Legislature(2009 - 2010)HOUSE FINANCE 519
01/25/2010 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB300 || HB302 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| HB 300 | |||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
January 25, 2010
1:32 p.m.
1:32:01 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Hawker called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:32 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Hawker, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Stoltze, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Thomas Jr., Vice-Chair
Representative Allan Austerman
Representative Mike Doogan
Representative Anna Fairclough
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Les Gara
Representative Reggie Joule
Representative Mike Kelly
Representative Woodie Salmon
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Larry Hartig, Commissioner, Department of Environmental
Conservation; Mike Maher, Director, Division of
Administrative Services, Department of Revenue; Denby Lloyd,
Commissioner, Department of Fish and Game
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
None
SUMMARY
HB 300 APPROP: OPERATING BUDGET/LOANS/FUNDS
HB 300 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for
further consideration. The following departments
presented overviews:
The Department of Environmental Conservation
The Department of Fish and Game
HB 302 APPROP: MENTAL HEALTH BUDGET
HB 302 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for
further consideration.
1:32:12 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 300
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government, for certain
programs, and to capitalize funds; making supplemental
appropriations; making appropriations under art. IX,
sec. 17(c), Constitution of the State of Alaska; and
providing for an effective date."
HOUSE BILL NO. 302
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
capital expenses of the state's integrated
comprehensive mental health program; and providing for
an effective date."
Co-Chair Hawker presented the overviews for today.
1:33:05 PM
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
LARRY HARTIG, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION, introduced his staff in Administrative
services. He stated the department mission to protect human
health and the environment. He explained that the Department
of Environmental Conservation (DEC) is primary a regulatory
agency. He added that one of the most important functions in
the water division is the village safe water and matching
grant programs. This division helps small and large
communities with water and sanitation systems. Commissioner
Hartig listed the department's five divisions:
Administrative Services (budget, financial, information,
leasing, procurement, and environmental crimes), Air
Quality (set federal clean air act standards and issue
compliance permits), Environmental Health (laboratory
services, state veterinarian, food safety and sanitation,
drinking water, solid waste and pesticide management),
Water Quality and Spill Prevention and Response.
Co-Chair Stoltze asked how invasive species are handled
between the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). He wondered
if there was duplication or cooperation between the
departments.
Commissioner Hartig replied that the primary role of DEC was
issuing permits in dealing with invasive species through
pesticides.
1:40:47 PM
Commissioner Hartig continued with the Division of Spill and
Response which deals with preventing and responding to
spills and cleaning up spills. There is also an industrial
prevention and pipeline program.
Representative Gara questioned if the ongoing five cents per
barrel oil surcharge adequately covers spill response and
prevention work. Commissioner Hartig acknowledged he would
be discussing that later in his presentation.
Commissioner Hartig remarked that the Division of Water sets
water quality standards, facilities programs, the village
and safe water municipal matching grants program, and issues
the cruise ship program permits for wastewater discharge.
1:42:45 PM
Commissioner Hartig reported that the total operating budget
proposed for FY2011 is $75,546,000 with the general fund
component at $19.7 million, federal money at $22.1 million
and $14 million in "Other". It also includes commercial
vessel funds, Ocean Ranger funds, clean air funds and other
smaller funds.
Co-Chair Hawker believed that Commissioner Hartig was
presenting his information using the old categorization
methods, therefore an immediate connection cannot be made on
the totals shown on the legislature's short form books. He
stressed that the fund sources are the same but cannot be
compared.
Commissioner Hartig announced that there is a large
component of federal funds in the DEC budget, but the funds
are in decline. He highlighted an increase in funding for
the drinking water program. The proposed budget increase in
general funds of $300,000 and the addition of five permanent
full time positions. He explained the reason for the request
was that in 2006 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
put forward three new drinking water rules or programs that
the department needs to handle. These new programs would
increase the workload and oversight in the department. He
also foresaw more future regulations.
1:46:16 PM
Representative Austerman requested more detailed information
about the new EPA rules. He wondered how long the federal
government will be matching 50/50 funds with the state
government. Commissioner Hartig reported that the three
added rules were number 17 through 19 on the list issued by
the EPA. The new rules cover disinfectants, disinfection
byproducts, long term enhanced service work treatment, and
ground water. Commissioner Hartig stated he would provide
the details on these rules to the committee. He noted that
as the federal government adds more complex rules,
especially for rural communities, his department is required
to oversee the training and outreach in these communities.
