Legislature(1997 - 1998)
04/10/1997 01:15 PM House RES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 198 - DIVE FISHERY MANAGEMENT ASSN. & ASSESSMNT CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON announced the first order of business was House Bill No. 198, "An Act relating to regional dive fishery development associations and to dive fishery management assessments; and providing for an effective date." Before the committee was the original version of the bill. Although a committee substitute had been voted out of the House Special Committee on Fisheries, that version had not been read across the House floor. Number 0115 KYLE JOHANSEN, Legislative Administrative Assistant to Representative Bill Williams, read the sponsor statement into the record: "Southeast Alaska dive fishermen have been attempting for the past decade to establish orderly, consistent and stable fisheries capable of providing dependable economic opportunity for themselves, their families and the communities of Southeast. The urgency to create an economically viable fishery is highlighted by the recent closure of the region's largest employer and the other related negative economic impacts on the economy of Southeast Alaska. "Substantial untapped dive fishery resources have been identified through diver and Fish and Game underwater activities for over a decade. Many of the Southeast communities have placed the development of the dive fishery as a priority item in economic development documents and locally developed legislative budget priorities. The dive fishery resources appear to be abundant and diverse throughout the region. The small sea cucumber and geoduck fisheries in Southeast have a combined annual ex-vessel value of $2 million to $2.5 million. "In California, the urchin fishery has ranged in ex-vessel value from $16 million to $39 million annually from 1990 to 1996. Geoducks range in price from $6/pound live to $3.50/pound processed. Alaskan waters contain abundant amounts of these fishery resources plus many others not currently harvested. This legislation will encourage the identification and development of these resources. The potential for future jobs for harvesters, processors and the support industries is considerable. "The commitment to work together with Fish and Game is evidenced in the red sea urchin fishery. In 1996, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, after a test fishery, was unable to open the red sea urchin fishery because of a lack of funding. Based on positive results in this test fishery and a vision to diversify and develop their local economy, the Ketchikan Gateway Borough provided funding to Fish and Game to conduct bio-assessment surveys needed to open a fishery. "The Borough continued its involvement by facilitating and participating in a local task force comprised of Borough personnel, divers, processors and the department. The resulting plan was for processors to `forward fund' the management costs of the fishery, with agreements to recoup their funding through a 5 cents/pound assessment on the divers. Thus, in January 1997, a red sea urchin fishery opened in districts 1 through 4 in the Ketchikan and Craig areas. "This temporary fishery opening is based on a one-time source of funding that will expire at the end of this fiscal year, June 30, 1997. In order to continue this fishery and to develop the other dive fishery resources, a stable source of funding is necessary. "The August 1996 red urchin management plan states: `Developing a long-term program to fund the costs of stock assessment, research and management remains an outstanding issue. If sufficient funds are not provided to the department each year, the fishery will not open.' This is the dilemma divers face, and House Bill 198 provides a creative and progressive vehicle to move towards that solution. "House Bill 198 does not mandate but allows the creation of regional dive fishery development associations for the purpose of developing dive fisheries and creates a working relationship between the divers and the Department of Fish and Game to develop annual operating plans. This legislation is permissive, and once a regional association is formed, divers can hold a ballot election of all [interim-use] permit holders to answer two questions: First, shall we assess ourselves? And second, at what rate shall we assess ourselves? "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 will be based on the mutually developed annual operating budget and plan. Fish and Game would then fund the specific purposes outlined in the legislation for the regional dive fishery development association and the Fish and Game. "All the appropriate checks and balances are in place, and all the parties are held accountable. In addition, all other fisheries business taxes are collected and deposited into the general fund. "House Bill 198 is a positive step forward by the private sector to support economic development and diversification without seeking a general fund appropriation. Time is of the essence. Representative Williams would appreciate your support of this legislation for passage this session, and