Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/19/2004 04:00 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 452-GUIDED SPORT FISHING CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 452, "An Act relating to licensing and regulation of sport fishing services operators and fishing guides; and providing for an effective date." [Before the committee, adopted as a work draft on 3/17/04, was Version D, labeled 23-LS1619\D, Utermohle, 2/27/04.] Number 0188 BEVERLY MINN, Owner, Sitka's Secrets, noted that she has operated a single charter boat in Sitka since 1986. Testifying against HB 452, Ms. Minn said she believes the bill is unnecessary; she and her husband already are overregulated. She also suggested this bill wouldn't increase safety or aid the industry, and would be costly and meaningless. CHAIR ANDERSON asked Ms. Minn if there was any consensus they could come to or whether she was totally opposed to the bill. MS. MINN said the bill as currently written is totally adverse to her business. Number 0347 JOEL HANSON, The Boat Company, focused on the personal- possession clause, suggesting there needs to be a standard of reasonableness. He explained: We operate small, open skiffs that are auxiliary boats to our larger vessels. ... The "personally possessed" clause in House Bill 452 would require our guides to actually have on them documents that even the Coast Guard doesn't require to have on them. I just checked with Juneau MSO [Marine Safety Office] ... and it turns out that the Coast Guard's requirements is for certain items to be available for inspection, is their terminology, which means reasonably available so that they can make sure that you are licensed. That would include things like a copy or an original of your captain's license, the proof of enrollment in a random drug-testing program, first aid and CPR [cardiopulmonary resuscitation]. This bill would require all of those items to be actually carried on your person. And in a small, open boat that doesn't have a pilot's house, that doesn't have a place to keep documents, it would make you basically subject to a criminal fine and penalties if you didn't actually have those documents on you. So there needs to be a "reasonable" clause in here, a "reasonableness" clause of some kind. CHAIR ANDERSON asked Mr. Hanson if he had Version D and could propose a change to address his concern. Number 0510 MR. HANSON affirmed that he had [Version D] and referred to page 5, lines 13-14, subsection (e)(2), which read: (2) the current licenses, tags and permits that are required to engage in the sport fishery for which the sport fishing guide services are being provided; MR. HANSON said these lines would require that a guide have on his/her person a sport fishing license and a sport fishing king salmon tag, even though current regulations don't require these documents. He pointed out that guides aren't permitted to fish for king salmon. CHAIR ANDERSON interjected that he thought Mr. Hanson was misinterpreting the law. He said, "I don't think it said it's mandated they carry a king salmon tag." He asked whether Mr. Hanson thought he could carry a license and a permit in an open boat. MR. HANSON admitted this actually was not a problem. He then referred to page 5, lines 23-26, page 5, paragraph (6), which requires a guide to carry proof of licensure by the U.S. Coast Guard to carry passengers for hire. He pointed out that the Coast Guard requires an original document, not a copy; it also requires a letter as proof of enrollment in a random drug program, and first-aid and CPR cards. He recognized these weren't burdens either. Number 0720 ROB BENTZ, Deputy Director, Division of Sport Fish, Alaska Department of Fish & Game, replied to Mr. Hanson's concerns: Current licenses, tags, permits required to engage in the sport fishery are requirements for every sport angler. And one of the provisions of this bill is that any guide have a current sport fishing license. They would have to carry [it] just like any other sport-fishing angler in the state, other than children under 16. Proof of insurance, proof of licensing by the Coast Guard: they already have to carry their Coast Guard license on board, as I understand it. MR. HANSON noted that the Coast Guard recognizes the difficulties of carrying original documents in small boats that are attached to a mother vessel. He said he'd spoken with the MSO in Juneau, who said the Coast Guard boarding officers wouldn't require the guide to carry that documentation on his or her person. He added, "There's a reasonableness that they're willing to abide by that this legislation does not recognize." Number 0838 THERESA WEISER, Sitka, agreed with Mr. Hanson's concern about physical possession of documents. She said, "I think that there could be a better wording that would just say if it's on the grounds, so that it's nearby." As for the bill itself, she said: I am not in favor of it unless there were some changes. One of the changes I see is the insurance line. If anybody in this town is doing charters for cruise ship passengers, they're required to have $1 million per incident ... coverage. ... There's a lot of commercial fishermen out there