He noted that the new positions would be added to the base
budget as permanent positions.
Representative Austerman inquired how long the 50 percent
matching federal money would be available.
Commissioner Hartig anticipated that the 50 percent federal
money would continue for several years for the drinking
water program. The program is nationwide, so if EPA backed
off funding all the other states would be arguing for money.
Commissioner Hartig reported that the three new rules were
implemented in 2006 and the state had until 2010 to take
primacy on them. If not implemented, the state could lose
primacy of this program. He added that an anticipated four
new rules will be rolled out by the EPA in the next few
years; therefore, in the long term plan in FY2013 there is
another $500,000 in additional general fund match request
with $500,000 in federal.
Representative Austerman asked out of 19 rules how long have
they been in primacy.
Commissioner Hartig replied that primacy is taken in each of
these rules. If the department elects not to take primacy
then the EPA could take the drinking water program over.
Representative Austerman reiterated that three new rules
were being implemented that was costing the state $300,000
in general funds and $300,000 in federal money with five new
positions created. He asked for further information on how
many new employees have been added with each new EPA rule.
Commissioner Hartig answered that new positions have been
added as certain rules are implemented. He remarked that his
department would send the finance committee a summary of new
positions.
1:52:04 PM
Representative Gara asked for a general fund cost for taking
over primacy in the drinking water area versus if primacy is
not taken. Commissioner Hartig said that would be done.
Representative Gara questioned if the department also had
primacy in wastewater and asked for a comparison of primacy
versus not taking primacy. Commissioner Hartig replied that
one of concerns is that EPA is not set up to take programs
back; therefore the question would be theoretical.
Representative Gara responded that the federal law says this
program must be implemented even if the state does not take
primacy. Commissioner Hartig replied that it would take a
lot of preparation for the federal government to take over
the program.
1:53:57 PM
Representative Kelly asked that with the decline in federal
funds combined with the added new federal requirements and
the federal government's inability to take primacy; he
wondered if this was good or bad news for Alaska.
Commissioner Hartig responded that it would be bad for
Alaska and hard for someone outside of Alaska to run this
program.
Representative Kelly restated that Alaska might choose not
to have the EPA programs or be willing to pay for them. If
the federal government could not take primacy back or be
able to force Alaska to take primacy, then he believed this
might be good news for Alaska to be able to choose what is
necessary. He added that with federal funds declining, the
state will have to keep contributing more to keep these
programs working.
1:57:42 PM
Co-Chair Hawker interjected that one of the next
rule/programs anticipated is called the Radon rule which
could cost the state a lot of money. He added that another
major revision would involve lead and copper programs. He
noted that federal rules are causing financial problems for
Alaska. He announced that just within all the agencies'
budgets, there is a 5.7 percent aggregate growth that needs
to be cut to 3 percent, which translates to cutting $130
million out of the governor's requested general funds
budget.
1:59:40 PM
Commissioner Hartig pointed out that the federal drinking
rules are not a take it or leave it option. These programs
are federal requirements and if the state government did not
take it over then someone else would. He questioned if
Alaska would rather have the federal or state government
enforcing these programs. He added that it was also
important to point out that the state would lose federal
funds attached to these programs. Commissioner Hartig
continued with highlights from the FY2011 operating budget,
noting there is a $260,000 general fund increment for
equipment maintenance agreements. He informed that equipment
warranties were expiring at the Environmental Health Lab. He
stated that $153,000 was for contractual services for
pesticide programs. This money would provide expert
consultation for the program and would be totally funded out
of the yearly registration fees charged to those who
register pesticides to sell in Alaska.
Commissioner Hartig continued that $150,000 in general funds
would be used for a full time position for consistency
determination in the Air Quality division and help with the
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) and Alaska Gasline Inducement
Act (AGIA) work.
Co-Chair Hawker asked if there was work within the division
that was not necessary or required. Commissioner Hartig
responded that the Air Quality division has a lot of new
work and needs the greatest lead time on any oil and gas
projects before there is any development.
2:04:08 PM
Representative Kelly asked if CO2 was a regulated substance.
Commissioner Hartig responded that it was regulated not at
this time, but there is a requirement to monitor reporting
of greenhouse emissions over 25 tons per year.
