Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
03/03/2021 03:30 PM Senate RESOURCES
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 | |
| SB29 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 29 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 29-COOK INLET: NEW ADMIN AREA; PERMIT BUYBACK
3:33:30 PM
ACTING CHAIR BISHOP announced the consideration of SENATE BILL
NO. 29 "An Act relating to the powers of the Alaska Commercial
Fisheries Entry Commission; relating to administrative areas for
regulation of certain commercial set net entry permits;
establishing a buy-back program for certain set net entry
permits; providing for the termination of state set net tract
leases under the buy-back program; closing certain water to
commercial fishing; and providing for an effective date."
3:34:41 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE, speaking as sponsor of SB 29, stated that
sport and commercial fishing user groups in Cook Inlet brought
this forward after years of work to find a solution for the
overly dense fishery on the east side of Cook Inlet. The bill
provides the structure for a voluntary permit buyback.
He detailed that the bill allows the Commercial Fisheries Entry
Commission to divide the east side of Cook Inlet. This is where
fish return to the Kenai and Kasilof rivers If the fishermen
approve the voluntary buyback program, they will register for a
drawing to be bought out. The bill allows registered fishermen
to participate in a draw for a permit buyback. Their names will
go on the roster. If the bill passes and the program is funded,
the fishermen on the roster will be asked (in order) if they
want their site and permit purchased by the fund to not be
fished again.
SENATOR MICCICHE explained the goal is to [voluntarily] reduce
the fishery by about 50 percent. The [Eastside Setnetters] did
their own survey to address uncertain legislative support. Each
east side Cook Inlet permitholder received the survey, 95
percent of those who responded [supported the permit buy-back].
SENATOR MICCICHE said the goal is to relieve the pressure,
provide more fish, more king salmon in rivers while maintaining
a viable fishery for Eastside Setnetters who remain. The
remaining setnetters will provide enough fish for the processors
because right now they are getting almost no fishing time and
are "starving to death."
He noted the [Eastside Setnetters] may finally have support from
[United Fishermen of Alaska] (UFA) and the other fishing groups
who realize "We are at the end of our rope." Fishing families
that have been fishing the east side in Cook Inlet for
generations are at the end of their rope. The intent is for some
of those families to remain viable and to give those who choose
to be voluntarily bought out an opportunity to move to other
fisheries or retrain for another line of work.
SENATOR MICCICHE stated the [Eastside Setnetters] do not know
where the funding comes from. However, until there is a process
in place, they cannot ask some of the federal conservation
buckets of dollars that have bought out other voluntary buyouts
in the Lower 48 or the private sector that may be interested in
contributing. The bill allows those fisherfolk to go look for
funding to execute the program.
He said Mr. Coleman will explain how the program works.
3:40:47 PM
At ease
[There were technical difficulties]
3:42:21 PM
ACTING CHAIR BISHOP called the committee back to order.
3:42:32 PM
KEN COLEMAN, President, Eastside Consolidation Association,
Kenai, Alaska, testified in support of SB 29. He said he has
been a setnetter on the east side of Cook Inlet for 49 years. He
explained the Eastside Consolidation Association (ECA) is a
qualified salmon association recognized by the State,
specifically formulated as a vehicle to explore gear reduction
or permit buybacks. The goal of ECA is to reduce the number of
set net permits and nets on the east side of Cook Inletonly the
east sideand there are four other districts [in Cook Inlet]
that are not included in the bill.
He explained ECA is trying to find a way to return to a viable
and sustainable set net fishery. ECA still subscribesand always
willto have sustainable escapements in all rivers and a
reasonable harvest opportunity for all user groupsnot just ECA
but sport, guided sport, general public, personal use fishers,
everyone. ECA would like to work collaboratively with all user
groups to do the right thing for the fish and to make sure
everyone ends up with a reasonable opportunity to harvest.
3:44:53 PM
MR. COLEMAN said SB 29 asks the legislature to create a new
administrative area and provide for a permit reduction via
permit buybacks.
MR. COLEMAN referenced slide 3 in his presentation and detailed
ECA is a non-profit salmon association that is formulated
specifically to explore permit reductions or permit buybacks
from user-group members or affected partiesas stated in
statute.
