years." He stated that the last few legislatures have been gutting the best fisheries management system in the world. He stated that all groups of fishermen have always been willing to make harvest scarifies for conservation of the resource and for Alaskan residents who need the fish to eat. TAPE 97-35, SIDE A Number 0001 MR. JORDEN stated that currently there is an increasing charter presence in the state and commercial fishermen are unwilling to give up fish so that other people can make money off of them. He stated that it is very tempting for the legislature to try and enact legislature solutions to problems that the Board of Fisheries has successfully dealt with for generations. He stated that in the past the legislature has had the wisdom to stay out of the allocation business. He asked that this legislature stay out of the fishery management business. He asked that the advisory committee system and ADF&G be funded to do the job for them. Number 0212 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN reiterated that it is still the legislature that delegates all the authority to the boards and it is in the legislature's prerogative to do it. Whether it is wise or not is debatable. He stated that he wanted to make sure everybody is aware that the legislature does have the authority to manage it. Number 0301 MR. JORDEN stated that he does not question that at all. Number 0332 ROBERT ELLIS, Fisheries Biologist, stated that he has worked all over the state. He stated that he is opposed to HB 149. He stated that the legislature should be supporting science based management as is now being conducted by the Board of Fisheries and is very well augmented by the local fish and game advisory committees. He stated that the present system of management should be kept and the legislature can help the system work by supplying more funding to ADF&G for research. Number 0541 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN stated that he is hearing that more and more. Number 0545 PETE ESQUIRO, General Manger, Northern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association, read the following into the record: "NSRAA is one of five salmon enhancement associations operating in the state of Alaska. We work with all species of salmon releasing a minimum of 120 million juvenile salmon into the ocean each year. These releases result in adult returns that contribute very significantly to all the common property fisheries in Southeast Alaska. "We are concerned that HB 149 does not make a distinction between naturally produced salmon and enhanced stocks. We do not believe that HB 149 should apply to salmon produced by the various enhancement projects operating throughout the state. In most cases these fish are caught near terminal and designated special harvest areas, relatively inaccessible to large numbers of sport, subsistence and personal use fishermen. The high number species that they produce are of virtually little or no interest to many of those users. Salmon returning to NSRAA projects are already subject to high interception rates and provide added relief to all common property fisheries. 85 percent of NRSAA's total adult returns are taken by the various common property fisheries, 15 percent are used for brood stock and for cost recovery. Number 0824 "The wording in HB 149 pertaining to reserving for sport, subsistence and personal use fisheries, 5 percent of the projected statewide harvest, is also of great concern. It does not look at this on a species by species basis. It is probable that under this provision, if left alone, all Chinook, all silver salmon and a significant portion of all the reds in the state, will no longer be available for commercial purposes. If this were adopted, it would mean that the historic troll fishery of Southeast Alaska could very easily vanish and major red fisheries, all over the state, could be drastically curtailed or disappear. There is a good chance that they would disappear because this bill seems to move in a direction of in-river run management, and the quality of those fish that would available at that point would be dramatically decreased. One need only to look at areas where in-river commercial fishing was tried to see that they have never been successful enough to sustain themselves over a long period of time. Number 0935 "Finally, I do not believe that the legislature really wants to be in the business of allocating salmon. Placing salmon management issues in the political arena has it problems, I believe. Allocation decisions have been and should continue to be the role and function of the Alaska Board of Fisheries. Furthermore, enacting a law which has statewide implications, as this would have, to solve an allocation dispute in one particular area of the state simply makes no sense." Number 1047 MIKE SAUNDERS, Commercial Fisherman; and President, Lynn Canal Gilnetters Association, stated that he is on the board at NSRAA. He stated that his life style will be impacted by this bill and is worried about having to give up his lifestyle. He stated that a lot of terms are defined in the bill except for the term sport fishermen and it should be. He stated subsistence has a priority over commercial fishing and if Alaska resident sport fishermen are not getting enough fish, he would give up his fish for them. But in the bill a sport fisherman could be a commercial charter operator with 700 clients a year. He stated that the legislature has a lot more valuable things that they could do with their time then to get into this issue. He stated that he did not agree with everything the Board of Fisheries does but everybody is represented on the Board Fisheries and these issues should be decided by them. Number 1454 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated that it is not clear in