keep the economic development for Southeast moving forward." Number 0505 REPRESENTATIVE BILL WILLIAMS advised that committee packets include letters of support from the City of Craig, City of Wrangell and City and Borough of Sitka, as well as from the Sitka Chamber of Commerce, Wrangell Fisheries Incorporated, Sitka Sound Seafoods, Norquest Seafoods, Incorporated, the Seafood Producers Cooperative and others. Number 0556 GERON BRUCE, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), came forward to testify, noting he had also testified the previous day before the House Special Committee on Fisheries. He indicated the committee substitute, voted out of that committee but not read across the House floor, had contained changes requested by the ADF&G. Number 0601 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON advised that the committee needed to adopt as a work draft version 0-LS0415\T, Utermohle, 4/9/97. Number 0671 REPRESENTATIVE FRED DYSON made a motion to adopt that as a work draft. There being no objection, 0-LS0415\T, Utermohle, 4/9/97 was before the committee. Number 0695 MR. BRUCE discussed changes made at the ADF&G's request. The sponsor had agree to two changes, incorporated in this version, and a third was still under discussion. MR. BRUCE referred to page 2, lines 4 through 7. He said the first change relates to composition of the board of directors of the dive association. The ADF&G believes its representation should reflect all stakeholders involved in development of the resource, not just harvesters. The sponsor agrees with this change. MR. BRUCE referred to page 8, line 7. He said the second change relates to the annual operating plan. The earlier version had the dive association responsible for writing the fishery's annual operating plan, with the ADF&G assisting. The ADF&G believes actual management and development of the management plan should be by public officials with no vested interest in the fishery; for good reason, it is done that way in all fisheries. Under the new version, the ADF&G will develop the plan with cooperation, assistance and input from the industry. The sponsor agrees to this. Number 0871 MR. BRUCE provided general comments on the bill. The ADF&G is very interested in developing these under-utilized resources. These resources offer an opportunity not only for economic development but also for Alaska to build a new fisheries model that does not suffer from problems associated with more historic fisheries. The latter were developed largely by outside interests, not necessarily with a maximum concern for benefits to Alaskans. This offers an opportunity for Alaska to start over again, at least on these fisheries, and do it right. MR. BRUCE said questions about the big picture relate to sustained yield, preventing overharvest, preventing boom-and-bust cycles and ensuring maximum benefits to Alaskans and communities. There is certainly less benefit if the state goes to great efforts to develop these resources and then most benefits leave the state. MR. BRUCE said unfortunately, the timing of opportunities to develop these resources coincides with reduced general fund appropriations to the ADF&G. To develop a new fishery, the ADF&G must remove money from an existing one. Hence, the introduction of HB 198. The sponsor is looking for some way to provide a source of funding for development of new fisheries that does not subtract resources from management of existing fisheries. Number 1011 MR. BRUCE does not believe, however, that this bill alone will accomplish that. Program receipts, such as these, are generally considered by the legislature as part of the general fund appropriation for the department. If additional program receipt funds flow into the ADF&G's general fund appropriation, funds from elsewhere would be eliminated. Divers could justifiably claim they expect their fishery to go forward with these funds because they are coming forward to tax themselves. MR. BRUCE suggested one way to deal with this issue. The designated program receipt bill, introduced by the Governor in both the House and the Senate, establishes designated program receipts as an "other fund" category, rather than a general fund category. If that passes, Mr. Bruce believes the objectives of HB 198 would be achieved. Number 1122 MR. BRUCE discussed the second concern, which relates to the big picture and the chance to develop Alaska's new fisheries the right way. The bill is a funding mechanism. The ADF&G believes additional issues should be addressed now. Five years down the road, they do not want to end up with the same structure as they have in some older fisheries from which Alaskans are not receiving maximum benefits. A number of species with development potential are not currently being developed. Some are dive resources, some are not. Mr. Bruce cited octopus as an example. The ADF&G is looking for a mechanism to address broader public policy issues underlying and guiding development of these new fisheries, which would apply to a variety of species statewide. MR. BRUCE acknowledged that is not the sponsor's intention. He said the ADF&G applauds