Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
04/04/2017 10:00 AM House FISHERIES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB128 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 128 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 128-SHELLFISH ENHANCE. PROJECTS; HATCHERIES
10:02:23 AM
CHAIR STUTES announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 128, "An Act relating to management of enhanced
stocks of shellfish; authorizing certain nonprofit organizations
to engage in shellfish enhancement projects; relating to
application fees for salmon hatchery permits; and providing for
an effective date."
10:02:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DAN ORTIZ, Alaska State Legislature, reintroduced
HB 128 to the committee, paraphrasing from a prepared statement,
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Thank you for hearing HB 128 dealing with Shellfish
Enhancement Projects.
HB128 advances mariculture opportunities in Alaska -
through shellfish enhancement projects.
Very briefly, it allows non-profits to apply for, and
pursue enhancement or restoration projects involving
shellfish. This may include Red and blue king crab,
sea cucumber, geoduck (gooey duck) & razor clams, plus
other shell fish species -not yet on the radar.
HB 128 bill holds the Department to a very high
standard in their process of issuing permits -
specifically requiring the Commissioner to make a
finding of "substantial public benefit" and a
determination that the project "would not jeopardize
natural stocks.
It's important to note that when shellfish are
released back into the wild by a permit holder, the
shellfish become a common property resource.
HB 128 addresses both rehabilitation and enhancement
of shellfish stocks.
The bill has 2 zero fiscal notes
10:04:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN asked if there are mechanisms in the bill
to allow the commissioner the authority to ensure compliance.
10:05:08 AM
MARY HAKALA, Staff, Representative Dan Ortiz, Alaska State
Legislature, said the commissioner has the discretion to shut
down the operation entirely by invoking the safeguards found in
Sec. 16.12.040, page 4, line 8, which reads:
(a) If a permit holder fails to comply with the
conditions and terms of the permit issued under AS
16.12.010 within a reasonable period after
notification by the department of noncompliance, the
permit may be suspended or revoked, in the discretion
of the commissioner.
(b) If the commissioner finds that the operation of
the permitted activity is not in the best interests of
the public, the commissioner may alter the conditions
of the permit to mitigate the adverse effects of the
operation or, if the adverse effects are irreversible
and cannot be mitigated sufficiently, initiate a
termination of the operation under the permit over a
reasonable period under the circumstances, not to
exceed four years.
10:06:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER noted that the terms rehabilitation and
enhancement were an initial concern, and asked whether the
situation has been addressed.
REPRESENTATIVE ORTIZ deferred comment.
10:07:16 AM
FORREST BOWERS, Deputy Director, Commercial Fisheries Division,
directed attention to the bill, page 8, line 18, to indicate the
definitions of the terms for application to HB 128. Enhancement
includes increasing the wild stocks reproduction beyond natural
levels. Rehabilitation is taking a depressed stock and
rebuilding it to a natural reproductive level. A rehabilitation
project generally ends once a stock has recovered to a level
that it can sustain a common property harvest versus
enhancement, which may continue for a period of time.
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER asked whether the use of the term
enhancement, in the bill title, accurately reflects the
sponsor's intent.
MR. BOWERS said the title is accurate, and added that the terms
were scrutinized for the purposes required in HB 128.
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER commented on the importance of clarity
and maintaining a universal meaning for the terms throughout
statute.
10:10:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN said that when enhancement occurs,
introduction of a species is taking place, and asked what
science goes into that decision, and what steps are taken to
determine how the action might affect existing aquatic life. He
further asked if a peer review is part of the
consideration/permitting process.
MR. BOWERS reported that the types of projects initially
anticipated would be efforts for rebuilding stocks that once
existed in abundance. Future projects might propose to
introduce outside species, and applicants could expect close
scrutiny to be exercised prior to permitting. Successful
species introduction has occurred elsewhere, such as Norway
introducing king crab into Barents Sea, and those successes and
challenges would be studied and compared.
REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN suggested that peer reviews would be in
order along with consideration for the entire biological system
into which organisms are being introduced, or reintroduced.
MR. BOWERS assured the committee that the bill includes a
provision for engaging an external review by independent
experts, to advise the commissioner on any permitting decisions.
10:14:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER moved to report HB 128 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal
note. Without objection, HB 128 was moved from the House
Special Committee on Fisheries.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB128 Supporting Document-JEDC.pdf |
HFSH 4/4/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 128 |
| HB128 Supporting Document-Alutiiq Pride Shellfish Hatchery.pdf |
HFSH 4/4/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 128 |