Representative Kelly expressed concern that there was heavy
pressure to regulate emissions. He noted that if there is a
backlash against cap and trade that could cost Alaskans
electricity and fuel, he believed the carbon situation may
not have played out completely. He emphasized that as some
of the expenditures continue to accelerate; there might be a
different result than anticipated. He told the commissioner
to be suspicious of anything adding cost to the DEC heading
in that direction.
2:05:51 PM
Representative Austerman asked if there were any existing
environmental programs not required by law. Commissioner
Hartig responded no. He informed the committee that Supreme
Court case, Massachusetts vs. EPA, held that if the EPA
finds that CO2 emissions were endangering the health of the
public, then it must be regulated as a pollutant under the
Clean Air Act. The EPA made this endangerment finding and
will proceed to regulate CO2 and other greenhouse gas
emissions under the Clean Air Act. He reported that Senator
Lisa Murkowski introduced a resolution that would preclude
EPA from going forward with this plan, pending congressional
action. He warned that there is a risk for Alaska if the
state does not evaluate the impact of a cap and trade
program or understand how it might impact a gas line or
other economic development programs critical to Alaska's
economy. He cautioned that the discussions would go forward
without Alaska's input.
Representative Austerman asked what would be the duties of
this new full time position. Commissioner Hartig responded
that this position would look at OCS, AGIA and the baseline
information needed and also look at the impact of a federal
program and how to represent Alaska in these discussions.
2:09:16 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze asked if the various departments would be
willing to help the legislature send a strong message to the
federal government expressing concern regarding cap and
trade issues.
Commissioner Hartig replied that the governor has taken a
position on cap and trade and its possible impact on a gas
line project and has sent letters to Alaska's delegation in
Washington. Co-Chair Stoltze asked if it would be harmful to
the state if the legislature expresses their concern
regarding federal policies. Commissioner Hartig believed it
would be best to leave it with the governor's office.
2:11:03 PM
Representative Salmon referred to the pollution problems in
Fairbanks and asked how the state deals with it.
Commissioner Hartig remarked that the EPA set a standard for
particulate matter, the particles that go into the air when
burning hydrocarbons, at 2.5 micron particles. These
particles get imbedded deep in the lungs causing health
concerns. If communities do not meet the required levels
then the consequences, besides the harm to human health,
could be a cut in federal highway funds. When a community,
such as Fairbanks, does not meet this federal law, then DEC
works with the community to develop a plan to come into
compliance. Once the plan is in place and the community
starts operating under the plan, the EPA just monitors the
situation. If the community does not adopt a plan then EPA
will implement their own plan. He reminded the community
that failure to comply may ultimately end with a cut in
highway funds.
2:13:33 PM
Representative Salmon asked if anything was being done about
the smoke problem in Fairbanks and the Yukon flats.
Commissioner Hartig answered that the department works
closely with DNR and other federal agencies to monitor the
metrological conditions and warn people with health
advisories. Representative Salmon questioned what the
difference was between summer and winter conditions.
Commissioner Hartig stated that inversions in the winter
traps the smoke, but it does not rise to the same levels as
the large summer fires around Fairbanks in recent years.
2:15:08 PM
Co-Chair Hawker remarked that he wanted to get the longer
range goal for the department.
Representative Kelly quoted that "this investment would
allow the state to further its objectives to address climate
change and efficiently move forward the construction of a
natural gas pipeline." (Department of Environmental
Conservation, Operating Budget Presentation to House Finance
Committee-Jan.25, 2120, page 2, under Air Quality, copy on
file). He asked what the objectives of the state were.
Commissioner Hartig remarked that the objectives would be to
make sure that if there is a federal program to control
greenhouse emissions, it would not hinder going forward with
coal and the natural gas pipeline. He added that to
commercialize natural gas on the North Slope there will be a
huge energy need and that cost along with federal rules
could make the gas line unprofitable; therefore it was very
important for DEC to know how the carbon could be managed.
Representative Kelly suggested that the DEC help the state
find ways to fight the federal government rules.
Commissioner Hartig said they were trying to move in a
rational way toward what is best for Alaska and its
communities.
2:18:48 PM
Commissioner Hartig moved on to the capital budget review.
He noted the capital budget proposal is $75 million for
FY2010. The safe water program is $48,500,000, 75 percent
federal with a 25 percent state match. He noted there
continues to be a 40 percent decline in federal funding over
the last six years. The FY2011 budget is approximately $18
million less just because of the drop in federal funding.
Eventually the federal funds will end so the question arises
on what to do for funding the village safe water situation.