what Representative Williams is trying to do. Unfortunately, even in early development of the urchin fishery the ADF&G is seeing all-too-familiar characteristics of the older fisheries' development model. Increasing product is already leaving the state, which concerns them. Number 1247 MR. BRUCE discussed the third change the ADF&G seeks. They suggest launching a public/private task force or working group to examine policy issues and possible or existing models. They expect that to take one or two years. At the end of that time, they want to revisit this whole issue, including how the funding mechanism is working and how it ties in with the bigger policy issues. For that reason, they request a sunset on the bill. MR. BRUCE said this new approach deserves an opportunity. However, the ADF&G has concerns about an individual fishery believing they are funding a particular management program, rather than having funds go into the broad base of government and then being part of the legislature's general appropriation to the department. Although the sense of ownership fishermen may feel over the management and managers may work all right, it may cause problems. The ADF&G, through the sunset provision, would come back and make sure this serves the public interest and is not causing inadvertent, undesired consequences. MR. BRUCE stated that the ADF&G sees this as an interim funding approach that may become permanent. Another reason for revisiting the issue is that it may serve as a precedent for other fisheries Alaskans may want to develop. Furthermore, if it works for new fisheries, people in existing fisheries may also want it. Number 1462 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS agreed this is a new approach and that other fisheries may be interested in such a concept. However, he does not support a sunset clause. If it does not work, the legislature can change it later. He asked for input from the committee. Number 1589 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked whether there is a sunset on the Northern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association (NSRAA), for example. MR. BRUCE said no. He noted, however, that during the hatchery forums, people had felt maybe there should have been. Number 1608 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON advised there is a sunset on the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute (ASMI) 1 percent salmon marketing tax. He stated the belief that a small, emerging fishery such as this would receive "enough daylight and hard looks" because it is new and exotic. He applauded participants in the fishing industry in general for putting their money up. He does not take a firm position that a sunset is necessary. Number 1648 REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN concurred. He also agreed that if something is not working or needs modified, that can be done either through regulation or the legislative process. Number 1725 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether Mr. Bruce envisions that some control through bag limits or seasonal limits may be required. MR. BRUCE replied that the fishery is managed on a quota basis, based on inventory and assessment of the resource and what it can maintain as a sustained yield. Number 1743 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether some sea urchins would be brought to the surface to extract roe and whether that falls under the category of "roe stripping." MR. BRUCE said the roe is the edible, marketable part of the product. To his knowledge, it is the only part currently sold. Prices quoted earlier were for roe. Number 1781 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether somehow the ADF&G would be able to determine that by extracting roe, the fishery would not be damaged. MR. BRUCE said yes. Number 1788 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether there are possible alternate methods, such as robot arms or urchin pots, or whether this would always remain a dive fishery. MR. BRUCE said someone testified the previous day about experiments with alternative harvest methods for sea urchins. The dive method, successful in other parts of the country, has been what the industry has focused on; Mr. Bruce assumes that is the best way. Number 1824 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether the ADF&G or the sponsor has checked to see how this would affect other fisheries such as crabbing. MR. BRUCE said as part of the ADF&G's assessment and inventory, to some extent it looks at relationships between different species. They do not believe there are detrimental affects on other resources such as crab as a result of harvesting urchins. Number 1862 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON suggested divers could provide the department more information, from a management perspective, than currently available. Number 1880 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked whether the ADF&G would encourage, if not require, that kind of feedback from divers. MR. BRUCE replied that he believes that is the principal idea in this cooperative relationship. Number 