Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 124
04/11/2005 08:30 AM House FISHERIES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB256 | |
| HB251 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 256 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 251 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
April 11, 2005
8:44 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bill Thomas, Co-Chair
Representative John Harris
Representative Jim Elkins
Representative Peggy Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Co-Chair
Representative Mary Kapsner
Representative Woodie Salmon
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 256
"An Act naming the Ruth Burnett Sport Fish Hatchery in
Fairbanks."
- MOVED HB 256 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 251
"An Act authorizing the Board of Fisheries to adopt regulations
regarding fishing by a person who holds two entry permits for a
salmon fishery."
- MOVED HB 251 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 256
SHORT TITLE: RUTH BURNETT SPORT FISH HATCHERY
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) RAMRAS
04/06/05 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/06/05 (H) FSH, RES
04/11/05 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM CAPITOL 124
04/11/05 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
BILL: HB 251
SHORT TITLE: COMMERCIAL FISHING MULTIPLE PERMIT HOLDER
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) SAMUELS
04/05/05 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/05/05 (H) FSH, RES
04/11/05 (H) FSH AT 8:30 AM CAPITOL 124
04/11/05 (H) RES AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE JAY RAMRAS
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 256 as sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SAMUELS
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 251 as sponsor.
MIKE SAUNDERS, President
Lynn Canal Gillnetters Association
Haines, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 251.
CHARLES TREINEN
(No address provided)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 251.
JASON KOONTZ
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 251.
SIMON SCHAAD
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 251.
TIM MIKKELSEN
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 251.
GERALD GUGEL
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 251.
PETER THOMPSON
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 251.
LEROY COSSETTE
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 251.
BOB THORSTENSON, President
United Fishermen of Alaska
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 251.
SCOTT McALLISTER
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 251.
FRANK HOMAN, Commissioner
Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 251.
MAC MEINERS
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 251.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CO-CHAIR BILL THOMAS called the House Special Committee on
Fisheries meeting to order at 8:44:23 AM. Representatives
Thomas, Elkins, Wilson, and Harris were present at the call to
order.
[Due to technical difficulties, the recording begins at 8:46:44
AM.]
HB 256-RUTH BURNETT SPORT FISH HATCHERY
CO-CHAIR THOMAS announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 256, "An Act naming the Ruth Burnett Sport
Fish Hatchery in Fairbanks."
REPRESENTATIVE JAY RAMRAS, Alaska State Legislature, presented
HB 256 as sponsor. He explained that the bill would name the
proposed new sport fish hatchery in Fairbanks the Ruth Burnett
Sport Fish Hatchery.
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked Representative Ramras to provide the
committee with some background information on Ms. Burnett.
8:46:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE RAMRAS pointed out that Ms. Burnett, late former
mayor of Fairbanks, originally conceived of the idea of a fish
hatchery there. She also worked as the Fairbanks aide for U.S.
Senator Ted Stevens. He noted that the proposed hatchery
location is near Ms. Burnett's former home. He commented, "She
one of the greatest ladies that I ever had the privilege of
knowing through my youth and young adulthood."
REPRESENTATIVE ELKINS remarked, "She led the fight to clean up
that area down around the Chena River, ... and was very
successful."
8:48:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON moved to report HB 256 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes. There being no objection, HB 256 was reported from the
House Special Committee on Fisheries.
HB 251-COMMERCIAL FISHING MULTIPLE PERMIT HOLDER
8:48:40 AM
CO-CHAIR THOMAS announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 251, "An Act authorizing the Board of
Fisheries to adopt regulations regarding fishing by a person who
holds two entry permits for a salmon fishery."
8:49:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SAMUELS, Alaska State Legislature,
presented HB 251 as sponsor. He explained:
[The bill] would give some authorization to the Board
of Fisheries to assign fishing privileges for those
who already hold one permit in a salmon fishery; they
would be able to buy a second permit. ... Market
forces already prompt permit holders to buy or sell
permits. This bill would not require anybody to buy
or sell a permit. ... It would add another option for
specific fisheries to deal with situations where
salmon prices are falling, and that's contributed to
large numbers of outstanding permits. It would allow
the [Board of Fisheries] to have another tool to
reduce the amount of gear in the water ... and try to
consolidate some of the fisheries a little bit. ...
I've talked to [Co-Chair Thomas] quite a bit here
about some potential amendments.
8:50:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked if the bill has a lot of support
from United Fishermen of Alaska (UFA) or other fishing groups.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS replied, "UFA talked to me about it. I
made some calls to some folks back in my hometown out in Bristol
Bay, and I think mostly people are going to be supportive of
this."
8:51:10 AM
MIKE SAUNDERS commented, "I'd like to make sure that the
information that was sent to [Representative] LeDoux's office
from the department regarding this idea when it was a [Board of
Fisheries] proposal number 378 is submitted as evidence to the
committee."
CO-CHAIR THOMAS replied that the committee did not have this
information.