Co-Chair Hawker voiced his concern regarding deferred
maintenance issues in the villages and wondered about the
accumulated exposure for the state regarding maintenance.
Commissioner Hartig remarked that not maintaining facilities
may require them to be replaced earlier resulting in a huge
expense to the state. He added that lack of maintenance
might also affect the reliability of the facilities. He
understood that the high cost of energy in communities may
be putting pressure not to fund maintenance issues. He
remarked that the legislature might consider working with
the federal government to provide some incentives for
communities to develop sound maintenance plans.
Co-Chair Hawker asked if the DEC can use the village safe-
water earmark for maintenance or only for new construction.
Commissioner Hartig answered that the earmark is used for
new construction and to replace facilities and upgrades, but
not for maintenance. He pointed out that remote maintenance
workers are on call to travel to a community to train how to
fix problems, but the remote workers do not do the work
themselves. He indicated that the DEC was exploring
different ideas on how deal with maintenance issues.
2:23:17 PM
Co-Chair Hawker asked about the prevention account balance.
Commissioner Hartig referred to the handout on the "nickel a
barrel" tax on crude oil from the North Slope and Cook Inlet
(Department of Environmental Conservation Response Fund,
Prevention Account-Balance Projection, copy on file). He
mentioned this tax is split in the Response Fund into two
accounts; the Prevention account receives four cents and the
Response Account receives one cent. The Prevention account
handles the spill prevention response division. The one cent
goes into the Response Account for emergency spills. He
elaborated that the $50 million response fund is available
for emergencies. If this account drops below $50 million,
then the one cent tax is implemented until the $50 million
is restored. He added that with declining oil production,
the surcharge will go down over time. The Prevention Account
Balance graph shows the fund decline. Commissioner Lloyd
noted that in FY2014, the account will go into the red. The
only thing that has kept the account from going into the red
earlier is the surplus established years ago. In order to
avoid cutting back on services, the options after FY2014
would be to increase production, increase the surcharge, or
supplement the fund with general funds.
Co-Chair Hawker asked what the department planned to do
about the bankrupt fund in FY2014. Commissioner Hartig
repeated that there could be a proposal next year to
increase the surcharge or supplement it with general fund
money. He added that this situation has been brought to the
attention of the legislature each year. Co-Chair Hawker
asked if it was possible to reduce costs. Commissioner
Hartig agreed that cost savings was an option.
2:28:16 PM
Representative Austerman requested a ten year history of
what the fund has generated and any growth in expenditures.
Commissioner Hartig agreed to provide the information to the
committee and subcommittee.
Representative Doogan wondered why the administration
intended to spend $7.5 million more than the fund's revenue.
Commissioner Hartig repeated that there was a surplus in the
fund at present. Representative Doogan asked why it was the
policy of the department to spend down the surplus money at
this rate.
Commissioner Hartig responded that the amount in the fund
was not designed to be the amount the Division of Spill,
Prevention, and Response (SAR) needed for their operations.
He added that because of the amount that existed when the
fund split between the prevention and response accounts, a
surplus was created. He added that there was never an agreed
budget for SPAR. There was the belief that the surcharge on
crude oil production would support SPAR. Unfortunately this
has gone down. The division is at a point of filling the gap
with the surplus, but that is also declining. He emphasized
that a new way of funding will have to fill the gap.
MIKE MAHER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, explained that the two expenditures
for capital or contaminated sites cleanup are based on risk.
For three years the division has not asked for any capital
funds for many contaminated sites throughout the state, but
some sites have reached a critical point where the use of
this fund or the general fund is necessary. In the past the
legislature has helped by adding some general funds to the
account.
2:33:02 PM
Representative Doogan asked for a plan to solve the problem.
Commissioner Hartig responded that the department would be
putting proposals together for a long term plan. The fund
problem is all triggered by the decline in production;
therefore additional revenue will be needed. Co-Chair
Hawker voiced past concern about the use of the fund to
clean up sites that may not have been appropriate, such as
bailing out other state agencies. He wondered if this was
still happening. Commissioner Hartig noted this year's
proposed budget of $1 million general fund money to clean up
of some state's contaminated sites.
2:36:05 PM
Representative Gara asked if there will be further
discussion on the five cents a barrel issue in the House
Finance committee or subcommittee. Co-Chair Hawker
interjected that the discussion would certainly be in the
subcommittee. Commissioner Hartig indicated his willingness
to meet with any individual legislator to discuss the matter
further. Representative Gara stated that the DEC was put on
a goal to economize and wondered if this had happened. He
also asked where the $50 million response fund was today.