his mind why Mr. Saunders feels this legislation would be a threat to him and to the commercial industry. He said, "Our goal here is to put just a little bit bigger piece of that pie into the -- make it available to the personal consumptive user." He stated that if 5 percent of the goal was reached there would still be 95 percent of the resource out there. He asked Mr. Saunders if in light of this would he deem this to be a threat to the commercial industry and his livelihood. Number 1544 MR. SAUNDERS stated that there is a king salmon fishery in Haines in the Chilkat Inlet that is managed very well. He stated that there is derby in it as well, but with the sport fishing priority if sport fishermen feel they need more fish then the entire fishery could be shut down for a couple of weeks. This would cost him up to $5,000 a week, possibly not be able to make his payments and then he could lose his boat. Number 1714 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA referred to Section 16.05.740, line 17, "A salmon stock may not be allocated to a commercial fishery at any point along its migration route unless the board and the department have determined that the portion of the sock reserved under this subsection to satisfy the harvest needs of a common consumptive use fishery will be available." He stated that HB 149 would stop the fishery all the way through Cook Inlet because there is one river up in the Mat-Su Valley that is not getting enough fish or even stop all fishing in Southeast Alaska. He stated that is one of the biggest problems he has with the bill; it has ability to destroy many rivers by stopping the fishing of that area if it is felt that one river is not getting enough fish. Number 1908 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated that he would be willing to address the issue and perhaps make modifications if it is deemed appropriate by the committee. He stated that the legislation is just his ideas to get the dialogue going and to let people know that there is a problem in the valley. He stated that he is open to resolve the problem, if it means modifying the bill or throwing it out .... (TAPE CHANGE) TAPE 97-35, SIDE B Number 0005 ROBERT SCHELL, Board Chairman, Seafood Producers Cooperative; and Commercial Fisherman, stated that he is against HB 149. He participates in the salmon troll fishery in Southeast Alaska. The Seafood Producers Cooperative is composed of 462 fishermen members and 353 members hold Alaska limited entry power troll permits. He stated that the members own a cold storage plant in Sitka and can deliver products from Ketchikan to Dutch harbor. House Bill 149 could be called the demise of commercial fishing in Alaska bill. He stated that almost all salmon fisheries in Alaska are intercept fisheries to some extent. House Bill 149 would close over 1,000 small businesses participating in the troll fishery in Southeast Alaska. Each troll permit represents a small business generating income for the fishermen, crew members, shore side processors, and support businesses. He stated that along with the income generated for the private sector, revenue is generated for local communities through the tax base and for the communities in the state of Alaska through the raw fish taxes. He stated that Southeast Alaska has been hit hard by the loss of the logging industry which has resulted in a cut of government spending. He stated that Alaska can not afford the passage of HB 149 and the private sector could not survive the passage of this bill. Number 0420 MR. SCHELL stated that the Seafood Producers Cooperative members hold over a third of the power troll permits in Alaska. He stated that in the past two years they have invested an additional $2 million in the Sitka plant. The commercial fishermen have individual investments in the processing and selling of their catches. He stated that the latest investments were made with the future of the fisheries in mind. He stated that the Board of Fisheries has worked very well in Alaska and is the proper forum for these issues. He stated that the fish stocks have rebounded from the federal management before statehood. Number 0540 MR. SCHELL stated that HB 176 would generate the profit margins needed to develop and market new products and help compete in the domestic retail markets. He asked for support of HB 176. Number 0746 MR. SCHELL stated that HB 73, which would extend the statewide marketing tax, is imperative so that the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute (ASMI) can be continued. He explained how this program can develop a stronger domestic market that will make up for the farmed fish competition on the international market. Number 0909 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING stated that he appreciates ASMI and how the commercial fishing industry has brought the program to the point where it is self sufficient. He stated that he wished the tourism industry and others would take a cue from this and recognize that programs like this can run without subsidizes from the government. He said, "The comment has been made numerous times here tonight that the proper forum to address issues and allocation in the Board of Fisheries and I counter that by saying I don't think the department has managed adequately enough to address our concern out in the valley." He stated that in 1994 Governor Knowles stated that he would make Northern Cook Inlet the sport fish capital of the world. Representative Kohring stated that he does not see it moving in that direction. Number 1051 MR. SCHELL stated that he understands what Representative Kohring is saying in some respects but he has also heard from many people from the area and read various publications that there is ample fish for people from the Lower 48 to come up and fill freezers, can