MR. SAUNDERS stated, "I'm in opposition to [HB 251] because I
see this as granting the [Board of Fisheries] authority for
social engineering, and the outcome of this bill would
redistribution of wealth amongst fishermen, at least in
Southeast Alaska." He remarked that he didn't want to have to
buy another permit in order to compete with other fishermen who
have two permits; many people in Haines cannot afford to buy an
additional permit.
8:53:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS asked Mr. Saunders who he was
representing.
MR. SAUNDERS replied that he is the president of the Lynn Canal
Gillnetters Association. He noted that when this idea was a
Board of Fisheries proposal, he ran a letter-writing campaign
that produced about 30 letters in opposition to the idea.
8:53:55 AM
CHARLES TREINEN testified in support of HB 251. He noted that
he is a fisherman involved in several different fisheries for
over 25 years. He said, "It's a market-based way to reduce the
number of permits and reduce the number of latent permits in a
fishery. Latent permits are a real problem and are a drag on
investing in a fishery." He continued:
If a person ... or a group doesn't want any kind of
permit-stacking, they're capable of opposing it at the
[Board of Fisheries] level and there are numerous
advantages to having that tool in the toolbox of the
[Board of Fisheries] in a situation where you have too
many permits, a lot of latent permits, and you need to
have a way to consolidate permits without doing a
buyback. Buybacks are very difficult to enact and
costly for government and maybe not feasible
financially for the ... people that stay in the
fishery.
MR. TREINEN explained that in Bristol Bay, two permits can fish
on a single vessel but the vessel is only allowed one-third more
gear. Therefore there is less gear in the water than there
would be if there were two vessels with one permit each.
8:58:41 AM
JASON KOONTZ stated that he is a commercial fisherman and a
tender operator in Bristol Bay. He testified in support of HB
251. He commented:
[The bill] would allow the guys to use some permits
that aren't being utilized. It would allow some guys
to increase their production. With the lower price of
salmon, it's important that guys are able to generate
some income to really make it a viable fishery. If
it's not viable guys like me with a tender are not
going to be able to participate. ... We should give
the [Board of Fisheries] as many tools as they need to
revamp our salmon industry.
MR. KOONTZ emphasized that young people need this bill as
encouragement to stay in the fishery, and that a buyback would
eliminate the possibility for young people to enter the fishery.
9:01:05 AM
SIMON SCHAAD, stated that he is a junior at the Homer High
School and a permit holder in Bristol Bay. He commented that he
supports the bill because, "it would really help the Board of
Fisheries for the future of the fishery. ... And it's the
cheapest and quickest way to reduce the overpopulation of this
fishery."
9:01:50 AM
TIM MIKKELSEN stated that he and his wife fish two permits in
Bristol Bay, and they support HB 251. He said:
We like [the bill] better than a buyback system in
that we've already paid for two permits and we'd hate
to be taxed or something to get rid of more permits.
It will reduce the amount of gear in the water, so I
believe it will be a benefit to those who buy a second
permit and to the people who don't have two permits
just because there'll be less gear in the water. And
it would also just be easier to make business
decisions on the fishery.... If you have permits out
there that people can grab up when it looks good it
takes away the profitable years for those who stay in
it. Every time it looks like a good run or a good
price, then a bunch more people jump in and it still
makes everything marginal; we know in fishing we have
bad years, and it's nice to have some good years and
be able to count on that rather than it just kind of
getting wiped away by people who want to take a shot
in the dark.
9:03:34 AM
GERALD GUGEL stated that he is a third generation fisherman who
started salmon fishing in 1953. He noted that he has three
herring permits, a Kodiak salmon permit, and a Bristol Bay
permit. He testified in support of HB 251. He said that he
supported the move to limited entry fishing permits, however, he
opined that most areas ended up with too many permits. The
fisheries have been poor lately, and he emphasized the
importance of having several permits so that one can be
flexible.
9:07:36 AM
MR. GUGEL continued:
What I have seen here is that many people are fishing
in different salmon fisheries. The thing is that many
of them are actually doing it illegally, one way or
another. So there's a problem that's presented by the
way the situation is right now. ... What I have done
it the past with my seven kids: now my Bristol Bay
permit has actually gone from Laura, it's gone to
Esther, it's been in Samuel's name.... With cod and
crab and all these other areas going [Individual
Fishing Quota (IFQ)], the ability to be able to be
flexible is becoming more and more difficult. ... [The
bill is] an awesome way to control the number of
permits. One of the things that bothers me right now:
in Kodiak we're down to 100 boats but I know that the
minute there's any real sparkle at all in the fishery,
you've got 200 permits sitting out there that are very
easy to move right back into the fishery. And so the
potential of becoming financially viable stands in
jeopardy with those permits drifting out there. ...
Any way here by which we can eliminate some of those
permits and give a slight benefit to them I think
would really help the system, much better than a tax
situation, much better than a buyback program.
