Legislature(2003 - 2004)
05/08/2004 09:04 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE CS FOR CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 452(RES)
"An Act relating to licensing and regulation of sport fishing
operators and sport fishing guides; relating to licensing and
registration of sport fishing vessels; authorizing the
Department of Fish and Game and the Alaska Commercial
Fisheries Entry Commission to release records and reports to
the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of
Public Safety; and providing for an effective date."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-Chair Wilken informed the Committee that this legislation would
establish minimal licensing requirements and fees for two types of
sport fishing guide licenses: sport fishing services operator
licenses and sport fishing guide licenses. He stated that Version
23-LS1619\W and its accompanying fiscal notes are before the
Committee.
JON BITTNER, Staff to Representative Cheryll Heinze, the bill's
sponsor, informed the Committee that the sponsor is presenting this
bill at the request of the Department of Fish and Game. He noted
that the bill would create two new licenses and requirements. The
fee for a sport fishing guide license, he noted, would be $50
annually and the sport-fishing operator's license would be $100
annually, and he clarified that were a person to provide both
services, the fee would be limited to $100. Continuing, he stated
that the sport-fishing guide licensing requirement mandate the
licensee to have minimum liability insurance, first aid training,
and conduct certain "minimum" reporting requirements.
Mr. Bittner pointed out that Members' packets contain a chart
titled "Regulations after passage of HB 452" [copy on file] that
depicts current reporting requirements and those that would be
implemented were this legislation adopted. He stated that
currently, with the exception of minimal reporting requirements in
the Kenai River Management area, no reporting is required for
guided freshwater fishing. He noted that the freshwater fishing
report requirements that would be established by this bill would
provide the Department with "more useful information" and would
align with current saltwater fishing report requirements which
include such things as the number of hours fished, the number and
types of fish caught, and the general location fished.
Mr. Bittner stated that Version "W" differs from the previous
version of the bill, CS HB 452(FIN)am, Version 23-LS1619\U.A, in
regards to sport guide vessel licensing registrations. This
language, he noted, is located in Section 2, subsection Section
16.05.395 and Section 3, subsections (a), (b), and (c) on page two
of the bill. He summarized that this language would move sport
guide vessel registrations from the Commercial Fisheries Entry
Commission (CFEC) to the Division of Sport Fish, Department of Fish
and Game in order to "consolidate information" and to streamline
the process by having all the sport guide information in one State
agency. He noted that the $20 vessel registration fee currently
charged by CFEC would be eliminated were this legislation adopted
and the guide registration fee enacted.
SARAH GILBERTSON, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Fish and Game, commented that the sport fish industry
is important as it generates approximately $6 billion in revenue a
year. She stated that currently, while individuals participating in
the sport fishing industry, must register with the Department of
Fish and Game, there are no registration fee, license, insurance,
medical, training or reporting requirements in place. This
legislation, she continued, would establish annual $50 sport fish
guide license fees, annual $100 operator license fees applicable to
the owner of a business who employs guides, or an annual $100
combination guide/operator license.
Ms. Gilbertson stated that this legislation would also allow the
Board of Fish to establish reporting guidelines that would provide
the Department and the Board of Fish "better information" with
which to manage the fishery. This information, she shared, would
include such things as where the guides are operating, how many and
what fish are being caught, and the frequency of the operations.
She stated that rather than implementing "onerous and burdensome"
reporting requirements, the Department's desire is to make them
flexible and area appropriate.
Ms. Gilbertson stated that the bill, during its numerous committee
hearings, has been amended to best serve the desired objectives and
has garnered wide spread support from numerous sport fishing
charter boat and guide associations in Sitka, Homer, Kenai and
other areas. She noted that the language in Version "W" which moved
vessel registration to the Division of Sport Fish within the
Department of Fish and Game and eliminated the vessel fee was "the
icing on the cake for a lot of folks."
Senator Dyson asked the difference between an operator and a guide.