He noted slide 4 specifies who the Eastside Setnetters are:
fathers, mothers, grandparents, children, sons, daughters, and
families; a community filled with generations of set netting
families and an important part of its local history. Set netting
is not just a job, set netting defines who they are as a user
group. He said he suspects all commercial fisherfolk and gear
groups in Alaska feels much the same way, "It is a way of life
that is very much family oriented."
MR. COLEMAN detailed his personal history, noting his father was
a fisherman in northern Cook Inlet and Bristol Bay. He detailed
he started fishing as a teenager, his sons grew up fishing, and
his wife helped him fish. He added his sons grew up on their
fishing site and his grandchildren are experiencing the
setnetter life on the beach, "It's just nothing else like it."
3:47:02 PM
MR. COLEMAN referenced slide 5, Eastside Setnet History. The
east side setnet fishery takes its roots back to about 1880s.
There were early canneries in the mouth of Kasilof and Kenai
Rivers. The east side set net fishery has been around as one of
the longest and historical fisheries in the state.
MR. COLEMAN addressed slide 6, Upper Cook Inlet Setnet Area, and
detailed the Eastside Setnetters do their fishing in Upper Cook
Inlet. The set net area is one of five different districts in
Cook Inlet. The Central District is where the Eastside
Setnetters reside. The Northern Districtnorthern end of Cook
Inletis closer to Anchorage. The Kalgin Island District is
located around the largest islands in Cook Inlet. The Western
District runs on the westside of Cook Inlet, all the way down to
Chinitna Bay. The Southern District is in the Kachemak Bay area.
He reiterated ECA is strictly talking about the east side of
Cook Inlet, from the Ninilchik River up to Northern District
line.
MR. COLEMAN detailed slide 7, 1973 Limited Entry, and explained
limited entry was promulgated in 1973, noting most of Eastside
Setnetters are original permit owners who are very supportive of
the program within the [Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission]
(CFEC). Today there are 735 permits throughout Cook Inlet with
440 east side set net permitholders.
3:49:37 PM
MR. COLEMAN referenced slide 8 and noted the largest river
systems and the most harvests come from both the Kenai and the
Kasilof Rivers in the east side set net fishery. The area became
even more popular for other Cook Inlet set net fisherfolk in the
mid-1980s because the area had tidelands for populating permits
and nets; that coincided with record biomass and record prices
which resulted in an influx that created a fishery that was
about twice as big as its historical sizewhich continues today
resulting in difficulty for sustaining a business.
He noted [the current runs on the east side of Cook Inlet] are
somewhat smaller due no sockeye enhancement and much larger user
groups that includes sportfishing, dipnetters, and another gear
groupdriftnetters. There is a lot of competition, and the
"east-side pie" has become increasingly smaller with multiple
user groups trying to find a way to continue being viablethe
reason for the bill.
MR. COLEMAN referenced slide 9, SB 29Cook Inlet: New Admin
Area: Permit Buyback and Gear Reduction Act, and explained the
bill is a legislative attempt to find a way to reduce the
[Eastside Setnetters] in its posture and footprint to remain as
viable as they have been for the last 150 years.
3:52:17 PM
MR. COLEMAN referred to slide 10, Reducing Permits, noting the
bill is the mechanism where the [Eastside Setnetters] request
their size reduction from 440 permits to 240 permits, an
approximate 45-percent reduction. The permit reduction will
significantly close areas of water. Currently there are 1,320
nets on the east side of Cook Inlet, an area spread out over 60
miles; however, viability has become increasingly hard. The
reduction of nets and permits will allow the people who remain
behind to continue doing what they love and remain part of [the
state's] cash economy.
MR. COLEMAN noted there are ways for CFEC to reduce permits in
particular fisheries, but none allow for set net permits to have
self-determination in particular areas. Sixty percent of the
nets in Cook Inlet are fishing on the east side of Cook Inlet.
He pointed out if CFEC was asked to do an optimization study for
Cook Inlet, their study would analyze the connected economics
and sociology, but their optimization number may not be less
than what currently exists. However, if CFEC came up with a
number that required permit reductions, the reduction would
apply to the entire Cook Inlet. The Eastside Setnetters have to
find a way to exclude itself from the rest of Cook Inlet to
reduce its numbers and fix its issues. The buyback is the only
vehicle ECA has come up with that does that.