fish and then sell it. He stated that he did not know if the problem was a perception problem of if they just want more. He stated that the use of nets, as with the dipnet fishery, should not be considered sport fishing. He stated that it is a finite resource and he could not understand why the commercial sport guiding industry should displace an industry that is already there. Number 1221 MR. SCHELL stated that the state lent him money and encouraged him to get into the commercial fishing industry and buy a new boat. He stated that to have a bill that would dump that entire industry does not make any sense. Number 1257 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA stated that Representative Kohring is on the House Standing Finance Committe and Governor Knowles has made certain political promises but he also has to submit a budget that the legislature has to allow for funding. Representative Kubina stated that it needs to be recognized that ADF&G's budget has not been funded at the level that Governor Knowles has requested. He stated that the constant message from all of these meetings is the need for more funding. He stated that if we want Governor Knowles to live up to his word, we need to fund those areas, otherwise we cannot criticize him when it is the legislature that is not allocating the funds to those areas. Number 1442 ARNIE FUGLVOG, Representative, Petersburg Vessel Owners Association, testified via teleconference from Petersburg, that the association is against HB 149. He stated that on several occasions it has been said that this bill would only reallocate 5 percent of the statewide salmon predictions. This seems fair enough until the predictions are actually looked at. He stated that last year it was 204 million salmon, which would allocate up to 10 million fish for personal and sport harvesters. He stated that it is unlikely that there would be much interest in sport fishing for 10 million pink salmon but certainly king and coho salmon would be popular. He stated that last year's harvest of king and coho salmon was around 4.5 million fish. He stated that the sports fishermen could demand 100 percent of the entire statewide commercial harvest of king and coho and still not be anywhere near the 5 percent cap of 10 million fish. He stated that in this case 5 percent really means 100 percent of the resource. In order to ensure that anglers would be able to harvest the 5 percent, the Board of Fisheries would be obligated to provide for harvest needs of sport fishermen before a commercial fishery could occur. Number 1658 MR. FUGLVOG stated that since Southeast Alaska recorded 530,000 angler days in 1995, HB 149 would be applicable to our fisheries. He stated that if Southeast Alaska's commercial fisheries were delayed, as required in the bill, the fleet would be fishing in terminal areas where the only salmon available for harvest would be dark and unmarketable. The result would be Alaskan salmon would no longer be able to compete on the world market and our economies would suffer. Number 1731 MR. FUGLVOG stated that last year when Petersburg was faced with a similar threat under the F.I.S.H. Initiative, the city of Petersburg and the Chamber of Commerce recognized the potential economic cost associated with this type of measure and both the city and chamber passed resolutions opposing the Initiative. House Bill 149 isn't fair, it doesn't provide for a better way to manage our fisheries resource and it hurts the economy. He stated that HB 149 does not make sense for Alaska. Number 1815 MR. FUGLVOG stated that the association strongly supports the halibut charter management plan that was recently approved by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council. The public accesses the halibut resource through three methods, fishing from their own boats, fishing from charter boats and purchasing fish at local markets. He stated that by balancing the needs of subsistence, sport, charter and halibut fishermen, the management plan ensures that consumers throughout the nation, as well as residents and visitors to Alaska, continue to access and enjoy the halibut resource. Number 1912 GERRY MERRIGAN, Commercial Troller; and Alaskan Representative, Pacific Salmon Commission, testified via teleconference from Petersburg, that his quest is for accuracy and facts as there is a big difference between public perception and fact. TAPE 97-36, SIDE A Number 0001 MR. MERRIGAN stated that this issue should be taken up by the Board of Fisheries. He stated the angler hour criteria will include Southeast Alaska. He said, "There is no personal use for king salmon and there is limited if any subsistence use, this leaves sport use only." He stated that sport use is both resident and nonresident, the only growth being in the nonresident harvest. He stated that in 1985, the king catch was 70 percent for resident sport fishermen and 30 percent for nonresident sport fishermen. In 1995, the king catch was 70 percent for nonresident sport fishermen and 30 percent for resident fishermen. He stated that two-thirds of this nonresident catch occurs on charter vessels, only five percent of the residents Southeast king salmon harvest occurs on charter vessels. He stated that charter vessels are unregulated in regards to limited entry. Number 0117 MR. MERRIGAN stated the in Southeast Alaska 90 percent of the commercial harvest is pink and chum salmon. The real issue is the king, coho, and sockeye salmon, which are the mainstays of the Southeast Alaskan troll and gilnet fisheries. He stated that under HB 149 all king, coho, and sockeye salmon could be reserved for sport fishing only, which is predominately nonresident. He stated commercial fishing would be eliminated basically for nonresident use which goes against the stated intention to put fish on the