Commissioner Hartig responded that the one cent surcharge
was presently in effect to bring the fund back up to $50
million. Mr. Maher responded that the response fund was
presently at $45 million. Representative Gara asked how long
it would take to reach $50 million. Mr. Maher answered that
one cent is roughly $2.3 million a year; therefore it would
take about 2 1/2 to 3 years. Co-Chair Hawker added that
increasing production might solve the problem.
2:38:53 PM
Representative Austerman asked for information on how the
four cents is being used. Commissioner Hartig noted that
there is cost recovery on third parties, but not for state
agencies.
Representative Kelly responded that the commissioner needs
to put pressure on policymakers to make this sustainable.
2:40:51 PM
Co-Chair Hawker remarked that a review of legislative intent
was needed.
Representative Salmon questioned if the one cent was capped
at $50 million. Commissioner Hartig replied that was
correct. Representative Salmon inquired what turns the one
cent on and off. Commissioner Hartig answered that if money
is drawn from the response fund then the one cent surcharge
turns on until $50 million is reached. Representative Salmon
asked where the one cent money goes after $50 million is
reached. Commissioner Hartig said that the surcharge is
turned off once the $50 million is reached. He explained
that when the DEC draws from the fund, the governor, finance
chairs and the Department of Revenue are notified. The
Department of Revenue sends a bill for the oil surcharge
until the $50 million is reached, then the billing stops.
2:43:23 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze wondered if the commissioner had gone back
to the original intent of the bill. Commissioner Hartig
concluded that in the long term plan, the key issues were
declining federal and response funds.
2:46:32 PM
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
DENBY LLOYD, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
(DFG), provided a broad overview of the department. He
referred to Article 8 in the Alaska Constitution stating
that the legislature will provide for utilization,
development and conservation of all natural resources
belonging to the state for the maximum benefit of its
people. He read the department missions statement, "To
protect, maintain, and improve the fish, game, and aquatic
plant resources of the state, and manage their use and
development in the best interest of the economy and well-
being of the people of the state, consistent with the
sustained yield principle." He stressed that sustained yield
means obtaining ongoing production and use of the resources.
The department deals with fisheries, hunting, and
conservation of fish and wildlife primarily within state
boundaries. The DFG must also work with federal agency
authorities, such as the National Marine Fisheries Service,
the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and
others. The department must also comply with the Endangered
Species Act and Marine Mammal protection Act which he
believed to be an encroachment on some of the state's
authority. He also remarked on some international agencies
that affect the department's work. Commissioner Lloyd
stressed that the people of Alaska are passionate about
hunting, trapping, and fishing resources.
Commissioner Lloyd listed the department's core services:
Harvest Management, Stock Assessment, Customer Service,
Public Involvement, State Sovereignty, and Habitat
Protection. (Alaska Department of Fish and Game, FY11
Governor's Operating Budget Request Overview, copy on file).
In order to accomplish the core services, the department
internally takes workforce development seriously. He
mentioned the difficulty in retention and recruitment of
employees along with hunters and anglers who provide much of
the department's revenues.
2:54:23 PM
Commissioner Lloyd referred to the three budget tables (page
3). The Current Capacity table is the FY2010 authorized
budget which is broken out by the six core service programs.
The next table deals with transactions of increments
proposed for FY2011 operating budget. The last table is the
FY2011 Governor's Budget. Commissioner Lloyd noted that the
two main programs are harvest management and stock
assessment. He added that harvest management is the most
fundamental service provided to determine the population and
biological productive parameters.
2:55:46 PM
Vice-Chair Thomas inquired how the stock assessment monies
have gone up or down in the past ten years. Mr. Lloyd
responded that he would send the information to the
committee.
Representative Doogan asked about the numbers under the
"other funds" category.
Mr. Lloyd listed state general funds, federal funds,
licensing revenues, fines and forfeitures, interagency
receipts, and test fisheries. Co-Chair Hawker noted that the
information was located under numeral "V" in the short form
book.
2:58:00 PM
Commissioner Lloyd referred to the Key Performance
Indicators of each core program (page 4-5).