3:55:52 PM
MR. COLEMAN noted the 200-permit reduction requires the closure
of the tidewater associated with the permits. Tidewater closure
allows for individuals who retain their sites to benefit from
increased fish availability. Closed water is a primary feature
of SB 29.
He addressed slide 12, Voluntary Reduction Approved by Fleet.
The voluntary program allows permitholders to register their "A
permit" and its associated site to participate in the lottery
that CFEC would run. No commercial fisherfolk, agent, or
unassociated third party with the fishing community would have
control of the lottery processwhich is the right thing to do.
MR. COLEMAN noted ECA conducted a number of fleet reduction
program polls. The two polls he was involved with indicated over
80 percent of set net fisherfolk approved a gear reduction and
permit buyback; that number continues to grow for allowing self-
determination and moving forward.
3:58:42 PM
He referenced slide 13 and explained the $260,000 [estimated
buyout value] was derived by looking at how much Cook Inlet set
net permits annually grossapproximately $20,000 per permitover
10-years. The [estimated value] also includes $60,000 for tax
implications. The lottery buyout would allow permitholders to
close their business in perpetuity. Many permitholders expressed
to him a desire to move to other commercial fishing areas
Bristol Bay or Prince William Soundif they were bought out.
MR. COLEMAN noted permit reductions addresses the "fish wars" by
conserving some of the stocks that are desirable by the other
user groups. ECA has had discussions with other user groups to
allow everyone to thrive and survive. The bill would allow for
securing non-state funding for the buyback.
4:02:56 PM
ACTING CHAIR BISHOP thanked Mr. Coleman for the comprehensive
overview.
SENATOR MICCICHE commented that the bill should say "by request"
because the proposal was brought to him by two user groups in
Cook Inlet that have been struggling for solutions for many
years.
He stated the eastside setnetters are up against a wall and he
believes the buyback is the only option that will provide a
future for half of the fishermen on the east side of Cook Inlet,
as well as provide an opportunity for those who are willing to
move on to other options. SB 29 is a win-win option that
provides a future.
SENATOR MICCICHE said for Kenai River sportfishing and
setnetters to walk into his office to present what they think is
a solution that will benefit all the user groups is unusual, and
that occurred about five years ago. He expressed hope that the
eastside setnetters formally support the buyback program. Recent
polls indicate the level of support is 95 percent, but that has
been after two more years of consistent closures and almost a
complete absence of opportunity for fishing families on the east
side of Cook Inlet.
4:05:22 PM
SENATOR STEVENS asked Mr. Coleman to explain the prioritization
process for the permit buybacks when the funding is unknown.
MR. COLEMAN explained people would put themselves into a lottery
process done by the state. People will have the option to leave
the program prior to the consummation where the next person in
line could opt into the program.
He has discussed the potential to solicit federal grant funding
through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) Fishing Capacity Reduction Program with Senator Micciche
and the Alaska federal delegation, and ECA has also explored
private funding. However, people are reluctant to participate
unless there is a work product such as SB 29. The bill has a
sunset clause and ECA will try mightily to secure funding prior
to the sunset, he said.
4:08:12 PM
SENATOR STEVENS asked the sponsor if the set net owners
themselves could invest money to help fund permit reduction.
SENATOR MICCICHE explained the setnetters have evaluated a
tariff on themselves, but they opted to explore buyouts via a
program that Konrad Jackson will explain in the sectional
analysis.
He noted the proposed buyout program eliminated the potential
for people to speculate because they think there will suddenly
be a higher value. The program also eliminated the potential to
jump a place in line by getting in early. The buyback is based
totally by lotteryno one has a jump on order. People would send
their interest in to participate and based on the scientific
survey showing 95 percent are interested, there might be close
to 400 people applying. The CFEC would draw the name order, but
only 200 would be part of the voluntary buyout system to provide
a viable remaining fishery.
SENATOR MICCICHE explained drawing more than 200 names allows
for people to change their mindsespecially with multi-
generational fishing familiesand the next name in line drops
down.
He asked Senator Stevens to repeat his last question.