plates of Alaskans. He stated that the sport king salmon harvest in Southeast Alaska has been up 15 to 20 percent and up to 4 percent for coho harvest. This bill would means elimination of certain fisheries and it would impact the seine fisheries as well. He stated that the troll fleet is made up of 85 percent residents and the nonresidents would be the ones who would benefit from the elimination of this fleet. He said, "HB 149 is a wolf in sheep's clothing." Number 0226 MR. MERRIGAN referred to Section 16.05.740, lines 17 through 21, "A salmon stock may not be allocated to a commercial fishery at any point along its migration route unless the board and the department have determined that the portion of the stock reserved under this subsection to satisfy the harvest needs of a common consumptive use fishery." He stated that in Southeast Alaska there is basically small salmon systems, which is why there are predominately mixed stock fisheries, there are not large terminal fisheries because there are not large terminal rivers. He stated that this section is mandating an unrealistic management objective. He stated that the intent of the bill may be well meaning, the reality of HB 149 is devastating to Alaskan residents. Number 0259 BILL FOSTER, former Charter Guide; and Representative, Recreational Fisheries Northern Panel Pacific Salmon Commission, stated that he started chartering in 1984, in Southeast Alaska and 1997 was the first year he did not charter. He stated that he is still interested in the charter industry. He stated that when he first heard of the F.I.S.H Initiative he thought it would put a lot of pressure on the sport fishermen to catch 5 percent of the pink salmon in Southeast Alaska. He stated that sport anglers would have to use seine boats to catch 5 percent of the pink salmon in Alaska. He stated that it might help the problems in Southcentral Alaska but it would be very confusing in Southeast Alaska. He stated that he was against the F.I.S.H. Initiative and went so far as to give a wild life charter at the anti-F.I.S.H. Initiative booth at the Palmer Fair. He stated that HB 149 does pose a lot of problems and he hoped that it could be worked out. He stated that he had a lot of faith in the Board of Fisheries. Number 0612 MR. FOSTER stated the time has come to limit the charter fleets and he stated that he would support HJR 38. Number 0631 DAN CASTLE, President, Southeast Alaska Seiner's Association, stated that it is a falsehood that the seiners are insulated from the 5 percent, they are not because of the magnitude of the systems, 2,500 salmon bearing systems, in the Southeast Alaska. Seiners do not fish in terminal areas. He stated that the whole concept of fishing for wild stocks in terminal areas was deemed a failure a long time ago because there is no way to manage the 2,500 systems or monitor who is fishing where. He stated that the seiners have moved away from fishing the mouths of the creeks and are fishing on mixed stocks. He stated that every gear group in Southeast Alaska fishes on mixed stocks. He stated that because people are saying that they can't catch enough fish to feed their families, instead of asking for a small closure, the proposed solution of HB 149 is to start at the ocean and work in, closing fisheries along the way. Number 0917 REPRESENTATIVE KUBINA stated that its seems like everyone who comes to Alaska wants to be fishermen and hunters. He stated that he was a ring man on a seine boat and he had his own troller. He stated that he hoped Representative Kohring has gotten the feel from these numerous testifiers that HB 149 is not the answer to the problem in the Mat-Su Valley. He referred to Representative Kohring's comment that all he wants is 5 percent of the fish. Representative Kubina stated that nobody could argue with that but that really isn't the case, it is a lot more complicated than that. He referred to Representative Kohring's statement that he only wants to find a way to get more fish on his constituents' table. Representative Kubina stated that he thought Alaskan residents would support him on that. He stated that the people on the Kenai are doing a lot environmentally so that people can fish without hurting their surroundings. He stated that he was out on the Deshka several years ago and it was really crowded and full of traffic with the jet boats and planes. He stated that he would encourage a local solution to what is a local problem. He compared a solution to the adopt a highway effort, in that if the rivers could be worked on at one stretch at time the problem could be resolved. He stated that he does not want to argue with Representative Kohring about the issue but he does not want to see people getting hurt in the process. He stated that he would be willing to go out there and work with Representative Kohring towards a solution. Number 1244 REPRESENTATIVE MARK HODGINS, testified via teleconference from Kenai, that he did agree with Representative Kubina that there is a lot regarding habitat and enforcement that has been on the Kenai, that could be a solution for the Mat-Su area. He thanked that residents of Sitka for coming forward with their comments. Number 1323 REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING thanked everybody for their testimony and stated that he looks forward to working together. Number 1405 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN thanked everybody in Sitka. He stated he is from the Mat-Su and there is a real problem in the Deshka River as it was shut down for a couple of years and it is now starting to come back through major scarifying. Number 1508 CHAIRMAN AUSTERMAN thanked everybody for their testimony and stated that HB 149 would be held over until the upcoming session.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|