ROB BENTZ, Deputy Director, Division of Sport Fish, Department of
Fish and Game explained that an operator is the owner of a business
that provides boats and employs guides. He stated that,
particularly in Southeast Alaska and Cook Inlet, there are numerous
one-person businesses in which the owner owns the boat, owns the
business, operates the boat, and serves as the guide. This person,
he stated would be considered a sport fish guide.
Senator Dyson asked the difference between a charter business
operation and a situation in which a guide accompanies a client in
a boat.
Mr. Bentz stated that the definition of a guide in a charter
business "is a person that accompanies and personally assists other
people during any portion of the fishing trip." This, he attested,
is different from a transporter or an outfitter who just provide
transportation services from one point to another.
Senator Dyson asked whether a person who owns and operates a boat
but does not provide any fishing assistance to a client would be
classified as a guide.
Mr. Bentz responded yes, as he is providing a charter vessel and is
accompanying the client. He noted that there is also such a thing
as a "bare boat charter" in which people rent a boat and fish
unaccompanied by a guide.
Senator Dyson asked for further clarification regarding a situation
in which an accompanying owner/operator of a vessel is on the boat
but does not provide assistance to a client who is fishing.
Mr. Bentz expressed that were an owner/operator of a boat to take a
client out fishing but not provide them "assistance in any way," he
would be considered the operator rather than a guide, "if he had
someone down there to assist them down there on the deck."
Senator Dyson asked at what point, a trip, with a guide
accompanying clients on a boat, would be recognized as a charter
operation.
Mr. Bentz responded that when a guide accompanies clients on a boat
trip, it would be considered a chartered fishing operation the
instance they begin to fish. Continuing he stated that were the
trip to simply involve whale watching, and not engage in sport
fishing, it would not be considered a chartered fishing trip.
Senator Dyson asked in what situation a boat with a guide and
fishing clients would be required to adhere to United State Coast
Guard charter license regulations.
Mr. Bentz responded that anytime "a paying client is onboard a
vessel and they are being accompanied by an operator of that
vessel," that operator is required to possess a United States Coast
Guard operator's license. He noted that the size of the boat is not
a factor in this requirement.
Senator Dyson understood therefore that were a client to operate,
for example, an eight-foot boat, an operator license would not be
required; however, were a guide to accompany that client on a
vessel that the client operated, the guide would be required to
have a Coast Guard license.
Mr. Bentz responded, "to my knowledge, yes."
Senator Olson asked whether this legislation is being presented as
a result of a problem with the current management of the sport fish
guide industry.
Mr. Bentz responded that one reason for the legislation is to
assist in addressing the current lack of information regarding the
impact on a fishery and the number of people fishing, particularly
in remote freshwater areas He stated that while this might not be
classified as a problem, it is difficult to track overall usage. He
also noted that, as a result of the lack of information, the
Department might recommend more conservative regulations than
necessary to the Board of Fisheries.
Senator Olson opined that the Department is currently experiencing
funding shortfalls which are serving to reduce fishery management.
He voiced concern that more staff and more funding would be
required to manage the licensing process, and as result, the
Department's efforts might be further negatively impacted.
Ms. Gilbertson responded that the costs of the license program and
subsequent data analyses have been analyzed and that the proposed
program would be receipt-supported. The fee structure proposed, she
continued, would provide sufficient funding to implement the
program. She referenced the Division of Sport Fish fiscal note # 2
and noted that while the analysis specifies that four new full-time
positions and one new part-time positions would be required, the
full-time positions would be staffed by shifting four Department
funded employees, who currently process the Saltwater Log books
reports, to staff the needs of this proposal. The receipts
generated from this legislation, she attested, would then pay these
people's wages. Therefore, she declared, this proposal would be
increase staffing by only the one part-time position.
Ms. Gilbertson noted that it was made known during the bill's
hearing in the Senate Resources Committee that increasing the scope
of State government is not a desired end result. She shared that
shifting vessel registration to the Division of Sport Fish was
supported by numerous entities as it would increase efficiency in
government and create "one stop shopping."
Senator Olson asked how these fishing management changes might
affect subsistence fishing issues in areas under federal
management.