4:10:20 PM
SENATOR STEVENS said he asked about private funding.
SENATOR MICCICHE explained that ECA initially thought about an
assessment, but they were not sure there would be additional
product available for the remaining setnetters due to the
competition and allocation issues in Cook Inlet. ECA will first
try to secure funding from agencies and private entities
involved in gear reduction operations. If funding is inadequate,
ECA would have to come back for another discussion with the
setnetters and the legislature.
SENATOR KAWASAKI commented that set net permits must have some
value.
SENATOR MICCICHE replied they do and it varies dramatically
depending on location. Permits from very productive sites have
sold for over $1 million.
He pointed out ECA does not care which permits sell when taking
200 permits out of the water. If there is a lower value site,
the hope is that those individuals will reinvest in another
fishery or take the money and go elsewhere. However, the key is
some of the lower value sites actually catch a larger proportion
of king salmon because the nets are in the water longer, but the
sites are just not the high volume later in the season when the
sockeye salmon are really hitting sites.
SENATOR MICCICHE noted some people might say there is a permit
site for $35,000; however, the buyout intent is to take set net
businesses out of existence in perpetuity and reduce the fleet
to give the fisherfolk something to move on to via the funding.
4:13:16 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if the 200 permit buybacks of the 735
permits artificially inflates the prices for the remaining
permits.
SENATOR MICCICHE explained the buyback pertains to 440 permits
for the Eastside Setnetters, not 735 permits.
He said the sectional analysis will address a cutoff date so
that there is no speculation. The permits would not be worth the
buyout amount to anyone else because permitholders are either
going to be bought out or not, then the permits will go back to
their traditional value. Whether the buyout results in
additional volume is unknown, but the hope is it does and leaves
a more viable fishery.
SENATOR MICCICHE explained that limited entry permit values on a
graph may look like a rollercoaster ride. The value of Bristol
Bay permits has ranged from $15,000 to almost $200,000. Cook
Inlet permitsnot long ago for drifterswere in the $200,000
ranges, now the permits are worth about $50,000. Permit values
will increase when several good years occur in a row and the
reverse happens when there are several down years in a row. The
reason for basing the buyout on average earnings for 10 years
was to smooth out the value versus the "rollercoaster ride."
SENATOR KAWASAKI expressed hope that the bill does not create an
awkward secondary market as it has with liquor licenses.
4:16:26 PM
SENATOR STEVENS asked the sponsor if the bill precludes someone
from selling their site outside of the buyback program,
especially for someone that had a $1 million site who wants to
sell that on the open market.
SENATOR MICCICHE answered sites on "North Beach" are not going
to sell for $200,000 plus tax protection, but the less
productive sites will more likely sell. However, the value of
less productive sites is greater passage of king salmon which is
really the biggest rub. There is a "sockeye thing" right now due
to low returns, the 10-year average is down with a lot of
competition that has grown dramatically.
He said when thinking about the allocation shift to the other
groups, the buyback plan is unfortunately the only response
[Eastside Setnetters] see left that reduces the take-out while
allowing viability for the remaining setnetters.
SENATOR KIEHL asked him why he chose a value number versus using
a hybrid of the methods that allows CFEC to come up with an
optimization number or buyout value with the other methods
described in the bill, and then fund the program.
4:18:48 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE explained the permit numbers in the bill are
returning the east side to the appropriate number of
participants prior to the move east during the really large runs
in the 1980sa more traditional number. If CFEC where to do an
optimization study, it would be Cook Inlet wide. The Bristol Bay
districts are divided but Cook Inlet setnetters are not divided
in that way; they are regulated in different areas, but they are
all treated the same.
SENATOR MICCICHE said the bill allows CFED to break off the
east-side area which is the one dramatically impacted. The
individuals on the far west sidewhere they are open pretty much
all season long on a huge swath because there is not really an
allocationis not a fishery that has a lot of demand from other
user groups. The east side is a localized issue between the
Kenai and Kasilof Rivers that the bill divides out and treats
differently.
4:20:46 PM
KONRAD JACKSON, Staff, Senator Peter Micciche, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, referenced a sectional analysis of
SB 29 as follows:
Section 1: Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which establishes that
this legislation may be known as the East Side of Cook
Inlet Set Net Fleet Reduction Act.