Co-Chair Hawker noted the received increment request money
was for Western Region Fisheries Management and wondered if
there might be additional federal funds now that the federal
government has declared the western region fisheries a
disaster. Mr. Lloyd hoped there would be additional federal
funds available. There have been additional projects added
over the last several years that will provide better
management of those runs. He added there is an ongoing
federal grant process through the Pacific Coastal Salmon
Recovery Fund program, but it will be shared with other
western states.
3:00:35 PM
Representative Austerman asked how much money is left over
from the sustainable salmon funds. Mr. Lloyd said it depends
on which year of the grant fund. Vice-Chair Thomas asked
where the funds for Crystal Lake Hatchery would come from.
Commissioner Lloyd reported he did not know, but would look
into the matter. He added there are ongoing discussions
among many constituent groups for the Southeast Mitigation
Fund. This is money appropriated by the federal government
to the state of Alaska in recognition of some detriments in
Southeast due to the Pacific Salmon agreement.
3:03:25 PM
Representative Salmon wondered what the money in the budget
would do for the Yukon River. Commissioner Lloyd remarked
that in the operating budget, there was a request for
$130,000 to help continue the Chinook salmon stock
identification program to determine their movements.
Commissioner Lloyd noted a number of items in the capital
budget that could be used for fishery research; such as
$750,000 for an ongoing effort in the Western Alaska Salmon
Identification program. He shared that when completed the
study will be the largest and most intensive salmon stock
genetic identification study anywhere. In additional there
is a request for $200,000 to enhance aerial survey of Chum
salmon and $250,000 to refine the pilot station sonar
program.
3:07:02 PM
Representative Joule asked the department's plans regarding
subsistence issues.
Commissioner Lloyd responded that the department would
continue to work with the federal government substance
review process. He noted that Alaska would like the federal
government to recognize the state's sovereignty on fish and
wildlife management. The federal subsistence management
program occurred when Alaska failed to comply with the
federal rural position under the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). The department is not
contesting the federal preference on federal lands for
federally eligible subsistence users. Commissioner Lloyd
added that the department is responsible for the
conservation of the fish and wildlife stocks upon which the
federally eligible users are dependent.
Representative Joule asked how the dual management process
is working. Commissioner Lloyd alleged it would be
preferable not to have dual management, but it has been
getting operationally better over the years.
3:12:07 PM
Representative Gara asked if there was any compensation for
those who were unable to fish King [Chinook] salmon on the
Yukon River after it had been wrongly closed due to
miscounting. Commissioner Lloyd declared that the Yukon
River is a difficult area to manage. He noted that the
closing has been characterized as an error or miscount, but
in actuality, given the total run size of the Chinook run,
the statistics were within 15 to 20 percent of the estimate
of the total run. He agreed that for a region suffering
economic problems, but it is a dramatic problem. In prior
years there had been too much harvesting hindering the
conservation goals. Commissioner Lloyd said that people or
communities were not paid back, but DEC tried to design the
opening and closing of the summer Chum fishers and, later in
the year, the Coho fisheries to allow more harvesting to
occur. Representative Gara contended that in more
economically depressed areas, reliant on one industry, it
seems to call for a more financial response.
3:15:51 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze asserted that subsistence issues are the
state's highest priority. Commissioner Lloyd agreed that the
department operates under the mandate that subsistence has a
priority. Co-Chair Stoltze asked if management decisions
were being made before or after the fish enter the Alaska
river systems. Commissioner Lloyd answered that fisheries
looked at both before and after they enter the river
systems.
Co-Chair Stoltze noted that in 2008 the number of anglers
purchasing fishing licenses was 8 percent over of the target
goal, but the days the anglers spent fishing was under
target. He wondered if this would change in 2009 and how
this would affect department policy. Commissioner Lloyd
responded that the department did not know the 2009 numbers,
but he did not believe that policy affected the 2008
numbers. He believed economic conditions affected the
numbers more.
Co-Chair Stoltze maintained that when there are more
closures and less angler days, that could affect the
numbers.
3:21:54 PM
Vice-Chair Thomas believed that the once the Anchorage
Hatchery opens some of these problems might be solved. He
noted that Fairbanks does not have a hatchery. Commissioner
Lloyd warned that more fish is not always the best way to
address all management issues.
3:23:43 PM
Representative Salmon asked if there were two sonar near
mouth of the Yukon River and one at the border. Commissioner
Lloyd answered that there is one sonar site near the mouth
at Pilot Station; there are two sonar aiming from different
banks counted as one. There is also sonar at Eagle near the
Canadian border.