1960 EDWARD T. GRAY testified via teleconference from Sitka. A diver and member of the Alaska Harvest Divers Association, he deferred to the sponsor statement for the many reasons why he supports the bill. He had ten years of experience meeting with a string of ADF&G officials in unsuccessful bids to secure funds. He said the first allocations in Sitka happened around 1989. Since then, there have been closures and reduced quotas while large quantities of unharvested products have gone unutilized year after year because of inability to secure funds. MR. GRAY said they are committed to the association concept. It contains the "appropriate checks" to provide security to the divers. He has no philosophical preference about who should pay or why. He is happy with the 3 percent salmon tax, both in what it has done for him and the salmon fleet. Mr. Gray concluded by thanking the sponsor and saying he has renewed hope of going forward because of this bill. Number 2043 LARRY TRANI, President, Alaska Harvest Divers Association, testified via teleconference from Sitka. His association, representing about 50 divers in the area, unanimously supports HB 198. He pointed out that for years, divers have requested that ADF&G expand various dive fisheries or open new ones. The answer has always been that there is not enough money in the ADF&G budget to meet those requests. Now, the ADF&G is facing budget cuts. Requests will only be met if the industry comes forward with the money. Although naturally members would prefer that the state pick up the tab to develop fisheries, because that is unlikely to happen in the near future, they urge passage of the committee substitute for HB 198. Number 2105 GEORGE ELIASON testified via teleconference from Sitka. A lifelong fisherman, he has been diving 20 to 30 years. He supports HB 198 on behalf of himself, his two sons and the two divers he works with. It will provide a long-term, economically viable dive fishery for his region. He believes these renewable resources will remain unharvested without such a bill, which would be unfortunate for divers, processors, deck hands, consumers and support services. This sounds like a win-win situation, and Southeast Alaska needs the jobs. Number 2178 JAMES R. DENNIS testified via teleconference from Craig in support of the bill. Although there is no dive organization there, he believes he can speak for a major portion of the area's divers. While nobody wants to think they are paying more than their share, this is realistic in light of budget cuts. Number 2247 RICHARD POLLEN, Plant Manager, Norquest Seafoods, Incorporated, testified via teleconference from Craig, specifying he is also a member of the city council. He said as a processor in Craig, he fully supports the bill. Norquest is currently involved in the sea urchin fishery. Employing 35 people, they contribute $2,500 per day in payroll to the community, providing jobs that would otherwise not be there. At any given time, they have five to twelve divers working for them, each with a deck hand on board. MR. POLLEN, speaking as a city council member, advised that the City of Craig had voted unanimously to contribute start-up money in one way or another. He said this fishery offers the city revenue in the form of a fish tax, which is sorely needed. Number 2316 LINDA SLITER testified via teleconference from Ketchikan in opposition to the bill. The wife of a diver, she is an equal partner in the Linda Lou (ph), a dive vessel. She asked where start-up costs for the association would come from. The association will need an office; equipment; travel money; an executive director, secretary and other employees; and a paid lobbyist to watch-dog the budget yearly to ensure money collected goes to the dive fisheries. She asked: If the proposed association goes to the state loan fund for an operation's loan, who would pay it back? She further asked whether divers would start out "in the red" with a loan to repay before any money can be appropriated for management. MS. SLITER said the association sounds like an expensive layer of bureaucracy between divers and the ADF&G. If the bill passes, an association forms, and an election is held to determine the amount of assessment, she said it would take at least two years before tax proceeds find their way into the ADF&G budget. She asked who will foot the bill until that tax is a reality. MS. SLITER had heard rumors that the proposed association would seek disaster fund money given to Southeast communities by the federal government. Convincing communities to fund an association whose goals are extremely unclear will be a battle all its own. Once salmon, herring, crab and shrimp fisheries find out about this, participants will demand their fair share of the disaster fund money from their communities. She asked whether it is the job of communities to fund fisheries programs managed by the ADF&G. MS. SLITER finds it hard to believe a state with no need for a state income tax, and which distributes millions of dollars to residents yearly through permanent fund dividends, cannot come up with $300,000 to fund a multimillion-dollar