Mr. Bentz responded that this legislation would serve to alleviate
a lot of the problems that have arisen during the last few years as
the federal government, the Board of Fish, the Department of Fish
and Game and State would have better information as to who is
operating where and what they are doing. This, he stated, would
enable better management decisions to be made.
Senator Olson respectfully argued that many problems have arisen
due to the dual management scenario in which federal entities
manage one area and the State manages another. The current
situation, he declared presents hardships to residents who are
therefore "double hand-cuffed." He stated that, in his experience,
"the route" is more complicated.
Mr. Bentz agreed that this legislation would not simplify the
situation, as he noted there is the chance of controversies when
there are "two, in some cases, conflicting regulatory regimes." He
stated, however, that the information this legislation would
provide would benefit State and federal agencies.
Senator Olson referenced language pertinent to the reporting
requirements as specified in Section 6, subsection 16.40.280(b) on
page seven, lines 19-23 that read as follows.
(b) A person who holds a license issued under AS 16.40.260 or
16.40.270 shall comply with the reporting requirements in this
section and reporting requirements adopted in regulation by
the department or board. The department and the board may
adopt by regulation requirements for timely submission of
reports required under this section or under regulation
adopted by the department or board.
Senator Olson asked what consideration would be provided to
individuals in remote settings who experience difficulties in
submitting reports due to such things as infrequent or poor mail
service in respect to fines and other penalties.
AT EASE 10:18 AM / 10:18 AM
Senator Olson asked whether this language could be eliminated or
modified.
Mr. Bentz clarified that the intent of the language is to allow the
Department to develop reporting and guide regulations on a "least
intrusive, less problematic" area-by-area basis.
AT EASE 10:19 AM / 10:19 AM
Mr. Bentz declared that the regulations would be developed, by
area, with input from the guides and would be user friendly. He
stated that the Board of Fish, whose meetings are open to the
public, would formulate reporting and other guidelines dependent on
an area's circumstances.
Ms. Gilbertson reiterated that the Department would continue to
work with the industry to address the logbook reporting concern,
and she noted that recently, the Department decided to waive the
logbook submittal requirement when periods of inactivity occur. She
stressed that there is no intent to place "a burden" on operators,
and that the intent is to gather "better information" with which to
better manage the resource.
Senator Olson noted that the reporting submittal issue could be a
burden to anyone anywhere in the State as oftentimes, weather could
hinder the submittal for weeks at a time. He asked for industry
testimony in this regard.
JIM PRESTON, Boat Charter Owner/Operator, stated that the
timeliness of reporting and the obligation to maintain logbooks is
an industry concern. He disclosed that he had been fined $200 last
year for not submitting his logbook when his boat was out of
commission and, during that period of inactivity, he had forgotten
to remit his logbook. However, he acknowledged that, as a result of
industry and Department discussions, the Department has changed the
reporting requirement concerning periods of inactivity. He noted
that the Department has also specified that, were this legislation
enacted, there would be more industry/Department collaboration
regarding regulations. He stated that guides in remote areas of the
State often have to depend on air taxi pilots, ferry personnel and
others to assist in getting their logbooks reports to the
Department. In summary, he voiced the understanding that the
Department would, through cooperative efforts, address the areas of
industry concern.
Mr. Preston noted that he was speaking on behalf of operators in
Homer and other places, as some of them were unable to participate
due to being unable to access their local Legislative Information
Office.
Senator Olson asked whether Mr. Preston would support eliminating
or changing language in Section 6(b) that pertains to reporting
requirements. He noted that while he understands that additional
information would be helpful to the management of the resource, the
penalties for non-reporting or tardy reporting are of concern;
especially when someone is very busy at the peak of their season.
Co-Chair Wilken understood that language in Section 6(b) addresses
these circumstances by allowing for "timely submission of reports
required under this section or under regulation as adopted by the
department or board." Therefore, he understood that regulations
would consider the circumstances and accommodate them.
Mr. Bittner concurred.
Mr. Preston informed the Committee that he is also a member of the
advisory panel of the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council.