Section 2: Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding new Legislative findings and intent
relating to the bill.
Section 3: Amends AS 16.43.200(b), clarifying the
Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission's
(commission) specific authority to divide an existing
commercial fishing administrative area into two or
more separate areas.
Section 4: Amends AS 16.43.200 by adding 2 new
subsections:
(c) Establishes an area of the Upper Subdistrict of
the Cook Inlet Central District as a distinct
administrative area separate from the Cook Inlet
Central District on December 31, 2019. This area
is made up of the statistical areas identified
on January 1, 2019 as 244-21, 244- 22, 244-31,
244-32, 244-41 and 244-42.
(d) Provides that an individual who has a set net
permit for the Cook Inlet Central District on
December 31, 2019 is not entitled to set net in
the administrative area created under this
section as of January 1, 2020 unless the permit
has been reassigned to that new administrative
area.
Section 5: Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which provides how the
commission will determine whether an individual who
holds a set net entry permit in the Cook Inlet Central
District on January 1, 2022 is reassigned an entry
permit for the administrative area established under
AS 16.43.200(c) (added by sec. 4 of the bill) or the
portion of the Cook Inlet Central District that was
not assigned into the administrative area established
under AS 16.43.200(c).
Section 6: Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which defines the
appeals process in the new administrative area. This
section provides that Senator.Peter.Micciche@akleg.gov
a provisional license will be issued pending
resolution of an appeal and the provisional permit
holder may cast a provisional ballot in the election
established under section 7.
Section 7: Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which requires on April
1, 2022 an election be conducted by the commission
among persons holding permits in the new
administrative area, to affirm support or opposition
to a buy-back program. Requires the commission provide
public notice of the election, hold public meetings
concerning the election, and clarify the details of
the buy-back program to those participating in the
election.
4:25:31 PM
Section 8: Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which establishes the
set net entry permit buy-back program for certain
permits fished in the administrative area established
under AS 16.43.200(c) (added by sec. 4 of the bill).
This section will only take effect if approved in an
election by the set net entry permit holders in the
administrative area established under AS 16.43.200(c).
If it is approved, the buy-back program will become
law 30 days following notification of the Lt. Governor
(see secs. 10 and 12). Sets qualifications for
participation in the program, provides the buy-back
price for permits, requires that the purchased permits
be cancelled and not re-issued, provides that certain
waters that were fished with permits purchased under
the program will be closed to future commercial salmon
fishing, and specifies other details of the buy-back
program.
Section 9: Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which requires the
commission to provide a written report to the
Legislature on the status of the program not later
than January 15, 2028.
Section 10: Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which requires the
chair of the commission to notify the Lieutenant
Governor and the Revisor of Statutes of the outcome of
the election held under section 7.
Section 11: Repeals sections 1, 2, 8 and 9 on June 30,
2028.
Section 12: Amends the uncodified law of the State of
Alaska by adding a new section which provides that
secs. 1, 2, 8, and 9 take effect only if notice is
provided under section 10 that the buy-back program
established under section 8 was approved.
Section 13: Effective Date Clause. Section 4 of the
bill takes effect January 1, 2022.
Section 14: Effective Date Clause. Provides if
sections 1, 2, 8 and, 9, take effect under section 12,
they take effect 30 days following the date of the
notice provided in section 10 that the buyback program
was approved.
Section 15: Effective Date Clause. Except as provided
in sections 13 and 14, the bill takes effect July 1,
2021.
4:28:45 PM
SENATOR STEVENS referenced Section 9 and asked why the report on
the status of the program is not until 2028 instead of annually.
MR. JACKSON answered there might not be much to report in 2021
or 2022. It is intended as a final wrap up on the success of the
program and how many nets were ultimately removed from the
water.
ACTING CHAIR BISHOP turned the gavel over to Vice-Chair
Micciche.
4:29:52 PM
VICE-CHAIR MICCICHE opened public testimony on SB 29.
4:30:27 PM
GARY DEIMAN, representing self, Ninilchik, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He noted he is a long time Eastside Setnetter.
He asked that the bill not use the term "lottery."