fishery. A self- imposed tax for management of a fishery is precedent-setting. She asked when participants in other fisheries would be requested to fund management of their fisheries as well. MS. SLITER noted that she has worked for the Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association for 18 years. They are partially funded by a 3 percent tax self-imposed by the fishermen of Southeast Alaska. TAPE 97-40, SIDE B Number 0006 MS. SLITER concluded by saying the sea urchin fishery is able to become one of the highest revenue-generating industries in Alaska. It would be economically unsound for the state not to fund the fishery once it is established and paying the 3 percent raw fish tax. She urged delay of HB 198 until all avenues of state funding have been exhausted and all fisheries are being managed equitably. Number 0064 MELINDA WEST testified via teleconference from Ketchikan in opposition to HB 198. A harvest diver, she spoke on behalf of herself, her husband and 40 other divers who had signed a petition against the bill. They believe it is unconstitutional and discriminatory against one user group. A tax amounting to 14 percent would be required to manage and enforce the fishery and support the dive association attached to the bill. Ms. West said dive fisheries will pay a 3 percent raw fish tax next year. They will therefore pay for management of the fishery twice. If dive fisheries expand and stabilize, the 3 percent tax would generate more than enough revenue to make the fishery self-sustaining. Number 0116 MS. WEST suggested modifications in the event the bill passes. First, the "user pay" tax should be across-the-board for all fisheries. Second, the cooperative management statement, which "fooled all the divers on this bill to start with," should be put back in. Third, the ability to use the tax for dive association management should be eliminated; she believes those should be separate issues. MS. WEST also wants to delete the requirement that divers must have bought and paid for their permits 90 days before being allowed to vote. Many divers cannot afford permits until the day before they fish, and many are fronted money to do so. The present scheme would not provide good representation for the vote on the tax. MS. WEST said furthermore, the tax should be dedicated. She stated, "We would support this tax on those grounds, because we are not opposed to supporting our fishery. We are opposed to this bill as it is written." She specified they do not want to pay a lobbyist $50,000 per year to get their money back through the general fund. "I think this is the biggest flaw of this bill, is that general fund," she added. Number 0161 MS. WEST suggested if they pay for management, they have the right to call the shots. This must be cooperative management, and they would be looking at competitive bids for management, as perhaps someone else could do it for better and cheaper than the ADF&G. MS. WEST concluded by saying no consideration should be given to any unproven method of self-taxation that singles out a certain user group to fund management by the ADF&G. She referred to the previous day's hearing, where someone had "pointed out the $60 million that comes in on the raw fish tax, and only $20 million of it comes back." She feels this is a bit of mismanagement. Number 0222 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON referred to dedicated funds and said in his experience with the legislature, that is impossible without a constitutional amendment. He asked that Ms. West fax her proposed amendments to the committee. Number 0264 STERLING SLITER, President, Alaska Harvest Divers Association, testified via teleconference from Ketchikan. A member of the sea urchin task force, he has worked with the ADF&G since the inception of this concept. He said Geron Bruce echoes their concerns regarding collected taxes going into the general fund. For this reason, as written, they cannot support the bill. Not opposed to taxing themselves if necessary, they believe there must be a mechanism that would allow taxes generated by divers to go back into their industry. Number 0295 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON commented that over the years, the legislature has made diligent efforts to ensure that assessments collected from the NSRAA and others go back to appropriate areas; this applies as well to ASMI and to the raw fish tax that generally supports the industry. He said there is a moral commitment on his part, and he believes also on the part of his colleagues, that if they collect the tax for this particular purpose, they would do their level best to guarantee it goes back to the ADF&G for the management, growth and development of that industry. Number 0333 RODNEY LINTON testified via teleconference from Ketchikan. A harvest diver, he supports HB 198 but is concerned about changes in the committee substitute, including deletion of cooperative management terms. Although supportive of having a way to supplement state funding for the fishery, he does not believe they should have to fund the whole thing. He also likes the idea of this mechanism