He stated that the Council views logbook data as a way to verify
and justify information pertinent to harvest. He stated that the
validity of the information is crucial to the legitimacy to the
data. Continuing, he noted that the Department currently relies on
the data provided by the saltwater reporting logbooks. He stated
that were this legislation adopted, it would provide the industry
legitimate standing before the Board of Fish, which, he declared,
is currently not the case. Therefore, he stated that this
legislation would provide the industry the ability to work with the
Board to develop area appropriate regulations.
Senator Olson reiterated the importance in accommodating remote
area guiding operations.
Senator B. Stevens understood that there are many requirements that
must be met in order to obtain a sport fishing guide license
including such things as being a citizen of Canada, the United
States, or Mexico; meeting first aid and six-pack license
requirements; and submittal of the proper fees. Therefore, he asked
what additional requirements must be met as referenced in Section
6, subsection (a)(6) on page six, lines five and six that reads as
follows.
(6) satisfies all additional requirements adopted in
regulation by the Board of Fisheries.
Mr. Bentz explained that this language would allow additional
things to be adopted as required by the adoption of new proposals
by the Board.
Senator B. Stevens voiced that with the exception of the vagueness
of this language, which would allow "a non-legislative institute to
create the guidelines for the qualifications of a license," he
supports the legislation.
Senator Dyson asked Mr. Preston whether a licensed fishing guide,
employed by Mr. Preston and operating one of Mr. Preston's boats,
would be required to be individually licensed by the Coast Guard.
Mr. Preston affirmed that anytime an individual is operating a boat
available for hire and has paying passengers, he is required to
have either a United States Coast Guard license, commonly referred
to as "a six-pack license," or a Master's License.
Senator Dyson asked whether the fact that the client, rather than
the guide, is operating the vessel would have a different bearing
on the Coast Guard license requirement.
Mr. Preston stated that he would defer to the Coast Guard to
provide an answer to the question.
Co-Chair Green asked whether the licensing guideline parameters
Senator B. Stevens was concerned about might be addressed in other
State statutes.
Mr. Bentz responded that the State's codified regulations do
address future license changes; however, he stated that the
language in question is specific to a Board of Fisheries proposal
that might be adopted and would modify requirements. He stated that
the Board does operate under public process guidelines.
Ms. Gilbertson pointed out that this legislation, at the
recommendation of the Alaska Outdoor Council, is scheduled to
terminate on January 1, 2010. Therefore, she noted that were it
determined that the program is not beneficial to the industry, it
could be eliminated. She stated that the Department supports the
proposed timeline, as the intent of the program is to enhance the
industry.
Senator B. Stevens voiced appreciation for Senator Green's efforts
to address his concern. However, he noted that while he continues
to question the Board's ability to dictate requirements, he would
not prevent the bill from moving forward; especially in light of
the fact that the sport fish industry supports the bill.
Senator Hoffman asked whether the sport fish industry in Southwest
Alaska has testified in regard to this legislation.
Mr. Bentz expressed that the progress of this legislation has been
continually updated and distributed to Department area offices and
to groups and lodges throughout the State. He noted that while
feedback was received from the Fairbanks and Chitna area, he could
not recall any comments being received from the Southwest region of
the State.
Senator Hoffman asked whether the Department could anticipate
whether Native Corporations in the Southwest region of the Sate
would support this legislation.
Mr. Bentz replied that he could not answer on their behalf.
Senator Olson asked, were this legislation enacted, that follow-
up reports be provided to the Legislature; particularly in regard
to the implementation of the reporting timelines.
Senator Dyson reported a conflict of interest, as he is involved in
the sport fish guiding industry.
Co-Chair Green moved to report the bill from Committee with
individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, SCS CS HB 452(RES) was REPORTED from
Committee with $3465,600 fiscal note #2, dated March 16, 2004 from
the Sport Fish Division, Department of Fish and Game; zero fiscal
note #3, dated April 1, 2004, from the Department of Public Safety;
and negative $92,000 fiscal note #4, dated May 6, 2004 from the
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission, Department of Fish and Game.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|