4:31:18 PM
SHARON DEIMAN, representing self, Ninilchik, Alaska, testified
in support of SB 29. She noted her family has four generations
of setnetters.
4:31:56 PM
JEFF DENT, representing self, Kenai, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He noted he has been Cook Inlet setnetter for
35 years. He said the proposed buyback will take a lot of
pressure off of the Kenai River to allow more fish to spawn.
4:33:09 PM
DEVIN EVERY, representing self, Kenai, Alaska, testified in
support for SB 29. He noted he is 20-year-old, fourth generation
Cook Inlet setnetter. He said the bill is the best opportunity
to keep the fishery available for future generations.
4:34:57 PM
RUSSEL CLARK, representing self, Kenai, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He said he has been a commercial setnetter for
20 years. He noted the Alaska Department of Fish and Game Alaska
(ADF&G) has used emergency orders to reduce gear for king salmon
conservation; however, implementing SB 29 will accomplish the
ADF&G order. He stated the bill is a win-win because he will
come out favorably whether he is chosen or not.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked him if he would participate in the
lottery if SB 29 passed.
MR. CLARK answered yes.
4:37:28 PM
GARY HOLLIER, representing self, Kenai, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He noted he has been an Eastside Setnetter for
50 years and his family has 9 permits. He said SB 29 would help
the setnetters who want out, make the fishery economically
viable, and help the end-river usersespecially for king salmon.
He added he contacted 48 other setnetters, all were in favor of
gear reduction, and 75 percent would participate in the lottery.
4:39:44 PM
ANDY HALL, President, Kenai Peninsula Fishermen's Association,
Chugiak, Alaska, testified in support of SB 29. He stated trying
to make a living from setnetting has been a struggle. Taking a
portion of the east side set nets out will result in a healthy
fishery. The closed-waters piece in the bill is crucial for
[fishery viability]. He noted 55 percent of east side permit
holders have responded to the poll Vice-Chair Micciche
referenced with 95 percent supporting the buyback.
4:42:56 PM
MELISSA DEVAUGHN HALL, owner, Hall Family Salmon, Chugiak,
Alaska, testified in support of SB 29. She noted her family is
not sure whether they will take part in the buyback, but
hopefully the program will result in a conclusion to the
fighting among all user groups.
4:44:26 PM
TIM DONER, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He noted he is a setnetter in the area that
the bill was written for. He stated the bill is the best
solution to address the ongoing issues that the east side has.
He said whether he participates or not, the [buyback] will make
the fishery more viable for those who remain in the fishery.
4:45:37 PM
BRUCE MANLEY, representing self, Kenai, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He noted he has set net fished north of the
Kasilof River since 1975. He said over the years he has been
affected by the encroachment of other setnetters.
4:46:53 PM
JOANNE WICKERS, representing self, State of Washington,
testified in support of SB 29. She said she and her family have
been east side setnetting for 35 years. She noted the Cook Inlet
fishery has changed over the years due to increased pressure
from all user groups. She stated her family wants the fishery to
remain viable for all user groups for generations to come.
4:47:59 PM
SCOTT SUMMERS, representing self, Kenai, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He said his family has fished their current
site since 1958; however, the fishery is no longer viable for
his family and the fishery needs to change. He stated the bill
will provide more fish to the setnetters that are left and give
people the option of getting out.
VICE-CHAIR MICCICHE noted his appreciation to his staff member,
Mr. Jackson, for putting his "heart and soul" into the
legislation in addition to other individuals.
4:51:01 PM
JOHN MANLEY, representing self, Kenai, Alaska, testified in
support SB 29. He detailed he has been fishing north of the
Kasilof River for 40 years. He stated the drift fleet will
benefit from the bill as well. He said the legislation is fair
for everybody. He noted those who are left can gain and people
who take the buyout receive a fair compensation.
VICE-CHAIR MICCICHE disclosed he is a Cook Inlet drift
fishermanhe has not figured a way that the drift fleet
benefits, but that would be nice, too.
4:52:15 PM
NANCY TAYLOR, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. She said her family has fished near the
Kasilof River for 39 years. She stated the buyout, and the
closed-water provision in the bill, is good for everybodya win-
win.