Representative Salmon asked who decides when to shut the
salmon flow into the Yukon River.
Commissioner Lloyd responded that it was impossible to know
how many salmon would be returning each year. The department
only issues projections or forecasts. He added that salmon
management deals with escapement; targeting the number of
fish that need to escape through the fishery to end up on
the spawning grounds. He reminded that it is not an exact
science. Representative Salmon asked if another sonar site
after the Tanana River would give a better estimate of how
many salmon were heading toward the Canadian border.
Commissioner Lloyd commented that additional sonar is not
always the answer. He noted the department operates aerial
surveys in the spawning grounds and would put into place
other projects, but often not enough money for additional
programs.
3:30:01 PM
Representative Austerman indicated that prior to the state
having the oil money there were other systems in place. He
wondered why the department doesn't request more money to
run the department in the manner it needs to manage the
fishery stocks. Commissioner Lloyd replied that different
departments would ask for different amounts of money. He
added that the DFG has enjoyed some good growth and focused
on some problem areas, but there were good opportunities for
additional investment to do a better job of getting more
from sustained yield.
Representative Austerman believed the Administration needs
to ask for what they need, and then the legislature needs to
fund it. He asked how many systems around the state are
having ongoing problems.
Mr. Lloyd responded that he does not have a count. He noted
that Alaska is known as a leader in salmon management, but
problem cycles in productivity tend to move around the
state. There are some chronic areas of difficulty such as
the Susitna Valley, Norton Sound and Yukon River. He
mentioned eight salmon stocks of concern around the state of
Alaska.
3:36:46 PM
Representative Gara agreed that counting fish on every river
system is not the same, but he contended that it seemed like
a lot less effort and equipment goes into counting on the
Yukon River.
Commissioner Lloyd stated that was not the case. He asserted
that the Yukon River was getting a lot of attention
factoring in the logistical difficulties, but agreed there
was a lot of room for growth. Representative Gara reiterated
that the perception is a lot more money is given to counting
on the Kenai River versus the Yukon River.
3:39:13 PM
Commissioner Lloyd shared that he did not have the budgets
for the two rivers before him, but he believed that
assumption was wrong. Co-Chair Hawker mentioned the
Commercial Fisheries Revolving Loan Fund is a successful and
important program within the agency. He stressed his concern
of taking money from this fund to support other government
or department activities.
3:40:51 PM
Representative Kelly asked about some thoughts on the guides
use variance.
Commissioner Lloyd maintained that the reason the DFG and
DNR were going though this exercise deals with identified
problems of crowding and too many guides in too small an
area. It may be necessary to limited the number of guides
per area and improve the quality of service. The tradeoff is
that if you restrict the number of guides, the revenue might
increase, but also reduce someone's opportunity to engage in
the guiding business.
Co-Chair Hawker voiced his concern about the objectivity of
the board members.
Commissioner Lloyd asked if Co-Chair Hawker believed there
were too many vested guiding interests on the board. Co-
Chair Hawker remarked that one group of professionals feels
that another established group controls the board and is
excluding, injuring and damaging them. He emphasized the
desire for these boards to be as fair and objective as
possible.
3:44:34 PM
Representative Kelly declared the outcome could be the
disenfranchisement of a large group of people who earn their
living as guides. Often when rules are changed unilaterally
is causes dislocation in the bush communities and he
believed this has elements of the same problem.
Commissioner Lloyd stated that the review has been ongoing
for at least three years. Representative Kelly reiterated
that there was a belief that it was driven by the "good old
boys."
Representative Salmon inquire about the chain of command
for stopping the fish on the Yukon River. Commissioner
Lloyd stated that the state's management system for fish
and game is unique, but there is an emergency order
authority granted to the department by the Alaska statute
which provides for the opening and closing of fishing and
hunting seasons based of the assessment of harvest goals
and biological productivity. The department has delegated
this power to as local a level as possible. The strength of
the system is that people in the field with real time
access to the information and direct interaction with local
users are making the decisions.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:50 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| ADF&G FY 11 Operating Budget Presentation 1.22.10Overview.pdf |
HFIN 1/25/2010 1:30:00 PM |
|
| DEC Overview01 22 2010 (3).pdf |
HFIN 1/25/2010 1:30:00 PM |
|
| ADF&G handout correction 1.28.10pg.3.pdf |
HFIN 1/25/2010 1:30:00 PM |