9:09:54 AM
PETER THOMPSON stated that he has lived and fished in Kodiak for
25 years and also has held a Bristol Bay salmon permit for 18
years. He testified in support of HB 251. He commented:
The salmon industry has been in economic disaster for
the last five years or so and we do need to look at
anything and everything that can make it more
economically viable for those that attempt to remain
in the salmon business. Fleet consolidation is a
concept whose time has come. Most of the limited
entry fisheries in the state are plagued by having too
many permits. Last year the [Commercial Fisheries
Entry Commission (CFEC)] came out with an optimum
numbers study that indicated that the number of
Bristol Bay salmon drift net permits should be reduced
by as much as half. An example of how permit-stacking
regulations can be applied is available from the
Bristol Bay salmon drift net fishery. In 2003 the
[Board of Fisheries] changed a regulation that allowed
a vessel to fish one-third more gear as long as there
were two permit holders on board. Specifically the
regulation allowed the double-permitted vessel to fish
200 fathoms of gear instead of the standard 150
fathoms. As a consequence, instead of 300 fathoms of
net in the water for two permits, only 200 fathoms was
fished. Because there is a significant cost to
getting an additional vessel in the water, it can be
cost effective to get an incremental fishing power
increase even if it is less than a whole gear unit for
an individual vessel. As a tool for reducing fishing
effort and improving the economics of the fishing
fleet the Bristol Bay permit-stacking regulation was
effective in reducing effort during its inaugural 2004
season.
9:11:57 AM
MR. THOMPSON continued:
The requirement to have two separate permit holders on
board is cumbersome, likely to create conflict, as two
captains on a boat doesn't work, and creates
incentives to engage in gray market permit trades....
I also want to stress that permit-stacking options are
much more flexible than many other fleet consolidation
options such as permit buybacks. They're market-based
and reversible, because an individual fishing
operation could easily choose to go back to using one
permit at any time and be unburdened of the cost of
owning two. For those who are concerned about the
prospect of escalating permit prices, the issue is not
really the permit cost; it's how to pay for it. There
is clearly a need to make commercial fishing a vibrant
and viable contributor to the individual businesses,
communities, and the state. Eliminating a statutory
impediment to permit stacking simply gives fishing
businesses another tool to use in making operational
decisions. All vessels will share in having few
vessels participating through stacking of permits.
9:15:07 AM
LEROY COSSETTE stated that he lives in Kodiak and has fished in
Bristol Bay since 1966. He testified in support of HB 251. He
clarified that the bill would reduce the amount of fishing gear
used by 66 percent for every permit that is stacked, which for
100 boats is about 10,000 fathoms of gear. He said, "We need
the money in Bristol Bay; it's down to sharecroppers wages up
there now. This is the way the legislature can help us put some
real economics back in Bristol Bay like we had in the ... 80s
and 90s."
9:16:33 AM
BOB THORSTENSON, President, United Fishermen of Alaska,
testified in support of HB 251. He commented that there are
different levels of interest in the bill in different areas of
the state, noting that people in Southeast are generally not
interested in the idea while people in Kodiak and Bristol Bay
are interested. He said:
We're not in favor of this for the whole state, of
course, and we're not going to impose this upon
anybody who doesn't want it. It's going to have to go
through a very rigorous [Board of Fisheries]
restructuring program that's being implemented, so ...
this will be years out; it'll take awhile for this to
actually take place.
9:17:51 AM
SCOTT McALLISTER stated that he has been purse seining primarily
in Southeast Alaska for 30 years. He testified in support of HB
251. He said:
In recent years latency has become a very, very
prevalent problem within the fisheries. It's very
difficult to make decisions both on how you're going
to ... make future decisions for quality improvements
[and] efficiency upgrades within your fishery ...
knowing that there's a lot of latency out there within
the permit structure of a fishery.... So this [bill]
gives the [Board of Fisheries] an opportunity to deal
with not just the latency problem but with these
efficiency problems or quality problems....
9:19:39 AM
FRANK HOMAN, Commissioner, Commercial Fisheries Entry
Commission, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, testified in
support of HB 251. He said:
The commission supports the concept of moving ahead
with permit-stacking.... It's another tool in the
toolbox, and the thing that would be necessary for any
fishery: it's not going to be imposed on anybody. It
would have to go to the [Board of Fisheries] and they
would do an analysis of the fishery and take public
testimony, and so each fishery would be a case-by-case
basis. They'd have the opportunity during their
analysis and discussion ... to monitor any permit
stacking to see how it develops in the marketplace,
and who's buying and selling permits, and how the
affect is on the latent permits. So I think there's a
lot of safeguards in it and there's a lot of
opportunity to try a new tool.
9:21:13 AM
MAC MEINERS stated that he is a permit holder in Kodiak and
Southeast Alaska. He testified in support of HB 251.
9:21:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS moved to report HB 251 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes. There being no objection, HB 251 was reported from the
House Special Committee on Fisheries.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 9:21:47
AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|