to develop new dive fisheries such as for clams, scallops or octopus. Mr. Linton wants the tax funds to be designated for the dive fishery, as in the designated program receipts bill he has been hearing about. He asked the number of that bill. Number 0391 MR. BRUCE said HB 78 and SB 55. CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON agreed program receipts ought to be designated to the extent possible. He said he wishes to see changes to differentiate between monies collected generally and those collected for specific purposes. Number 0426 JACK SHAY, Mayor, Ketchikan Gateway Borough, testified via teleconference. The previous Monday, the assembly had voted unanimously to authorize him to send a letter in support of HB 198. In talking with dive harvesters and processors, they had been impressed with the excellent economic opportunity, which would help in part to rescue the area's economy. Until the timber industry is healthy again, they look forward to having a healthy dive fishery. MAYOR SHAY advised that the only resistance they had heard was from a few divers who believe they should not be assessed because the ADF&G should do this. In addition, the Kake Tribal Corporation gave a presentation in Juneau the previous week, citing the fact that processing occurs outside Alaska. He said, similar to the timber industry, until an enterprise can be guaranteed or be more certain, people would not make a capital investment towards local processing. He noted that local processors have been processing urchin roe. However, a certain amount of expertise needs to be built in to enhance the product and make it more cost-effective for foreign markets. MAYOR SHAY said that "the proposals that have been made for amending the measure seem to be perfectly reasonable; as a matter of fact, I like very much the inclusion of a local government involvement in the board of directors, and also the other proposal seems to be perfectly acceptable here." He urged passage of the bill, saying the borough is fully committed to assisting in this new enterprise. Number 0550 PATRICK LAWS testified via teleconference from Ketchikan, specifying he dives off the vessel Mach-I. He opposes the bill as currently written. He cannot believe the state cannot come up with a little money to help fund this fishery. Number 0592 RAY CAMPBELL testified via teleconference from Ketchikan, saying he is a harvest diver statewide. He opposes HB 198. The previous year at this time, a moratorium had been placed on dive fisheries. He was cut out under the moratorium but qualified as a dungeness diver, in a fishery with three people in it. Now, there is a bill to tax him to help develop fisheries that do not even include him. He believes that is wrong. He further believes it is wrong to lump all dive fisheries and try to manage four or five fisheries as one. He suggested if there are problems with the urchin fishery, they should come up with a bill taxing that fishery for itself. MR. CAMPBELL said he had called the sponsor's office twice in the past month to ask why the dungeness dive fishery was included in this bill. He noted it was not included in the moratorium bill. REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS asked for Mr. Campbell's phone number and said he would contact him. Number 0704 HARLEY ETHELBAH testified via teleconference from Petersburg. A diver and statewide fisherman, he said this should be looked at as a whole, for other fisheries as well. He has participated in the geoduck fishery for five years and has been working with the ADF&G to try to expand that. After five years, it is obvious to him that the ADF&G does not have the money to do the surveys and expand it. He sees HB 198 as a great opportunity for these fisheries. MR. ETHELBAH believes cooperative management should be included in the bill, as it once was. Divers could work with the ADF&G in the surveys, as they are trained in looking for geoducks, urchins and so forth. Referring to the requirement that permit fees be paid before voting, he said, "I think that's great that that's in the bill, because it means that serious divers will be voting, and those not willing to pay their permit fees won't be voting." Number 0811 STEPHEN LaCROIX, Dive Program, Norquest Seafoods, Incorporated, came forward to testify. He runs the dive program for Norquest, which has processing plants in Craig, Petersburg and Ketchikan. In the recent dive fishery, they took one-half million pounds of urchins, almost 20 percent of the quota. They have employed 70 people full time. It is a good fit for his company, and it transforms part-time seasonal workers into full-time employees. He noted that it requires five people on shore to service one diver in the water. MR. LaCROIX stated that Norquest supports HB 198 because it puts a secure funding structure in place for them to make investments necessary to compete with established players in the business. He said so far, they had collected over $23,000 in voluntary assessments from the divers in this business. "And we only have about $480 that remains to be collected, in other words, money that was not voluntarily