4:52:56 PM
GEORGE TOWNSEND, representing self, Kenai, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He noted he has set net fished in Kasilof
since 1984. He stated having a buyback plan is the only thing
that makes sense going forward and having fewer permits, leases,
and nets in the water will help make the fishery more
profitable. He stated the fight between different user groups is
not going to solve itself and having solidarity amongst
fisherfolk for a change is kind of a rarity.
4:54:46 PM
RANDY MEIER, representing self, Kasilof, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He said his family has five permits and fish
north of the Kasilof River. He stated the restrictions in place
have led to less fishing time, less funds, and increased
difficulty in hiring crew. He noted he and his family will
participate in the lottery and those who remain will have a
viable fishery.
4:56:05 PM
JEREMY NOET, representing self, Bellingham, Washington,
testified in support of SB 29. He noted he has been fishing
since 1991. He said there needs to be a solution and he thinks
the bill could be an excellent solution for all those involved.
4:56:45 PM
TED CROOKSTON, representing self, Kenai, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He noted he has been fishing in Kenai for 56
consecutive seasons. He said the legislation is a win-win
situation that puts the fishery into its tradition state that
existed prior to the 1980s.
4:57:53 PM
TIM OSMAR, representing self, Kasilof, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He noted he is a third-generation fisherman
and has been fishing Cook Inlet for 50 years. He said the
legislation is a no-brainer.
4:58:28 PM
ROBERT WILLIAMS, representing self, Kasilof, Alaska, testified
in support of SB 29. He pointed out the State will realize very
little cost to implement SB 29. He noted other fisheries have
done [permit reductions] and the proposed bill is not new
ground. He said the remaining fisherfolk will realize a more
viable fishery. He noted the proposed buyback is voluntary and a
permit holder does not have to participate if they do not want
to.
4:59:41 PM
MARILYNN KEENER, representing self, Soldotna, Alaska, testified
in support of SB 29. She said she and her family have set net
fished since the 1970s and set net fishing has been a wonderful
way of life.
5:00:43 PM
MELVIN JOHNSON, representing self, Cook Inlet, Alaska, testified
in support of SB 29.
5:01:18 PM
TIM KEENER, representing self, Soldotna, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. He said the bill is going to work and will
benefit anybody and everybody that has been in the "fish wars"
for far too long. He stated the legislation will make history
and do something right that is going to benefit a lot of people,
help a lot of families, and secure the future for a lot of
families.
5:02:44 PM
VICKI NELSON, representing self, Kasilof, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 29. She said the [set net] fishery has not been
viable. She stated her family will participate in the lottery so
others around their site will catch more fish.
5:04:03 PM
VICE-CHAIR MICCICHE closed public testimony on SB 29.
He explained when the buyback project started there was much
more resistance than what is currently heard. Several hundred
years of experience just testified before the committee. Some
permitholder cases have five generations who have no desire to
sell their permits because they want to fish; however, that has
become impossible at this time.
He noted one thing no one mentioned is in some cases the set net
families invest tens of thousands of dollars to get ready to
fish, only to be left on the beach without an opportunity. He
reiterated he sees no other viable alternative.
VICE-CHAIR MICCICHE stated setnetting is "our history and our
culture" in his and Senator Steven's districts. The setnetters
are proud families that see no other way, but he thinks they are
willing to take a chance. The day a family is asked to sell
their permit is going to be a really tough decision.
He said he thinks SB 29 is a solid bill that has some solutions
that could finally bring the different user groups together on
something, and he hopes the bill can move along.
5:06:22 PM
VICE-CHAIR MICCICHE held SB 29 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 29 UCI_Districts_Subdistricts_Sections ADFG Map 2.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Supporting Documents-ADFG Upper Cook Inlet Management Area Central District Statistical Areas Map 1.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Sectional Summary ver A.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Sponsor Statement ver A 2.22.21.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 DNR Shore Fishery Leasing Fact Sheet.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 ECA Presentation to SRES 3.3.21.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Fiscal Note DNR 2.26.21.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Fiscal Note DPS 3.3.21.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Fiscal Note DF&G CF 2.26.21.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Fiscal Note DF&G CFEC 3.2.21.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Support Letters 3.2.21.pdf |
SRES 3/3/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 29 |