that are fishing for a charter boat license, if it should ever go to limited entry, that are registered as charter boats. This bill isn't going to stop them from registering, but it might slow some of them down if that insurance requirement was up there where it should be anyway. So, I would propose that the insurance requirements were raised to at least a minimum of [$1 million]. ... They don't have near the amount of regulations that we already face, and I feel that this bill is like putting more regulations on us. My last comment is in regards to the penalties. I think that they are very severe for what possibly could happen as a minor infraction. I think that needs to be looked at more closely before I would give my support to this bill. ... For an example, the part where it says if we know that a client has committed some kind of a violation, we would have to report that violation: there could be a violation the client has committed that we weren't any way part of. And the example I will give is that a client comes up and fishes with some outfit and catches three kings in May. He's caught his annual limit of kings and he comes back in August to fish cohos, but he buys a king stamp ... and he goes out with a different outfit or he goes out with the same outfit and he catches more kings. If we know that, whether we overheard it in a bar ... or we witnessed it just across the water, are we now in the position of having to report this violation? We are not the enforcement officers, and I don't think we should be put in the position of having to act like enforcement officers. Number 1026 REPRESENTATIVE LYNN suggested alternative wording such as "in close proximity" or "reasonably nearby". MR. BENTZ said he knows the Department of Public Safety (DPS) and the Coast Guard have used discretion when they encountered incidents similar to the example Ms. Weiser had given. MS. WEISER replied, "That is not our personal experience here with enforcement in Sitka, and we wish that that would be the way it would be, but it is not that way." Number 1096 JOHN BELCHER, Sitka, spoke to the severity of what he called harsh penalties in HB 452, asking if these same penalties applied to commercial fishing. He inquired, "If I were to lose my guide license after three violations, does a commercial fisherman lose his ability to conduct his fishing for doing the same thing?" MR. BENTZ responded: We did compare the proposed penalties in House Bill 452 with existing penalties for some of the other natural resource violations. ... The maximum fine for a class A misdemeanor in this bill is up to $10,000, one year in jail. Penalties and fines for violations of big-game guides have fines up to $30,000 and one year in jail. For commercial fishermen, it's fines up to $15,000 and one year in jail. So the proposed fines are somewhat less than those for the other two groups. Number 1200 DWIGHT KRAMER, Chairman, Kenai/Soldotna Fish and Game Advisory Committee, testified in support of HB 452 on behalf of his organization. He said: We realize this bill may change throughout the process, but we support it in principle and feel it may be an important piece of the puzzle in future efforts regarding guide industry issues. One suggestion we might make, where it talks about reports and says the department shall collect information from the fishing organizations, perhaps it doesn't need to be analyzed every year for every place. We're saying that the implementation costs and costs to collect and analyze that data, perhaps these costs could be reduced if data-analyzation needs were identified by discretionary areas on an annual basis. Number 1250 KELLY HEPLER, Director, Division of Sport Fish, Alaska Department of Fish & Game, agreed with Mr. Kramer's comment and thanked him for the observation. Number 1265 REUBEN HANKE, Owner, Harry Gaines Kenai River Fishing, testified in support of HB 452. He stated: The guides on the Kenai River have been adhering to standards such as those found in House Bill 452 for the past 15 years. It's produced a more professional industry and helped our clientele feel safe about their Alaskan experience. I hope that you will pass this bill in order to help standardize and professionalize the sport fish guiding industry. ... As far as carrying credentials in open boats, in my business I have five 20-foot boats, and all of my guides are required to carry all of their permits and licenses on their person in the boat, and it's not a problem. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked what type of insurance Mr. Hanke has for his business. MR. HANKE replied that he is required to have liability insurance with the same limits listed in HB 452. In further reply, he said his insurance is readily available and reasonably priced. Number 1355 RON RAINEY, Chairman, Kenai River Sportfishing Association, testified that his association favors HB 452 for the same reasons Mr. Hanke expressed. He felt is was better for the sport fishing public to have these regulations in place. He then said: The lady that said we shouldn't be held responsible for people breaking the sport fishing laws around us in our vicinity, I totally disagree with that. I think we should all take responsibility for making sure that our fishing laws are adhered to and upheld. I would take strong exception to [Ms. Weiser's position on reporting violations]. We should absolutely get after those people that don't do that. Number 1418 ANDREW SZCZESNY said he was a Kenai River Guide for 18 years and agreed with Mr. Hanke's testimony. He said, "Not only do I have to do a lot of the same things that this bill states, but also I deal with the [U.S.] Department of the Interior with the same type of stuff. I've never had a problem in 18 years of dealing with this stuff." He responded to questions from Representative Rokeberg, saying that carrying the logbook in a boat isn't a problem and that typically he fills out the information regarding the number of clients and their names five minutes before the trip starts. He didn't think adding information about the fish that were harvested would present a problem. MR. BENTZ noted that currently the saltwater charter logbook policy allows for leaving the book in a vehicle at the boat launch; guides return from a trip and then fill out the logbook while the clients are still on site. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG expressed concern that the language in the bill was vague with regard to when the logbook had to be filled out. MR. BENTZ indicated this is a policy decision and said, "We're not trying to make this an enforcement tool we beat up people on. We know people get cited for these type of things." He said the intention is to get the information, for better management." REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG suggested adding the following: "The department shall periodically collect information". MR. BENTZ replied that the guides record for every trip they take, usually filling out the reports at the dock afterwards. MR. RAINEY said he didn't believe the logbooks had been a problem and that many guides kept detailed records. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG noted, "The department's comments say one thing, the bill says another, and then they are saying another thing. They have the right to make the regulations, so I want to make sure that this is clear and very well understood by anybody." Number 1760 MARK GLASSMAKER, Vice President, Kenai Professional Guide Association, noting that he'd speak for other members of the association, testified that HB 452 had unanimous support from its board of directors. He characterized this legislation as a necessary first step, and mentioned professionalizing the sport fish guide industry statewide. He said: We are very much in favor of the information- collection portion of the bill, as we feel the information provided will greatly assist Board of [Fisheries] and fisheries managers on establishing new regulations and assessing individual fisheries. Finally, as you are well aware of, and as many of my colleagues have already pointed out to you, Kenai River guides have been abiding by stringent state park stipulations since 1985, and we are glad to see the remainder of the state adhere to many of the same standards of professionalism and safety. CHAIR ANDERSON closed public testimony. He asked Representative Rokeberg whether he was still interested in making an amendment. Number 1834 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG explained, "It needs to be clear when the report should be done. It says under comments that they have to be filled out while still on site. It doesn't say that in the bill. When is it supposed to be done?" MR. HEPLER responded: I apologize for the confusion that we caused, because the response we gave back to the committee at that time was directed toward one person's comment that runs big boats. Our comment back focused on big boats. We didn't address the concern [Representative] Rokeberg brought, and that's what about if somebody's in a small boat somewhere on Prince of Wales Island. That's where Rob [Bentz] explained the other half is that we don't expect people to necessarily carry that with them and then, at the end of the day, before they put their boat on the trailer and take it back out, we want it filled out. That's what our intent is. I understand your concern is that it doesn't say that clearly in here, so does that leave room, then, if we get a zealot coming in who's a protection officer, one of our own, to come in and cite people. That isn't the intent. We're not meant to harass people. I guess we can think of some language and tighten it up. That's what we're looking for: protection of the people so we don't unnecessarily cause them problems, while still getting our information. CHAIR ANDERSON proposed that the suggested change be carried to the House Judiciary Standing Committee, the next committee of referral, where he is vice chair. He added that the current committee would defer to the sponsor and [Mr. Hepler]. MR. HEPLER offered to draw up some draft language. Number 1986 REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report CSHB 452, Version 23- LS1619\D, Utermohle, 2/27/04, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 452(L&C) was reported from the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|