donated," he stated. "So that shows the kind of support that we've got from the divers that are working for us." Number 0885 GIG DECKER, President, Wrangell Harvest Divers Association, came forward to testify, noting that his association is part of Southeast Alaska Harvest Divers Association. Wrangell has had a mill closure, and people are interested in going to work, not only as divers but through attracting processing and all the jobs associated with it. He expressed excitement about the bill and said he totally supports it. Number 0943 AARON J. CUMMINS came forward to testify. A lifelong commercial fisherman from Petersburg, he completely supports the bill. He believes it is ironic that for the last few years, he has left town, crossing vast resources of undeveloped fisheries to work in the Bering Sea and California. He would much rather be at home. He believes these fisheries can be expanded. Right now in Petersburg there are 25 divers, who often take an additional diver along. If this fishery could be enhanced to where they earn more per diver, many would gladly buy their own boats. They could quit working as deck hands for others, opening up new jobs for younger people in the communities. In addition, more boats would generate additional shipyard work, and so on. He restated his support. Number 1020 CLAY BEZENEK, President, Southeast Alaska Harvest Divers Association, came forward to testify. A Ketchikan resident, he has fished in Alaska 15 years, and 100 percent of his income derives from harvest of "creatures from the sea." With the exception of one dissenting vote, his association fully supports HB 198. It provides a reliable funding source for all developing dive fisheries, as well as a direct link for a cooperative working relationship with the ADF&G. He noted that dive fisheries are unique in that the gear used is a human being, not gillnets or hooks. He believes special consideration should be given to any fishery that is "so human-interactive," and that HB 198 addresses this important issue. MR. BEZENEK advised that they now voluntarily assess themselves for management costs set forth by the ADF&G for the urchin fisheries. This is not new to them. This bill provides a tried-and-true assessment vehicle that guarantees a funding source for years to come. As a commercial salmon fisherman as well, he is completely satisfied with the job the aquaculture association does with assessment dollars. He expects to be similarly satisfied when this becomes law. It will allows businesses, both small and large, to formulate business plans for processing these products. It will also allow development of new dive fisheries currently identified but not bio-assessed. He believes HB 198 is important to all Southeast Alaska towns. Number 1131 CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked if anyone else wished to testify, then closed public testimony. Number 1156 REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS advised that he had worked with the ADF&G on the cooperative management language removed from the bill. In talking with them, he understands the department will come up with a plan but divers will still have a say. He feels comfortable with it. CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON asked Geron Bruce whether that is his understanding. Number 1212 MR. BRUCE replied yes, they are interested in working with people in the dive industry on shaping and developing the fishery. He added that the ADF&G does this kind of thing routinely. In pretty much all fisheries, there are working groups and an advisory committee system. "We want to work with people affected by fishery management and have the benefit of their knowledge and expertise in shaping management," he concluded. Number 1245 REPRESENTATIVE REGGIE JOULE commented that he supports this. He cautioned, however, that in efforts to try to curtail spending, the legislature should not limit development of areas that need a jump- start for economic development. Number 1316 CO-CHAIRMAN SCOTT OGAN said this is a statement of the legislature's support of people in Southeast Alaska in recognition of mill closures. CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON acknowledged suggested amendments by testifiers and said obviously the committee could not deal with amendments that were not before them. He did not intend to hold the bill. However, he asked that proposals be advanced to Representative Williams; if amendments would enhance the bill and maintain its intentions, he suggested the sponsor would not hesitate to offer those on the House floor. REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS said either on the floor or the other side. Number 1396 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to move the committee substitute, 0-LS0415\T, Utermohle, 4/9/97, from the committee with accompanying fiscal notes and individual recommendations. There being no objection, CSHB 198(RES) moved from the House Resources Standing Committee. CO-CHAIRMAN HUDSON turned the gavel over to Co-Chairman Ogan for the next item of business.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|